Misleading Measurements

[pkane2001]

3 minutes ago, sandyk said:

It should be, because it's a perfect example of MISLEADING MEASUREMENTS.

 

You appear to have a closed mind where only Measurements matter, just like most ASR members. 

 I will now exit this pointless thread before somebody complains.

 

No. This is an example of those who see magic in any sufficiently advanced technology. There’s no magic, Alex.

[pkane2001]

4 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

And the trouble with doing such a test is that immediately people with the desire not to be curious about what's going on will either:

 

a) Completely ignore it, pretend that it never happened - if I just turn my back on it, it will eventually go away ...

 

b) Be certain that the testing was stuffed up; that there had to be a 'tell' - and frantically dive into every corner, of everything, to ferret it out

 

c) Turn around, and insist that 20 people get the same result - if that fails, insist that 200 people get the same result - if that fails, insist that 2,000 people get the same result - if that fails, ...

 

😝

Yes, Frank. Being objective is much harder than just believing things with no real evidence.

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, fas42 said:

b) Be certain that the testing was stuffed up; that there had to be a 'tell' - and frantically dive into every corner, of everything, to ferret it out

 

😝

 

Like the fact that the files names Alex used telegraphed the expected results? 

 

🦄

[fas42]

Just now, pkane2001 said:

Yes, Frank. Being objective is much harder than just believing things with no real evidence.

 

Oh, there's real evidence all right ... people don't follow a certain path for 30 years if they don't keep getting clear feedback that their activities are producing positive results. If I could just walk into a room which had an audio setup blessed by the Benchmark company, say, and experience excellent subjective performance, I would be the happiest man in the world ... unfortunately, we are not quite there yet, 😉.

 

 

[manueljenkin]

11 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

So you too hear amazing sound coming out of the built-in laptop speakers? ;)

 

I can hear quite nice sound coming out of my phone speakers the moment I swapped my music player software to usb audio player Pro. I also hear much better sound out of a superlux hd562 + a decent amp combo than hd600 with a sub-par amp (mind you, this sub par amp is better than most mobiles, it's a dap).

 

I feel I am more discerning of aberrations in digital playback chain, than from a transducer so much so that my split up in pricing for components would be 40% for dac, 40% for amp and 20% for the transducer.

[fas42]

3 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Like the fact that the files names Alex used telegraphed the expected results? 

 

🦄

 

Ahh, so you're certain that the names are a tell - okay, which is the "better version"?

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Like the fact that files names Alex used telegraphed the expected results? 

 

🦄

 I made no effort to conceal the origins, which do not say how they should sound ,as the differences should even be blindingly obvious to people like you !

They certainly are NOT subtle to anyone with half decent equipment and hearing.

Did you even listen to them ?

[pkane2001]

Just now, fas42 said:

 

Oh, there's real evidence all right ... people don't follow a certain path for 30 years if they don't keep getting clear feedback that their activities are producing positive results. If I could just walk into a room which had an audio setup blessed by the Benchmark company, say, and experience excellent subjective performance, I would be the happiest man in the world ... unfortunately, we are not quite there yet, 😉.

 

 

Would it be asking for too much to use at least a shred of something objective in your arguments in an objective forum, Frank?

[manueljenkin]

10 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Would it be asking for too much to use at least a shred of something objective in your arguments in an objective forum, Frank?

Well the designs being successful and well received for decades is a fact, and there exists a big population of engineers and others who have heard the "asr approved" gear and these and preferred the voodoo, as you say! All of these are factual. Maybe there's more to it after all, a gremlin you just don't seem to understand, or refuse to comprehend.

[sandyk]

22 minutes ago, sandyk said:

It should be, because it's a perfect example of MISLEADING MEASUREMENTS.

 

You appear to have a closed mind where only Measurements matter, just like most ASR members. 

 I will now exit this pointless thread before somebody complains.

 

 If they let me , without further attacks on my , or Frank's credibility.

All people need to do is LOOK and LISTEN to the supplied "bit perfect" copies of the original YouTube video.

Is that so hard ?

[manueljenkin]

On 11/14/2020 at 8:54 AM, manueljenkin said:

Let me share my thoughts on this topic. Most of this is a copypasta (with minor modifications) from my messages in another forum, so you might be having answers even before your questions 😜.

1. Most of the people from objectivist cult speak for themselves, but frame it in a way as if it were universal truth for everyone. Not everyone needs to have the same needs or interests as they do. Armchair opinions, thinking every audible parameter is covered with a limited subset of measurements (most of them static or steady state) form a major part of such conversations. Oh you prefer a different amp topology or design? They claim that you MUST be hearing and preferring distortion,  completely dismissing every other possibility. As of today, we can't CONCLUDE things, especially relating to audibility limits, with the limited set of measurements being done generally.

