RHosch said:
Which is not to say a high end speaker manufacturer is not interested in producing better sound.
My, I'm feeling sleepy.
It ain't proof and it won't increase the perceived value as most potential customers simply won't pay attention. It may, otoh, aid the sound...
Even well respected and intelligent "experts" in the field do strange things at times... strange things that have no basis in reality that is. Even the most educated and experienced are subject to the forces of perceptual and psychological biases. That they often claim otherwise is even more reason to remain skeptical of their claims.
He may have been derisive about how some ABX tests were done but he used to be a regular on rec.audio.opinion and spoke in defense of ABX and how it is indeed a very good way to determine if small audio differences were present.
Do a Google search for JJ+ABX and you find many posts of his on the subject.
Hot damn! I seem to have gotten this quote thing down.
Next, spelling!
It is kind of discouraging that those that can hear differences seem to be adament about the subject - almost arrogantly so.
(not necesarily those in this discussion)
Seldom do they say that they were fooled on one thing or another. I suppose that some might think that this gives them credibility, but I would be more impressd if they were LESS decisive- admitting that perhaps in some cses they were wrong- or fooled or changed their minds.
It has been proven to me over and over in life that people can make perceptual mistakes. To claim that all differences are clear and obvious is a signifier of people deluding themselves.
To bring up the cable directionality test again- here was a blind study that allowed the participants to spend any amount of time and try them in any manner that they wanted. It seems that this would be a fair test even for the anti Peliconist group. I can't see how this has the problems that some claim the ABX tests have.
they could burn them in or not.... they could listen to them for hours or minutes. They could label them with their own arbitrary labels so that they knew when they were listening to one or the other.
To me, the participants were very very confident of their abilities to discern directionality in cables, yet were unable to do so.
Now of course one can say that the results are only for that particular cable, and that is true. Yet the results say to me that I would be better off spending my time on other issues.
I am very greatful to the members and participants who did this test. Perhaps we can organize others.
(not necesarily those in this discussion)
Seldom do they say that they were fooled on one thing or another. I suppose that some might think that this gives them credibility, but I would be more impressd if they were LESS decisive- admitting that perhaps in some cses they were wrong- or fooled or changed their minds.
It has been proven to me over and over in life that people can make perceptual mistakes. To claim that all differences are clear and obvious is a signifier of people deluding themselves.
To bring up the cable directionality test again- here was a blind study that allowed the participants to spend any amount of time and try them in any manner that they wanted. It seems that this would be a fair test even for the anti Peliconist group. I can't see how this has the problems that some claim the ABX tests have.
they could burn them in or not.... they could listen to them for hours or minutes. They could label them with their own arbitrary labels so that they knew when they were listening to one or the other.
To me, the participants were very very confident of their abilities to discern directionality in cables, yet were unable to do so.
Now of course one can say that the results are only for that particular cable, and that is true. Yet the results say to me that I would be better off spending my time on other issues.
I am very greatful to the members and participants who did this test. Perhaps we can organize others.
Hi,
This is kind of surprising to read to me:
I can only speak for myself but I've never been fooled by my auditory senses so far...
When there's no difference that I can perceive I'll tell it just the same.
It has a huge problem, actually more than one:
- 2 test candidates. (I happened to be one of the volunteers)
- one kind of wire coming off the same spool, same for both candidates.
- test doesn't meet ABX requirements at all.
Conclusion of that test: both testers said they couldn't detect a difference one way or the other.
My conclusion: Maybe that wire is not directional.
After all, who claimed every wire is directional? Not me.
If every wire is in fact directional (Who knows?) then there must be some correlation to the way it is manufactured? Is there?
BTW, after my testing was done I passed the wire to other people whom I happen to know are also capable of telling directionality of wire apart, if any.
They couldn't detect any difference with that wire no matter how we tested.
It seems to me the wrong conclusions are drawn and to this day nobody ever told anyone if the wire was directional or not...Not to my knowledge anyway.
How would you know unless another parallel test was run that came up with a positive identification?
Was there?
Cheers, 😉
This is kind of surprising to read to me:
I can only speak for myself but I've never been fooled by my auditory senses so far...
When there's no difference that I can perceive I'll tell it just the same.
It has a huge problem, actually more than one:
- 2 test candidates. (I happened to be one of the volunteers)
- one kind of wire coming off the same spool, same for both candidates.
- test doesn't meet ABX requirements at all.
Conclusion of that test: both testers said they couldn't detect a difference one way or the other.
My conclusion: Maybe that wire is not directional.
After all, who claimed every wire is directional? Not me.
If every wire is in fact directional (Who knows?) then there must be some correlation to the way it is manufactured? Is there?
BTW, after my testing was done I passed the wire to other people whom I happen to know are also capable of telling directionality of wire apart, if any.
They couldn't detect any difference with that wire no matter how we tested.
