The greatest problem for the understanding experience here is linked to the Cartesian divide beetween mind and matter...
Most people cannot understand psycho-acoustic phenomenon where music experience is distinguished from sound experience anyway and correlated with it...
And among most of those who understand half of them dismiss musical experience to be a "bias" or an illusion....
Reality is more subtle than our own apes brain...
Then we must educate ourself and training ourself....Experimenting ourself like the OP was proposing for his own discussion... If not experimenting at least thinking and listening the opinion and experience of those who did experiment....... |
However, this thread from what I can tell is not at all a matter of physics, or electrical transmission, but one of psychology. It seems that people cannot put their brain around a new science called Neurophysiological psycho-acoustic... They cannot refrain themselves to put delusion in the side of "psychology" AKA "illusion" versus physical acoustic AKA reality... This is a recipe inherited from a gross materialistic conditioning.... For example the perception of "musical timbre" is to this day an OPEN problem in neuro-acoustic.... Some science are out of reach of simplistic mind or even from some engineers .... |
i only express my view never play "drumbeat"...
What is a drumbeat?
It seems your post are more akin to a "drumbeat" here than mine....
Censorship and scientism faith instead of experiment are your appeal not mine....
It is not about "cable sellers direction" in this thread but some way other many things....Then confusing the two to ridicule someone, this is a "drumbeat" for the crowds....
Enjoy.... |
this old chestnut of a thread is well deserving of a rightful and prompt demise I wonder why a valid asking question about an original experiment by the OP urge you so swiftly to appeal a censorship? Is it your wonderful and powerful scientific knowing brain in action? Or is it the reptilian robotic brain reacting? i dont know, being myself ignorant about the question asked here and about yourself.... I am curious in the 2 cases tough....And in general i try to apply censorship to my own language not to others and NOT to a complete thread...I am not perfect tough..... Are you? |
I wouldn’t go as far as calling them cultist. I see them as folks who’s understanding of science isn’t quite as advanced as what they believe it to be.
You are right... I will not retract my words tough only because this universal movement work way beyond this thread, but applying it to some here is perhaps not the right context....You are right about that.... |
Great post!
The problem here is many who speak of science are techno cultist...
They think science= technology and technology =science ....
But a relation is not an equivalence and an equivalence is not an equality....
|
As for linearity, its value is greatly exaggerated. There is absolutely no need to make the linearity of the system with an accuracy of 0.3 db, much less 0.1 db. If it was so important for perception, we would not be able to enjoy listening to cassette recorders, receivers, and so on. By our nature we automatically adapt to changes in the frequency response within a wide range, this is how our perception works. Adaptation to changes takes a few tens of seconds, after that we get used to the new reality and the new frequency response becomes "transparent" for us, it does not interfere and does not help us to perceive music, it just becomes a kind of reference point, relative to which we perceive sounds..
This statement is easy to verify, if you have timbre controls in the system, turn the controls a bit, spend 10 minutes listening calmly and analyzing impressions, make a conclusion.
Very important point to meditate..... The CORRELATIONS for example between physical acoustic and psychoacoustic are anything except linear...It is deeply non linear... Personaly i think that there is an unknown participation of the consciousness to the phenomena that we miss "systematically" in viewing the object always separated of the subject or in an "external" relation only... |
All of of you need to spend some time on a psych ward just to see some brains that are really not working right. This is neuro-psychiatry leading you all around by the nose. Coming and insulting people in their communicating thread with NO REASON save our own prejudices and ignorance is something... Are you the same arrogant man at work? You can not depend on what you and other people hear for these type of analyses. There are hundreds of psychiatric variables you can not control this way. In order to indicate anything these types of tests have to be controlled if they are not they mean babkas. Nobody sells nothing here you are in the wrong thread...We dont sell "tweaks"... And the experiments described are controlled by the ears pertaining to those with Anton who had LEARNED how to perceive and described it with the right directed wired tubes amplifiers... An " horse with blinders" calling others by words like "delusion" like in psychiatric vocabulary, using wrong premise and false attribution in the second step of a simple logical deduction is not a good adviser: --All audible perception are measured ONLY in Db (which is false for example in the case of the timbre perception evaluation where other factors are at play) -- The effects of a changing of the direction in the wire is an " electro magnetic" process change, indiscernible, because measured in micro Db out of the range of human hearing... ( which is an assumption falsely attributed to Anton who says he has excluded this physical known E.M. change in the wire already for explanation from the beginning of his thread ) -- THEN all wiring direction experiments are false... (the conclusion is blatently a sophism) If you really want to improve the performance of your system and learn what you are doing in the process get one of these and get down with it.
