Is Audiophiledom a confidence game?

[Allan F]

9 minutes ago, sandyk said:

That's not the problem. It is being used at less than optimum bit rates, in Australia at least, and most likely in many other countries including the USA,  to squeeze in more channels, usually ones that are so called "Lifestyle" channels, which really are mainly long commercials, undoubtedly in order to get more advertising revenue.

It would be foolish to think that only Australia is using less than optimum bit rates for HD TV, as we usually "follow the leader"

 

In Canada, at least where I live, the issue seems to be identifying the provider that uses less compression. A cable provider is known to employ less compression than a telecom, but both use it to conserve bandwidth.

[Allan F]

On 10/1/2017 at 5:14 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't have a single reported post of Ralf's in my inbox. Everyone seems OK with him or doesn't have the willingness to report his posts. 

 

Additions to one's Ignore List are not reported, Chris.

[Allan F]

13 hours ago, crenca said:

Also I should note that "technically unexplainable" won't work because it takes the likely (granted, in almost all of this not "proven") cause out of the language, namely the delusional agent (no matter how self satisfied the agent is with their state of affairs).

 

To this objectivist mantra, with which I do not agree, the following reply is appropriate:

 

"Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted."

-William Bruce Cameron

 

By way of example, there was an interesting panel discussion at RMAF which included four well known designers of audio equipment. John Curl noted how, in his experience in designing and building amplifiers, he found that different brands of resistors that measured the same did not sound the same. Some sounded great while others sounded awful. Notwithstanding his background in physics, he was unaware of any "technical explanation". His mantra is, "Trust your ears".

[Allan F]

2 hours ago, lucretius said:

Did he measure the properties of the resulting sound waves?

 

No, he determined that they sounded different by listening to them. A novel concept to many on this forum.

[Allan F]

2 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

 

.

[Allan F]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

John is well aware of the technical explanations. He is also interested in promoting the idea that that his designs have been perfected down to the last detail.

 

That was not the tenor of his comments at all. Rather, his point was that measurements tell only part of the story. Kevin Hayes of VAC expressed similar views. The correlation between measurements and sound quality is hardly an exact science.

[Allan F]

9 minutes ago, esldude said:

So the big elephant to me is the sighted evaluation.  We know for certain those are always suspect.  

 

As are many dbt's.

[Allan F]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

Expectation impacts on our perceptual system by biasing perception towards reporting the expected signal.

 

Not if one starts out with no pre-conceived notion. Furthermore, expectation bias works both ways. If one is convinced that there is no difference, it won't be heard notwithstanding that it actually exists.

 

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

Repeatability by other independent listeners.

 

Something that is frequently reported on this forum.

 

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

Measurements that correlate with the listening report.

 

Which assumes that what is heard is measurable, which may or may not be the case.

[Allan F]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Not possible.

In your opinion.

[Allan F]

1 minute ago, esldude said:

No in point of fact. 

 

No one who is human is immune to such things.  NO ONE!  That is not an opinion. 

 

In your opinion. It just doesn't make sense that one will always have an expectation of a particular result. Open minds do exist, notwithstanding your view to the contrary.

[Allan F]

15 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

True. And open minds don't hear a difference between Ethernet cables

 

But they may, not will, hear a difference between USB cables, interconnect cables, speaker cables, and power cables.

[Allan F]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

Nah. I know this from personal experience

 

I have no reason to question your experience. But, it runs counter to the experience of every audiophile I know.

[Allan F]

 

16 minutes ago, fas42 said:

The good news is, that "nasty sounding stuff" exists in audio equipment, rather than recordings.

 

It is not uncommon to find "the nasty sounding stuff" in the recording. And when that is the case, the more transparent and resolving the system, the worse it often sounds.

[Allan F]

Sorry, duplicate post.

[Allan F]

38 minutes ago, jabbr said:

John Curl has written extensively about measurable differences between resistors. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/the-lounge/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-ii-634.html

 

Apart from demonstrating his expertise, that doesn't run contrary to his expressed experience in finding that certain resistors did not sound the same, notwithstanding that there was no measurable difference between them.

[Allan F]

35 minutes ago, jabbr said:

Without knowing exactly which measurements were done, impossible to evaluate your memory of what he said.

