Popular Post jabbr Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 10 minutes ago, plissken said: That wasn't the goal of their evaluation! Jesus wept. What has happened to reading comprehension around here? The goal was to remove sighted bias that may have them arbitrarily picking candidates for other reasons then musicianship. This isn't that hard to understand folks. Sorry for not properly enclosing my post in <sarcasm> ... </sarcasm> or would CSS have been more appropriate? Do you think @The Computer Audiophile would be able to enable this in the toolbar above ... it would be very useful or at the very least the emoji :eyesrolledbacksofarinheadneedopthalmolgicsurgeontoremove: I hope I clarified this later when I suggested that the elimination of bias by experts, while being a very good thing, does not in and of itself equate to "science" which is only relevent in the context of the exchange Jud, The Computer Audiophile and christopher3393 3 Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
Popular Post mmerrill99 Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 The strange thing is, if we are to believe that we are slaves to sighted bias, when we see these people perform we will be so influenced by their appearance that how they performed blind will have no actual significance to what we perceive them now sounding like. It's a strange, strange world, according to some, isn't it? jabbr, MikeyFresh and Albrecht 3 Link to comment
Popular Post wgscott Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 6 hours ago, christopher3393 said: . (winkie of absolution) I love to see terminology like this catch on. Jud and christopher3393 2 Link to comment
Popular Post wgscott Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 14 minutes ago, jabbr said: or would CSS have been more appropriate? Cascading Sarcasm Sheet? lucretius, The Computer Audiophile, mansr and 2 others 5 Link to comment
jabbr Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 1 minute ago, wgscott said: Cascading Sarcasm Sheet? Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 On 6/24/2017 at 10:31 AM, mansr said: The tea tastes much better if the water is boiled with a Shunyata power cord. Everybody knows that. I don't know that. I use fire. I have a gas stove, I turn on the fire under the teapot, when it whistles, I pour boiling water over the tea bag and turn off the fire. I am curious, how would the taste of tea be improved with an upgraded power cord for those who have electric stoves? Do you have an electric stove? Perhaps another reason to stay with my gas stove as I don't even have upgraded power cords for my audio/video system. Anyway, I thought you were against using upgraded cables and cords. P.S. Mansr, If your post was meant as a joke, IMHO it is in very poor taste. I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 On 6/24/2017 at 9:48 AM, plissken said: ...You can't claim an un-measurable change... I am curious, why not? I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 16 hours ago, Dragonfyr said: Did anyone watch this excellent video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqJmqhu2ga0 I did, thanks for the link. I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 15 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said: Of course it appears that way to an audiophile No you dont https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_audition This is not the same thing and you know it!! You do understand the blind audition of musicians by the decision-makers of an orchestra is not the same thing as AB'ing, each musician plays a complete piece, the decision-makers do not switch back and forth between candidates. It's one musician auditioning at a time. The candidate performs from behind a wall or screen so they don't discriminate based on appearance, name, gender, etc., thus their talent is evaluated fairly. I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 20 hours ago, beerandmusic said: ^^^^ in regards to blind tests, I will never forget the story about how TEST B predominantly is better than TEST A regardless. There is subjectivity at it's best. No, it proves what I have been saying for decades that AB’ing either sighted or blind doesn’t work. I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 On 6/24/2017 at 4:00 PM, AJ Soundfield said: I do. That's why I take blind tests without fear. The definition of a blind listening test is trust your ears. That's all you can do in a blind listening test. OTOH, the folks who bray endlessly about "trust your ears", are always the ones who have zero trust of the ears. That is exactly why they shun blind tests and come up with every excuse to avoid them, preferring to stare at audio components for weeks to judge "sound", because their hearing stinks and have zero trust of their ears. By your definition I guess my hearing stinks as I can't decide what I like in a few seconds. I need weeks of listening to a wide variety of my favorite audiophile and other naturally made recordings, with lights out, eyes closed in the sweet spot before I can make a judgement of whither any item brings me closer to the real live sonic event, further away or makes no change at all. So you see I am not staring at my audio components. I can’t do things quite as fast as you and others and I’m not alone. I consider your claim to be extraordinary. Subjectivists find nothing wrong with blind tests, it’s AB’ing that doesn’t work. Bring over two unmarked black boxes and at the end of two weeks I will tell you if one I liked better or if they sound close to the same. I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 19 hours ago, mansr said: Suppose you have a stereo analogue signal. You cut it to vinyl and simultaneously digitise it and store on a CD. Then you play back those recordings using suitable equipment and compare the analogue output to the original signal. The output from the CD player will be closer to the original than that of the turntable. This will be the case even if the turntable is the best money can buy and the CD player is a $50 "disposable" model. Of course, if what you store on the CD is subjected to unnecessary mangling like dynamic range compression, it can end up being worse than the vinyl. However, that in no way means that vinyl is inherently superior, only that someone