EVERYBODY says that. Never met anyone who said: 'my hearing is really below average'.
It's a bit like IQ. Basically everyone feels their IQ is 'above average'. Yet, by definition, half of the people are below average.
Jan
I do better because it's my rules. It's called irrepressible confidence. I am never wrong about my taste. It has improved with time perhaps? That is I listen to more music and like it. The hi fi had to change to allow that.
I am a bad as the next person in controlled tests. It's just I am not worried about it. I know many are. I do genuinely do a bit better just due to lack of fear.
I won't pass other people tests as usually I am very very bored very very quickly. It's like going to a Cat House , it just isn't how I fall in love.
I find it a bit odd that no-one's mentioned the power of dreams. They are amazingly powerful.
There are two types of dreams, the literally taken dreams as our adventures while we sleep, and dreams as our life long ideas we know well because we strive towards them. Sometimes, it can get all mixed up.
A while ago, I dreamt that I finally managed to acquire not one, but two Maserati cars (I am a Maserati fan). I parked them for safe keeping. For the next 2 or 3 days, I wrecked my brains trying to remember WHERE I parked them. The illusion/dream was so compelling that it took me 3 or 4 days to realize that it was just a dream. And just when I managed to get a 1979 Maserati Indy, the most beautiful thing on 4 wheels I ever saw which proves that building cars can actually be art.
Nobody can get us the way we can get ourselves.
There are two types of dreams, the literally taken dreams as our adventures while we sleep, and dreams as our life long ideas we know well because we strive towards them. Sometimes, it can get all mixed up.
A while ago, I dreamt that I finally managed to acquire not one, but two Maserati cars (I am a Maserati fan). I parked them for safe keeping. For the next 2 or 3 days, I wrecked my brains trying to remember WHERE I parked them. The illusion/dream was so compelling that it took me 3 or 4 days to realize that it was just a dream. And just when I managed to get a 1979 Maserati Indy, the most beautiful thing on 4 wheels I ever saw which proves that building cars can actually be art.
Nobody can get us the way we can get ourselves.
I rather would extend that test:
Have a light source with and without flicker. Adjust the flicker frequency just so that it is _not_ detected in your ABX like test.
Then let one group work a day with "flicker light" and another with non flickering light. Test both groups for concentration, how tired they are, having headache or not etc. after this day.
I think you can guess the result...
Last edited:
debunked that strawman already
you can use all knowledge, even suspicions in designing a controlled test
the gold standard in Science is replication by multiple researchers using tests of the "the same" phenomena from different perspectives,
particularly seeing transitivity - predicting the result of tests in substantially different contexts which have the employ the same sense mechanism
but in the end we believe there is no avoiding blinding protocols when people are involved - our brains are deeply hardwired to "cheat" - use any clue, including unconscious expectations
and these expectations do have real effects, do change reported impressions when present - those are strong positive test results that occur in over and over in human sensory testing
you can use all knowledge, even suspicions in designing a controlled test
the gold standard in Science is replication by multiple researchers using tests of the "the same" phenomena from different perspectives,
particularly seeing transitivity - predicting the result of tests in substantially different contexts which have the employ the same sense mechanism
but in the end we believe there is no avoiding blinding protocols when people are involved - our brains are deeply hardwired to "cheat" - use any clue, including unconscious expectations
and these expectations do have real effects, do change reported impressions when present - those are strong positive test results that occur in over and over in human sensory testing
Last edited:
Of course your taste is your taste, nobody can argue with that, it is your 'yard stick'. But by that same token it is a bit nonsensical to also state that your hearing is better than most. Especially since a) there's no way of you to know, and b) has nothing to do with taste.
Jan
Well I don't know about spacecraft, but as a pilot-in-training for light aircraft, let me tell you, if I make a bad landing it is NOT the plane's fault
Jan
OK, then don't guess ;-)
At any rate, the sensitivity of typical ABX test for audio seems to be rarely (if at all) checked. Extrapolating from a null result then, like it's usually done, is rather questionable, especially when they rely solely on what participants tell you. Other types of (blind) tests might be more appropriate, once they are validated. Additional measurements of participants reactions would be on order before something is declared "inaudible".
At any rate, the sensitivity of typical ABX test for audio seems to be rarely (if at all) checked. Extrapolating from a null result then, like it's usually done, is rather questionable, especially when they rely solely on what participants tell you. Other types of (blind) tests might be more appropriate, once they are validated. Additional measurements of participants reactions would be on order before something is declared "inaudible".