 

Frankly, your evaluation of my memory of what he said is of absolutely no significance. I was there; you weren't. When the seminar - The Four Wise Men of Design - from RMAF 2017 is posted online, you can listen to what he said and draw whatever conclusions that you wish. He did not refer to any specific measurements. He only said that they measured the same.

[Allan F]

7 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Speaking of PIM, here: he discusses the need to develop new type of measurements to improve his new designs: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/the-lounge/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-ii-9538.html#post5164494

 

You can stop chasing your tail. It doesn't alter what he said or the opinion that he holds regarding the correlation between measurements and sound quality. The final tuning of his designs is done by listening, not measuring.

[Allan F]

3 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Ah but that is an entirely different issue: we can measure down to individual subatomic particles yet that does not imply that we understand the correlation between these measurements and sound quality. I have no doubt that what he actually said is that the correlation between measurements and sound quality is not well understood.

 

Have it your way. If you want to see it as a separate issue (it's not), be my guest. I'm out of this discussion.

[Allan F]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

I don't think this is possible. Even if you have no knowledge of something your brains perception of sight, sense, and smell is pre programmed from previous experience. Your brain makes all sorts of  assumptions and the interpretation is what you see, sense, and smell. It's one of the reasons illusions work.

 

I respectfully disagree. For example, If I decide to compare the sound of two cables not knowing if I will hear a difference between them, and I have no initial expectation one way or another, how is that starting with a preconceived notion? OTOH, if we are talking about preferences, then what you say about bias from previous experience is valid.

[Allan F]

7 hours ago, esldude said:

If you didn't think a difference was somewhat probable/possible, you wouldn't engage in the exercise.  I still remember the early days of the notion and the queer look some older people had at even the idea such a thing could be different.  It was a copper wire! If you made connection the signal flows. 

 

So you already without realizing it are looking for a possible difference.  And you are prone to find one. Without even being conscious of it you will notice if one is thicker or the insulation looks different.  You'll be soaking up any little difference prior to listening for a difference.  Which you wouldn't do otherwise. 

 

While one may think that "a difference was "somewhat probable/possible", your conclusion simply that "you are prone to find one" does not logically follow. To talk about "without realizing it" or "without even being conscious of it" is nothing more than speculation on your part, absent an evidentiary basis. To suggest that physical differences are inevitably going to influence what one hears is similarly speculative and, IMO, simply wrong. I readily agree that some or,  perhaps, many people may conform to your scenario but, IMO,  it does not apply to experienced listeners whose focus is limited to the fundamental issue.

[Allan F]

11 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

For some reason, your insistence that you are able to override the deeply-ingrained human propensity to judge based on appearance, etc., reminded me of this old cartoon character who had a similar self-image:

 

Coincidentally,  you and elsdude also bring to mind an image.

 

[Allan F]

12 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

Regardless of how many times Alex posts something with the "Audiophile" portion of "Computer Audiophile" highlighted in bold, I refuse to give into the bullying tactics of the hardline audiophiles that have overrun this site.

 

Who gives a rat's ass about what you refuse to give into? Your use of the word "audiophile" as a pejorative term only serves to highlight your abject negativity. While I generally and strongly reject Michael Lavorgna's characterization of the Computer Audiophile community, at least in your sad case, he appears to be right.

[Allan F]

1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

 

It was a joke, Allan, in the same vein as Bill's Taliban references.

 

The line between sarcasm and snide remarks can become so thin as to be virtually non-existent, especially with certain members of this forum. Those who closely approach or occasionally cross it should not expect apologies but, if it makes you feel better, I offer mine.

 

Given the role that religion has played in the slaughter of so many millions of people, the often stormy relationship between religion and humour may be a good thing. My last polemic for today.

[Allan F]

2 minutes ago, wgscott said:

Even being married to a British individual for > 20 years, I still find the whole "sorry" business a sorry business.

 

Sorry about that!

[Allan F]

18 hours ago, esldude said:

If the terms that some find offensive were directly used with that intent it would be one thing.  That was not the case here.

 

What if a red car ran over my first puppy and I have never recovered, making me see red when I hear the word.  Should I expect everyone to not use the word red because it bothers me?  I realize this is not quite that.  But where is the line appropriately drawn.

 

An inadequate test and, IMO, a hardly apt analogy to support it. It might satisfy If empathy and sensitivity are eliminated as relevant considerations.