Myths busted.
"10. Frequency response (and other specifications) will reliably tell us how a piece of equipment will sound".
So is that to infer that a FR that stops at 150hz won't sound bass light? Or one that stops at 6K Hz won't sound dull?
I don't have an issue with the other nine.
"10. Frequency response (and other specifications) will reliably tell us how a piece of equipment will sound".
So is that to infer that a FR that stops at 150hz won't sound bass light? Or one that stops at 6K Hz won't sound dull?
I don't have an issue with the other nine.
I presume by "(and other specifications)" the statement could include ... oh, I don't want to repeat myself.
That's not much as far as fuel, just from reading the list of 10 things, the writer is more knowledgeable than the person in the video in the OP.
So what has been a derogatory term for the Dunning-Kruger 'superhuman hearing' types, "The Golden Ear", is now a brand of a speaker, the irony is palpable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick
Musical interlude (may be covered under copyright, but I've not heard of anyone sued for quoting two lines on a message board):
"There's a sign on the wall, but she wants to be sure,
'Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings."
Specifically, you're using the words proof and theory/theories colloquially, and NOT as they're used in science (actually, proof is NOT used in science at all, even though it's used colloquially and in mathematics).
When successfully testing theories, scientists use the term "confirmed".
This means the theory is consistent with the observations.
The term "proven" is never used in science. There's a reason.
This means the theory is consistent with the observations.
The term "proven" is never used in science. There's a reason.
The atomic bomb proved E = mc2. The fact we can measure a black hole proves black holes are real. It doesn’t make sense to say they’re theoretical.the Double slit experiment proved that light is both a particle and a wave.
Last edited:
We must not confuse data with a particular theory. The same data can confirm more than one theory.
This is why further observation may be needed to distinguish among theory candidates.
This is why further observation may be needed to distinguish among theory candidates.
Last edited:
Probably not. I mean, its not a mathematical expression that is to be taken as logically true in the general case.
Its probably referring more to, say, maybe two speakers that measure as having pretty much the same FR, yet sound different. Some of that might be due to dispersion/directivity. Differences in sound might also have to do with how FR is measured by different manufacturers, sweep rate, filter bandwidth, etc., that may show or hide jagged FR as it is, or else make it look more smooth. Another factor with FR is how it is obtained, by resonance effects, say, for example, in a cabinet with ports, versus with a sealed cabinet. Waterfall plots may help in that case, but if we are only given FR plots, well...
Last edited:
What about semi-attentionally deaf guys who think they can hear anything anyone else can? Those who imagine they are competent diy perceptual scientists? Dunning-Kruger?
Its clear that thresholds of audibility are estimates of statistical variation among humans. Why is it the sceptics seem to think they are in the most sensitive 50% of the population for hearing distortion or any other factor? If they can't hear it then nobody can, seems to be their point of view. And they sometimes try to back it up with incompetent DIY ABX tests where their "experimenter bias" drives them to "confront" test subjects to prove to them they can't hear anything reliably. Good example of junk science.
Last edited:
The Universe is not locally real. This was proven. It was proven experimentally By the 3 fellows who shared the Nobel prize in physics last year.
“If I could explain it to the average person they wouldn’t have given me the Nobel prize.”
“You can’t prove it!” - 12 Angry Men
“If I could explain it to the average person they wouldn’t have given me the Nobel prize.”
“You can’t prove it!” - 12 Angry Men
Everyone is above average.
https://decision-wise.com/resources/articles/do-you-suffer-from-the-lake-wobegon-effect/
No, it wasn't. Proof exists only in mathematics. If you want to understand science, maybe start with this: https://www.discovery.com/science/Difference-Between-Fact-Hypothesis-Theory-Law-Science#:~:text=Calling it a theory means,anything with 100 percent certainty.
"...science never says anything with 100 percent certainty."
Last edited:
Perhaps because of the preceding BS?
If the foundation of it's claims are built on BS, then surely what follows is BS. On the one hand, Bybee claims his devices do nothing or (what?), and then you make possible claims of what they do. Why.
Why is that not hard to understand?
PS,
We have fairies at the bottom of our garden, is that hard to believe or disprove?
Last edited:
You seem confused. Are we testing Jack Bybee's claims, or are we testing some physical devices to see if they do anything at all that is measurable? Those are two completely different questions. For example, if I take a Bybee device to an independent testing lab, and don't tell them anything about Bybee or his claims, if I only ask them to perform some measurements, including for 'excess noise' at 2A of current, then why can't they just do the measurement and give me the results?
No, it wasn't. Proof exists only in mathematics. If you want to understand science, maybe start with this: https://www.discovery.com/science/Difference-Between-Fact-Hypothesis-Theory-Law-Science#:~:text=Calling it a theory means,anything with 100 percent certainty.
"...science never says anything with 100 percent certainty."
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone,
`it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.'
`it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.'
Last edited:
Snake oil salesman is the second oldest profession
I live in the quantum slipstream, superpositioning allows yoda AND Spock to validate the superiority of my audio widget (available for 999.99), get them now while they are still in-phase in this dimension, no measurements please, proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing
I live in the quantum slipstream, superpositioning allows yoda AND Spock to validate the superiority of my audio widget (available for 999.99), get them now while they are still in-phase in this dimension, no measurements please, proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing
Pretty good example of noise, or maybe some kind of signal buried in noise?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.