If you find one person who agrees with you and a video (where no one knows what has been done) but who "confirms" your fantasies, then you believe and trust it and overlook the hundreds of other people and videos that disprove your imagination fantasy.
All those you write who have experienced the same as you, how influenced do you think they have been by knowing what has been made, or being able to see it?
Now remember that many of your friends could hear big and clear differences on RCA signal cables in a test, the problem was just that the input the cables were used on was not active at all, the amplifier was on XLR balanced input
All those you write who have experienced the same as you, how influenced do you think they have been by knowing what has been made, or being able to see it?
Now remember that many of your friends could hear big and clear differences on RCA signal cables in a test, the problem was just that the input the cables were used on was not active at all, the amplifier was on XLR balanced input
While a third party can't rule out "imagination & delusions" , it quite often happens that even things that are known to be audible, were not detected in "blind tests".
Otoh measurable differences were deemed as unimportant due to conclusions from other (mainly onedimensional) listening experiments.
As we mostly measure single parameters (a lot of these, though), while our hearing sense takes a holistic approach, we have to carefully examine if a certain set of measurement describes the device (it's reproduction abilities) already in a sufficient way.
I have the simple opinion that if you can not measure the difference and can not be heard when you do not know a change has been made, then it is not worth spending money on.
If you can not measure or hear the difference between a capacitor for 7 $ and one for 2000 $ then I buy and use the one that costs
$ 7.
That some people seem to be able to hear the difference when they know that there is a capacitor for 2000 $ and want to spend that kind of money on it, well they should be allowed to
Try these files =
Dropbox - Testen anden raekkefolge - Simplify your life
Do they sound like the same or is there a difference ?
If you can not measure or hear the difference between a capacitor for 7 $ and one for 2000 $ then I buy and use the one that costs
$ 7.
That some people seem to be able to hear the difference when they know that there is a capacitor for 2000 $ and want to spend that kind of money on it, well they should be allowed to
Try these files =
Dropbox - Testen anden raekkefolge - Simplify your life
Do they sound like the same or is there a difference ?
Depends greatly on the quality of the equipment(s) used, the test setup and skill of the technician. Then it comes down to the ability of the observer to interpret the readings. Same as a listening test, blind or not.
Believe me, if you can hear something, it is detectable with current audio analyzers. We are currently measuring well beyond the ability of a human to be even remotely aware of the anomaly. However, the cost of this equipment is a high bar and it isn't easily affordable for most technicians. A sound card doesn't cut it, but it is better than a simple meter reading. That's assuming that the rest of the test setup doesn't contaminate the readings. Good equipment has a noise floor so low that the test setup may swamp the real noise floor with its own noise and picked up interference.
The entire notion that you can hear things that cannot be measured must die. It isn't 1980 or 1990 anymore folks. We've come a great long way in our ability to measure audio equipment and circuits. Cost of admission to this club is high, but it is possible and routine.
-Chris
Agreed, but using good equipment, I've yet to find two devices which are identical measurement wise.
The interpretation of measured differences is still a difficult task and as we have stated already in another thread, we need both - good measurements and good listening experiments.
But afair, the notion of unmeasurable (but audible) differences occured, because some people were adamant that the measured differences couldn't have led to perceptable differences while otoh the listeners were adamant that they were still able to detect audible differences.
Imo, both of these groups didn't try hard enough to find corrobation for their hypothesises.
Accordingly the discussions are too often driven by beliefs, but not from the urge to find out, what is happening.
Which of course is a reasonable pov.
But, it is often not so easy to decide, if a measured difference is "the" difference and often quite difficult to find out, if a difference can be heard or not, which means if a negative test result occurs because the difference can't be detected or simply due to the experimental conditions.
Hi Jakob2,
Yes, I agree and have a long record of stating that measuring tests go hand in hand with listening tests. So we are in perfect agreement.
