Popular Post Sal1950 Posted December 28, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted December 28, 2018 1 hour ago, lasker98 said: So why keep hammering on in every thread with requests to have them provided if it's obvious they're not available? If I was to walk outside tomorrow and report I saw a red/purple sky with green colored clouds, and you knew it was a typical blue sky-white gray clouds day, wouldn't you query me on what the conditions were that I had these impressions? People can not constantly post having audible impressions that make no sense within known science and not expect to be asked to present supporting evidence. 1 hour ago, lasker98 said: To be honest it's something I have no interest in. No offense meant. 1 hour ago, lasker98 said: I have no idea about your background but do you honestly believe that everything relating to the science of electronics is already known? Nothing more to be learned? If there is, how do you expect to learn anything new when you refuse to involve yourself in any testing, preferring to stick your head in the sand and say "I heard it, so it is so"? askat1988 and mansr 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
Sal1950 Posted December 28, 2018 Share Posted December 28, 2018 34 minutes ago, Ralf11 said: 2. subjective listening tests - here, biases are eliminated (or at least, reduced) by std. scientific protocols such as blind testing; rudimentary statistical analysis removes outcomes that are due to chance Blind testing should always be at the top of the list. We have to first determine if the listener can actually hear any of the artifacts he is listening for, before any determination of relevance can be made. You can't tell me that A is better than B if you can't first show the ability to determine there is really any difference between the two. Tightly bias controlled blind testing is still the gold standard of any science. Ajax 1 "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
Popular Post Sal1950 Posted December 28, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted December 28, 2018 9 minutes ago, lasker98 said: I believe there's a 30 day money back deal. That's the oldest snake-oil hook there is. In audio very very very few will ever return a product and admit, His hearing isn't good enough to hear a difference His gear isn't good -------------------------------- On and on and on. Admit you not worthy and they'll give you $ Can't believe you don't see thru that con, It's used on every late night TV commercial made mansr and sarvsa 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
Popular Post Sal1950 Posted December 28, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted December 28, 2018 15 minutes ago, Jud said: Liking the idea of being objective and scientific is great, but there's a heck of a lot of work to be done to reach the reality. Yes it can be very difficult (blind testing) to do right. But in many cases it should be relatively easy. When lasker98 tell us to listen to some very expensive USB cable and that the difference will "Blow you away". That should be a difference that will be easily determined in a blind test, hell even one of those audiophool "wife heard it from the kitchen" proclamations. marce, esldude and 89reksal 2 1 "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
Sal1950 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 14 minutes ago, pkane2001 said: I know it may sound like a challenge, but to me it’s just a question: if the reviewer did only sighted testing, I’ll discount most of the findings. Nothing wrong with sighted testing when doing it for yourself, but the reliability of such reports to others is pretty much impossible to judge. Many time asking about "blind testing" is more a bigger picture question. It asks the poster if he questions his results at all beyond a spot "sounds like" statement. Measurement and blind testing are still at the heart of investigation. The human weaknesses in perception are too large to accept unquestioned. If you "trust your ears only" you've set yourself up to be taken advantage of by people who are expert at marketing and crowd control. Trust but Verify. Or throw away $32,000 on a boutique power cord, it will give you blacker blacks. LOL "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
Sal1950 Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: You don’t seem interested in audio at all, just the destruction of the industry and walking in to parties of like-minded individuals and being a thorn in their sides. 6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: It seems like you’ve forgotten this is a hobbiest site. People come here to have fun. 6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: So you’re here to help the industry by getting rid of voodoo? Chris, I know you weren't speaking to me but I would like to make a few comments. First I never realized you built this site to have a party? From it's very name (Computer Audiophile) I came here looking to learn and share my knowledge of using a computer to source and distribute my library of music. Any yes, that means trying to make some understand how IMHO they are in danger of getting caught up in what relates very closely to a religious cult. You know my feelings so there's no need to repeat them once again here. There's also the situation of the passing thru reader, if this site is like the others I've been associated with, the majority of of those reading the site on a day to day basis is composed of unregistered people who get linked in from google searches and all that.That's a large part of why I'll post to some of what I feel is the discussion of some of the more ridiculous claims made by the radical subjectives. There's two sides to the stories told in the fairy tales that get thrown around here as reality. People deserve better than to have their pockets picked without a tiny bit of warning. YMMV "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
Sal1950 Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 3 hours ago, crenca said: If your into the shooting sports, you quickly learn just how much subjectivism there is out there - pre and post internet forums. Around things like terminal ballistics, or the best firearm for this or that situation, there is little consensus. It took the FBI trying to find the objective truth with standardized gel testing on the "service" pistol calibers (i.e. 9mm, 40, 45) to bring some sanity to it... True but in the end we do fall back to measurements to learn the truth. I own Chrony chronograph to develop my loads to perform properly to the task at hand, etc. Have done some very limited gel tests for bullet performance though like audio there are others that do that type of thing professionally to use for reference. In my other main "hobby" 2 & 4 wheel performance there is little to nothing left to subjectivism. From horsepower and torque numbers to race track timing, the numbers tell it all. It's only in the area of things like food and wine where subjective impressions rule the day, but there it's only a humans preference that's important, not a reference to something definable, like the idea of High Fidelity. esldude 1 "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