It seems to me the wrong conclusions are drawn and to this day nobody ever told anyone if the wire was directional or not...Not to my knowledge anyway.
How would you know unless another parallel test was run that came up with a positive identification?
Was there?
Cheers, 😉
Variac: I've got these very cool multiposition Shallcross switches, perfect for doing a blind test comparing Radio Shack-level components to Audiophile Approved ones. And Peter Daniel offered to help with fabricating boxes. My idea was to build some simple passive high-pass filters (with an f3 of something like 15 Hz) using fancy and cooking-grade parts (trimmed for identical response and level) and have the switch positions randomized. The person doing the test would have to sort which were which. He could switch rapidly or slowly. Long listening sessions or brief ones. Complete control of source material, sequence, volume, and listening environment. The tester could do anything he wanted except measure.
I had called for some donations of fancy parts, universally recognized among the fashionable as being top-drawer (I'd buy 'em, but I can't afford 'em). Fdegrove was willing to donate a couple of resistors, but I needed more and some fancy caps, too. I'm still willing to donate my switches and construction time to the cause if anyone is willing to step up to the plate and get me some fancy Rs and Cs.
I had called for some donations of fancy parts, universally recognized among the fashionable as being top-drawer (I'd buy 'em, but I can't afford 'em). Fdegrove was willing to donate a couple of resistors, but I needed more and some fancy caps, too. I'm still willing to donate my switches and construction time to the cause if anyone is willing to step up to the plate and get me some fancy Rs and Cs.
Jan, that's interesting. I take it that's an AES article? My local U doesn't carry the journal, alas!
I'd sure like to read it and the preceding paper.
Do you have a URL?
I wonder what the distortion components were?
Incidently, Geddes's wife Lidia Lee, the other part of Gedlee, is a psychologist specializing in audiology. Same structure as the Cambridge-Nokia team.
I'd sure like to read it and the preceding paper.
Do you have a URL?
I wonder what the distortion components were?
Incidently, Geddes's wife Lidia Lee, the other part of Gedlee, is a psychologist specializing in audiology. Same structure as the Cambridge-Nokia team.
janneman said:
The answer of course is, they don't know the difference between noise and the sound signal. Any reduction in noise will be accompanied by the same reduction in signal.
And you can't trust the Bybee website for information anyway. John has said several times in the past that the information there about the QPs is intentionally misleading.
se
First Frank, I admire you for taking the time and effort to take the test, as well as those that put it together-SY
was involved -correct?
I'm not sure what you mean. Of course I know you would honestly report the results.
My point is that maybe after extended listening - or maybe after a double blind test of
some sort, that you might have changed your mind once or something....
If there is no difference that you PERCEIVE, isn't it possible that you are being fooled ?
How do you know you are right when you don't perceive a difference? Or you do?
I recently read a study of various personality traits- People with basically no sense of humor think that they have a fine sense of humor. How can this be? Well.... they don't know what a sense of humor is! How do you know if you are being fooled if you are being fooled? Well if you are fooled- you don't I guess.
Doesn't this make the test more fair-that you had wire manufactured in the same way? After all,
there is no way to test if all wire is directional or not. All we can try to determine is whether the wire under test is directional, not that all wires are. It is meaningful to me that this type of wire just happened to be non directional. certainly not proof that wire isn't directional, but an indication, no?
Since you have
You "happen to know?" how has this been established? This doesn't sound very rigorous. What tests were done?
Isn't it POSSIBLE that they have been fooling themselves and others?
Now we know that there were in fact more than 2 people that could NOT perceive any difference. More evidence.
What happened to the wire?- we could have a lot more people test it since it still exists. I'm willing to give it a go. I don't have as much confidence in my abilities as you though. Perhaps others that are more confident would like to try it too.
Myself, I wopuld love to hear some cable that you and your friends find to be directional so I could give it a try.
EDIT: Yeah, I also wonder how they measured "Sense of Humor"😀
was involved -correct?
I'm not sure what you mean. Of course I know you would honestly report the results.
My point is that maybe after extended listening - or maybe after a double blind test of
some sort, that you might have changed your mind once or something....
If there is no difference that you PERCEIVE, isn't it possible that you are being fooled ?
How do you know you are right when you don't perceive a difference? Or you do?
I recently read a study of various personality traits- People with basically no sense of humor think that they have a fine sense of humor. How can this be? Well.... they don't know what a sense of humor is! How do you know if you are being fooled if you are being fooled? Well if you are fooled- you don't I guess.
Doesn't this make the test more fair-that you had wire manufactured in the same way? After all,
there is no way to test if all wire is directional or not. All we can try to determine is whether the wire under test is directional, not that all wires are. It is meaningful to me that this type of wire just happened to be non directional. certainly not proof that wire isn't directional, but an indication, no?
Since you have
then you are confident that the wire is nondirectional.So now we have a bit of imnformation. There seems to be wire which is non directional
Well, you should know, since you have "never been fooled by my auditory senses so far"
You "happen to know?" how has this been established? This doesn't sound very rigorous. What tests were done?
