Confirmation bias - Wikipedia
-quo-Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.[1] It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for desired outcomes, emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched-beliefs. -unquo-
Isn't this the way we all understand the concept of confirmation bias?
I was looking up the scientific definition of 'pedantry', but that also appears to be the kind of word that people understand the meaning of just through osmosis.
24-bit file vs. 16-bit undithered file. Can't you make it technically correct???
Attachments
Sometimes it is, as it leads to confusion.
Mainly because most of the words used to denote things in a field are taken from normal language but often their specific meaning in a field diverge from the normal use.
If you consider the meaning of PRAT wrt a percepted impression then you'll realize that time is involved.... 🙂
While I agree to the publication assertion, there is no formal requirement that an experimenter has to be a professional experimenter to be prone to experimenter bias.
Further, our situation is often unique as a person does an experiment himself, being both experimenter and participant, but at different times.
So as a listener, if being influenced by his expectations it is not expectation bias while it is if he chooses the conditions of the experiment according to his expectations (although unconsciously).
As you will ask if "I heard", yes I did.
Code:
foo_abx 2.0.2 report
foobar2000 v1.3.7
2019-07-30 09:52:01
File A: 01 - The 2 Trumpeters.wav
SHA1: 4cb2bb222e60d25dbf2ee7613a666fa641bd03ba
File B: 02 - The 2 Trumpeters.wav
SHA1: 5e56935dabff634ee739289874cc246360f149d9
Output:
DS : Speakers (iConnectAudio4+ D1)
Crossfading: NO
09:52:01 : Test started.
09:53:49 : 01/01
09:54:01 : 02/02
09:54:14 : 03/03
09:54:43 : 04/04
09:55:04 : 05/05
09:55:12 : 06/06
09:55:19 : 07/07
09:55:28 : 08/08
09:55:35 : 09/09
09:55:45 : 10/10
09:55:45 : Test finished.
----------
Total: 10/10
Probability that you were guessing: 0.1%
-- signature --
46dabd90e57021b34b955cc4c4020295ffef5893
As soon as I started basing equipment purchses on low PRAT scores from the linnie magazine reviews I started being a lot happier about my system. It's always seemed to basically be the set of colourations that come with a Linn/Naim system.
I think so, but does that cover people who are convinced they can hear impossible differences?
Such people often address their trivial errors and mistakes to some kind of undisclosed phenomenon. So, it must be kept in the status of "story telling".
That is happening in your imagination and therefore I tried to remind you how easy it is to fool yourself.
The skin effect is a physical fact and I was talking about the physical implications; skin effect doesn't care about audibility and you will not be able to understand why coaxial cables work well for higher frequenies without understanding the role of the skin effect.
It's just your version of a conspiracy theory and as usual even doing the complete opposite makes one even more suspect. 🙂
As said before, stop reacting to trigger words, try to get the context instead and educate yourself. Peter Aczels (not so correct) opinion paper isn't a sufficient basis.....
Sorry, but no; your question was a deflection and I refrained from following. 😉
Therefore the problem to use it in the case of a listener in a controlled listening test as it is linked to information processing.
Being for example confused in a listening test because a difference might be not as large as expected or don't (subconsciously) trying hard enough because of a prior belief of inaudibility, is not exactly in that category (although there are similarities).
If that approach worked for you that is good news. 🙂
You're the one whos impression is the important one.
Could be for these systems, but the "PRAT property" isn't restricted to this category of systems and IMO not linked to specific kind of coloration.
However, he can be trusted to hear sound difference of different memory locations 😉
But what is the 'PRAT property'? I honestly do not understand it.
Aside: I went to a little concert in a church on saturday. It was a child focussed concert. Violin and Piano no amplification. Wonderful acoustics and a good reminder of how natural music sounds. Even with mini godzilla next to me causing trouble 🙂
Aside: I went to a little concert in a church on saturday. It was a child focussed concert. Violin and Piano no amplification. Wonderful acoustics and a good reminder of how natural music sounds. Even with mini godzilla next to me causing trouble 🙂
To explain something like that is surely one of the most difficult parts. 🙂
In a recent post, I tried to relate it to a term known for musical performance, i.e. "groove/groovy" , which I think is quite easy to point out when listening to a groovy and a non-groovy performance, but difficult to express verbally.
That the definition of "PRaT" seems to have been altered over the decade doesn't make it easier; "Rhythm" was constantly part of it, though. (IMO)
Even more difficult to exactly find a clear "cause/effect" relationship wrt measurements vs. perceived impression.
As stated before, there is a clear relationship to the group delay parameter, but that alone isn't sufficient.
In german forums, the perception is often related to the so-called "Fusswippfaktor" (roughly translated to a toe-tapping factor), means listener involvement leading to physiological reactions. I'd say, it is physically related to the (more or less clear) reproduction of temporal micro fluctuations in the music, which points to the phase response and onset/leading edge reproduction.
But again, I'd say it would be quite easy to define and agree while listening together to different systems......
That is an important part, being often reminded what it is all about or what the ultimate goal is. 🙂
Except clocking the same file in and out with better than one sample period resolution can not change the relative group delay of the contents. Turntable and speaker choices certainly can.
hmm, to me 'toe tapping' is a function of the music. I can't imagine doing that to arvo Part piano works but happy to do it to uncle bunt even off an old 78. And I will admit to being biased due to some of the more bonkers writings of Martin Colloms and (unproven) apocryphal strories about linn salesman being trained to stand by punters and tap their feet when demoing the stuff they were incentivised to sell (and I hope this is untrue).
Maybe we need 'air guitar factor' or AGF? 🙂
Maybe we need 'air guitar factor' or AGF? 🙂
Surely it depends on the music, but wouldn't it be nice stop pretending being new to this forum?
If it were just about the music we wouldn't care about the reproduction and surely wouldn't be here; further, am I really supposed to include two pages of disclaimers to prevent all possible imaginations about what wasn't included and why? 🙂
That said, I guess I've already mentioned the difficulties to explain a perceived impression without having a shared listening experience at hand and obviously I failed.... 😉
Doesn't that just go to show that it is a pretty useless marketing term when used in the presence of the not so gullible?
For me music is the passion, DIY audio is the hobby*. I was being serious though. I have never listened to any system that made we want to 'toe tap' more than any other. Maybe I am just sensitive to different aspects of reproduction, which is not a contentious point.
*I would sell the main system if it meant I could keep the music to play on whatever was around.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.