Jump to content
IGNORED

Blue or red pill?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

I shall judge as much as I want. If we  don't judge PC will make all these other things compulsory real soon.

 

And in the UK I can legally refuse to sell a cake to anyone who doesn't meet with my approval.

"The World's Most Exclusive Cake Maker" might well be a very successful business :D

Well, I don't know the law and I don't know if your cake business would succeed, but I did just read this and the writer is pretty funny

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/should-we-all-have-the-right-not-to-bake-a-cake/

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, psjug said:

Well, I don't know the law and I don't know if your cake business would succeed, but I did just read this and the writer is pretty funny

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/should-we-all-have-the-right-not-to-bake-a-cake/

In UK law selling stuff is asking people to make    "an offer to buy".

 

Which the seller is legally entitled to refuse without giving a reason.  It eliminates all this 'cake' stuff and all  other  similar nonsense :D 

Link to comment

coming in late so apologies if already covered but:

What exactly is the null hypothesis?

What variables will/won't be controlled for?

When/ how will the null hypothesis be rejected or accepted, and at what level of statistical significance?

 

 I get if neither participant/s wants to make this a scholarly exercise and just keep it a bit of fun.

 

  • <quote> Playing the same exact file using two different players or the same player with different settings can easily invalidate the test. You’re then comparing two players and their internal processing and not two storage devices. That’s why capturing the digital output to the DAC is critical to ensure that the same digital samples are being sent to it in both cases, as Mansr already said he’ll do.</quote>

 

My question is does the same digital samples captured really control for the variables of different players? I mean, say if they were played at slightly different volumes, could they still have the same "digital output"?

 

Regarding expectation or confirmation bias, this should be controlled by the blind testing and the agreed upon test methodology.

 

I agree with the poster about ideally not over discussing the outcomes prior to the experiment (like that MQA test a while back) and even just knowing its an 'experiment'/test *some* would say influences behavior (Hawthorne effect). However, in this case both participants likely have an agenda and so it gets back to controlling for biases. However, it is very possible IMO that the more it is discussed, the more Mani will feel potentially stressed about performing (....the blue pills may help this??). I believe it is important that Mani, who has set the challenge, feels comfortable that somehow the ground rules have not been changed from his original intention or design.

 

 

 

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

coming in late so apologies if already covered but:

What exactly is the null hypothesis?

What variables will/won't be controlled for?

When/ how will the null hypothesis be rejected or accepted, and at what level of statistical significance?

 

 I get if neither participant/s wants to make this a scholarly exercise and just keep it a bit of fun.

 

  • <quote> Playing the same exact file using two different players or the same player with different settings can easily invalidate the test. You’re then comparing two players and their internal processing and not two storage devices. That’s why capturing the digital output to the DAC is critical to ensure that the same digital samples are being sent to it in both cases, as Mansr already said he’ll do.</quote>

 

My question is does the same digital samples captured really control for the variables of different players? I mean, say if they were played at slightly different volumes, could they still have the same "digital output"?

 

Regarding expectation or confirmation bias, this should be controlled by the blind testing and the agreed upon test methodology.

 

I agree with the poster about ideally not over discussing the outcomes prior to the experiment (like that MQA test a while back) and even just knowing its an 'experiment'/test *some* would say influences behavior (Hawthorne effect). However, in this case both participants likely have an agenda and so it gets back to controlling for biases. However, it is very possible IMO that the more it is discussed, the more Mani will feel potentially stressed about performing (....the blue pills may help this??). I believe it is important that Mani, who has set the challenge, feels comfortable that somehow the ground rules have not been changed from his original intention or design.

 

 

 

It doesn't really matter. Similar things have  been tried often before. Those who believe in myth and magic will continue to do so  whatever the test result because the methods, including any listening tests, blind or not,  are "faulty" as they don't coincide with their beliefs.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

It doesn't really matter. Similar things have  been tried often before. Those who believe in myth and magic will continue to do so  whatever the test result because the methods, including any listening tests, blind or not,  are "faulty" as they don't coincide with their beliefs.