Well I don't know about spacecraft, but as a pilot-in-training for light aircraft, let me tell you, if I make a bad landing it is NOT the plane's fault
Jan
Nah, never! It was the strong side wind, with thick snow, and some idiot parked his bicycle in the middle of the runway.
Ah . You got that very wrong. I do better in listening tests because as they said in Gone with the wind " Frankly my dear I don't give a dam ". I find the attitude of those around me makes a difference. If all are relaxed it goes better. As I have said before. Play the exact same thing twice and the second time is , Louder, deep, more open and usually better. It is not a mistake . It is just how it works. Learning brain, usual brain. When I go to these tests I usually insist we do this. They seem dumfounded and it is not in their procedural notes. That means all of their science is wrong. They even think it is a trick. Often people say it was the clearest difference as it is the one that should be impossible. I hope I haven't wasted a bit more of my life saying this. Bad science.
My daughter is Ashburgers Autistic and her hearing is 300 % better than average ( not a clue what that means) . This is a hypothesis of the team in Oxford looking into the condition . We allowed her to be tested. Both my kids are autistic and it follows I might be and from that you might infer? People with Williams syndrome also. The hearing thing is not the question. It is the ability to focus on something. OCD and hearing.
Autism , blindness and deafness affect all people to a greater or lesser extent. Pitch perception is usually good in most people and is what is usually in question when enjoying music. Testing tonal colour means absolutely nothing except matters of taste. Perspective and discordant traits are arguable. People with profound hearing loss sometimes are the most accurate judges of traditional hi fi traits. That is mid band colouration and transient clarity ( piano ) .They find anything aggressive to set off whatever defect they live with. Many could not endure live music.
My ability to listen to people is very poor. That is not the same thing.
I just went on a fuel forum as I was interested to see what they thought of the rubbish I buy. I then saw this gem. Hi fi is the same.
" no mpg out of tesco, full of ethanol and chit to thin it out.
i can get 560miles to a tank in bp of maxol,
tesco and asda drops like hell to 380.
tested it tons of times, just won't buy it now."
" no mpg out of tesco, full of ethanol and chit to thin it out.
i can get 560miles to a tank in bp of maxol,
tesco and asda drops like hell to 380.
tested it tons of times, just won't buy it now."
I should clarify the profound hearing loss thing ( raised by Gilbert Briggs and my lifetime of observations ). It is possible why this contradiction is so marked is those who persist with hi fi when profoundly deaf may not be a representative sample. They are the ones who still find value in owning good hi fi. Their need is greatest. They do not hear the whole spectrum so nit pick the bit they can hear. Their mechanism is intact in some ways ( speed ). They often have tinnitus which is made worse by excessive volume. Micro detail is the most valuable thing to them and the use of audio memory fills in. Beethoven would have understood I guess.correct.
I have just sent this to someone. In a nutshell it combines all the problems and the ways we accept a thing to be good or bad. The speaker is both atrocious and wonderful. The reviewer is blind.
http://www.onethingaudio.webspace.virginmedia.com/FOR/QUA/57/9512-QUA-57-REV-CS2.htm
I have just sent this to someone. In a nutshell it combines all the problems and the ways we accept a thing to be good or bad. The speaker is both atrocious and wonderful. The reviewer is blind.
http://www.onethingaudio.webspace.virginmedia.com/FOR/QUA/57/9512-QUA-57-REV-CS2.htm
Last edited:
No its not ignorance at all! I would bet that almost anyone, when detachedly (sp?) considering this, would say: yes of course, that's non-sense, how can anyone say so!
But it is a basic tenet of humans that we are disposed to blindly assume 'I' am better than most, or maybe the best of all! This is evolutions' way of making sure that we go on and on and survive against all odds - if we would be aware of our shortcomings and insignificance we would have disappeared from the face of this earth long ago!
So this kind of behaviour is very important as it enhance out 'success' in life.
Then again, we DO have the capacity to look at things the way they are, especially when it does NOT concern ourselves but others. That's why we feel we make all the smart posts while all the others are the stupid ones.
, not realizing that 'the others' think exactly the same thing about us!Are we not an interesting breed??
jan
- Status
- Not open for further replies.