did a bad job mastering the CD. 18 hours ago, esldude said: That a preferred vinyl recording could go thru an AD/DA stage and sound the same as if it didn't. So any preference one had for vinyl is not due to vinyl being a more accurate medium. The method is to have the direct phono preamp output, and an ADA stage signal to switch between and compare. Personal experience from back in the late 1980’s recording from audiophile LP’s to a 16-bit 48kHz DAT from my old Comet SOTA turntable with the Alpha Genesis 1000II moving coil cartridge proves this is not true. I might agree commercial LPs and LPs made on recycled vinyl have less resolution than CDs but not audiophile LPs from audiophile labels on virgin vinyl, such as Reference Recordings Pure Analogue LPs, Direct to Disc LPs pressed in Germany, UK or Japan and other audiophile LPs. If 16-bit 48kHz DAT isn’t good enough, then it follows 16-bit 44.1kHz CD isn't good enough either. I think 5.6 MHz DSD sounds close to the best audiophile LPs, close enough for me as I don’t like all the fuss and maintenance of LP playback. 2 Track 15 IPS reel to reel is even better but to expensive for me. I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Teresa Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 18 hours ago, plissken said: So you are saying you couldn't tell the difference between 128Kbps MP3 and 24/192 blind. Good to know. Not directed at me, but I could hear the difference blind when casually listening to single songs or classical pieces uninterrupted. Such as making a playlist of an album, some songs at 128kbps and some at 24/192 and mix them up so I don't know which is coming next. I could not hear the difference AB’ing either sighted or blind. AB’ing doesn’t work for me except for large level differences (which are supposed to be removed if you match levels), and I am sure that is true for the majority of people if they are just honest with themselves. I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums. I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past. I still love music. Teresa Link to comment
Jud Posted June 26, 2017 Author Share Posted June 26, 2017 9 hours ago, pkane2001 said: I believe I now know the answer to Jud's original question "Why Do People Come To Computer Audiophile To Display Their Contempt For Audiophiles?". It's because of threads just like this one. 27 pages so far. Have we reached any conclusions yet? Has anyone been convinced of the error of their ways? Anyone change their mind? Hmmm.... I have to say I'm surprised at what's taken up some of this space. That another member would act so outrageously toward mansr surprised (and angered) me. (For anyone catching up with the thread, don't bother looking. Chris quite rightly banned the member and deleted posts having to do with the member's conduct and comments on it.) The reaction to saying what we all learned about science in high school, that for a valid experiment you want to control for as many variables as possible, and the sheer number of comments that reaction involved, surprised me. There've been some valuable and interesting comments along the way, too (thank goodness ). jabbr 1 One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
Jud Posted June 26, 2017 Author Share Posted June 26, 2017 3 hours ago, Teresa said: No, it proves what I have been saying for decades that AB’ing either sighted or blind doesn’t work. Hi Teresa. There are situations where blind A/B testing works very well. What your statement has in common with a lot of folks that you'd be surprised to have something in common with ( ) is that it doesn't pay attention to the specifics that might make a particular test valid or not. The fact that blind or sighted A/B testing doesn't work for you is fine - you've put together a system you like at low cost without it. But if you're saying that blind testing doesn't work for anyone in any circumstances, then that's really just the flip side of someone else trying to tell you it works for everyone in all circumstances. It's just you (or them) trying to impose one (inaccurate) view on everyone else. jabbr 1 One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 38 minutes ago, Jud said: I have to say I'm surprised at what's taken up some of this space. That another member would act so outrageously toward mansr surprised (and angered) me. (For anyone catching up with the thread, don't bother looking. Chris quite rightly banned the member and deleted posts having to do with the member's conduct and comments on it.) The reaction to saying what we all learned about science in high school, that for a valid experiment you want to control for as many variables as possible, and the sheer number of comments that reaction involved, surprised me. There've been some valuable and interesting comments along the way, too (thank goodness ). By banning that one individual, Chris reduced my ignore list by 50% Don't get me wrong, I think this thread is useful in its own way. For one, it provides an outlet for all of the same arguments (blind, A/B, cables, break-in, science vs scientism, audiophile vs audiophool, etc.) that keeps them away from polluting other threads. Of course, there is also an occasional nugget of information to be found here as well, although you have to dig deep and hard to find these -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
Popular Post mmerrill99 Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Jud said: Hi Teresa. There are situations where blind A/B testing works very well. Yes but what I believe Teresa is reacting against is the use of A/B testing as the de-facto "proof" that something is perceivable or not - this is one of the techniques of choice for the display of 'contempt for audiophiles'. I admire your attempt at even-handedness in your viewpoint but there is a lopsidedness (dare I say bias) to this view - most everyone knows the reasons that sightedness/knowledge can be a bias in sighted listening - how many of those who promote A/B blind testing actually want to examine the possible flaws in it & admit to " specifics that might make a particular test valid or not."? I have seldom if ever, seen such a view expressed, otherwise we would have a far more balanced understanding of just when A/B blind testing is useful/valid & what the potential pitfalls are in conducting such a test. The absence of such a view is evidence of the lack of even-handedness in consideration of A/B blind testing lucretius, christopher3393 and Teresa 3 Link to comment
