Misleading Measurements

[pkane2001]

39 minutes ago, bluesman said:

I just realized how to describe what’s missing here.  I have no reason to doubt that the tool in question does exactly what it was designed to do - so I don’t.  My question is whether and how we know that it does exactly and only what it was designed to do.  And that’s why knowing how it does what it does would be useful.  No medication has only one effect, and I suspect this is true of essentially every other intervention into a system with more than one running process.

If it has no confounding effect beyond the controlled addition of distortion products, DISTORT would be useful to add a measured amount of IM products to a signal so I could run repetitive play-record cycles to test my theory that playback yields a double dose of IM (i.e. both captured in the source program and created during playback of the same program).  I have to test this approach, because I’m not sure that digitally generated and/or processed signals interact the same way when played back through speakers that pure analog signals from generation to playback do.  So IMD in digital equipment and sources may be misleading compared to IMD in analog devices.

 

This is getting more interesting every day!

 

Everyone interested in the DISTORT discussion is invited to continue in a thread dedicated to it:

 

[Summit]

2 hours ago, Patate91 said:

 

It seems that you are misusing sceptism and science method for an unknown reason.

 

You can simply use and verify the app to see if it works.

 

Maybe you don't know how a plane works and can fly. You don't have access to all the data and how everything works. But still those planes are flying around the world.

 

I don’t know about airplanes but we don’t like UFOs flying around the world without validated independent testing that they do exactly what they were designed to do.

 

The ministry of extraterrestrial spacecraft has a form (you got to love bureaucracy) for obtaining independent testing, but so far none on an unidentified spacecraft has been able to verify their identity, which is required to submit the application (a classic catch 22 situation).

[bluesman]

3 hours ago, Patate91 said:

Maybe you don't know how a plane works and can fly. You don't have access to all the data and how everything works. But still those planes are flying around the world.

And we all know they have absolutely no effect on the world other than to shift their passengers’ mass from place to place.  Airport locations and flight paths couldn’t possibly affect real estate values, could they? Accident & fatality rates are identical for all of them, right?  They all pollute equally, have identical performance specs, and cost exactly the same amount.........just like audio equipment.

 

Maybe you don’t know how a car works and gets down the road. You don’t have access to all the data and how everything works.  But still those cars are transporting people all over the place. Do you think they might possibly have any other effect on the world depending on how they work?  Or do 2500 pound electric cars on hard, skinny tires have the exact same effect on the environment, infrastructure, economics, etc as 5000 pound cars with 7 liter gasoline burning V8s and sticky 30 aspect ratio gum balls on their wheels?

 

Hmmmm - maybe the above observations are based on misleading measurements.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

8 hours ago, Patate91 said:

 

It seems that you are misusing sceptism and science method for an unknown reason.

 

As said, I am open to the possibilities that DISTORT does what it says on the can. Asking for validation of a tool is neither misuse or skepticism of scientific method, it is a normal part of scientific method.

“Science is the organized skepticism in the reliability of expert opinion.” Richard Feynman

"At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes - an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counter-intuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new. " - Carl Sagan

 

8 hours ago, Patate91 said:

You can simply use and verify the app to see if it works.

 

Already answered this but perhaps you, as an end user, can provide the verification the app is valid?

 

8 hours ago, Patate91 said:

Maybe you don't know how a plane works and can fly. You don't have access to all the data and how everything works. But still those planes are flying around the world.

 

I'll let this one fly by for now

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

7 hours ago, bluesman said:

I just realized how to describe what’s missing here.  I have no reason to doubt that the tool in question does exactly what it was designed to do - so I don’t.  My question is whether and how we know that it does exactly and only what it was designed to do.  

 

The way I see it, they are two sides of the same coin.

 

 

7 hours ago, bluesman said:

And that’s why knowing how it does what it does would be useful.  No medication has only one effect, and I suspect this is true of essentially every other intervention into a system with more than one running process.

 

In this analogy one side of the coin is a) does the drug do what it says it does (efficacy) b) does it only do what it is supposed to do (side effects)

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

There has been a lot of discussion on validation of a tool, device, gadget - does it do what it says it does accurately and reliably and does it do that without introducing other issues (lets leave it vague for the moment).

 

Getting back on topic is there possibility of both misleading measurements and double standards IF validation is demanded sometimes but not offered at other times.. beyond 'try and decide yourself'.

 

For me products like the ER are offered based on their subjective listening merits.It would be nice to have independent validation beyond anecdotal evidence but I am okay making up my own mind. Devices that do measurements or even indirectly rely on a measured input/outcome (introducing x% distortion, measured simulated distortion products, proper use of transfer functions etc) are a different beast. The subjective evaluation of the latter (listening to it) or interpreting what you see on screen, depends on the accuracy of the design and implementation of the device in the first place.

 

Does end-user satisfaction constitute independent validation of a device itself or only one persons subjective, possibly biased, evaluation ie can others rely upon this?

 

Depending on your answers then should not the same standard apply to things like Uptone's Ether Regen or is there a double standard at play here when it suits ?