 

there is a certain futility to be sure.

 

I don't think its "faulty" to question beliefs if they don't match your particular experience. I also don't think it is "faulty" to question whether that experience  is somehow an illusion.

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

there is a certain futility to be sure.

 

I don't think its "faulty" to question beliefs if they don't match your particular experience. I also don't think it is "faulty" to question whether that experience  is somehow an illusion.

I agree with all that, but as I said, but the 'myth and magic' crowd will say the methods are faulty. They always do. Not, of course, that they would have taken the trouble to understand the methods anyway.

 

And though they are somewhat 'opposed', both Mani and Mansr know what they are doing.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

I agree with all that, but as I said, but the 'myth and magic' crowd will say the methods are faulty.

 

They may be right

 

 

1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

 

They always do.

 

always?

 

 

1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

 

Not, of course, that they would have taken the trouble to understand the methods anyway.

 

enlighten us

 

 

1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

 

And though they are somewhat 'opposed', both Mani and Mansr know what they are doing.

 

would you prefer they didn't?

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
On 2/11/2018 at 8:47 AM, manisandher said:

A microphone should have no problem picking this 'temporal microstructure' up, but the ADC will screw it up if it's smoothing* this 'microstructure' up in any way.

...

On 2/11/2018 at 8:47 AM, manisandher said:

*I believe all the ADCs I've owned and still own do this to varying degrees.

 

I forgot to mention that none of my needle drops (made with a variety of different ADCs over the years) manage to recreate surface ticks correctly - the ticks on a recording always sound smoothed out in comparison to those heard playing the vinyl directly.

 

(Of course, they're still bloody annoying, and I do everything from vacuum- to ultrasonic-cleaning beforehand to minimise them.)

 

Mani.

Main: SOtM sMS-200 -> Okto dac8PRO -> 6x Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horns + 2x Rotel RB-1590 amps -> 4 subs

Home Office: SOtM sMS-200 -> MOTU UltraLite-mk5 -> 6x Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Impulse H2 speakers

Vinyl: Technics SP10 / London (Decca) Reference -> Trafomatic Luna -> RME ADI-2 Pro

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

They may be right

 

 

 

always?

 

 

 

enlighten us

 

 

 

would you prefer they didn't?

It's not impossible.

 

It appears so.

 

They are unlikely to spend much time  studying  something they 100% misunderstand from  the moment it's switched on and which they do not wish to understand as it would force them out of their cozy 'analogue' safe space.

EG, while imitche's post above is   true  any effect from it  is confined entirely to the 'last half' of the DAC and  what follows.

 

Of course not.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, manisandher said:

...

 

I forgot to mention that none of my needle drops (made with a variety of different ADCs over the years) manage to recreate surface ticks correctly - the ticks on a recording always sound smoothed out in comparison to those heard playing the vinyl directly.

 

(Of course, they're still bloody annoying, and I do everything from vacuum- to ultrasonic-cleaning beforehand to minimise them.)

 

Mani.

 

Yes, it even counts on needle drops ... where playback chains often fail is that the transient events are not reproduced with full impact - and a vinyl noise tick is a beautiful example of such. When the sound element is the attack of an instrument, this is an obvious giveaway that it's "not right", when the normal impact is not there.

Link to comment
16 hours ago, Spacehound said:

It doesn't really matter. Similar things have  been tried often before. Those who believe in myth and magic will continue to do so  whatever the test result because the methods, including any listening tests, blind or not,  are "faulty" as they don't coincide with their beliefs.

 A typically arrogant reply from an E.E. who appears to think that E.E.s are GODs, and infallible !

 This belief system applies just as much to E.E.s as much as Audiophiles, whenever their deeply ingrained beliefs are questioned.

 Just a reminder that without Subjective reports, there would be no need for Objective measurements, and no incentive to further improve an electronic product other than on how attractive and easy to use it is , as well as the cost of the product .