Isn't it POSSIBLE that they have been fooling themselves and others?
Now we know that there were in fact more than 2 people that could NOT perceive any difference. More evidence.
What happened to the wire?- we could have a lot more people test it since it still exists. I'm willing to give it a go. I don't have as much confidence in my abilities as you though. Perhaps others that are more confident would like to try it too.
Myself, I wopuld love to hear some cable that you and your friends find to be directional so I could give it a try.
EDIT: Yeah, I also wonder how they measured "Sense of Humor"😀
Jan, Steve is being 'inadvertently' misleading. Jack Bybee does not intentionally lie on his website, and over the years, I have tried to get him to clean it up. It was first written by his former business partner who was a CFO for Linear Technology at the time. Jack should have edited it better, from the get-go. Still, it is vague, and it will remain so. The 1/f noise is real, however, and well could be what is most easily measured. I don't know, nor does SE, whether the signal is lost with the 1/f noise. The fact that it does anything at all is a minor miracle. ;-)
john curl said:
Ah. So he's he's unintentionally lying on his website?
Here's what you yourself said:
I know that Jack's descriptions are' inaccurate' or misleading.
Ok, so you say that they are in fact inaccurate or misleading.
Those words were followed by these words:
They apparently are meant to conceal the operating mechanism from others as well a talk generally about his devices.
Ok. So the descriptions are inaccurate or misleading. And this was done for a specific intended purpose.
I've never claimed to be the sharpest tool in the shed, but if you say something inaccurate or misleading for a specific intened purpose, does that not make it intentional?
Oh, and what's that word we use for people who intentionally use inaccurate or misleading information in the course of convincing people to part with their money?
Please, John. The resisor in the ceramic tube with the goop painted on it would have to be prescient to remove noise without also removing signal.
And by the way, there's at present not one shred of evidence that the thing even reduces 1/f noise.
se
Variac, my rôle in the wire fiasco was peripheral- the driving force was Steve Eddy. He is MUCH more fascinated by wire claims than I am. That's his second-biggest personality defect, the biggest being that he prefers not to work with tubes.
Interesting how Steve and John Curl share that same nasty blind spot. Has anyone ever seen them in the same room? Hmmm....?
Interesting how Steve and John Curl share that same nasty blind spot. Has anyone ever seen them in the same room? Hmmm....?
Variac said:
The very straightforward part two of this (failed) experiment would be to ask Golden Eared Ones about the SPECIFIC wire that DID exhibit the directionality (in their experience), and repeat the test in the same way (someone carefully cuts out samples from a single spool and mails them to Golden Eared Ones for testing).
The problem is twofold - GEO's will pick the wires where directionality can be VISUALLY detected (like most braided cables), or have printing/extrusion artefacts that can be used for the same purpose,
OR
GEOs will simply say "I have nothing to prove to any of you pelicans", declare victory and go and have a drink of their choice.
Steve Eddy said:
Well, I didn't want to be so harsh with all the sensitivity floating around here, but I also noted Mr B was quite ambiguous on the technology, basically saying gee, I really don't know how it works, but it does.
That's his predicament of course. If he explains it technically, he will be attacked because you can be sure it will have a weak basis. If he doesn't say how it works, they will think it is a tweak/placebo.
Not an easy life in this business😀
Jan Didden
Konnichiwa,
Cable (and especially wire) directionality is an interresting issue. I have so far failed to reliably identify it, except in cables where the actual contruction is "directional" (eg cables with screens grounded only on one side), but I do observe it in wiring Amplifiers and making cables, as it does not really increase effort. It's one of those things where I am highly skeptical but apply it anyway, "just in case"...
I cannot as such remember the test, but it strikes me as a poor choice of subject. In order to be valid the test would have to use cables that are generally rekoned to be genuinely directional and ensure that both cable quality and system quality is such that the difference would be actualy able to show up.
I find that using the "wrong" speaker cable can drastically reduces the audibility of other small changes, as does the "wrong" interconnect somewhere. Of course, most speakers are also bad enough.
Sayonara
Variac said:
Cable (and especially wire) directionality is an interresting issue. I have so far failed to reliably identify it, except in cables where the actual contruction is "directional" (eg cables with screens grounded only on one side), but I do observe it in wiring Amplifiers and making cables, as it does not really increase effort. It's one of those things where I am highly skeptical but apply it anyway, "just in case"...
I cannot as such remember the test, but it strikes me as a poor choice of subject. In order to be valid the test would have to use cables that are generally rekoned to be genuinely directional and ensure that both cable quality and system quality is such that the difference would be actualy able to show up.
I find that using the "wrong" speaker cable can drastically reduces the audibility of other small changes, as does the "wrong" interconnect somewhere. Of course, most speakers are also bad enough.
Sayonara
- Status
- Not open for further replies.