Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science?

[sandyk]

so in other words, when you said "the vast majority of c.a. Members", you actually meant the six or seven members who have discussed their experiences in this area.

 

ignored.

[wakibaki]

Alex, with all due respect, neither you, esldude, nor anyone else have any way of knowing how the vast majority of CA members do their listening comparisons.

 

This is a good point, but anyway I think on balance of probabilities Alex is incorrect.

 

How do we know there is at least some improperly conducted blind testing?

 

There are some results that are beyond common sense.

 

We all have an innate sense of the possible and the impossible. This is why people watch a magician. He does things that, to all appearances, common sense tells us are impossible. If we didn't have some sense that they were impossible, we wouldn't be interested, and we always leave secure in the knowledge that there is some explanation. There is no magic.

 

Obviously a surgeon has a clearer idea of what is possible medically than a layman. When he hears medical BS, like 'the seat of intelligence is in the abdomen', he doesn't pay any attention to the guy tugging his sleeve saying 'I have blind test results, I have blind test results', moreover, he tells the security guard, 'Don't let that guy in here again.'

 

And this illustrates what we all know about everyday things. We all know that the seat of intelligence is in the penis.

 

Those of us who don't have electronics skills still have to parlay the knowledge we do have into the equation.

[esldude]

You really are selling the vast majority of C.A. members short, if you genuinely believe that most rely solely on "sighted" listening comparisons.

 

Then what do they rely on? I don't claim to know beyond what they post. I know what I have seen audiophiles do for many, many years. I know what a fair number will complain about not being a good method. Ever read the phrase, "trust your ears" on CA? I know from what basic measures of cables are that they aren't relying on measurement. So Alex, what are they relying on?

 

As waki's post above alludes to, the results indicate what you might expect of sighted listening evaluation.

 

Alex anytime sighted bias is brought up it gets your rancor. You either act as if people can insulate themselves from that tendency or that sighted listening isn't what they are doing. Yet the details of your disagreement never seem to pan out or even get explained.

[sandyk]

Ever read the phrase, "trust your ears" on CA? I know from what basic measures of cables are that they aren't relying on measurement. So Alex, what are they relying on?

They are relying on repeated observations over a period of time, as well as confirmation by others through the same gear. Anybody silly enough to post a subjective finding here without at least doing a little more than just pure sighted listening is going to get quickly ripped to shreds by members such as yourself, usually with a dose of sarcasm too.

Perhaps another reason why so many members are silent members ?

 

Measurements aren't the be-all-end-all with Computer Audio, or General Audio either for that matter.

[wakibaki]

If you'd said, 'If you want to know how it's done, then read the instructions on SY's website', I'd be a lot happier, Alex.

[kumakuma]

They are relying on repeated observations over a period of time, as well as confirmation by others through the same gear. Anybody silly enough to post a subjective finding here without at least doing a little more than just pure sighted listening is going to get quickly ripped to shreds by members such as yourself, usually with a dose of sarcasm too.

Perhaps another reason why so many members are silent members ?

 

Measurements aren't the be-all-end-all with Computer Audio, or General Audio either for that matter.

 

To me, "sighted listening" means you know which cable, file format, power supply, etc., your system is using when you listen to it. This would seem to be what's happening in your examples so perhaps you and esldude are operating from different definitions of the same term. Can you clarify what you mean by "sighted listening"?

[sandyk]

If you'd said, 'If you want to know how it's done, then read the instructions on SY's website', I'd be a lot happier, Alex.

 

Stuart ?

As far as I am concerned he is as deaf/out of date as you are.(smile)

He should stick with areas where he has some expertise such as the "chemicals" area.

IMO, his findings on the Bybee Purifiers left a lot to be desired too, although personally, I fail to see how they can result in improvements as claimed.

[wakibaki]

Bybee Purifiers... ...I fail to see how they can result in improvements as claimed.

 

I never hoped to discover a piece of quackery you didn't endorse.

 

How 'bout the LessLoss Blackbody?

[sandyk]

To me, "sighted listening" means you know which cable, file format, power supply, etc., your system is using when you listen to it. This would seem to be what's happening in your examples so perhaps you and esldude are operating from different definitions of the same term. Can you clarify what you mean by "sighted listening"?

 

Even at the Sydney listening sessions, of which there will be another one tomorrow with Audiophile Neuroscience present, the majority of those present do not know exactly what the latest thing they are listening to is, where the source material is coming from, or if there is an external Linear PSU in use, or whether a Mac or Windows laptop is in use.