Popular Post Sal1950 Posted December 30, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted December 30, 2018 13 hours ago, agtp said: Sal, do you advocate an objective, science based approach, or are you just projecting and compartmentalizing? You seem to be contradicting yourself and it's confusing. Step back from your fantasy world and get in tune with the reality of known science. There is no Santa Claus my friend. I know he's already been banned (again) but I'm sure he's still reading. ROTFLMAO Are you serious, what did you do, keep a file on my posts? Or did you sit at the keyboard for hours doing research on the number of times you could find me using some religious term? TOO TOO funny. Sorry if my very minor religious thoughts are offensive to you. All I've done was to wish others well. Maybe you can get even by going out and kicking over some Christmas trees? LOL Hugo9000, Teresa and esldude 3 "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
Sal1950 Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 13 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: People come to CA to have fun and increase their enjoyment of this wonderful hobby. To you that may mean interjecting every conversation with statements about putting up or shutting up. For others, this means experimenting with whatever they want and talking about it amongst friends who feel the same. Do you understand that not everyone cares about a rigorous scientific approach to their hobby? I do, but I know you understand my reasoning on people also being able to hear opposing points of view and not be hoodwinked by mass histarira. No reason for us to debate, it's your site so you will ultimately decide on how to handle things. I hope it doesn't turn into blind censorship of the objective approach like has happened at headfi, WBF, and others dedicated to group stroking of delusional hearing. esldude 1 "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
Sal1950 Posted December 31, 2018 Share Posted December 31, 2018 1 hour ago, Allan F said: Trust based on many years of experience and repeated critical listening has provided more than sufficient proof for many of us. We have neither the need nor the desire to "verify" in order to satisfy you or anyone else. We would rather spend the time enjoying music. Oh No Mr Objectivist, please don't ask me to close my eyes. How will I ever know which is which? I'm not going to have my illusion bubble burst. "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
Sal1950 Posted December 31, 2018 Share Posted December 31, 2018 2 hours ago, Don Hills said: At least at Headfi, it's been balanced. There is a prohibition on mentioning objective testing in the cable (for example) threads, but there is also a specific area set aside for objective discussion where those who discount measurements are unwelcome. Yea but you better walk the line there, don't threaten their little church of believers too strongly. I received warnings there sometime back when I posted the thread on the falsified AQ HDMI cable video, they didn't like a sponsor being caught with it's pants down. Very much like the Sound Science header at WBF, I was banned from the site for simply politely asking Steve why Amir couldn't post his measurements in a thread completely made for them? LOL "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
Popular Post Sal1950 Posted January 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 1, 2019 43 minutes ago, wgscott said: Not all of them. Just the ones that you can't identify with your eyes closed. That is the bottom line here. A motto to go forward into the New Year understanding. Ralf11, wgscott and esldude 2 1 "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
Sal1950 Posted January 1, 2019 Share Posted January 1, 2019 On 12/30/2018 at 2:11 PM, Sal1950 said: Are you serious, what did you do, keep a file on my posts? Or did you sit at the keyboard for hours doing research on the number of times you could find me using some religious term? TOO TOO funny. Just thought I'd let our members know I was contacted by agtp on another site and he WAS keeping a file on my posts. Something about them or me gives him a unnatural interest. 😁 That's fine, I'm well prepared for stalkers. "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
Sal1950 Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 4 hours ago, esldude said: Yeah, I think we're at the point where the question is whether the point is missed or instead evaded? Evade or ignore. That's how they always respond to requests for evidence they're unable to supply. wgscott 1 "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
Popular Post Sal1950 Posted January 2, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2019 31 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said: But the problem with most of these forum objectivists is they can't hear good enough themselves to pickup on these things. We know, it's our ears or gears that's not up to your standards. Not the fact that you can't produce repeatable results with you eyes closed. wgscott and sarvsa 1 1 "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
Popular Post Sal1950 Posted January 2, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2019 8 hours ago, Music Enthusiast said: Nobody is saying that expectation bias and placebo effect isn't real. But this can't be used to explain away everything that's not easy to understand. There's actually real differences between some gear that simple Audio Precision tests don't pick up on. If and when that's true, you should be able to hear that difference with your eyes closed. If it only exists when you know what your listening to, it's a bias. A very simple deduction, wgscott and sarvsa 1 1 "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
Sal1950 Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 34 minutes ago, Blake said: I think this article may resolve the objectivist/subjectivist wars: Your kidding right, this is what you present for evidence? Edit, esldude just posted what I was about to type here. +1 "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