Civility

[fas42]

1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

I would like to have you sit down and blind evaluate two tracks. One ripped from a CD and one that is a ADC capture of the same track and using Foobar ABX hit any statistical significance.

 

Let me know when you want to make that happen.

 

Bang! First problem: Foobar ABX is flawed, badly, as a mechanism for discriminating. Don't ask ... several years ago I spent some time disassembling how it worked, and it fails as a reasonable means of comparing files ...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 minute ago, esldude said:

Not hearing differences disturbs others. 

 

Only when ASSES disturb them, accusing them of not hearing differences 

[plissken]

13 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Bang! First problem: Foobar ABX is flawed, badly, as a mechanism for discriminating. Don't ask ... several years ago I spent some time disassembling how it worked, and it fails as a reasonable means of comparing files ...

 

Do you have a write up? I've never heard anyone successfully pick apart Foobar's AB/X plug in.

 

Very convenient for you.

 

Michael Lavorgna even espouses it when it aligns with his interests.

[esldude]

Just now, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Only when ASSES disturb them, accusing them of not hearing differences 

No, that is not the case.  

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Just now, esldude said:

No, that is not the case.  

 

yes it IS !

 

your turn.

[christopher3393]

4 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Interesting (if I am following you).  I have not read any modern stuff such as Heidegger but I can tell you in that milieu of Neo-Platonic and Christian thought of the first millennium it would have been odd to suppose of God as being.  God was understood to utterly transcend being as such.

 

 Spot on. Like st. Denis (pseudo-Dionysius) Mystical Theology. There isn't a good online translation available, unfortunately. This is a good one: https://www.amazon.com/Pseudo-Dionysius-Complete-Classics-Spirituality-Paperback/dp/0809128381/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=69VM5ZCS8W3WW7FQ5P7P

 There is a contemporary philosopher and theologian, Jean-Luc Marion, who has explored this in great depth in relationship to contemporary philosophy. I'm thinking particularly of God Without Being. But it is a really arduous read. If you are interested, I'll try to find something readable.

[christopher3393]

10 minutes ago, esldude said:

Not hearing differences disturbs others.  

 

 Yes, we are the Mutual Disturbance Society.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

19 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

32 minutes ago, crenca said:

God was understood to utterly transcend being as such.

 

 Spot on. Like st. Denis (pseudo-Dionysius) Mystical Theology. There isn't a good online translation available, unfortunately. This is a good one: https://www.amazon.com/Pseudo-Dionysius-Complete-Classics-Spirituality-Paperback/dp/0809128381/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=69VM5ZCS8W3WW7FQ5P7P

 There is a contemporary philosopher and theologian, Jean-Luc Marion, who has explored this in great depth in relationship to contemporary philosophy. I'm thinking particularly of God Without Being.

 

talking about concepts of the absolute mind, spirit or soul and all things ontological in relation to music and science, i find the allegory of Plato's cave not fundamentally different to Aristotlean realism - only in its explanation of how perceptions might be illusory. Plato describing them as shadows on the cave wall (and better explained by concepts of the absolute mind, spirit or soul) and realists believing object reality exists independent of the human mind (and better explained by scientific inquiry).

The Aristotelian view and scientific method is still based on observations. In music perception those observations rely on the subjective senses. Of course mathematical observations and measurements of data are more "objective". The question always is are we measuring what we think we are. As Einstein used to say (quoting from William Cameron apparently) “Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.” The audio signal and sound wave and neural signal remain surrogates, indirect markers, of what is the end game - music perception in the brain. Until that point it simply isnt music. And it is more than just a passive registration of a signal on the cortex.

Then there is view that reality is malleable, changing with fresh evidence of objects and things. How we know reality is from scientific inquiry when that inquiry all goes well. The pursuit of truth through inquiry and collection of evidence is therefore fallible.

 

oops... methinks I forgot Daffy's advice

[fas42]

34 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

Do you have a write up? I've never heard anyone successfully pick apart Foobar's AB/X plug in.

 

Very convenient for you.

 

Michael Lavorgna even espouses it when it aligns with his interests.

