Apparently fabricate. I have Dougyboy on ignore but when I saw this my jaw dropped:
Beyond the highly obvious unlikelihood of that scenario (think about it for a minute in your situation), how does he know he has the best without a DBT? What protocol eliminated his bias and preconceptions comparing something he built, that didn't waste money, and bested "doctors, lawyers and business owners". These guys love to trumpet psychology but that paragraph contains enough for a regional conference.
Some time ago I was encouraged by this thread to change speaker cables
I have always heard a difference on just about any kind of cable
But havent experimented with cables in a very long time, so I wanted to give it try
I was not surpriced, there really was a difference
I had no expectations for better sound, on the contratry
So I cant explain why it sounded better, when I actually expected it would sound worse
You can see the cables in the picture ..... I cant find anything causing a sighted bias
but its true
if I would try and advocate thin simple cables, I would not get many listeners
Fore some reason we usually prefer bigger, and advanced materials
But that has nothing to do with any "audiophile" influence, just human nature
Noone will buy a PVC cable, even if it sounds better
And silver plating will mostly be preferred more than raw copper, even if raw copper sounds better ...ups, did it again
I guess we have all been through that
I once listened to a rather thin solid core copper wire in cotton sleeve, as speaker cable
I liked it
Then I took another wire and twisted a pair
But that did not sound as good at all
I have always heard a difference on just about any kind of cable
But havent experimented with cables in a very long time, so I wanted to give it try
I was not surpriced, there really was a difference
I had no expectations for better sound, on the contratry
So I cant explain why it sounded better, when I actually expected it would sound worse
You can see the cables in the picture ..... I cant find anything causing a sighted bias
but its true
if I would try and advocate thin simple cables, I would not get many listeners
Fore some reason we usually prefer bigger, and advanced materials
But that has nothing to do with any "audiophile" influence, just human nature
Noone will buy a PVC cable, even if it sounds better
And silver plating will mostly be preferred more than raw copper, even if raw copper sounds better ...ups, did it again
I guess we have all been through that
I once listened to a rather thin solid core copper wire in cotton sleeve, as speaker cable
I liked it
Then I took another wire and twisted a pair
But that did not sound as good at all
Attachments
You can see the cables in the picture ..... I cant find anything causing a sighted bias
Can't you?
I can understand that there are questions about audibility of cables but when dbt's are done with equipment / system differences like in quoted 'tests' and provide null results, I can't help but question the test. I still have to find two different amplifiers that sound the same, let alone a system.
IIRC you use quite decent equipment, why would that be? Also trying to impress the neighbours with their BOSE systems?
Ad hominem? I invite you to flesh that out. It's a direct and logical consequence of his posts. And after all the daily accusations hurdled at 'believers' here you complain about being mean by pointing out a story that contradicts everything doug proclaims to believe? Some of us here understand both sides of this debate are governed by the same rules. Or should be.
I owned a hardware ABX box at one stage that randomized the selection of A or B, allowed for alignment of voltages between the two channels (to within 0.1 db) and calculated the probabilities once you had finished. So its possible to do ABX by yourself.
Also, there are ABX programs, such as the plug-in for Foobar that will allow a person to ABX two files on a computer. It also calculates the probabilities for you. BTW, great program to use with headphones to listen to compressed audio codecs compared with the uncompressed versions. Codecs that use at or above 256K bits per second bandwidth are impressively hard to distinguish from the uncompressed version (705K bits per second Red Book CD).
oh yeah??
Then why don't you leave "dougyboy" , as you so kindly and graciously name him, on ignore. Then you don't have to deal with his supposed inconsistencies...
Here's a thought that might clean up the thread...
All believers put all non-believers on "IGNORE", and vice-versa... maybe the mods could help, eh? Kinda like in the enabl threads, what with the "technical" and "applications" threads spllt.. only in this case, it'd be far more obvious, and easier to moderate...
John L.
Then why don't you leave "dougyboy" , as you so kindly and graciously name him, on ignore. Then you don't have to deal with his supposed inconsistencies...