 

 

[fas42]

To prolong the, ahem, medical analogy - what we have is a patient who is feeling somewhat unwell; some medical professionals will be heavily focused on diagnosing a particular cause, out of the many things that possibly are causing a specific symptom, and who will then hit that cause with all the medical knowledge, and pharmaceuticals at their disposal. Someone who is coming from a health coach angle will look at the big picture, and suggest major lifestyle changes, to encourage a better overall sense of wellness - and what is needed are measurements that tell everyone that the patient is going in the right direction, when following that regime, 😉.

[Patate91]

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

As said, I am open to the possibilities that DISTORT does what it says on the can. Asking for validation of a tool is neither misuse or skepticism of scientific method, it is a normal part of scientific method.

“Science is the organized skepticism in the reliability of expert opinion.” Richard Feynman

"At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes - an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counter-intuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new. " - Carl Sagan

 

 

Already answered this but perhaps you, as an end user, can provide the verification the app is valid?

 

 

I'll let this one fly by for now

 

 

Look, distortions, numerical music and sound are well understand for a long time no. Software devellopment too.

 

For now it looks like you don't have enough knowledge to understand how Distort works. It's up to you to learn. I know it sounds rude but it looks like you are looking for some magical effect or to prove that there effects about numerical music and sound reproduction that are still misunderstood.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 hours ago, Patate91 said:

 

Look, distortions, numerical music and sound are well understand for a long time no. Software devellopment too.

 

So, maybe, so what ?

 

2 hours ago, Patate91 said:

For now it looks like you don't have enough knowledge to understand how Distort works.It's up to you to learn.

 

Why? I don't need to go anywhere near Distort or any other App for that matter to have it independently validated. To think otherwise is misguided.

 

2 hours ago, Patate91 said:

I know it sounds rude but it looks like you are looking for some magical effect or to prove that there effects about numerical music and sound reproduction that are still misunderstood.

 

Not magic, science.

If you are certain because it is as you say "all so well understood" please share with us the objective data or should we just believe you because you say so?

[Patate91]

2 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

So, maybe, so what ?

 

 

Why? I don't need to go anywhere near Distort or any other App for that matter to have it independently validated. To think otherwise is misguided.

 

 

Not magic, science.

If you are certain because it is as you say "all so well understood" please share with us the objective data or should we just believe you because you say so?

 

You'll have all the objective data you want by using the application. Then you can do everything you want to do with it. There won't be any authority that will validate anything.

 

About the subject of the post : what will you do with the app data and technical informations? As per OP it is not necessary and it could be misleading you. You are asking for strange proofs, but as Pkane sais you'll have to do your own search in order to understand/appreciate  what the app ia doing and maybe about what measurements means. There's no free ticket.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

To prolong the, ahem, medical analogy - what we have is a patient who is feeling somewhat unwell; some medical professionals will be heavily focused on diagnosing a particular cause, out of the many things that possibly are causing a specific symptom, and who will then hit that cause with all the medical knowledge, and pharmaceuticals at their disposal. Someone who is coming from a health coach angle will look at the big picture, and suggest major lifestyle changes, to encourage a better overall sense of wellness - and what is needed are measurements that tell everyone that the patient is going in the right direction, when following that regime, 😉.

 

Frank I have no idea what this has to do with anything ! If doctors find a problem they try and treat it. No surprises here. Doctors do look at the "big picture" and their treatments include lifestyle changes.

[Patate91]

9 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

So, maybe, so what ?

 

 

Why? I don't need to go anywhere near Distort or any other App for that matter to have it independently validated. To think otherwise is misguided.

 

 

Not magic, science.

If you are certain because it is as you say "all so well understood" please share with us the objective data or should we just believe you because you say so?

 

And for what I see aven if Pkane gives toi thé objective data toi won't be able to judge what it is doing?

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

7 minutes ago, Patate91 said:

There won't be any authority that will validate anything.

 

i think that's the problem not the solution 😄

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

6 minutes ago, Patate91 said:

 

And for what I see aven if Pkane gives toi thé objective data toi won't be able to judge what it is doing?

 

please explain what you have seen.

 

Not sure why objectivists can't provide objective data in an Objective-Fi forum. if you have it, provide it, rather than making empty accusations.

 

[Patate91]

1 minute ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

please explain what you have seen.

 

Not sure why objectivists can't provide objective data in an Objective-Fi forum. if you have it, provide it, rather than making empty accusations.

 

 

Let say I'm presenting you a hammer. 

 

What kind of objective data would you want? What kind of objective data do you need to be sure you can hit nails with it?

 

Then what kind of objective data do you expect from an application that "creates" all kind of distortions that you can add on music, tones, noises, or whatever you want? 

 

Another exemple? What kind of objective data do want for a tone or multitone generator to convince you that it generates tones? What kind of data do you need to prove you that a guitar distortion pedal really generate distortions ?

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

9 minutes ago, Patate91 said:

 

Let say I'm presenting you a hammer. 

