Yes indeed. I wish that people would stop unfairly accusing others that 'they cannot hear a difference between cables'. Of cours 'we' can. I have heard lots of differences between cables. But I could explain them on the basis of measurements. Its easy to hear differnces with those speaker cables, forget the brand, with the 'boxes' on each end, because they are so pathalogical that they mess with both freq response and freq dependent damping.
It is so simple do deliberately mess with a cable so as to make it sound different to a good red homedepot cable. And if you like that sound, by all means plunk down your cash. But the difference between well designed cables with reasonable R, C, L? Haven;t heard it yet. YMMV.
And no, I have not yet heard differences between burned in and not burned in cables. So far
jd
As I have for almost 20 years now, I await any citation better than a loaded audio club demonstration by a biased test administrator who tells his subjects which answer is correct and which a delusion before group testing.
You sound certain to be the one to make my dreams comes true. 'Hundreds if not thousands' you say?
@sy,
In that case I would argue that you suffer from hearing problems and would counsel that you indergo a proper investigation as soon as possible to establish scientifically how far your hearing may vary from accepted norms. Although I can (just) accept your appeal to technical and scientific norms, I cannot accept the subjective reports which you sometimes have given.
@all:
Seriously though, I would suggest that anyone, especially those who have lived for 40+ years and who make strong subjective claims should have such tests as ones opinions may well be unique due to undiscovered hearing problems. I now have an annual check - next one is on 5 January. Well worth it just to see how much treble roll-off one is suffering from BEFORE spending a lot of money on new ribbon tweeters!! syn08 has admitted that he does not trust his hearing, he has some real reason why he has to trust his technical designs.
In that case I would argue that you suffer from hearing problems and would counsel that you indergo a proper investigation as soon as possible to establish scientifically how far your hearing may vary from accepted norms. Although I can (just) accept your appeal to technical and scientific norms, I cannot accept the subjective reports which you sometimes have given.
@all:
Seriously though, I would suggest that anyone, especially those who have lived for 40+ years and who make strong subjective claims should have such tests as ones opinions may well be unique due to undiscovered hearing problems. I now have an annual check - next one is on 5 January. Well worth it just to see how much treble roll-off one is suffering from BEFORE spending a lot of money on new ribbon tweeters!! syn08 has admitted that he does not trust his hearing, he has some real reason why he has to trust his technical designs.
@sy,
In that case I would argue that you suffer from hearing problems and would counsel that you indergo a proper investigation as soon as possible to establish scientifically how far your hearing may vary from accepted norms. Although I can (just) accept your appeal to technical and scientific norms, I cannot accept the subjective reports which you sometimes have given.
Speak up, son, why are you mumbling?
Beside the price tag, which is irrelevant in this discussion, for statistical reasons it is highly unprobable that "hundreds if not thousands" of tests do exists. Otherwise we would have most likely a lot of positive test results (maybe false positives)
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2002
Again, a correctly administered double blind test prevents these types of bias. No single result is ever counted as valid - there's a 1:1 chance of success by simply guessing. There must be a clear trend among many different samples.Otherwise we would have most likely a lot of positive test results (maybe false positives)
A good definition
Another short article...
Oaty, several people have made the remarkable assertion that the "vibes" of a skeptic can suddenly turn the test subject deaf. This has been asserted, of course, with no evidence, just an unsourced, unreferenced "IQ test" that may or may not have happened sometime, somewhere, with some unknown protocol.
In this viewpoint, it's not a matter of the skeptic knowing or not knowing what the answer for a particular trial is, it's the projection of the attitude that there won't be any significant detection. Of course, the one guy here who has enough confidence in his own abilities to be willing to submit to a reasonably controlled test doesn't seem to mind having me around for it. Most of the others just like doing the Superior Dance without putting their beliefs to the test.
In this viewpoint, it's not a matter of the skeptic knowing or not knowing what the answer for a particular trial is, it's the projection of the attitude that there won't be any significant detection. Of course, the one guy here who has enough confidence in his own abilities to be willing to submit to a reasonably controlled test doesn't seem to mind having me around for it. Most of the others just like doing the Superior Dance without putting their beliefs to the test.
A long way of saying, "I have zero, zip, nada, nichts, for evidence. Wahhhhh!" Be more like TG1954- man up, stand up for your beliefs, put them to the test.
nope... lol
You seem to be making the remarkable claim that administrator behaviour has no impact on test validity up until they actively and physically interfere with the protocol. I see the consequences maintaining the opposite has on, for example, Randi's work but if high end audio designers can be part of the entertainment industry that's doubly true of magicians.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.