Here's a thought that might clean up the thread...
All believers put all non-believers on "IGNORE", and vice-versa... maybe the mods could help, eh? Kinda like in the enabl threads, what with the "technical" and "applications" threads spllt.. only in this case, it'd be far more obvious, and easier to moderate...
John L.
I'm feeling left out, won't someone put me on ignore?
Couldn't do it - ANZAAC spirit and all that
Hi,
As a fairly well trained athlete I can hardly begin to understand the amount of training it takes by other athletes to win a Giro d'Italia, a TdF, even just a single stage or whatever.
Yet time and time again I witness those cyclists doing just that.
When some people claim they're capable of detecting minute (obvious ones to some) differences between one cable or another, and this repeatedly so, because they (probably unconsciously) trained themselves to detect such differences it all becomes impossible because of what exactly?
Maybe instead of reading books we should all sit down and listen, and listen again?
Listening carefully may well develop the senses, reading too many books may well cloud the mind...?
Cheers,
As a fairly well trained athlete I can hardly begin to understand the amount of training it takes by other athletes to win a Giro d'Italia, a TdF, even just a single stage or whatever.
Yet time and time again I witness those cyclists doing just that.
When some people claim they're capable of detecting minute (obvious ones to some) differences between one cable or another, and this repeatedly so, because they (probably unconsciously) trained themselves to detect such differences it all becomes impossible because of what exactly?
Maybe instead of reading books we should all sit down and listen, and listen again?
Listening carefully may well develop the senses, reading too many books may well cloud the mind...?
Cheers,
Yep, that's true. All that can be done seems to be doing done..how did that tortured english sound??!! On his own system, at his own pace, when he is completely sure he is ready.
You might have to get a bit clever I'll grant...if cables (say) make sure they have the same connections, (and rigidity etc, or make them similar, or ask someone else to do it first), then cover them with a 'sock' just as a first example.
Bit trickier with components like pres...where you might need to access vol controls and selectors etc. Mine is single source system only, so that is less difficult in my case. Amps might be 'quite easy', stick them in a box with just a connector umbilical??
Dunno. Bias is always present (well that's the basis we operate under just to make sure). Seems to be a constant emphasis on 'price bias', expensive=better. I personally don't think that's the case, it's simply bias (of whatever flavour) that we don't know about.
Else we would not always see the rejoinder 'the one that sounded better to me was NOT the most expensive one (so there!)' No, price bias was only used as a (common) example, for all we know THIS guy usually gets 'three quotes, and buys the middle one' or somesuch.
Hey, I'd had a few beers ok?? sheesh, cut me some slack haha.
I tried to point out the disconnect here. The claim is something like 'DBTs skew results, because you are forced to compare and make a decision'.
That was my drunken counter to that, the normal purchase procedure. The guy says 'I compared two cables, and bought the better sounding one'.
OOooookkkaaay, you mean you compared and made a decision right?? The same thing as in a dbt. Except you knew which was which in the normal procedure, therefore were not able to control whatever bias may have been operating, be it 'more expensive=better' or 'buy the middle priced one' or a completely different one.
WHY??? That sinking feeling could very well be due to 'this is gonna be easy...oh shiiiit, they do sound much closer than I ever would have believed'. Then straight after that comes your 'additional' pressures of face etc (thought I'd throw face in there seein as how you are immersed now in asian cultures...
).AFAIR, Tom is choosing two cables that after audition he feels will most maximise his chances of differentiation. Then after that decision has been made by Tom, I think SY when he gets there will do a standard set of measurements on the cables.
I think.
I dunno why everyone has kinda jumped on this point of RDFs. I reckon he is spot on!
Why would WE as speaker/system builders be any less influenced by bias?? If anything, we have much more (at least emotional rather than financial) invested in our systems than most!
Man, I'd kill to somehow have my system set up on the HK table and be able to compare it to some highly regarded commercial brands. Why would I love that? It would give me solid evidence of where my system is truly at, and also because I reckon I'd trounce them.