https://www.parts-express.com/Dayton-Audio-OmniMic-V2-Acoustic-Measurement-System-390-792 Finally your perpetual advise to use an electronical equalizer for the speakers response WITHOUT being conscious of the LIMITATIONS of this type of equalization, versus for example the mechanical equalization of the room response, and proposing arrogantly something that had no relation anyway with the issue discussed here, show himself not only his prejudices but at least his stubborn narrow way or at worst plain stupidity...Pick the convenient one... The same nonsense permeates the "tweak" world. Amalgamating this Anton experiment or any other experiment in audio to be only a "tweak" reveal a despise of all audiophiles which speak volume about you... A question for you, which is a "tweak" here for example : a mechanical method to equalize a room inherited from Helmholtz and based on psychoacoustic laws you ignore or your consumerist proposition to buy a cheap or a costly electronical equalizer for tuning the speakers response instead, which could never be a complete solution to the acoustic room problem by itself, but only a helpful secondary tool at best ? The question clearly stated contain the answer.... 😁 Then look at yourself in a mirror.... This thread is not a medical assembly of your future patients nor audiophiles waiting your paternalist "solution" or miraculous cure for all problem: an electronic equalizer .... Discussing is being open first, listening, second, thinking, third and four being polite.... It is not necessary to be intelligent at each step but it is better to be before speaking.... «When someone propose an experiment, and if it is not the experience of jumping from the Niagara river, decency propose to keep an open mind; no advise is needed either if it is not related in any way to the proposed experiment itself but the reflection of our own prejudices»- Written in front of Groucho Marx audio room laboratory 🤓 |
Very interesting thread....
Thanks |
As a result, we have a completely illogical situation: the most important moments for the perception of music are improved, while the technical characteristics of the system are deteriorated.
A question I’ve been asking myself for years - how can this be, if the technical (electrical) characteristics determine everything? The comparison of Grappelli and Django is stunning... And like i already said this is the one of more important thread i ever read in audiogon.... The questions asked after Anton experiments and the comparison we can make listening his transfer of 78 Rpm says a lot.... Thanks.... |
If measurements are the be all end all, then why do the top audio designers all do listening tests? No serious designer in audio trust ONLY measurements and nothing else...They trust their ears at the end ... The opposite impression is a stupid idea communicated by some technocultists or Skeptic club pseudo-scientist who are not also artist and craftsman... "Most" audio designers or engineers are also artist that listen to test their creation....They love music not "accurate sound by the numbers on a dial"... 😊 |
Our models are sufficiently accurate for audio to make concrete conclusions. Saying something right does not erase all possibilities and dont suppress fact... And especially dont reduce human hearing to be an obsolete tool.... And dont prove that the brain is a computer save for comic science fiction book or for some genius like Wolfram in need of a too simple hypothesis to conflate the map and the territory with an algorithm able to generate the two... Like the Escher hand drawing itself....Or the Muchausen baron.... |
You know too much....
I will mute myself....
I apologize to you for my passionate reaction.... It is not personal.... |
LOL, Pascal’s Wager. Simplistic . You think that you understand what this genius speak about? You think a skeptic of the skeptic club exceed Pascal in intelligence? Think again i read it....I can understand the difference.... But you dont listen to anything your mind is set like an alarm clock... Imagination dont work this way, and if you think imagination is deception you dont understand what it is... Creativity does not exist in conditioned mind.... |
All religions are cults. We’re born, live, die. That’s it. Consciousness is a byproduct of our large brains. Pretty simple. I am sorry but no newspaper never help me to understand reality...cult are not only official or unofficial religions...Some scientist belief are also cultism.... Look at transhumanism.... The most powerful and growing cult ....It is not scientology but transhumanism... Only hard deep books and mostly intuition and experience help me....No sheep walking behind cult leader... And in this deep books no one confuse brain matter with consciousness...In my experience my brain is not me at all....Call that an illusion if this help you sleep better...Meaning is not a flow of proteins...The distribution of prime numbers is not a perceptive illusion or a fact coming from random atoms hitting each other.... It is the opposite physicist has discovered some links between energy distribution and the unknown dynamics of primes numbers... Meaning is not born from random atoms or toughts to die a meaningless death...Use your imagination more and less your logic..... And nowadays it is easy to look for information that go beyond, this mantra: " were born,live and die"... Love and thinking are not compatible with materialism.... And like i said pure materialism is a dead idea in science...Read Bernado Kastrup articles it is easy to read.... The best way to take a look at the universe was formulated by Blaise Pascal: bet on the more fecund idea... You lost nothing at worst and gain everything at best.... If you read his life you will see that he was not stupid at all.... |
I wasn’t referring to mysticism or biases but how our vision works. It’s like the blind spot everyone has in their eyes, the brain fills in the information, you don’t really "see" what’s in that blind spot but the illusion the brain created from the surrounding information. The eye sees a table the optic nerve passes information it receives to the brain, the brain recreates the table from the information. Evolution created an amazing Rube Goldberg contraption for our sight. What i just say is not mysticism... The book i just mention adress this problem of hearing and deception and is easy to read.... For the question of meaning, illusion or reality are inseparable.... But one thing must also be keep in mind.... The mind/brain does not work at all like a computer... The reason is simple, there is no possibility at all to reduce consciousness to an algorithm... Save negating consciousness and treating it like an illusion or an epiphenomenon in the absolute sense... But negating the value of consciousness is an autodestruction of the meaning of life .....nihilism in the absolute sense, idolatry of technology.... This is transhumanism cultism.... |
So what Anton is in an illusion and you are not, because you believe that measuring tools are more "accurate" in an absolute sense than a thinking brain with his many senses....