jabbr Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Jud said: Hi Teresa. There are situations where blind A/B testing works very well. What your statement has in common with a lot of folks that you'd be surprised to have something in common with ( ) is that it doesn't pay attention to the specifics that might make a particular test valid or not. The fact that blind or sighted A/B testing doesn't work for you is fine - you've put together a system you like at low cost without it. But if you're saying that blind testing doesn't work for anyone in any circumstances, then that's really just the flip side of someone else trying to tell you it works for everyone in all circumstances. It's just you (or them) trying to impose one (inaccurate) view on everyone else. One thing that I've learned, and in particular to the discussion @mmerrill99 and I had regarding A/B testing, that in the context of this group, and perhaps in the audiophile discussions in general, that A/B testing and in particular A/B/X implies a specific protocol. For me A/B testing simply means testing between 2 things. That creates confusion. I don't think there is ever one protocol that is appropriate for every situation and these testing techniques, like measurement equipment (e.g voltmeters, oscilloscopes etc) are toolkits to be applied appropriately to a given situation. Blinding is one technique and there are others. Personally I don't make my judgments blind generally elimination of confounding variables is helpful whatever they may be Jud 1 Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
plissken Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 7 hours ago, Teresa said: I am curious, why not? Because you are stipulating a change, that isn't able to be captured by instrumentation, and to not back it up with human trials is problematic. It's parlor tricks at that point. sarvsa 1 Link to comment
Popular Post plissken Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 6 hours ago, Teresa said: No, it proves what I have been saying for decades that AB’ing either sighted or blind doesn’t work. I can't speak for others but I attempt to design an evaluation rig setup around the claim. If someone can evaluated sighted I like to create, as close to, the same conditions for bias controlled listening. The issue is that by it's very definition, listening to A for a while, and upgrading to B and declaring all manner of superlative is A/B. sarvsa and esldude 2 Link to comment
mmerrill99 Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 1 hour ago, plissken said: The issue is that by it's very definition, listening to A for a while, and upgrading to B and declaring all manner of superlative is A/B. And that is enough to satisfy you that someone hears a difference? No repeats needed to provide statistical significance? What statistical level satisfies you & why? Albrecht 1 Link to comment
mmerrill99 Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 2 hours ago, plissken said: Because you are stipulating a change, that isn't able to be captured by instrumentation, and to not back it up with human trials is problematic. Maybe you should consider your instrumentation approach - are you measuring everything that is perceivable? Asking Teresa to do human trials to 'prove' she hears what she claims is a bit over the top in a hobby, no? Teresa 1 Link to comment
Popular Post Albrecht Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 15 minutes ago, mmerrill99 said: And that is enough to satisfy you that someone hears a difference? No repeats needed to provide statistical significance? What statistical level satisfies you & why? You hit the nail very solidly now. The answer to your question, - is no amount of proof, either through some sort of "precise" (sic) measuring device, or any other scientific investigation, will be enough proof. The conclusion is foregone, and therefore no scientific investigation will ever happen. There sits a "snake oil" dollar number. Cross that number, and the naysayers bite with religious vitriol & sarcasm. Many of us wait for some real humor, but all we get are snide cliches. Meanwhile, (outside this fight that only has losers), real posts, real tests, & real help comes from the experienced testers: and people are improving & enhancing their listening experiences with great, (yes, audiophile), products. One can site literally hundreds of great information sharing threads here: (the very good fiber thread sticks out for me). Teresa and MikeyFresh 2 Link to comment
Albrecht Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 On 6/23/2017 at 2:59 PM, plissken said: You are missing the point: The mechanism of transfer doesn't matter at that point. The sound either changes with the cable plugged in or unplugged at that point even though music is clearly being played back out of buffer. Jud asked why there is a push against subjectivity here. This is a prime example as to why. You can't represent at being an expert at something that you don't have any understanding of how it works. No one can claim expertise at anything that is as complicated & varied, and subjective. I am not claiming to be an expert. "The sound either changes with the cable plugged in or unplugged at that point even though music is clearly being played back out of buffer." No, - the noise "could" be carried into the buffer. No one is attaching audio qualities to CAT7 Ethernet. They are attaching the OSI model and data transmission qualities to the cable. CAT 7 IS higher bandwidth than CAT5. The push by a few angry & bitter naysayers isn't against subjectivity, it's against science. Link to comment
Popular Post Sal1950 Posted June 26, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted June 26, 2017 18 minutes ago, mmerrill99 said: Asking Teresa to do human trials to 'prove' she hears what she claims is a bit over the top in a hobby, no? Last I understood, this "hobby" was about obtaining High Fidelity Not just "sounds good to me" Teresa and plissken 2 "The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information?" Peter Aczel - The Audio Critic R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now