 

The plug in copies the files, resampling them if not in the "right" form, to a tmp directory on the hard drive - and uses those. It doesn't just play the specified files, A and B - which is sorta the idea, I would have thought ...

 

Watching what files are being created on the hard drive, while the ABX is working, tells one the story.

[fas42]

With regards to "gods", once the word "intent" can be used in some sense then we start swimming, IMO ...

[kumakuma]

4 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The plug in copies the files, resampling them if not in the "right" form, to a tmp directory on the hard drive - and uses those. It doesn't just play the specified files A and B - which is sorta the idea, I would have thought ...

 

Watching what files are being created on the hard drive, while the ABX is working, tells one the story.

 

 

Were you using Release 1.X or Release 2.X? 

[fas42]

Not sure, this was some years ago - is this a known change in behaviour?

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Not sure, this was some years ago - is this a known change in behaviour?

 

2.X was released in late 2014 and may have addressed some or all of the issues you had with 1.X:

 

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,107354.0.html

[dean70]

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 hour ago, esldude said:

That is right.  No one should appeal to me as an authority.  

 

When you're right, you're right !

[fas42]

6 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

2.X was released in late 2014 and may have addressed some or all of the issues you had with 1.X:

 

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,107354.0.html

 

Hmmm ... doesn't look like it - another big no no is that you can't stop the ABX code fidgeting while the test is running - it has to play the "keep you updated on what I'm doing!" routine instead of going to sleep as much as possible - a severe contrast to what PeterSt's player does, say.

 

At the time, foobar replay quality was quite poor on the desktop I used - turned out that a very simple Nero player, with all fancy settings off, did the best job with that m/c.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

 

2 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

 

 Maybe there is a really long acronym for ASSHOLES> Above my paygrade.

 

 

Audiophile Skeptical Society Having Only Low Evidence Scientifically

[plissken]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

The plug in copies the files, resampling them if not in the "right" form, to a tmp directory on the hard drive - and uses those. It doesn't just play the specified files, A and B - which is sorta the idea, I would have thought ...

 

Watching what files are being created on the hard drive, while the ABX is working, tells one the story.

 

Not sure if my read is correct but I don't think it re-samples.

 

I could just as easily rip a track then ADC that track and make 9 copies of the ADC'd and randomly label them and give you a 10 track folder evaluate.

[Ralf11]

If anyone is Anti-Audiophile, it is those who refuse to use scientific and engineering tools to improve music reproduction.

[Don Hills]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

Hmmm ... doesn't look like it ...

 

I recall some discussion about the changes in 2.x. You ought to take a look over on HA and see if your concerns have been addressed. If not, you ought to mention them there.

[fas42]

39 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

Not sure if my read is correct but I don't think it re-samples.

 

I could just as easily rip a track then ADC that track and make 9 copies of the ADC'd and randomly label them and give you a 10 track folder evaluate.

 

That's fine ... foobar ABX definitely resamples, I was amazed to see this behaviour, at the time - just pause the plug in, and run something like MediaInfo against the work files it creates and uses.

[fas42]

6 minutes ago, Don Hills said:

 

I recall some discussion about the changes in 2.x. You ought to take a look over on HA and see if your concerns have been addressed. If not, you ought to mention them there.

 

OK, I will check into it further ...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

32 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

If anyone is Anti-Audiophile, it is those who refuse to use scientific and engineering tools to improve music reproduction.

 

Ultimately "music reproduction" is judged in the brain. There is no onus to use other "tools" to judge music reproduction - not using tools does not make you anti-audiophile. Many audiophiles are very interested in the tools for improving audio reproduction

[Ralf11]

statistical analysis and blind testing are scientific tools - I am not talking about screwdrivers

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

statistical analysis and blind testing are scientific tools - I am not talking about screwdrivers

 

Either am I.

 

Doesn't change the fact that "Ultimately "music reproduction" is judged in the brain. There is no onus to use other "tools" to judge music reproduction - not using tools does not make you anti-audiophile. Many audiophiles are very interested in the tools for improving audio reproduction"