The best plug in filter ever!

For a double-blind test to be statistically valid, there must be at least 25-30 subjects in the test to assume a standard distribution curve so that you can calculate the reliability of the data.

Rather depends on the size of the effect, doesn't it? And even if we denigrate n=1 trials, as we do, what if they are all you have? Better to try and have some information with wide confidence limits than none at all.

You didn't do the blinded trial I suggested to you? Where someone else plugs it in, or unplugs it? You do understand, don't you, that doing it yourself means very little given all the biases that are not accounted for?

Yes, unlike Thomas, I like science. It only means being as certain as you can be about something before you believe it, and especially before you assert it to others. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and we have all seen expensive tweaks that we can laugh at. How shall we tell the difference without proper experimentation?

Indeed not. I don't intend to force 'my preferences' on anyone. I simply point out that if you don't control all the variables you can, you aren't sure of your own findings. I am as vulnerable to those confounders as anyone. I don't want to spend a great deal of money and then have no way of knowing whether I made an improvement or not. Better still, find out before buying rather than afterwards. If I cannot isolate the thing I bought from every other factor, I'm very likely to let the price I paid influence what I think about it. Don't believe me, believe Feynman “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.” It is sad, but true, and also unsurprising.

So let's have no condescending sarcasm. I don't mind what other people believe, nor what they like to buy and believe sounds good. Their money, their business. The issue comes along when they say to others that they should buy it too. Then we need just even a little teeny bit of evidence. No?

@cleeds 

Empirical evidence is evidence.

Empirical, adj.

1. Relying on or derived from observation or experiment.

2. Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment.

3. Guided by practical experience and not theory, especially in medicine.

The first two are respectable uses and comply with scientific method. The third, rather sadly, lets us down more often than not. Much of what I was taught as a medical student in the 1970's was empirical, and now known to be wrong. Very quickly, one learns to put faith in double-blind, controlled, crossover trials rather than the word of an authority. I expect you used 'empirical' in sense #3, and while semantically I can agree that "Empirical evidence is evidence" I have to add it is poor quality evidence and one should not trust it.

Again, I will say I do not mind how other spend their money. It is when they tell us we should do the same that it is right to ask "Why?" and examine the responses carefully.

@corepowertech 

I have had a good explanation from the inventor and owner of the company – Sudkee, he made me promise that I would not post about the tech.

Ah, the secret technology. Well, of course, now we shall all believe. 😉

You might be surprised, but my beef is not against you, as I said, I believe redemption possible. My reason for wasting my time here is that the thread attempts to get us to spend our dwindling resources on a product that has no theoretical underpinning, and which electrical engineers feel is unlikely to work. I'm not convinced by it being secret tech. If it works, patent it, then show us why and how it works. I'll happily eat my words if you show me solid evidence beyond testimonials.

Oh, and Happy Christmas to you too!

@normb I don't even need measurements (of what? If we don't what it does, what shall we measure?) But I do require blind listening tests to see if anyone can tell if it plugged in or not. Even that would be meaningful, if conducted honestly.

And yes, all I was taught at UCL/UCH has been deemed wrong over the years. Made me laugh when I realised there was a time you would fail your fellowship for saying you'd give a β-blocker in CHF, and now you'd fail if you said you wouldn't.

Yes, but let's not go off-topic.

Use of ad hominem replies is an admission that you lack any relevant argument.

I suppose you will now ask me how long I must have waited to use ad hominem.

I don't mind if you buy these things. I hope you enjoy them. But when you encourage others to buy them, with no theoretical mode of action - apparently it's a secret - you must expect wary people to say 'convince me'.

@whostolethebatmobile 

I researched via google and ChatGPT

You're a very naughty boy! ChatGPT works better than I had imagined. 🤣

What I have noticed that a few hours after applying the NPS-1260 to the blades on the Puron the sound got kinda dark sounding. But today everything is great! So, there was some sort of reaction.

Do you really believe that a solution applied to the prongs of something that isn't even in the chain of power to components might make a negative effect after a few hours and then after some (unspecified) hours later make everything better?

You know, asking for a friend...  But you are postulating something that doesn't make any physical/electrical sense, but rather reeks of psychoacoustics.

Maybe you should buy a Puron for every empty socket in your house and report back to us about the nirvana you enjoy? Or would only the seller be in nirvana in those circumstances?

Angry? Not at all. You mistake objectivity for an emotion. But that's up to you. Unless it makes you wonder, just a little bit, whether you have been taken in. And again, that's up to you to decide.

Try to keep an open mind, it might surprise you.

A mind so open your brains fall out?

@holydean  I hope your filter satisfies your hopes and that your wife thinks you're very clever for buying it. I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, and what people choose to spend their money on is not my business. As I have said before (and no doubt will have to say again) when recommending anything for purchase by others, there should be some kind of evidence for its benefits, or at least a potential mechanism of action. Without that, we are in testimonial land, and thus lost without a compass.

I am assuming she was testing video completely blind, right? Blind test ABX? 🤦‍♂️😉😂🤷‍♂️

Even n=1 blind tests are effectively nullified by the (clever*) statement that it takes 45 minutes or so for the effect to be apparent.

45 minutes ruins our ability to compare. I'm trying to keep my 17kCDN electrostatic speakers going despite their 12 panels failing, one by one. Each time one fails, I substitute a pair of boxless transmission line speakers. First disk I grit my teeth. By the third disk I say to myself "I can live with these—why am I repairing those expensive speakers?" And after repair, I say the same kind of thing to myself in reverse "This is so much better" yet by the third disk I can't remember (other than intellectually) what the difference was. Only do I find support for the better speakers in long term usage: do I choose to spend my days listening, or doing something else? Do I find myself staying up late at night for just one more disk? That's why I am going to replace all the panels in those speakers: they keep me listening. In just the same way, it would take months of honest self-reporting to do the same with a device like this. But, read on, if you like.

*clever? Well, certainly. It means you cannot conduct any kind of blind test for yourself, as 45 minutes means no worthwhile comparison. If you want to argue about that I have a solution for you. It will take a few weeks and need a helper. Let me suggest a couple of weeks with the device plugged in, and a couple without it. Record your satisfaction each day. Your helper must not tell you whether it is plugged in or not. Do this for about three cycles both ways, which is six weeks. You must not cheat, so the device must be hidden from accidental view. At the end your scores should be analysed, along with those of (as many as possible) other listeners doing the same thing. An independent examiner will take the results and the information from the helpers which says plugged-in or not-plugged-in for each set of two week scores. Then, and only then, will you know whether you are listening to a real effect, or your own expectations.

Many people will say none of this is necessary. My answer is why not do it—properly, with independent oversight and analysis—and prove me wrong in my suspicions? There's nothing to lose if you are right.