Popular Post Ralf11 Posted December 17, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 17, 2019 it ain't him; it's you askat1988, wgscott and esldude 1 2 Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 it ain't him either; it's you askat1988 1 Link to comment
Popular Post Ralf11 Posted December 17, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 17, 2019 LOL! Give it up. You cannot beat these guys up. They are professional engineers and scientists. mansr, crenca, pkane2001 and 2 others 1 4 Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 The scientific method is worth of study before you start playing with hypotheses crenca 1 Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, thyname said: ‘You have way too many posts here for a 14 years old guy writing from your parents’ basement 😁 what's with the personal attacks, muffy?? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Middy said: bullshit let me get this straight - the F word is not allowed, but this is? Link to comment
Popular Post Ralf11 Posted December 17, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 17, 2019 to get back to the topic: Audio stopped being about audio because some people realized they could sell worthless junk to others if they dressed it up as "hi-tech" or encased it in Bubinga wood mansr, Rt66indierock, Middy and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Normal practice is to issue a correction in a scientific journal. I've never had to do that tho. BTW, when will you conduct the testing that has been promised for the last few years? ( *I'm not saying any or all of your products improve or don't improve SQ - just that sauce for the goose is also nutrition for the gander) Link to comment
Popular Post Ralf11 Posted December 18, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 18, 2019 58 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: Your statement downplays this big time. Many drugs today and drugs still being worked on and released in the future are this way. I take one that I'd like to get off of. I asked my doctor if he could just measure the level in my blood when I'm on and off the drug and I could compare this will the results of what the drug is supposed to do. He laughed and said it can't be done. I know this is medicine, not audio, but it's an interesting piece of information for those that believe one can't develop a product without knowing how 100% of the pieces fit into the puzzle. I have an open mind, but not so open my brain falls out. There are always limitations to a mechanistic view, namely that you think you have it all understood yet there is some other factor affecting the system - often episodically. This is common in what I call complex systems, e.g. climate science, ecology, and economics (to name one that isn't a science). While "it strains credulity to think that such dramatic improvements in SQ wouldn't show up in some form in the measurements currently available to audio science" there is always some (small) possibility that some aspects of SQ are not captured by the measurements (done, made, presented to consumers or -gasp - possible today). And that is why I am a Subjectivist. But subjective analysis is not the same as guessing or "Impressionism" - to be at all valid it requires reliable comparisons, where sources of bias are removed by blind testing. tapatrick, kumakuma and crenca 3 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now