 

What kind of objective data would you want? What kind of objective data do you need to be sure you can hit nails with it?

 

Then what kind of objective data do you expect from an application that "creates" all kind of distortions that you can add on music, tones, noises, or whatever you want? 

 

Another exemple? What kind of objective data do want for a tone or multitone generator to convince you that it generates tones? What kind of data do you need to prove you that a guitar distortion pedal really generate distortions ?

 

Let me ask you first:

 

Are there the times when objective data is irrelevant and just not required?

 

Could irrelevant data measurements be misleading?

 

Could there be a double standard asking for irrelevant objective data when none is needed and only if it suits the agenda of the person demanding the data ?

[Patate91]

9 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Let me ask you first:

 

Are there the times when objective data is irrelevant and just not required?

 

Could irrelevant data measurements be misleading?

 

Could there be a double standard asking for irrelevant objective data when none is needed and only if it suits the agenda of the person demanding the data ?

 

 

Yes, for simple things like what's the use of a hammer.

 

Only if you don't have the appropriate knowledge. It becomes  a personnal choice to learn, or to trust and use the tool and verify if it does what it is supposed too. 

 

The data is mostly irrevelant for simples things, or very Well known things. For more complex things it's always revelant. Bertrand Russell said that education is an end in itself  (sorry don't know if the expression is ok). There's no gain To have at keeping people ignorant.

 

Now anwser my questions before we continue.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

11 minutes ago, Patate91 said:

 

 

Yes, for simple things like what's the use of a hammer.

 

Only if you don't have the appropriate knowledge. It becomes  a personnal choice to learn, or to trust and use the tool and verify if it does what it is supposed too. 

 

The data is mostly irrevelant for simples things, or very Well known things. For more complex things it's always revelant. Bertrand Russell said that education is an end in itself  (sorry don't know if the expression is ok). There's no gain To have at keeping people ignorant.

 

Now anwser my questions before we continue.

 

FWIW Bertrand Russell said quite the opposite AFAIK - education is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

 

So,  what about listening to music and observing that one playback is better than another playback. Is that a "hammer" thing that needs no objective data to verify?

[Patate91]

8 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

FWIW Bertrand Russell said quite the opposite AFAIK - education is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

 

So,  what about listening to music and observing that one playback is better than another playback. Is that a "hammer" thing that needs no objective data to verify?

 

That's not fair you  are not anwsering my questions.

 

What objective data do want from Pkane's Distort application? What kind of objective data do you want about a "simple" tool.

 

If you ask for something specific I'm sure Pkane will anwser.

 

For Bertrand I'm pretty sure he said an end in itself (French translation). But both are not opposite. Education can be a mean to and end and an end in itself (There's a lot of things we learn that have no "real utility", but it provide a richer life. We can learn just for the sake of learning).

[Patate91]

But I think I'm wrong about revelancy.

 

Even with simple things like a hammer objective data can be usefull.

 

His weight will tell me if I can handle it. His lenght too. Sure I can just buy a hammer and in the end I'll get the job done.

 

But anyway, I before I can use the data I need knowledge. 

 

You won't anwser my question because you don't know. I think what you are looking for is knowledge. But you'll have to do your part.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

20 minutes ago, Patate91 said:

What objective data do want from Pkane's Distort application? What kind of objective data do you want about a "simple" tool.

 

You seem to be saying that this App equates to using a hammer or it's truth is self-evident, no objective data required, correct?

 

.....I see our posts have crossed and now you are saying something different about hammers! Objective data is useful.You have changed tacks to pre-requiste knowledge.....

 

Yet So, Paul who invented the App says his Apps "do exactly what they were designed to do and have been validated through independent testing".

 

So, in an objective forum I am asking any objectivist (or non objectivist) for the objective data that tells me it does indeed  "do exactly what they were designed to do and have been validated through independent testing".

 

This is separate and distinct from understanding how the App does it, or any other specific knowledge, or how to use it. "Independent testing" is by its very nature , well, independent of my understanding or knowledge and does not rely on my expertise or lack thereof, to validate the App.

 

Is that so hard to understand?🤷‍♂️

 

I suggest we have an intermission to let others have a say (if they're interested)

 

 

[sandyk]

Unless the Simulation Software is able to confirm the results of  a decent sample of carefully controlled DBT sessions in each type of measurement, it is of very little value.

[opus101]

How could simulation software confirm the results of listening experiments? Do please outline how it could be done.

[sandyk]

27 minutes ago, opus101 said:

How could simulation software confirm the results of listening experiments? Do please outline how it could be done.

 

That's up to Paul to explain. If it can't then it is a just another measurement toy like DiffMaker which you rarely hear about these days and rarely achieved 100% confirmation, and that's when it didn't result in the dreaded BSOD.

 

DBT is still supposed to be the Gold Standard and trumps measurements every time.

[opus101]

5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

That's up to Paul to explain. 

 

No it isn't. Its up to you. Its simulation software btw, not a measurement toy.