Why Do People Come To Computer Audiophile To Display Their Contempt For Audiophiles?

[Ralf11]

read my sig.

 

someone has a good Peter Aczel quote too (Sal1950?)

[Ralf11]

if you think this is a highly combative environment, do not visit a sports car forum

[Ralf11]

I am certainly seeing a lot of irony on this thread

[Ralf11]

is Manson a taoist?

[Ralf11]

BTW, I saw the word "belief" used above.  Here is my take on this:

 

A major problem is the propensity of liberal arts majors (esp. from elite universities) to believe that they can evaluate all technical matters with expertise, and that notion can do real damage (outside of hobbies).  One example was an anti-vaxer with an elite liberal arts degree who lived in Tiburon.  She was also rich which may have contributed to her problems.  IIRC, her child died.

 

I blame the science faculty in our university systems for this.  They are busy discovering new knowledge about the nature of the universe (or slices thereof) when they could be doing committee work and fighting the "anything goes" liberal arts faculty who continually have degraded science education requirements for liberal arts, business, etc. majors.  Second, undergraduate teaching to non-majors does not focus on why science is different from, say, history; and instead tends to teach it as body of knowledge, not as self-correcting mechanism for discovering facts.

[Ralf11]

there is no such need, and the premise of Jud's initial question is false - people do not come here to do that

[Ralf11]

There is a lot of consumer fraud in the audio world.

 

This site is relatively sensible because of the number of technically trained people who can quickly detect BS.  Audiogoon is pretty much the opposite, and apparently contains a number of shills who are paid to tout dubious products.

[Ralf11]

31 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Well this is hardly Shakespeare.

 

You just appear to have a dislike for so many people on the thread, and concerned as I am about being with the “in crowd,” it seemed to me I’d be stuck with a rather small, lonely group if I were one of the few you didn’t ignore.

 

 

this is a much more clever way to diss someone

 

not that I don't think that someone should be dissed...

[Ralf11]

Could digital USB cables be affected by EMI?

 

I'm glad I read far enough on this thread to see the wave audio post.

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, esldude said:

I would say heavily effected.  It literally could control what music is played upon your system.

 

http://www.universalmusic.com/label/emi/

 

 

it would be better if you got effect/affect right ;]

[Ralf11]

got it

 

no problemo - will keep the gun cocked

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to speak for Gordon but we could discuss which measurements would be appropriate -- another topic -- but there really aren't any that are published by the manufacturers of the cables -- he said he didn't think they have the equipment

 

I have suggested that one measure would be the analogue output line width of a pure digital tone fed into the DAC.

 

I'd like to see a new thread on this...

[Ralf11]

3 hours ago, wgscott said:

 

Sorry, I meant pretty much everyone in the National Academy is above average.

 

 

Yes, they are the Elect under Calvinism.

 

 

No, not THAT Calvin!

 

 

It does not bother me if a scientist (or even the knuckle-dragging cousins, engineers) believe in a deity or deities as long as that belief does not contradict what we know about the universe.  It is when a belief system contradicts known facts that insanity arises, and one has to wonder if that person's mind is very tightly compartmentalized or if the insanity is metastasizing.

 

And for the record, I was a deity I'd blow up the universe -- just to hear the bang

 

[Ralf11]

people's personal experience may be the result of SQ differences or may be the result of confirmation bias

 

that is why there are things like statistical analysis, randomized designs, and blind testing

 

it can be troublesome and something simple, direct and powerful would be nice but to really find out if there is a difference a good test regime is worth the trouble - otherwise, you may be left with a bunch of empty hand-waving

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

 

Thing is, many people might be entirely uninterested in using science to advise their purchases. What would be the point of the effort, not like it's going to get anyone tenure  

 

dunno - but Maggie does blind testing before they intro a new speaker

 

for a consumer, it can save them a lot of money

 

(I am out of the tenure biz BTW - in fact, I am _supposed_ to be retired twice...)

[Ralf11]

27 minutes ago, mansr said:

That's why I avoid mentioning specifics of my gear. Whatever it is, someone will have a personal grudge with the brand.

 

I mock your reliance on electronics and lack of photonics

[Ralf11]

I think it is useful to look at the BS liquid cable thread (TEO cables, and I guess the t stands for Toxic...).

 

One poster noted that since their web site was chock full of BS which could not possibly be true, there was no reason to waste his time by ordering & listening to them.  He was able to use his technical astuteness to winnow out the chaff, and reduce the panoply of possibilities to a reduced subset.

 

I think that is a very useful process to a consumer in the world of audiophilia (not to mention that it also reminds me sparse statistical techniques to get  a handle on a large universe of effects - a la Box, Hunter, Box - and if anyone is interested I'll look up the title of their book).

[Ralf11]

If I collect 30 trained listeners, and use a double-blinded test regime, randomizing presentations, and... yad yada yada... then is that an objective or a subjective testing protocol?

[Ralf11]

maybe medium-rare?

 

the listeners are performing a subjective evaluation, which the experimenter is ... um... objectifying

[Ralf11]

The smell test for meat smoke is one of my favs

[Ralf11]

what is 'close-in' phase error?

[Ralf11]

Thx - I added a little Google Fu on fundamental vs ubiquitous and it seems to result from Brownian motion

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

@Ralf11 -- here's another few for you regarding the physics of 1/f noise:

http://www.umsl.edu/~handelp/

 http://physics.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/examples/statistics/handel_pra_22_745_80.pdf

http://www.foresight.org/Conference/MNT8/Papers/Handel/

https://phys.org/news/2016-04-ligo-background-noise-due-gravity.html

http://www.tapir.caltech.edu/~teviet/Waves/gwave_spectrum.html

http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/qfluctgeomnoise.pdf

 

its really really wild stuff !

 

Thx - seems pretty wild.  Parenthetically, my first non-manual labor summer job was as a young tyke in a physics lab trying to detect gravity waves.

[Ralf11]

6 hours ago, firedog said:

I'm doubtful about the efficacy of blind listening tests in practice. Personally I find that I listen differently in "test" situations. There is a fair amount of psychological stress involved also. So I don't think what I hear in that scenario is the same as what I hear when listening for enjoyment, even critically. 

 

I assume one way around this would be to conduct the tests with lots of subjects and under different testing conditions. You'd sort of assume that  any issues of the kind I'm referring to would cease to have much of an influence then. 

But that isn't a likely scenario. And even less so in a home environment.

 

Perfect for an audio club in a big city - Bosstown Audio Society anyone?

[Ralf11]

Again, the thread title is a bit of shuck & jive.

 

A better title would be "Why Do People On Computer Audiophile Display Their Contempt For Magical Woo-Woo Claims?"

 

Of course, the answer is immediately evident.