I read the one page abstract you referenced and there is nothing in it to support claims made frequently here that one type of capacitor sounds significantly different from another.
You are going to need to do a lot better than that to prove any difference.
Here I made it bigger for you! abx and a/b testing on real people……the fact that the resonances make a difference is relative in that different materials are going to resonate differently……plain physics.
Attachments
Last edited:
As the AES paper clearly states the results were entirely subjective. Hardly a result that proves anything and a somewhat disappointing statement for a supposedly scientific organization.
I keep pointing to fully objective well run blind tests as the real standard for coming to any conclusion about this subject. And I've included links to videos and other places that say exactly the same thing.
But so far no one has been able to produce any such test with regard to crossover capacitors. Lacking that evidence fully supports my position that no one has shown capacitors make any difference. Maybe some day someone will run the proper tests and we will all know. But up to now that does not appear to have happened.
I keep pointing to fully objective well run blind tests as the real standard for coming to any conclusion about this subject. And I've included links to videos and other places that say exactly the same thing.
But so far no one has been able to produce any such test with regard to crossover capacitors. Lacking that evidence fully supports my position that no one has shown capacitors make any difference. Maybe some day someone will run the proper tests and we will all know. But up to now that does not appear to have happened.
Last edited:
Did you actually read that paper? Did you notice they performed ABX test which can not find difference between capacitors? That is the science!
After that, the science has gone - then they switched to A/B test, which, surprise, surprise - found some difference!
Sorry, I will stick to the science only.
Last edited:
As I said, the need to believe differences can't be heard is strong, makes me wonder who are the most zealous 😉
So controlled a/b testing isn’t good enough? I could of swore that’s what everyone was shouting for. The bar will continue to raise that’s the way it goes I reckon.
I’m just curious as to why you discount the a/b testing? It seems to explain why it happened the way it did.
And to answer your question no I did not read the whole thing I’m not a member.
Oh yah, classical fan, please explain how blind testing is not ‘entirely subjective’ ?
“ As the AES paper clearly states the results were entirely subjective. Hardly a result that proves anything and clearly a disappointing statement for a supposedly scientific organization.”
I thought blind testing was how you objectively test the subjective?
I’m just curious as to why you discount the a/b testing? It seems to explain why it happened the way it did.
And to answer your question no I did not read the whole thing I’m not a member.
Oh yah, classical fan, please explain how blind testing is not ‘entirely subjective’ ?
“ As the AES paper clearly states the results were entirely subjective. Hardly a result that proves anything and clearly a disappointing statement for a supposedly scientific organization.”
I thought blind testing was how you objectively test the subjective?
Last edited:
Boy, if you have to ask that question then you apparently don't understand much of anything about testing.
Watch the two videos that I referenced above and then try asking your questions again.
Because of the contradictory results of that particular A/B testing!
About 60% preffered "low-resonance cap" (expensive, high-end cap) because it was "clearer in clarity" and "better in spatial information". And about 10% said "no difference". So far so good. But the gigantic contradiction is that remaining 30% said for the same "low-resonance cap" that was "duller in clarity" and "worse in spatial information" than the cheap "high-resonance cap"!
Please note - it is not the same thing as 60% preferred "A" because of some nondescript quality and other 30% preferred "B" because of something else! The same capacitor ("A") can not be clearer and duller at the same time!!!
And you are thinking that paper is good, only because you didn't read it?
Well, none of us will be able the difference in anything, what with the broken classical records skipping and playing on repeat over and over and all.
My- this thread is just taxing. Adamant, as well as ignorant, incessant repetitiveness, not unlike that of broken records, stating that of others' supposed findings and not one's own.
This thread is full of presumptions from the OP, that we are telling him to change something he loves. That has not happened. We are simply suggesting that the process is tried inherent to this thread, so that he has the same knowledge base as the participants who feel the opposite way. Suggesting to 'walk a mile in our shoes', is in no way insisting that he does what he does not wish to do.
OP-
No, you do not have to change your Piccolos. You love them, that is understood.
We do NOT feel that more expensive means better, and you seem to miss that point consistently. We understand that you are very unwavering due to your stance on the subject, but you really do not have to be condescending towards the other members participating in this thread. Just because we feel differently does not mean we misunderstand you. In fact, I feel the majority of this thread is you misunderstanding us.
Have you ever gone back and reread your posts before hitting submit? Being tactful is also something I feel you lack consistently, to the point where you come off rude in your posts. I am not offended, as I've dealt with people on your side many a time. I just feel you could be a little more congenial.
With this said, I feel both sides are banging their heads against a brick wall here, at least from my perspective. I feel the inexperienced 'science' side (as far as caps go) will not see the possibility that we could be correct. And then the dark side cap-rollers are not willing to allow him to think that way without getting some experience of some sort, because he started this thread that will have no change in result for outcome than any before it.
Some people's minds cannot be changed, brainwashed or not.
Wolf
My- this thread is just taxing. Adamant, as well as ignorant, incessant repetitiveness, not unlike that of broken records, stating that of others' supposed findings and not one's own.
This thread is full of presumptions from the OP, that we are telling him to change something he loves. That has not happened. We are simply suggesting that the process is tried inherent to this thread, so that he has the same knowledge base as the participants who feel the opposite way. Suggesting to 'walk a mile in our shoes', is in no way insisting that he does what he does not wish to do.
OP-
No, you do not have to change your Piccolos. You love them, that is understood.
We do NOT feel that more expensive means better, and you seem to miss that point consistently. We understand that you are very unwavering due to your stance on the subject, but you really do not have to be condescending towards the other members participating in this thread. Just because we feel differently does not mean we misunderstand you. In fact, I feel the majority of this thread is you misunderstanding us.
Have you ever gone back and reread your posts before hitting submit? Being tactful is also something I feel you lack consistently, to the point where you come off rude in your posts. I am not offended, as I've dealt with people on your side many a time. I just feel you could be a little more congenial.
With this said, I feel both sides are banging their heads against a brick wall here, at least from my perspective. I feel the inexperienced 'science' side (as far as caps go) will not see the possibility that we could be correct. And then the dark side cap-rollers are not willing to allow him to think that way without getting some experience of some sort, because he started this thread that will have no change in result for outcome than any before it.
Some people's minds cannot be changed, brainwashed or not.
Wolf
Audio weenies....Perpetuating their stereotyping.
Perennially it seems... sad and amusing.
Carry on Kids.
Perennially it seems... sad and amusing.
Carry on Kids.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with the idea that people have not told me to change what I have. In fact, there are multiple posts here that say exactly that and imply that if I don't change them then I'm some sort of audio dolt.
On the second point while not every post that reports perceived improvements in audio quality uses more expensive capacitors I think the majority of them do. There seems to be an underlying tone that more expensive is better.
And could I be a little more congenial? Yeah, that's probably true. But I'm not sure that I'm all that different from some of the people on the other side of this issue. Not everyone, but there are a few.
That particular test isn't scientific? 90% heard a difference, the statistical requirement is what? No one here has yet defined what they accept as "proof".
I post to you the test, is where came from.... that's only 20year that WE know
, for lissteng test do yourself there isnt better than this ..
Attachments
Last edited:
What ABX test is the people not stuff , I chat a lot with the inventor here , as do John Curl one of the better sounding product in the world....
must post the the sound of resistor ? yep non linear too ,TDH!
Objectively "so far so good"? Subjectively not good? I thought the demand was for objectivity?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.