It would be great to know.
In fact, a few years ago I started a thread on that very topic, and to a large degree got similar reactions as RDF just received.
DB speaker comparisons are 'infinitely' harder to set up than cables granted, but for the life of me I cannot believe *we* would consider it unnecessary simply because it involves *our* system. I do find that a bit hypocritical. (so what if all say 'your system sounds the best', we discount uncontrolled accounts that cable A sounds the best do we not??)
It has been said a few times that speakers sound very similar when blinded. I find that extremely hard to believe, as would presumably HK, but the question I want to ask is, has anyone ever done speaker listening tests that hid the identity?? If so, how was it, what were your reactions??
@ terry_j,
John is talking about an A/B-preference test instead of the ABX protocol.
Random allocation of the DUTs to "A" and "B" does the "blinding" part.
This idea should not sound that unfamiliar.
Wishes
Hi jakob, thanks! I get all that, which was why I on first simple glance gave it the 'terry j stamp of approval', a highly sought after imprimateur (sp) in the audio industry I'll have you know!
Bearing in mind the sticking point here is 'actual audible differences', so an extra step somewhere needs to be added, else all he has to do is say cable A sounds like syrup (as he can always see when it is cable A), cable B sounds like lemonade (as he can always see when it is B).
The X in ABX will then get him to say it is A or B. In his setup, how do we get the X part if there is no X?? He always sees A or B, so can simply say syrup or lemonade without any actual difference.
This highlight in his post might do that??
However, it reads as an afterthought rather than a specific component designed to show a relationship between sonic sigs of A or B.
That's why I asked for the clarification.
Not really. Your hypothesis still needs to be demonstrated. ATM all it is is your statement that 'this is the way I think it is'.
We can accept you at your word when you say 'I cannot tell cables apart in a DBT'. (kinda implies you have tried and failed, therefore we believe you)
The next step you need to do before we scour the literature to find out WHY that is, we need to know THAT it is.
When is a good time for you to demonstrate cable differences via your method?? Hopefully getting yours up and running will take less time than the other one in the works.
Hi,
And after all is said and done you still can't hear a difference between cable A or B?
I'd move neighbourhoods ASAP.....
RDF brought on the logic, shall we now do the burial?
Sic transit gloria.....
Cheers,
And after all is said and done you still can't hear a difference between cable A or B?
I'd move neighbourhoods ASAP.....
RDF brought on the logic, shall we now do the burial?
Sic transit gloria.....
Cheers,
Nice analogy. Our senses (applies to whole bodies really) are trained by practice, and in general not by attending expensive lectures given by guys with PhDs in food science and statisticians.
I like it this way, far more democratic - people with great ears don't need to have paid much for their education, and more often than not haven't been to university at all.Thanks for your reply.
I am "wandering" if there is any middle ground between the believers and non believers here?
Both sides know that people actually hear differences when in fact there are absolutely no differences, such as when someone is told a cable has been changed when in fact nothing was touched.
So there should be agreement that in certain situations people can make aural mistakes.
According to the believers people make mistakes in the blind part of a test.
According to the non believers the mistakes are made in the sighted part of the test.
And both these positions seem to be of the 'all or nothing' variety.
Is reality as simple as both sides would have us believe?
No. If they "actually hear" a difference, then there is in fact an actual audible difference.
I would use the term "perceive" instead of "actually hear."
se
One of Sean Olives' recent blogs raises expert listeners, and agrees:
Heaven forbid a factor he lists is maleable to tester influence.
Heaven forbid a factor he lists is maleable to tester influence.
Last edited:
I've now stopped using the word 'subjectivists' because of you explaining that they are actually 'psuedo subjectivists'.
But the words 'hear' and 'perceive' do go right to the heart of the matters dicussed here, and we should all use a common language. There doesn't seem to be a common word that differentiates between an aural experience caused by an external stimulus and one derived from internal brain functions. Maybe perceive is it, but we should all agree or else we are not really communicating at all.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.