Using battery power to go off the City's power grid

sns,

Correct.

You start off with two false premises, and use that to arrive at a whole litany of false conclusions:

How do you determine the TRUTH of anything? We are talking about whether a piece of equipment, even a single wire has a sound signature. Inductive reasoning starts with observation, in this case listening under controlled conditions. Most audiophiles have repeatedly heard differences in their homes. They wouldn’t spend money and keep their components if they didn’t hear differences.

False assumptions:

- Ad hoc listening in the home is not remotely controlled

- Perceiving you hear a change is not remotely the same thing as there being a change. As a doctor, you should know this. How much you slept, how much caffeine you had, how comfortable you are in that chair, none of which changes the sound, will change your perception of the sound

- They wouldn’t spend money and keep their components if they didn’t hear differences. ---- There are a ton of things that people absolutely "swear by" that are absolutely not true. Heck, some of them violate fundamental laws of physics, not just common sense. Many of these things people continue to believe in and spent money on. As a doctor, you can certainly (I hope) recognize homepathic solutions as an example of this (something diluted to where the original molecule can no longer exist beyond a slight statistic probability).

Continued false assumptions:

- However, the measurement people start from a stubborn bias that measurement tells the story.

No, engineers and scientists start with the result of listening tests done in controlled circumstances using idealized stimulus that will maximize the ability of us humans to hear differences (or not). Out of an abundance of caution, they will normally use these results as a baseline of what is potentially audible, even though tests with real music show the limits of audibility of many of the things discussed as 20, 40, even 60db higher.

MORE

- "A good medical doctor will listen, but they will also try to understand enough about the drug to know whether the claimed side effect is remotely possible because not all side effects will be possible." This shows how little you know about clinical practice.

I specifically stated "a good doctor" and I am well aware of how and why the medical profession often fails at diagnosis. However, this was also a logic trap with two specific traps. You failed to acknowledge that some side effects are impossible, no matter what the patient claims, and by simply accepting them, you are just as bad as those other doctors you don’t like because you are ignoring their could be another as yet undiagnosed reason. That is what is called a bias trap. The other trap is your expectation that I, and we can assume others, accept your expertise with items of a medical nature as superior, while you try to tell me, who obviously has more experience in this area (including listening), that I am wrong based on ad-hoc reports and feelings.

And you finish with the Coup de grâce, this little diddy, far more indicative of your bias and mine. I could state the under pinnings of why you state something like this, but I see no point.

My conclusion is that either your listening skills are poor, OR more likely you have an agenda bias to interfere with your good hearing ability if it actually is intact.

@sns ,

No, not really. It is more an argument between made up and real.

For instance, one of the people arguing believes that they could tell the difference between $1/4 million of audio equipment either hooked up or not hooked up to a very high end inverters when listened to over Youtube at 192kbps AAC, when the issues between the two videos included auto levelling applied to both videos by Youtube, what appears to be an object blocking one speaker in one of the videos resulting in both a level shift and a significant frequency shift in one channel (I assume a person standing in the wrong spot), what appears to be AGC pumping (the noise floor was pumping +/-3 db which will bring low level signals along with it), and that was coupled with a high amount of reverb. 

It does not matter if you are purely subjective, purely objective, or somewhere in the middle. Any reasonable person will understand the ability to accurately pull a super subtle difference between two setups out of low resolution highly flawed videos such as those is not being honest with themselves.

Guys,

There is no use in trying to reason, fight or argue with an objectivist. Their whole reason for existence is to argue and be right......so they will never give in....and they always have to keep arguing and have the last statement. So, just let it lie.....because it takes two to tango.....and that is what he wants.....he wants a fight. So, put your swords away because you cannot win against an objectivist......even though someone "scoring" the "fight" from a distance may give you every round.....it does not matter to him.....he will just keep saying he won. But winning and losing are the job of the ego......so if you are trying to win against someone who will never "say uncle’ then you are in your ego as much as him. All arguing does is make your own ego bigger......is this what you want? Just state the truth and let it lie. If you need to also clarify some point so his "nonesense" is not seen on its own as "truth" then do that but then STOP responding after that. I am done with him......nothing more needs to be said from me about what he thinks.

IT IS DONE........let him have the last word.

I surrender to the love of God.....flowing through my life.

Be Happy.........choose it now.

Objectively speaking, he or she (theaudioamp) should find someplace else to preach his or her "gospel. We just aren't collectively intelligent enough to see greatness in his or her every word.