2. Science often can't prove that something can never occur. It's just a framework to predict the behavior and outcome of something using past experiences, experiments and reasoning. They may anytime be over written. For this, I get a counter argument of something like say planck's constant and speed of light is unlikely to be overwritten anytime soon. True, but it is important to remember that there were so much abstractions earlier before we got to the level of quantum physics understanding we have today. We are not sticking to the John Dalton's model anymore which probably was the best approximation a couple of centuries ago. Comparing audio system analysis to Planck's constant or speed of light is strawman-hat argument since they are direct physical phenomenon which have now been well understood to quite a good level, while audio is cognition related. There is still plenty of research happening on cognition, especially audio. Music isn't really a mystery, cognition is. It's quite hard to probe and correlate what performs what functions there and we only get a black box view, and ears being super tied to the brain doesn't help it much. Spatial properties and object detection is still something not well understood beyond a basic abstraction. The door is wide open in this area for potential changes.

3. Throwing the burden of proof on the one who hears changes. Well telling there shouldn't be a difference is a claim too! Burden of proof must be on either ways of claim. And again, you can't prove there will be no perceivable difference without getting cognition solved. Sure you got "some measurements" but as said above, they are not Conclusive and certainly doesn't grant you permission to demean someone else's choices and experiences.

4. Assumption of weights to different performance parameters (measured or un-measured). You certainly can't make claims on what measurements correlate to perceivable changes, the weights for different performance metric on audibility and what type of parameters need to be measured additionally unless you understand cognition properly. A big part of understanding cognition is to check what types of input it is responsive and not responsive to. Cognition is also relating to precision of detectability of different parameters (including non-desirable influences from parameters), and the location estimation is a use case for which the brain developed to this precision.

As expected @pkane2001 has conveniently ignored all the valid points against asr I've mentioned here.

[fas42]

3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Would it be asking for too much to use at least a shred of something objective in your arguments in an objective forum, Frank?

 

Tell me, if I walked into your place, and changed parts of the rig you normally listen to for pleasure, quite drastically, so that many measurements were now better than before; and none were worse - that you would be 100% happy with that 'upgrade', and to listen to the 'improved rig' forever more - because "the numbers were better"?

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, manueljenkin said:

Well the designs being successful and well received for decades is a fact, and there exists a big population of engineers and others who have heard the "asr approved" gear and these and preferred the voodoo, as you say! All of these are factual. Maybe there's more to it after all, a gremlin you just don't seem to understand.

What exactly are you talking about? What design? 

[Don Hills]

11 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Ahh, so you're certain that the names are a tell - okay, which is the "better version"?

 

The "better version" is the one you prefer, of course.

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, manueljenkin said:

As expected @pkane2001 has conveniently ignored all the valid points against asr I've mentioned here.

What points and why would I be defending ASR? It’s not my site, I post there just like I post here. Why would you expect me to defend anyone against your attacks? Very strange discussion, indeed.

[sandyk]

18 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

As expected @pkane2001 has conveniently ignored all the valid points against asr I've mentioned here.

Yes, and incidentally, Teresa should also be able to check these supplied files out for herself directly from the DropBox player WITHOUT needing to download them and use up her communal bandwidth, as can our K1W1 member.   

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6ak9tyqrpglq1w9/Tyros 3 - The Power Of Love (Instrumental)HF.mp4?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a8koifix231idw3/Tyros 3 - The Power Of Love (Instrumental)LF.mp4?dl=0

[manueljenkin]

8 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

What points and why would I be defending ASR? It’s not my site, I post there just like I post here. Why would you expect me to defend anyone against your attacks? Very strange discussion, indeed.

It's not an attack it's a valid argument against the current state of measurements you so happen to promote actively.

 

And in fact you're the one who's attacking opinions differing from you by using manipulative words to either distract from the thread or try to belittle the credibility of the person in context.

[manueljenkin]

10 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

What exactly are you talking about? What design? 

So many. For starters, preference of toslink (optical spdif) over usb in the inexpensive end of spectrum, despite not seeing any measured noise with usb with the limited set of measurements we have.

[fas42]

On 11/14/2020 at 2:24 PM, manueljenkin said:

 

1. Most of the people from objectivist cult speak for themselves, but frame it in a way as if it were universal truth for everyone. Not everyone needs to have the same needs or interests as they do. Armchair opinions, thinking every audible parameter is covered with a limited subset of measurements (most of them static or steady state) form a major part of such conversations. Oh you prefer a different amp topology or design? They claim that you MUST be hearing and preferring distortion,  completely dismissing every other possibility. As of today, we can't CONCLUDE things, especially relating to audibility limits, with the limited set of measurements being done generally.