In the case of the big Nelson Pass 150W Class A monoblock amplifiers used mainly at last Fridays session, we did know when they were in use, but most present felt that at higher volume settings on the Bricasti DAC (56 instead of 50, for example,) they were causing room resonance problems in comparison with the Mark Levinson mono blocks. You also need to use a degree of common sense in such matters, as quite often the LED indicators, and change from Standby to Ready status give the game away.

[sandyk]

I never hoped to discover a piece of quackery you didn't endorse.

 

How 'bout the LessLoss Blackbody?

 

I don't endorse exotic mains fuses, special mains cables, or differences between interconnects of similar construction ( e.g. coaxial type ) either. Proper technical means can overcome most differences. USB cables are a little different however, as the differences are usually quite measurable and the measured differences often tend to confirm observations.

Actually, except for a couple of specific areas, I am more on the Objective side than many would expect.

[wakibaki]

So there are actually things that you look at and just go... ...Nah, that's not gonna work.

[sandyk]

So there are actually things that you look at and just go... ...Nah, that's not gonna work.

 

Don't try putting words in my mouth. The vast majority of subjective reports that I make have first been evaluated and confirmed by technical friends through the same gear or at different locations.

Several friends have spent many hours at the controls of my PC with me just laying on my bed with MOQ, while they flip back and forwards between tracks, usually not knowing the significance of the file names, and coming to their own conclusions. Only then after their confirmation do I put the results in a public forum, knowing full well that the resident know-it-alls will almost certainly come gunning for me. Many years ago I even sent a comparison CD to DIY Audio moderator "Netlist" (Hugo) in Europe , only to see him do a hatchet job on me after listening to them via analogue Out from a very mediocre internal sound card.

[kumakuma]

Even at the Sydney listening sessions, of which there will be another one tomorrow with Audiophile Neuroscience present, the majority of those present do not know exactly what the latest thing they are listening to is, where the source material is coming from, or if there is an external Linear PSU in use, or whether a Mac or Windows laptop is in use.

In the case of the big Nelson Pass 150W Class A monoblock amplifiers used mainly at last Fridays session, we did know when they were in use, but most present felt that at higher volume settings on the Bricasti DAC (56 instead of 50, for example,) they were causing room resonance problems in comparison with the Mark Levinson mono blocks. You also need to use a degree of common sense in such matters, as quite often the LED indicators, and change from Standby to Ready status give the game away.

 

Sounds like you are trying to minimize exactly what esldude said happens with sighted listening ("how easily everyone falls prey to sighted bias"). Perhaps the two of you agree about more things than you realize.

[wakibaki]

I'm not trying to impose my interpretation, I'm asking, are there things you're prepared to dismiss without test, if only because you tested many before, and found no difference. And are there things you would dismiss even without test, just because you think it's beyond the bounds of credibility. I got the impression that that's what you thought about the Bybee, correct me if I'm wrong.

[sandyk]

I'm not trying to impose my interpretation, I'm asking, are there things you're prepared to dismiss without test, if only because you tested many before, and found no difference. And are there things you would dismiss even without test, just because you think it's beyond the bounds of credibility. I got the impression that that's what you thought about the Bybee, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

All of the above to some extent, based both on what I have been taught as a result of my employment, and learned through many years of reading local technical publications such as Silicon Chip, Electronics Australia, AND constructing many items of equipment including Homodyne AM tuners,(MC1330P) TRF tuners, stereo tape decks, AV switchers etc. and many different topology Preamps and Power Amplifiers (both Valve and SS) as well as several speaker projects . I also possess and use wherever possible, Test Equipment such as a CRO, Function Generator (DIY) , AC mV meter, Capacitance Meter(DIY), a couple of DVMs ,dual regulated Bench PSU (DIY) etc.

[Teresa]

To me, "sighted listening" means you know which cable, file format, power supply, etc., your system is using when you listen to it...

 

I agree with this, however I feel blind listening should go further in order not to waste money.

 

1. Not knowing what one is listening to.
   
2. Listening in the dark with eyes closed.
   
3. Listening in the sweet spot.
   
4. Listening casually instead of critically. When I don't try to hear differences and just listen for musical enjoyment that is when the differences reveal themselves.
   
5. Listening over a long period of time.
   
6. Listening to a wide variety of music.
   

If you skip any of these steps you will not know the true sound of anything.