 (Enter the " Bean Counters" )

 Add to that, product lifetime issues built into designs, so that they had a limited lifetime, so that the public would keep periodically buying replacements. This appears to be the modern way, and not how it used to be with products that often  kept working as designed for 30 years or more, with perhaps simple component replacements such as noisy volume controls.

Even the main large filter capacitors in many designs would last considerably longer if proper attention was paid by the designer to heat issues due to component placement and good ventilation.

A good example of that, was electrolytic filter capacitors too close to vacuum tubes etc.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
3 hours ago, sandyk said:

 A typically arrogant reply from an E.E. who appears to think that E.E.s are GODs, and infallible !

 This belief system applies just as much to E.E.s as much as Audiophiles, whenever their deeply ingrained beliefs are questioned.

 Just a reminder that without Subjective reports, there would be no need for Objective measurements, and no incentive to further improve an electronic product other than on how attractive and easy to use it is , as well as the cost of the product .

 (Enter the " Bean Counters" )

 Add to that, product lifetime issues built into designs, so that they had a limited lifetime, so that the public would keep periodically buying replacements. This appears to be the modern way, and not how it used to be with products that often  kept working as designed for 30 years or more, with perhaps simple component replacements such as noisy volume controls.

Even the main large filter capacitors in many designs would last considerably longer if proper attention was paid by the designer to heat issues due to component placement and good ventilation.

A good example of that, was electrolytic filter capacitors too close to vacuum tubes etc.

"The Colloms" is worshipped as a god and claims to be an  a EE.

Mind you, he claims he's an "Expert Witness" too. What of he doesn't say, so presumably murders, car crashes, earthquakes, wars,  that sort of routine stuff.  Gods do get to see quite a lot,  I would think.

 

As for other EE's they are just people qualified in their field, by both education/examination and known expertise if they are members of professional bodies.  Much like Doctors, Airline pilots,  Quantum mechanics,  Vets,  etc are in their fields. All are  totally useless of course. 

 

BTW: What does  your reply have to do with what I posted?

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

BTW: What does  your reply have to do with what I posted?

 

 Are you so arrogant that you are unable to see why I posted the reply that I did  ?.

 

 Neither does anything I posted in that reply have anything to do with M.C. either, yet you dragged him into it again.

It was aimed purely at arrogant E.Es like yourself who treat people who make reports that they don't agree with ,as believing in "Myth and Magic" , even if they also happen to be fellow qualified E.E.s who post findings that you don't agree with ,and design electronic devices that you believe are a waste of time, just like you did in a reply to some Audiostream links recently.

You didn't have a good word to say about any of those gentlemen, despite their obvious qualifications in their respective areas, and vastly more experience in those areas than you have !

 

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

^^^^  I am mostly objectivist...but i do believe that "some people's hearing" may be much better than the mass majority, but i believe that most of the "subjective" opinions are those that have bought into marketing hype.

 

Just think, every year we have millions of new products available and they always sound better every year so the market can continue, but you have to "listen very hard" to actually know it is better....and we have been "listening very hard" year after year, and will probably continue for the next 100 years....at what point can we "listen very hard" so many years to hear only the slightest differences, that we can't distinguish in DBT, and not even consistently with our own ears, and not for every song, genre, frequency, instrument, etc...and then we have the law of diminishing returns.....How many times have we heard, this is the greatest DAC, or best amp of the year, and not get any "oh wow, totally new level" to realize that a lot of this stuff is marketing hype.

 

Sure maybe slightly different sound, but SQ improvement that isn't measurable year after year of "listening very hard"....

 

I even fool myself some time....then once in awhile i will put on vinyl record and think "OH WOW, that sounds really good".