 

This is a key point - "you MUST be hearing and preferring distortion,  completely dismissing every other possibility" ... closing off thinking to the chance that other parameters are being missed; the wanting of the audio world to be a neat, tidy box of predictable behaviours, with no unknowns, either known or unknown ... 🤣.

[pkane2001]

10 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

It's not an attack it's a valid argument against the current state of measurements you so happen to promote actively.

Provide objective evidence for any of your arguments, and not what someone somewhere claimed that they heard. There are probably thousands of different measurements on ASR, and I’m certainly not going to defend every one of them. 

[Teresa]

32 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Yes, and incidentally, Teresa should also be able to check these supplied files out for herself directly from the DropBox player WITHOUT needing to download them and use up her communal bandwidth, as can our K1W1 member.   

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6ak9tyqrpglq1w9/Tyros 3 - The Power Of Love (Instrumental)HF.mp4?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a8koifix231idw3/Tyros 3 - The Power Of Love (Instrumental)LF.mp4?dl=0

 

Alex I'm just responding so you know I read your post, since you mentioned me by name.

 

There are two reasons I won't listen to those two files:

• According to my apartment lease agreement I am not allowed to stream any audio or video.
• I hate comparing stuff, and I will never compare anything again unless I have to replace broken or dead equipment. And I dread that happening.

My use of internet is limited to checking email, reading and writing posts at Audiophile Style, checking for new SACD releases, and purchasing SACDs and canned goods online.

[sandyk]

6 minutes ago, Teresa said:

I hate comparing stuff, and I will never compare anything again unless I have to replace broken or dead equipment. And I dread that happening.

That's a shame as you were a very good Audio Reviewer before all this. 

[John Dyson]

3 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

Like the fact that the files names Alex used telegraphed the expected results? 

 

🦄

Heh -- I just ran a test where I was getting SUPER-inconsistent feedback on some tests.   So, to control the experiment, I added some metadata to the audio files from a major organization who it is known that I am working  with.

 

Alas -- the initial results were something like:  I'd love to have a copy of this recording -- until I made it known that the metadata was meaningless.   Then, got all kinds of specious criticism about the recording...  

 

The whole thing about 'expectation bias' or simple dishonesty/manipulation can always be operative.   Double blind tests can be trusted, if done correctly.   Even results from people with integrity and some discipline cannot be trusted -- because it is easy for the mind/opinion to interfere.

 

Bottom line:  JUST DO THE TESTS CORRECTLY  -- it eliminates all kinds of troubles.   There are just too many statistical noise sources to shortcut a test.   This is why I quit trusting 'feedback' on tests...   Some things that enable errors is a lack of discipline, but also cannot overlook the matter of manipulation and dishonesty.  Or, lets re-interpret the manipulation issue to 'extreme expectation bias' :-).

 

John

 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, John Dyson said:

The whole thing about 'expectation bias' or simple dishonesty/manipulation can always be operative.   Double blind tests can be trusted, if done correctly.   Even results from people with integrity and some discipline cannot be trusted -- because it is easy for the mind/opinion to interfere.

 That applies equally to both  the Subjective and Objective sides. 😜

 

 IF Kumakuma had bothered to actually read the original thread and discussions with Frank he would have seen that it was simply a reply/demonstration  from me about the effects of the PSU area  , where he thought that a shitload of low value bypass capacitors in the PSU area of a PC/Server belonging to Cappo ensured a higher sound quality. I simply demonstrated this using different types of capacitors in the capacitance multiplier section of a John Linsley Hood designed PSU add-on powering a USB memory stick. It was easier to use the same original file to do this, than compare 2 different recordings. 

I believe that I made my point with Frank .

[manueljenkin]

6 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

Provide objective evidence for any of your arguments, and not what someone somewhere claimed that they heard. There are probably thousands of different measurements on ASR, and I’m certainly not going to defend every one of them. 

I have a friend who does DBT on pretty much every gear he buys. He doesn't like to be around forums, but you can reach out to him if you're interested.

 

He runs a rme adi2 (which is touted by asr measurements to be completely impervious to upstream changes wrt usb, system scheduling) and found enough improvements on it using sonore switch. He has done enough DBT on this aspect.

 

He finds asr measurements to be almost irrelevant to the results he has got via DBT on many devices.

 

Just one of many examples.