Try finding a 'healing spot' or 'sacred spot' and take a listen to nature sounds then move off the spot and you will find sounds are different, what JB is doing is messing with fields, you have much to learn Grasshopper.
Dan.
Last edited:
He's fickle, or one of the bored old men (Mark quote 🙂) or both....or somethings else, it's hard to be sure of anything anymore 😕
Belief does not enter into this discussion, it's about subjective differences, ie heard differences.
Extra files and randomised files are coming, we still haven't established that Scott's hearing or gear is up to the task, this will come soon. The RMAA numbers for the soundcard are fine enough t would seem.
Dan.
What else will make it go away? Though its taken even a more interesting turn, if I can tell in a sighted test I get to do it blind???? There are two or three others that have "passed", give them the mixed up blind test. Guess not, too much opportunity to go off the rails.
We could just civilly do this, say the current original and 3 successive generations mixed up and see how folks line them up.
I'm sorry? Where have you been? Obviously all the discussions not directly affecting your personal beliefs go clean over your head or is automatically filtered somewhere in there. Have you considered you may be obsessed?
You need to let go of this, come on take the chance of challenging your beliefs.
Last time, promise.
Some quick photos of the setup would help - and show how / where the goop is applied, and show the devices used in making the files.
Like I said I can post randomised files tomorrow, you have choices of cheap Rca cable, with or without ferrite filters and Goop cable, is that suitable/ideal ?.
If not what files set would you like ?
One or both cables probably act like antennas and or have bad, noisy connections. Not good.
The more sources of problems, the more there is that needs fixing.
Moving at all changes sound anyway, as our member Mr.Harmonics likes to point out.
I believe it does, IMHO. Its hard to get away from beliefs since we are human. For example, I happen to believe anything we can hear can be explained by existing physics and or through the biological mechanisms of hearing, perception, and cognition. I am willing to change that believe in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, but so far there as been no properly conducted experimentation at all (that I am aware of).
There is one huge problem you have, IMHO, and that is that only people in your vicinity and whom you interact with directly ever seem to claim to hear any effects of goop. After having talked to you on the phone, I unambiguously heard clues in your tone of voice and apparent demeanor when you tried gooping the phone on your end while I listened.
In addition, from your voice I infer that you are not a small man, that you are rather physically fit, and that you can have mood swings evidenced in your vocal tone. I would bet on the issue of goop, you would respond rather negatively to someone if you suspected they were trying to screw around with you by denying the audibility of goop. It may be easier for the people around you to tell you what you want to hear, rather than tell you what you don't want to hear.
In addition, when you good the sound system at a concert, at that point you look for evidence in the crowd they are enjoying the music more. But you don't look for evidence that they are not enjoying it more in the presence of goop, or evidence that there is no change on average, or that they enjoy it more sometimes when there is no goop. I suggested that you have someone else apply and remove goop to the sound system without your knowledge and keep a log of when they make changes. I suggested you should stay in a location where you can not see what that person is going. Instead you should watch the crown and keep a log of what times you see evidence or the lack thereof in the behavior of the crowd. Only after the concert do you compare logs to see if your observations track the actual use of goop or not.
I don't think you ever do experiments to see if you can show that goop does nothing. Don't think you conduct proper double blind experiments using goop to find out what happens if it is impossible for you to influence the outcome based on your knowledge of goop being present or not.
Markw4,
Wikipedia says -> Expectation Bias = The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations.
What amuses me is your consistency in being unable to see or comprehend who I am or what you are dealing with. In my work I am a natural born experimenter who conducts research into what I practice every single day. Your own expectation bias is at times, breathtaking.
tapestryofsound
Almost anyone could say that, but it doesn't make them a professional researcher who publishes for a living. Mostly it would be college professor types who have to publish or perish, and it better be in the more respected professional journals if they want the Dean to promote them. If your published research is at that type of level, then maybe the research on expectation bias is applicable to you.
A paper with more detailed information can be found at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/94...837.95935788.1564429512-1610560960.1564429512
Further references are available in the reference section at the end of the above linked article
Last edited:
I pick that up from his posts, hard not to. When I asked if he considered whether he was obsessed I wasn't being flippant.
OK, I do realise that I am flogging a dead horse here - but - I have had peer approved research published in a recognised journal before today.
Edit: why are you being such a spoilsport?
Basically, there is more than a small amount of misuse of the term 'expectation bias' at places like that other audio website out there than features a lot of measurements. They say it means you hear what you expect to hear, as though the claim is some kind of proper scientific explanation for how people hear, which it is not. There is no published research I am aware of in cognitive science which defines the term expectation bias in that way. If there is such research, I would appreciate someone pointing it out.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.