What happened to diyaudio?

[Curly Woods]

Originally Posted by planet10

BNTW: welcome to the new cable thread.

"The song remains the same"

[SSassen]

we are still working with pretty crude models

Right, that's exactly my point, there's no reason for me to enter into this discussion if you seem to think that the laws of physics and mathematics that govern the operation of the equipment you use for audio recording and playback are based on 'pretty crude models'.

The only factor that we cannot quantify exactly is what happens between the ears, the belief system, psycho-acoustics, reputation of a product, word of mouth, etc. etc. That's why a proper DBT shows no differences between all those overpriced cables and a piece of standard copper installation wire. When you take all the nonsense that is belief and reputation of a certain product out of the equation and judge it on its 'sonic signature' (for lack of a better word) then suddenly it all sounds the same. Given the fact the listener is the only variable in a proper DBT what does that tell you? (of course the believers will argue a DBT is flawed, so we're going to go in circles).

Cheers,

Sander.

[planet10]

Originally Posted by SSassen

Right, that's exactly my point, there's no reason for me to enter into this discussion if you seem to think that the laws of physics and mathematics that govern the operation of the equipment you use for audio recording and playback are based on 'pretty crude models'.

But they are. I've read Olson, zillions of AES articles, Toole's latest, whatever i can get my hands on. A lot of simplifications are made to be able to do the math. Sometimes they can do a pretty good job of predicting the broad strokes.

Until the recent "discovery" of complexity theory (Chaos theory) about 5% of the set of mathematics of the pysical world had been explored. Complexity theory comprises the other 95% and the surface has been barely scratched there. Those big very fast super computers -- their very purpose is to bruteforce problems where there is no elegant mathematical models.

Right there we have a reasonable doubt about how well we can make mathematical models as we are missing a significant portion of the math that we need. And physics being applied mathematics, there is just as much to learn there.

We are still primitives. We have come a long way, but the more we learn, the more able we are to understand how little we know.

dave

[Curly Woods]

Originally Posted by planet10

But they are. I've read Olson, zillions of AES articles, Toole's latest, whatever i can get my hands on. A lot of simplifications are made to be able to do the math.

Until the recent "discovery" of complexity theory (Chaos theory) about 5% of the set of mathematics had been explored. Complexity theory comprises the other 95% and the surface has been barely scratched there.

Right there we have a reasonable doubt about how well we can make models. And physics being applied mathematics, there is just as much to learn there.

We are still primitives. We have come a long way, but the more we learn, the more able we are to understand how little we know.

dave

But if the closed minded keep preaching that there are no differences, how will we ever advance the sciences? That is my question.

[Netlist]

Curly, I show respect for both views but please check your terminology and
don't confuse science with what you preach, please. There are case where you can even offend me.

[Geek]

Originally Posted by planet10

BNTW: welcome to the new cable thread.

I was thinking that when I skimmed this thread this morning

Cheers!

[SSassen]

I think the below noted cartoon summarizes 99% of all audio products catering to the 'our product defies logic, physics, mathematics, but it sure sounds great'.



Cheers,

Sander.

[pheonix358]

I needed a listening panel at one stage many years ago. I set up a test to eliminate the people that couldn't simply listen. I ended up with a listening panel of two. I went and bought a big 12V relay intended for spotlights. Rigged it to a 12V battery and hid the whole thing behing my gear. I did spend some time making the switch wires look very upmarket. Then invited 4 at a time to sit and audition some gear. They had paper to write notes on etc.

Then play music, every track twice. A very audible click from the relay announced A or B. The only change was the click of the relay. Can be very entertaining having people argue which is better / worse.

Interestingly, the few wives that came along usually got it right when they admitted, sheepishly, they couldn't tell the difference.

Out of 20 'experts' I ended up with 2 who were strong enough to admit they perceived no difference.

Terry

PS don't ask friends!!!

[Bas Horneman]

Out of 20 'experts' I ended up with 2 who were strong enough to admit they perceived no difference

Great experiment.

[wintermute]

I've also been away for a time (approximately 4 years). Yes there are some threads which go on, and on, and on (like this one apparently is heading in the direction of). Yes there is the perpetual posting (from both sides) trying to convince the other side that they are wrong (faith based vs science based). IMO if it bothers you, tune out!! There is no point trying to convince someone of something that is not within their version of reality. By all means try if you must, but if it doesn't work give up already! (this goes for both sides of the fence).

I saw mention of sometimes there might be three pages of posts before someone points out a serious error. Lets not forget that there are all levels of knowledge here. I often put qualifiers on what I post because I know that I'm no expert (I've been playing with electronics for over 30 years but I have probably forgotten more than I remember ) , I hope that If I do post something inaccurate, that someone will pull me up on it. I do not like to spread false information, and If I say something wrong I want to know about it. However it takes someone with the knowledge that something is wrong to speak up and point it out (hopefully in a way that isn't demeaning) for the less experienced to advance in their knowledge. I think part of the problem is the more experienced get sick of correcting people, and will only do it if they see something that really really annoys them!

Not every question that a newbie asks can be answered by the oldest wisest and most experienced people on the forum. Often it is yesterdays newbie's who are answering because they asked the same questions themselves and got answers from someone more knowledgeable and they now pass on that knowledge (perhaps with some loss of information, or perhaps with more depending on how much they learnt).

IMO the only way to have a very high signal to noise ratio is to exclude anyone who does not fit the knowledge profile (or for that matter ideals) that whomever decides what a decent S/N ratio is. This will become boring and stale very quickly.

Personally I've always found DiyAudio full of helpful people, that have helped me to advance my knowledge and think about things in ways I might not otherwise have done. I think most people who post here are smart enough to make there own minds up as to whether or not they believe something... The need to point out to others (to protect them, and I'm guilty of it myself) that faith based observations have no scientific backing, is I think in some ways insulting. I think it is reasonable to assume that each individual is capable of making up their own mind whether something "faith based" has any merit and whether or not they would be willing to try it. One of the things that I find the funniest is that the Scientific types will mostly never try it because there is no proof, the irony is that they are the ones who would best be able to provide the proof if there is in fact something that can be measured.

I'm not sure why I get involved in these threads.... I think it is some sort of bizarre wish to try and mediate, and get people to be a little less black and white, but in the end I'm probably just adding to the noise

Tony.