A proposal: the Objectivist Audio Review magazine

[wgscott]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php

[wgscott]

Its value is primarily the measurements that are performed on various pieces of equipment (which in general are far more informative than single blind or double blind tests).

 

I would have been less likely to purchase my DAC (Teac NT-503) had I seen those measurements to begin with.  The poor quality of the DSD-upsampling was particularly eye-opening.  (I can pat myself on the back for having subjectively detected that there was something amiss with this before I saw the measurements.)

 

I like to look at the actual data -- the primary measurements, and to make up my own mind.  I fully understand the difference between that and subjective commentary and interpretation.

 

[wgscott]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

As such, I don't think of you as an objectivtist 

 

Perhaps it is time to move beyond the silly labels that no one can even manage to spell, let alone define.

[wgscott]

Empirical evidence is the basis for any experimental science, like chemistry, physics, biology, etc.

 

I think you are confusing it with anecdotal evidence, which is also a subset of empirical evidence (but is not considered to be the basis of any well-established field of science).

[wgscott]

Although I think it is quite possible for something to measure well but sound terrible, I'm not sure there are many examples of the opposite -- things that measure quite poorly but sound wonderful (unless it is euphonic distortion, so maybe we should add in accurate reproduction).  

 

In other words, good measurements are probably a necessary but not a sufficient condition.

[wgscott]

3 hours ago, lmitche said:

So what is this? Is this anecdotal evidence? Empirical evidence? Interesting but not significant until more data points are collected? Mass delusion?

 

As I said before, it is anecdotal evidence.  

 

Anecdotal evidence is a type of empirical evidence, but it isn't a particularly compelling form.  I am not saying it is without value.  It is a starting point to do some serious experiments, which would involve stuff like double-blind testing or measurements, to provide more compelling empirical evidence that is less subject to expectation bias.  

 

Case studies in medicine are examples of anecdotal reports.  It isn't a term of dismissal.  But it isn't particularly persuasive.

[wgscott]

3 minutes ago, lmitche said:

 

And if we had 30 people, or 60 people endoring the approach, is it perauasive then?

 

No.

 

But if you had a single person who could tell the difference in a rigorously-controlled, double-blind test, it would be more persuasive than 60 people's sighted test anecdotes.  

 

Hundreds of people claim to have been abducted by aliens from outer-space.  That doesn't make the claim any more credible.

[wgscott]

37 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Ah, so the whole internet review thing such as popularized with Amazon has no credibility?

 

It is probably fine for establishing which toaster to buy.

 

But it is still just anecdotal testimonials.

 

(This leaves aside the problem of paid reviewers, or people who have a grudge leaving gratuitously negative reviews, etc.)

[wgscott]

9 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

 

I think here, in a nutshell, is the divide in CA.

 

There is one group of folks who do not regard any anecdotal findings credible, no matter the sample size. That's OK. That's their prerogative.

 

That is a deliberate mischaracterization of what you quoted.

 

He asked if 30 or 60 anecdotal testimonials would be "persuasive."

 

They might be credible. They might not be credible.  

 

The problem is that we have no way to distinguish whether or not they are credible, unless we put it to a test that eliminates things like the power of suggestion, or expectation bias.

 

 

[wgscott]

3 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Well Jud, that's the thing, magazine and other publication formats are a dead end in the age of the internet. Steve Guttenberg, whose rise to fame happened due to his relationship with an internet review site, should know better then propose this stupid magazine idea.

 

Do you have CNET magazine in your newstand? Have you ever seen a newstand where you live?

 

Like it or not, on the internet, polling is used to collect likes and dislikes and to gain influence and power in consumer markets. There is no way to determine how people came by their endorsements.

 

I don't buy that the choice of one guy in after a dbt is more persuasive than 60 results that were collected independently especially in a group and enthusiasts and experts in a subject. Yes you need to throw out the outliers to ensure a robust sample, but I'll take, and do take, the combined expertise of many others over a dubious dbt with a sample of one.

 

 

If you believe truth is established by social consensus or a popularity contest, don't be surprised if you find other people who disagree.

[wgscott]

It is kind of amusing that the self-identified "subjectivists" are the only ones who believe that such a divide even exists.  

[wgscott]

8 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

Fair enough. I apologize if I mischaracterized what you said. It was not my intent.

 

But here's the thing... many of us don't come here to debate and evaluate the credibility of reported findings. We come here to share our experiences, and to garner ideas to try in our own systems. If you and others set a very high bar for yourselves, in terms of what content you consider credible, and perhaps actionable, that's fine and laudable.

 

But why not let others use their own looser criteria?

 

I am enjoying a level of SQ in my system that is light years beyond what it was 2 years ago, and even a year ago. I did it by adopting a series of changes based on posted experiences that would not meet your acceptance criteria. But I don't care, because I made my own choices, took a risk with my own money, and am happy with the results.

 

Why not leave people to make their own decisions?

 

It is also a deliberate mischaracterization to suggest that I give a flying rat's ass what people want to buy and stick in their audio system.

 

The question was whether a set of 30 or 60 testimonials would be "persuasive," which I took to mean "would it be enough to overcome skepticism."  The context was discussing anecdotal vs. other kinds of empirical evidence.