Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

I think you and others are focusing on the wrong thing.

Posted by Presto (A) on March 20, 2006 at 11:48:58

In Reply to: I bet he'll hear some "difference". (long) posted by cheap-Jack on March 20, 2006 at 09:25:44:

I think you and others (Clark included - hi Clark) are assuming that me (and others) are somehow demanding some sort of proof of perceived sonics. This is not what we ask - since no proof of what one hears can be had. But there IS something to be said about the ability to hear something REPEATEDLY as opposed to just once!
7
Anyhow - you make some statements that I chose to comment on or refute.

CJ> The question is: are you willing to accept his hearing the difference again this time?

PS> If this guy could tell that two of the discs were identical, and identify which two, then there is no doubt in my mind that what he heard was real. It would then be time to examing the discs for physical differences, and investigate the correlation (if any) between storage location and sonics.

CJ>I also bet you'll challenge him to "validate" his sonic findings since you THINK sonic impressions need to be proven.

PS>I've always maintained that sonic impressions are just that: subjective interpretations that require no proof or explanation. Stating the SOURCE of those sonics, however, is a whole other matter. I can say "A sounds better than B". No proof can be demanded, as it cannot even be provided. But if I say "A is better than B because for B the source was coupled to a stand that was coupled to a concrete floor" now THAT is something we can investigate. Perhaps we could go on to say "We believe that coupling the stand to the floor reduced jitter... and we were actually able to measure lower jitter numbers with the source coupling devices in place. Now with our "stored in different rooms tweak" there are many many more variables at work. I just find it interesting that subjectivists only care that the guy heard some differences, and have no concern at all that the storage location MAY or MAY NOT have been the cause for the experienced differences - if they exist at all. THIS is where I have the problem. I NEVER SAID ONE'S SUBJECTIVE COMMENTS ON SONICS NEEDED PROOF. I said that offering a REASON for improvements or degradation SHOULD at least invoke curiosity - and in some cases may require explanation, and in other cases may require actual proof.

CJ: Like tasting two wines, when one finds one wine taste better than the other. You go on to challenge to "validate" his taste "claim". My question to you is: do you NEED to do so?

PS> No. If the taster said the wine TASTED acidic then it tastes acidic to him. If he said "The wine tastes acidic and likely has a lower pH that the other wine." THEN I would say, intersting - we should measure the pH of the wine. In the second case, the taster is claiming to know what CAUSES the wine to be more acidic, and this can easily be established. Your arguments and parallelisms make me think you completely do not understand what it is I have been talking about, and what I take exception to. I believe what I am trying to convey is being misinterpreted or twisted into something it is not really. If the wine taster said "This wine tastes like it was stored in a room that was too warm." and the room temperature was measured, and indeed it was too warm for storing wine, we can then say that the tester INDEED knows how a wine that was stored in too warm a room will taste!!

CJ> Likewise, suppose you were requested to do the sonic test of the 3 identical CDs afterwards. I can safely assume you would "claim" you could not hear any difference basing on your pre-assumption that there is already NO sonic difference there.

PS> Here it is obvious that you assume I have an agenda. I would be the first one to ADMIT that when I believe something improves sonics, I tend to hear improvements. When I doubt a tweak, I tend to NOT hear improvements. It is very amusing that I am being labelled a stubborn objectivist with an agenda when it is ME who admits to subjective human factors such as psychological bias and the "placebo effect". These effects have been demonstrated time and time again, yet so called subjectivists (faith-based audiophiles) seem to need to ignore these factors. The only way I could participate in this test NOW would be to have four discs sent to me, three from the different rooms, and one which is a copy of one of the three. I would then attempt - nay STRAIN - to hear ANY differences between the discs, and go as far as to see if I can identify which discs are the same. I would invite as many willing participants to join in on the game - but I would NOT tell them why the discs are allegedly different - I would only ask them to report any differences/similaritites. I would not tell them one disc is a copy of one of the three and that they should look for that.

CJ> So I'll request you to "validate" your null finding. Do you think you can substanatiate your null findiing?????