Hi Thomas,
Sure they should be allowed. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is make claims that are not supported. Of course, this is really bad in medicine even today - and other professions.
-Chris
Yes, I agree and have a long record of stating that measuring tests go hand in hand with listening tests. So we are in perfect agreement.
Hi Thomas,
Sure they should be allowed. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is make claims that are not supported. Of course, this is really bad in medicine even today - and other professions.
-Chris
If you can´t hear the difference between the original file and the same file that has been through the test equipment, then the equipment is good enough for testing, right?
If you simultaneously load the 2 files into Audacity and the difference is minimal to non, then that equipment can be used, right?
If you can´t hear the difference between a $ 10 capacitor and a $ 2000 capacitor in that array, is the difference then insignificant?
And if you compare the files for the 2 capacitors (10 $ and 2000 $) in audacity and the difference is almost invisible and is 80 to 100 db down. Then no one should tell me that they can hear a difference without being contradicted and prove that I am wrong.
Thats how i did the test and the beleivers dont like it ;-)
The files are here = Dropbox - Testen anden raekkefolge - Simplify your life
If you simultaneously load the 2 files into Audacity and the difference is minimal to non, then that equipment can be used, right?
If you can´t hear the difference between a $ 10 capacitor and a $ 2000 capacitor in that array, is the difference then insignificant?
And if you compare the files for the 2 capacitors (10 $ and 2000 $) in audacity and the difference is almost invisible and is 80 to 100 db down. Then no one should tell me that they can hear a difference without being contradicted and prove that I am wrong.
Thats how i did the test and the beleivers dont like it ;-)
The files are here = Dropbox - Testen anden raekkefolge - Simplify your life
Technical explanation has already been given to you multiple times on this thread.
You are just repeating the same debunked opinion.
It's becoming clearer that his issue is psychological and not electrical.
What constitutes known to be audible? Double blind test or something perceived during subjective audition?
What constitutes good listening experiments? One that you approve?
Some people being adamant about their perception isn't a proof. It's still just a perception.
Agree with the above, but it is not easy I see in the same way, here in my words.
What sets it apart is that "The measuring Mafia/ASR people" is very quick to neglect any measured difference as meaning loose because no human will be able to hear it, and blind tests are rejected immediately if they are not after the book, double blind etc.
And we others who 'believe "know there are sound differences" our brain can not interpret and understand that such insignificant measuring differences can cause such great sound changes.the most difficult thing to understand is of course the sound difference between copper and silver.
will not hide that I believe in a third unknown measurement / theory, I experience it as a kind of material sound.
I agree that we can measure difference in everything, but the differences for me are not related to the sound differences that can be experienced in connection with changes in rhythm tempo, timbre/tone, fidelity to nature, imaging soundstage etc.
I started the thread in a naive hope that the two groups could join forces and go one step further, but unfortunately it became the usual battle without any respect for the other party.
You can not expect that 2 groups with different opinions can merge.
By the way, it seems that the many millions of people you say who hear the same thing as you, all fail to participate in all the forums.
You are pretty much the only one who has the opinion you have, the few others who also think there is a difference between silver and copper cable and many other things, are the ones who want to make money on it, or have managed to picture themselves in it because those by the cable have been replaced.
I don´t understand that you continue on all forums with your repetitive writings when no one, yes absolutely no one agrees with you.
You can not even point out a difference in a listening test and you can not prove any of your claims at all, so I wonder if it is not time to hold back
By the way, it seems that the many millions of people you say who hear the same thing as you, all fail to participate in all the forums.
You are pretty much the only one who has the opinion you have, the few others who also think there is a difference between silver and copper cable and many other things, are the ones who want to make money on it, or have managed to picture themselves in it because those by the cable have been replaced.
I don´t understand that you continue on all forums with your repetitive writings when no one, yes absolutely no one agrees with you.
