doctor_big wrote: > I feel that it's a fool's game as nobody in this arena is even remotely > interested in furthering the discussion.
That might be your impression of the situation. > The second sub-group are those who swap gear and hear clear differences. > These chappies are far more sensible. They realize that there's been a > large number of tests that show there SHOULDN'T be any differences, but > still, their senses tell them there's more going on than can be > explained by those tests. They're suspicious of ABX. These are the > people who the ABX'ers wrongly characterize as anti-science creationist, > homeopathic fools. No, the ones we characterize as anti-science creationist, homeopathic fools are the ones with not only a firm belief in that they hear differences, but also some crackpot reason for the difference. Usually a reason that derives from a deep misunderstanding of both technology and psychology. They are also the ones who deny that any sort of bias or perceptual psychology might in any way be at play. > There's significant anger and (I suspect) hidden gear envy here. That is pure speculation on your part. Many of us have or have had expensive systems. > True science-based experimentation goes thusly: A hypothesis, test it, > theory, test it. Exactly. > True scientists wouldn't stop at ABX. They'd see that perhaps ABX is > measuring the wrong thing, or is not valid for the model. In order to > support the ABX model, they'd strive to find other ways of testing the > hypothesis. Did you read any of the documents I linked to in this posting:? Julf wrote: > Indeed - no joke. For anyone seriously interested in listening tests, I > really recommend 'ITU-R BS.1534' > (http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BS.1534-2-201406-I/en) and 'ITU-R BS.1116' > (http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BS.1116-2-201406-I/en) > ABX is stale. It comes up with null findings when -everything- points > to the idea that it -should- show a result. No, that is just a false statement. In most cases where ABX comes up with null findings the theory and our current scientific understanding tends to support the hypothesis that the differences aren't audible. > Wildly different systems show no difference with ABX. To me, that says > that perhaps ABX isn't capable of revealing those differences. And why would there necessarily be audible differences even if the systems are "wildly different". That sounds like starting with a preconceived answer, and discrediting methodologies that don't provide the answer you want. Not very scientific... > So what do the anti-subjectivists do? They repeat the same tests over > and over again, The duck floats, so they burn the witch. No, they (we) say "so please come up with better ways to isolate differences in actual air waves from effects of bias, expectations and psychological factors". What do we usually get in response? "Those factors don't affect me, I know what I hear". > Any attempts to subvert the religion are met with obfuscation and > sophistry. Indeed! > Suggest another test - what's the response? "ABX! ABX!" Suggest another test - what's the response? "You can't measure everything! I know what I hear!". > I've debated some on religious forums, and it's a fool's game. Agree. Confirmation bias is a powerful force. > While am thoroughly in favour of exposing quackery in audio (vis: > ethernet cables, usb cables, and -- to a lesser extent -- > speaker/interconnects) the religious fervour and vitriol that's expended > by the anti-subjectivist against the possibility of ANY value whatsoever > in high-end gear, along with the logistical, circular wrangling required > to even try to deal with it, renders the prospect unsavoury and > wasteful. So what is your method of drawing a line between quackery and "genuine" high-end effects? To again quote Bruno Putzeys "If it walks like quack and it sounds like quack, duck!" "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102632 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
