How can I consider you sincere if you try, by comparison, to say that I don't trust the scientific process?
It's not what happened:
You generalize accusing subjectivists to have an economical interest....
Nothing to do with scientific process.
BTW I support too the scientific process.
I'm not refusing blind tests at all, I'm saying that almost all DBTs are designed and conducted by skepticals with the intention to prove there are no differences...
During the test design phase researcher's bias can lead to a test made to disprove differences... by design.
Could that be because the gullibles refuse to conduct (or even participate in) DBTs to demonstrate that there are differences? Note that some DBTs do show differences, or at least the ability to distinguish, but in some cases it turns out that this is due to incidental clues such as switching clicks or background noise level.
If you define "subjectivist" as someone who insists on doing controlled evaluations by ear, I would say that they're the opposite of gullible. They are hard-nosed realists. If "subjectivists" is defined as people who refuse to test their own perceptions and validate extraordinary claims, believing that they're somehow beyond the restrictions of the human brain, then "gullible" is apt.
I have ranted before about the false dichotomy of "subjective" versus "objective."
In any case, this is WAY off topic, so let's put that aside and stick to actual data regarding claims of capacitor break-in.
A little humor yes, laughing not necessarily. LBP is just a reference to the last time I got caught up in this little water spout with the same points of view expressed by a similar group of posters.
Like Carly Simon sings "Haven't Got Room For The Pain". So I'm out-a here.
Peace and enjoy !!!
The sound of caps after they have been "broken-in" may be analogous to getting used to listening to music with the tone controls set to flat, or no tone control in the loop at all.
When I built my first tube amp and speakers, I just, automatically in my mind, knew I should EQ like I was used to doing.
Over the past few years I decided to start listening with no tone control. I like it. Better balance to me. I recently set the tone back to the way I used to listen, no good whatsoever.
Just a thought.
When I built my first tube amp and speakers, I just, automatically in my mind, knew I should EQ like I was used to doing.
Over the past few years I decided to start listening with no tone control. I like it. Better balance to me. I recently set the tone back to the way I used to listen, no good whatsoever.
Just a thought.
No, actually, I don't. Please re-read my post on the subject. I said many or most claims of "mysterious effects" are made by people who have a financial interest in proving the "mysterious effect" exists. I did not say that all subjectivists have a financial interest. That would be a generalization.
You say you support the scientific process. But then in the second paragraph you completely dismiss it based on a conspiracy theory. I'm confused now...
~Tom
Don't forget the candles and incense after all . Or you could go for the quick mail message.
Here is a thought,
How do some capacitors self heal?
If the self healing takes place in the first few days of use?<<<yes you may think few days?<<<<well I guess it may have something to do with the applied voltage and frequency? Then again perhaps the burn away of leakage areas may not be the issue. (its just a thought).
Regards
M. Gregg
How do some capacitors self heal?
If the self healing takes place in the first few days of use?<<<yes you may think few days?<<<<well I guess it may have something to do with the applied voltage and frequency? Then again perhaps the burn away of leakage areas may not be the issue. (its just a thought).
Regards
M. Gregg
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.