You can not even point out a difference in a listening test and you can not prove any of your claims at all, so I wonder if it is not time to hold back
Hi thor2,
But, there aren't two sides.
There are those who have sufficient equipment, experience and who listen carefully, and those who do not have equipment. To them, everything is magic and they will believe things that are not true because they don't know any better.
The things you are talking about ...
Double blind tests are conducted in the lab as well for other tests, technical in nature and replicated by other groups to guard against what you have fallen victim to. There is a darned good reason why testing rigor is demanded, particularly when you are claiming findings that can not be proved by others.
Now, I have been thinking about what you have said and I do have a possible explanation for you. Is it possible you were hearing an interface problem between the test material and the connections to the test setup? That could lead one to make the conclusions you have. Just a thought.
-Chris
But, there aren't two sides.
There are those who have sufficient equipment, experience and who listen carefully, and those who do not have equipment. To them, everything is magic and they will believe things that are not true because they don't know any better.
The things you are talking about ...
... cannot be changed by the material a wire is made from. But, you say "for me", and that means you have a belief system that is not in keeping with the scientific community. That's why you don't have any support.
Double blind tests are conducted in the lab as well for other tests, technical in nature and replicated by other groups to guard against what you have fallen victim to. There is a darned good reason why testing rigor is demanded, particularly when you are claiming findings that can not be proved by others.
Now, I have been thinking about what you have said and I do have a possible explanation for you. Is it possible you were hearing an interface problem between the test material and the connections to the test setup? That could lead one to make the conclusions you have. Just a thought.
A third dimension as yet undiscovered ... Not very likely, and especially not something you might discover apart from the mass investigations that have taken place in labs worth billions of dollars while exploring things like superconductivity. Face it, you're now talking X-Files, the TV show. Total fantasy. I want you to sit and think about what industry and materials science people have studied in the past. Do you really think the things you are looking at have not been studied before? They have, and very carefully. The entire science of connectors and wire has been more than well studied - by people, not just math. Think about that for a bit, then reconsider that maybe you heard connection problems and not what you concluded you were hearing.
-Chris
Hi Thomas,
Well, that is exactly what they are saying right up front. They are lying of course, and most of us know it. Most of those who don't can't afford them. They make their living off the few people that can afford their product and don't know any better.
There is a lot in life that is a total lie. Beauty products for example, even shampoo. I would like it better if no one could lie, but that isn't the world we live in.
-Chris
Well, that is exactly what they are saying right up front. They are lying of course, and most of us know it. Most of those who don't can't afford them. They make their living off the few people that can afford their product and don't know any better.
There is a lot in life that is a total lie. Beauty products for example, even shampoo. I would like it better if no one could lie, but that isn't the world we live in.
-Chris
You were trying to equate single blind test with double blind test and that attempt is what got rejected.
Hi Thomas,
I wish the world was like that. I'm the one that has to tell these people they have been had when it comes to service time. My life would be a lot easier if:
1) Components were exactly as they were claimed to be
2) All technicians were competent
3) All customers were honest with me about the history of a unit
Because ...
1) Those parts are normally too large and wreck the PCB going in
2) Good techs have to clean up the damage at some cost (uncharged time) to themselves
3) Discovering hidden faults costs the customer more - and the technician plus wasted time when all the clues would speed diagnoses
But it is am imperfect world. Best get use to it and learn to spot the signs of a rip-off.
-Chris
I wish the world was like that. I'm the one that has to tell these people they have been had when it comes to service time. My life would be a lot easier if:
1) Components were exactly as they were claimed to be
2) All technicians were competent
3) All customers were honest with me about the history of a unit
Because ...
1) Those parts are normally too large and wreck the PCB going in
2) Good techs have to clean up the damage at some cost (uncharged time) to themselves
3) Discovering hidden faults costs the customer more - and the technician plus wasted time when all the clues would speed diagnoses
But it is am imperfect world. Best get use to it and learn to spot the signs of a rip-off.
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.