Link to comment

Hey Mani,

 

For my 2c, I think you just need to make the day low stress and interesting.  Do your abx test, play with some USB cables, show your guests the difference in sound between a bloated operating system and one optimised by XXHE.  Or don't.  Then if you want to you could start an investigation into the 'why' of things or even attempt to record some things to share with the forum.

 

Same goes for the guests as well.  Don't feel unduly pressured, enjoy yourself, make new friends, keep an open mind.  I helped run a multiple DAC blind test a few years ago and that proved to be a relatively stressful event for us who ran the show.  It was, however, very interesting sitting on a perch and watching the participants, reading their assessments and then talking to them later.

 

Cheers,

 

Anthony.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

How many times have we heard, this is the greatest DAC, or best amp of the year, and not get any "oh wow, totally new level" to realize that a lot of this stuff is marketing hype.

 

 

 Perhaps just like the current fascination in C.A. with Streaming, where the quality of the streamed music is highly unlikely to  come close to that of a well optimised system at home using your own source material ?

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Perhaps just like the current fascination in C.A. with Streaming, where the quality of the streamed music is highly unlikely to  come close to that of a well optimised system at home using your own source material ?

Why's that?

 

And don't forget that is  what the test is partly about.  And you aren't going. And if it goes 'against' you they don't know what they are doing.

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

Why's that?

 

And don't forget that is  what the test is partly about.  And you aren't going. And if it goes 'against' you they don't know what they are doing.

 

I am glad I am not going. 

I have nothing against Mansr, who is highly experienced in general, but perhaps out of touch in a few areas with the general membership.

I certainly would have no interest in meeting an arrogant and pompous person like yourself.

However, I do admire Mani for setting up these tests. If I lived in the U.K. or the USA, I would have been more than happy to do the same,  as I have already done for a couple of E.E. friends and several other Sydney C.A. members.

In the case of one E.E. I wasn't even present when he used my files to successfully demonstrate the findings to an E.E. friend of his.

These tests will  have no resemblance to those that I already have had confirmed, so no definite conclusions can be drawn from the results obtained at your meeting, even in the unlikely event that Mani uses some of my material, as we are using very different equipment and software players.

The proposed tests are very different to those that I have done, where both versions are usually saved on the same storage medium,(including adjacent tracks on the same CD-R) and played as .wav files with the same checksums as the original files ripped from CD, or as downloaded in high resolution and converted back to .wav files from the supplied .flac files, or extracted from DVD-A as .wav files  in some cases.

Even when mine are played (or uploaded) from different storage mediums on the same PC, the files are played AND uploaded  from System Memory. There are no conversions to another format performed, or software manipulation.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
Just now, Spacehound said:

There ya go. You've decided already,  Before it's been done.

 

 Due to the nature of the proposed tests as proposed by Mani, it will not be possible to draw any definite conclusions, as there will be format conversions etc. performed. Nevertheless, the results are likely to be very interesting and worthy of further investigation.

  I have very little doubt though, based on previous experience with Mani, that he will identify differences, but whether mansr will also hear those differences is another question, as he has a high Expectation Bias that there will be no differences. 

 

Why am I not surprised that you can't be bothered going ?

 

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

......Why am I not surprised that you can't be bothered going ?

 

Changed yer mind then?

 

How convenient. From your previous post you assumed I was a dead cert for going.

 

And as Mani, totally unprompted,  bet mansr, it's MANI who has the expectation bias, not mansr. But of course that doesn't  fit your agenda.

I'm not responding  to your stuff anymore on this thread. It's way off topic. I was just responding to  a question from Neuroscience.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

And as Mani, totally unprompted,  bet mansr, it's MANI who has the expectation bias, not mansr. But of course that doesn't  fit your agenda.

 

 Expectation Bias works both ways !

 If somebody has a high Expectation that there will be no differences, then they are far less likely to hear differences, even when  there are differences..

A high Expectation  that you will hear differences, does not mean that you will hear verifiable differences under non sighted conditions. One reason could be that you aren't relaxed enough (stress) , and the other reason that there are none to hear !

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...