PS> Maybe ask YOURSELF why the same person who heard GLARING differences between discs might be suddenly at a COMPLETE loss to identify anything with the mere addition of a simple little control. Just what are these controls DOING? Causing DEAFNESS? Why should they make a difference if the sonic differences are there and easily heard? This is the MAJOR problem with your thinking - you don't care to know WHY the incorporation of a simple control MIGHT cause the results to be inconclusive instead of so apparently determinant.

CJ>Before you challenge someone's sonic impression, please make sure you can reserve the situation.

PS>I never challenged their sonic impressions. I challenged a)the connection between storage location and sonic changes - which has YET to be proven at ALL and b)the manner in which the so-called listening 'test' was done. The fact this person heard three entirely different discs is simply what they heard. I just think more iterations and a controlled test environment could help to either validate or dispell whether or not this person is actually hearing sonic differences, imagining them, or simply inventing them.

The only people with agendas are those who are concered their "sonic differences" will vanish once the cameras turn on.

I don't need proof that someone "feels" the earth is flat. But I need proof when someone states it as fact. If they do not provide evidence for their claim, it does not have to be accepted as fact.

CJ> Give me a break, please. We are human, not a robot controlled by a computer with pre-programmes to standard instructions. There is inevitably sensing 'mobility' in our brain, but definitely no serious enough to upset & even reverse our previous established likeness or unlikeness. Normal person won't behave like this. Am I correct?

PS>ABSOLUTELY! We are human beings are our hearing can be tricked just as many neat images can fool our eyes. We must be constantly aware of psychological bias and "placbo effects" when we are doing subjective listening for analytical purposes. And this was the case with the guy who heard three different discs - and I happen to believe that is was SUGGESTED to him that he was SENT three different discs.

CJ>So what is "real" according to him, that we can depend on to establish a reference of our aural perception.

PS>What he heard is not proof that storing discs in different rooms causes sonic differences. There were no controls in place when the discs were burned, when they were stored, or when they were auditioned. The makers of this test and this claim failed in every aspect to provide ANY correlation WHATSOEVER between the storage location and the sonics.

CJ> Please don't blind me with so called "science", please.

PS> Please don't suggest that the only proof the audio community needs (or will accept) that storing dics in different rooms causes sonic differences is that "one guy heard it". The only pseudo-science here is how the gentlemen determined that storing discs in different locations causes changes in sonics.

CJ>Right, science is a process of learning the nature by systematic
investigation of OBSERVED material facts. It is alway on going.
Today, we don't know why it sounds like this, may be we know why in the future. Who knows? So why don't we be open-minded to evaluate
the counter opinions instead of insisting on evidences which may not be made available todate.

PS>Hearing something is subjective. Saying what caused the noise is not. I can't prove that someone else heard something I heard. But I can prove the sound existing when I heard it - I can record the sound, and show evidence of its occurance on a scope. What causes noises is pure science - it does not matter how the noise is interpreted - something moved air in a specific way.

Anyhow, I am not one in a million who think a claim as reaching as this should be sent with some better evidence than "my buddy heard it". You're just not going to convice me or many many like me that storage location effects sonics if you go about it this way. There were too many other variables completely ignored, and psychological bias was USED to get the desired result, instead of having controls in place to MINIMIZE IT.

You guys really need to take the card tricks somewhere else - try the tweaks forum. I don't intend to waste any more time on this - its even less productive than trying to "deprogram" cult members.

I can say "The sun looks red at sundown". I can also say "The sun looks red at sundown because it has cooled off", but in this case I'd be right about what color it appears to be, but wrong about why. 1000 years ago, I might have been able to fool a few people into thinking the sun was changing temperature - especially a blacksmith who watched metals change colors as they cooled. But now we know that we are merely looking at the sun through "more" atmosphere due to angles of incidence, and that only the longer red wavelengths of light are able to permeate the greater distance through the atmosphere at that angle.

I am saying that what that guy heard (or think he heard) in no way provides any real evidence that storing discs in diffferent rooms effects the discs in any way that could alter sonics.

That still needs to be properly proven if it is going to be offered as fact. Until then, we can all safely assume that storing discs in different locations "just may very well" cause sonic differences!

Cheers,

Presto

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Sonic Craft

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---