[Tony Lauck]

I'm not trying to impose my interpretation, I'm asking, are there things you're prepared to dismiss without test, if only because you tested many before, and found no difference. And are there things you would dismiss even without test, just because you think it's beyond the bounds of credibility. I got the impression that that's what you thought about the Bybee, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Life is short. There is not enough time (or money) to do everything. This means that one must often rely on one's knowledge. This is OK, provided that one realizes that this tradeoff is being made out of necessity and that the results may prove to be in error.

 

I run a couple of web sites that serve downloads. I did not do any tests, blind or otherwise, to see if the different hosting providers provided different sound quality to the users. (Users download a .zip file, extract on their computer and playback the extracted music files.) I certainly did not test whether Ethernet cables connecting the server to its router affected sound quality.

[wakibaki]

I'm delighted to discover that we're closer than I thought.

 

So, complely without sarcasm, you trust your own expertise, you just don't trust mine.

 

It's entirely mutual.

 

As Tony says, life is short. I assess whether testing is worthwhile by looking at the claim in the light of my expertise, just as you do.

 

Does the system sound better if you put a candle on top of it? I don't bother testing, because although it's not absolutely impossible, the probability is diminishingly small, and the likelihood that the effect is transferrable to another system is smaller.

 

I know. You have to remember to light the candle.

[Jud]

I certainly did not test whether Ethernet cables connecting the server to its router affected sound quality.

 

You didn't?? =o

[sandyk]

Does the system sound better if you put a candle on top of it? I don't bother testing, because although it's not absolutely impossible, the probability is diminishingly small, and the likelihood that the effect is transferrable to another system is smaller.

 

I know. You have to remember to light the candle

 

It's as unlikely as a pink rabbit orbiting around Uranus ?

[elcorso]

I learned about this recently when I became a website publisher. It sucks, but it is true. Trolls draw traffic, and traffic translates into dollars. This is why owners of websites have an inherent conflict of interest with respect to moderation of trolls.

 

The truth of all truths.

 

The rest? A lot of egos in combat. Well, occasionally some decent truth is exposed.

 

Roch

[JohnSwenson]

Does the system sound better if you put a candle on top of it? I don't bother testing, because although it's not absolutely impossible, the probability is diminishingly small, and the likelihood that the effect is transferrable to another system is smaller.

 

I know. You have to remember to light the candle.

 

Of course it does, the wax runs down the side of the candle, puddles on top blocking some of the ventilation holes, causing the internal temperature to rise. Quite a few electronic components change their behavior as their temperature increases.

 

Of course a lit candle may not be the safest way to block some ventilation holes. Of course then someone will come up with an expensive "basin" for the candle that prevents the wax from spilling, but that negates the effect because the designer did not understand the mechanism, and just thought the melted wax was an unwanted side effect of the combustion when in fact it was the primary mechanism for changing the sound.

 

John S.

[esldude]

Of course it does, the wax runs down the side of the candle, puddles on top blocking some of the ventilation holes, causing the internal temperature to rise. Quite a few electronic components change their behavior as their temperature increases.

 

Of course a lit candle may not be the safest way to block some ventilation holes. Of course then someone will come up with an expensive "basin" for the candle that prevents the wax from spilling, but that negates the effect because the designer did not understand the mechanism, and just thought the melted wax was an unwanted side effect of the combustion when in fact it was the primary mechanism for changing the sound.

 

John S.

 

You are making quite a few assumptions there John.

 

You are assuming the function of the candle. You are assuming the type of the candle. You are assuming the effect is measurable. You are assuming you know what the effect would be all without examing the process for yourself. Finally you didn't think of this exactly:

 

[elcorso]

You are making quite a few assumptions there John.

 

You are assuming the function of the candle. You are assuming the type of the candle. You are assuming the effect is measurable. You are assuming you know what the effect would be all without examing the process for yourself. Finally you didn't think of this exactly:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]17544[/ATTACH]

 

Ah, now I see, ISIS candles

 

Roch

[Tony Lauck]

You are making quite a few assumptions there John.

 

You are assuming the function of the candle. You are assuming the type of the candle. You are assuming the effect is measurable. You are assuming you know what the effect would be all without examing the process for yourself. Finally you didn't think of this exactly:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]17544[/ATTACH]

 

There were a few questionable assumptions in the spirit of the posting. However, what would you say if I told you that some years ago I got a new preamp and asked my wife what she thought of it? Her reply was, "It sounded OK, but ever since you installed that new preamp the house has been cold."

 

Hint: there is a rational explanation for this.