John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 2250 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th April 2012, 05:19 PM   #22491
diyAudio Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
Here you go John:
Excellent. Thank you for posting EXACTLY what I stated.

Now, read VERY CAREFULLY..I will highlight the very important parts of what I stated that you choose to ignore.

""Originally Posted by jneutron
As one of science, the first question scientific reasoning requires is: ""Prove your assertions under conditions which remove expectation bias"".

Audiophiles seem incapable of providing such under controlled testing regimens.

However, also as one of science, I have examined the testing methodology used to date and find it lacking rigor. Confounders which are not understood are simply ignored as a result. I therefore cannot consider lack of positive results as proof of no difference..

Do not mistake me. I do not consider everything as audible, just that the tests which indicate such may be flawed.""

Now, I accept the possibility that you do not speak english as a primary language and as a consequence, do not understand my meaning. Ask questions.

j

ps..Wavebourn..to you, I owe a profuse apology. I incorrectly attributed Thorsten's statement to you. You did NOT make a statement regarding scientists as arrogant..I am sorry for that mistake. Defending such is of course incorrect, but I erred in attribution. The balance of our discussion, I continue with pleasure. You CLEARLY do not understand the meaning of "seem" within the context of my statement and the subsequent statments of clarification.

Last edited by jneutron; 19th April 2012 at 05:28 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:33 PM   #22492
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

ps..Wavebourn..to you, I owe a profuse apology. I incorrectly attributed Thorsten's statement to you. You did NOT make a statement regarding scientists as arrogant..I am sorry for that mistake. Defending such is of course incorrect, but I erred in attribution. The balance of our discussion, I continue with pleasure. You CLEARLY do not understand the meaning of "seem" within the context of my statement and the subsequent statments of clarification.
Apology accepted.
But I am not interested in discussion of audiophiles and their beliefs. I am interested in learning of their language, in order to better understand what they mean, to satisfy their demands better. I mean audophiles that prefer sound reproduction as close to natural events as possible.
__________________
"Our youth [...] have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders, contradict their parents, [...] and tyrannize their teachers. -- Plato, 447-367 BCE
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:33 PM   #22493
diyAudio Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
Sometimes it is not necessary to call a person liar to make him believe that he was called a liar.
True enough. Course, when you said this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
So you lied....

nuff said.

j
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:38 PM   #22494
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakmont PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
That correlates as well, as it happens.
I thought that was an inverse correlation.

But it seems the suggestion was missed by the participants.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:38 PM   #22495
diyAudio Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
Apology accepted.
But I am not interested in discussion of audiophiles and their beliefs. I am interested in learning of their language, in order to better understand what they mean, to satisfy their demands better. I mean audophiles that prefer sound reproduction as close to natural events as possible.
Good. Because I have not done so (discussed their beliefs).

I have discussed at length physics, EMC, and acoustic hearing perceptions to the end of natural reproduction (audio of course).

And how IC's, PC's, chassis layouts, are capable of altering systems in ways that may arise to the level of audibility, as well as pointing out many ways in which testing has been mis-applied.

As well as dispelling many myths.

As I had previously believed, we are closer in thought than the recent dialogue would seem to indicate.

j
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:38 PM   #22496
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Can you provide a link please?
__________________
"Our youth [...] have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders, contradict their parents, [...] and tyrannize their teachers. -- Plato, 447-367 BCE
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:39 PM   #22497
diyAudio Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post
I thought that was an inverse correlation.

But it seems the suggestion was missed by the participants.
Ummm, pssst...(inverse correlation is still correlation).


Just inverted...

j
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:40 PM   #22498
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakmont PA
You know with all the brain power engaged in contest here there is one question I can never get answered. What does "Je ne sais pas !" really mean? (Hint there is a hidden level to this comic question.)

Last edited by simon7000; 19th April 2012 at 05:43 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:41 PM   #22499
KBK is offline KBK  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Wilds Of Canada
But to constantly err on the side of conservatism, that is indeed bias, by any definition.

For example, to take a hypothesis and run with it, willy-nilly.... is not advised.

Too many layers of potential error, in the cumulative sense, can be encountered. This is a very real danger, and one of the core points in the idea and expression of conservatism in scientific protocol and rigor. There's more to it than that, but that will suffice for this post's intent.

My point here, is that conservatism can be an issue on it's own.

For if one does not step out of a paradigm, one will not know if the systems in use or enacted ---are a failure point or not.

For example, to take multiple 'far out' hypothesis, under one roof, form them into a shape......and run with them.

And those who try that..or similar alternative forms of methodology, do indeed end up finding things that easily exceed the common knowledge of mainstream science, and that they exceed the known parameters of mainstream science.

That, improperly handled, the inherent conservatism in 'accepted' methodologies in science... can be a serious handicap to discovery. That there is and are large areas of discovery that exist outside of scientific conservative methodology.

That these discoveries do not exist outside of logic and associated rigor, or ideas on reality, but they exist outside of the baseline psychology of mainstream science. and that mainstream science and associated methods are not reality, they are not existence itself, they are a set of rules created by a bunch of humans, for whatever that is worth.

And that, as an item goes (scientific methodology), is indeed a creation, a mindset, it is not a reality or function of reality. Nice try, but the brick wall and a time for a fundamental correction is inevitable, as stated, even by the rules of science itself. And that time has indeed come to pass.

However, science, being full of people with issues in their psychological makeup, like the rest of human society and culture, science does not see it's own pitfalls. Once again, even by the rules of logic and science, this was inevitable.

Last edited by KBK; 19th April 2012 at 05:50 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 05:42 PM   #22500
diyAudio Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
Can you provide a link please?
To which?

As far as I can recall, I've posted at length on this forum on all dat stuff. If you have any specific questions, ask away.

If you prefer PM, that's ok as well. I assume you're in the business. I've give freely what I know.

j
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:20 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2