Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

+1 @reg19

However, after studying electronics engineering for 4 years and later working in a ‘measurements and calculations are everything’ world for a few decades, I still feel that they are necessary but not sufficient. ASR asks to prove it. As a hobbyist who likes to listen to music to relax, I’m not interested in the effort.

Well said -- and I agree. Necessary but not sufficient.

I can make out differences between *certain* speaker cables though they measure identically (with our current measurement set), for example. 

The Achilles' heel of their approach; well said.

There are several possibilities which might be responsible for identically-measuring things sounding differently:

(a) User error (lack of careful testing, distraction, bias, etc.)

(b) Inadequate measurement metric (we don't yet have measurements for the experiences heard). Umami was tasted before it was measured and classified. People tasting umami didn't have subjective bias; they had an experience for which there was not yet a scientific description or analysis. Happens all the time.

+1 @reg19, hilde45

@hilde45 do you think this new quality would survive null testing?  It's pretty easy with cables.

"Absolute rubbish Amir. You have no idea how many here actually do listen to a variety of equipment without knowing what the equipment is or what the cost is. Again you push the line that you are the omnipotent guru."

What I talk about is elementary in audio science. So no, stating the need for a controlled test is not any attempt at looking like a guru. However, it is trivial to show that your understanding of such tests is faulty. "Without knowing what equipment is" constitutes just one aspect of such tests. I explained all of that in my video but it is clear you didn’t watch it. So here it is again:

1. Levels must be matched. This applies to active devices like electronics and passives like speakers/headphones. If you don’t match levels, you better not bother.

2. Testing must be repeated to rule out chance. This is an extremely common failing of people who claim to have done "blind tests." I can predict a coin being a head, flip it and get that. I can even do that 4 or 5 times in a row. That doesn’t mean I have super powers to predict a coin toss. It just means I got lucky. You need to conduct the test at least 10 times and get 9 out of 10 right. Typical audiophile trying once or twice just generates "noise, " not data.

3. The test needs to truly be blind. No "tells." For this reason, you need to have a proper protocol to conduct the test.

All of this takes less time and effort by the way that some of you put up by posting here. The truth is there for you.

"There are and for what its worth Goldenone knows far more than you, but when he challenged your measurements you threw him out."

There is no truth to this at all. His unprofessional/unethical conduct is what got him banned on ASR. He has been doing measurements for a year or so with no background in audio engineering or science. If that makes him more qualified than me, fine. Post measurements of his that back your claims in audio. As it is, they don’t match his own subjective claims!