The problem is simple:
Access to reality is not ONLY and MAINLY through tools or models, any tools model reality around some chosen dimension and parameter...Any tool draw a map....
Your own brain PARTICIPE to reality in a direct way like any living creature.... Tools are not related DIRECTLY to reality but through a privilieged road eliminating other dimensions and their parameters...
Your body/being is not a map even if a doctor could map some aspect, it is reality....
The brain does not only recreate in part but participe to what is around us....
The brain is not OUTSIDE the universe nor the universe outside of the brain... This is participation... The recreating part is linked to your own individuality, this imply a selection, a system of BIASES, that oriented your being in some direction in this world and in this body.....These biases are related in Hindou and buddhist perspective to karma....but this is another story....
In this perspective digestive metabolism and immune system for example are totally individualized....Hearing also...
But there is a common part between all these possible recreation and this common link is what i called participation...
This is why what is the more subjective is also a deep indication and information about objective reality...And vice versa....
These subjective/objective concept are NOT dualities they are first and last polarities...
The difference between the two is duality pertain to language, polarities to the cosmos....
Then when we listen to pitch, we live a subjective experience, and our brain create pitch in relation with something in the external reality , but this does not mean that pitch is a subjective illusion or something that must be reduced and could be reduced to acoustic physics and to ONLY frequencies or to only and mainly the external source who was conditioning the experience of pitch and melody.... The external source could be like wooden cubes hitting each other randomly and perceived by us like a melody or a set of tone pitch... ...
To this day the perception/creation of pitch is a mystery...
And reproducing it with A.I. tomorrow will not erase the problem...
Meaning is not someting living on the same level of reality than tool....
|
Maybe hearing is like vision it’s an illusion. read that : The Universal Sense How Hearing Shapes the Mind by Seth S. Horowitz, Saying that all is illusion is completely non sense.... The presence of some "illusions" does not invalidate the meaning experience in hearing perception... Your remark remind me of the yogi refusing to quit the road where an elephant in crisis was on course of collision with him and the cornak sitting on top of the elephant was crying to him to "quit the road and go out ".... After the collision, half dead, the yogi said to the cornack : nothing could happen to me because all is an illusion, save God... The cornak replied : the elephant is God but me crying to you to quit the road, i am also God.... what is an "illusion" ? Is the rainbow an illusion? "Scientism" reduction of deep problem to joke even a good one, is not my idea of thinking... |
I believe we have decided there’s a china teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. making a joke will not erase what is at stake... This thread reminds me of one of my favourite jokes and it aligns with many discussions here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS3BZs5fx3Q And making a better joke will not solve anything for anyone... Thanks i like this joke.... BUT .... Reducing human perception of pitch to physical acoustic and to some technology and some limited theory about mathematical/physical frequencies to be the ONLY explanation of reality is not only wrong and simplistic , but it could be a fraud.... it is the reason why psychoacoustic is a scientific field by his own problematic.... THEN, Nobody will put more grey matter in a brain that shut himself down.... And joke about a scientific fact and conflate it with the religious questions by derision.... What is pitch perception in human? what is his signifiance? And why we cannot reduce it to a technological problem, even if tomorrow we will produce an A. I. with perfect pitch.... This problem could be interesting like Anton question: why someone could perceive something unexplained by standared electrical theory and measures.... And perhaps the 2 questions are related.... A tool never replace understanding and meaning except for ..... fill the blank..... This thread is not about someone who want to sells his cables, save for idiot or "scientist of scientism" who want to put the deep questions under trivial stupid answer : like a premature blindtest.... He does not sell cables , he comes here with experiments and questions... He does not think that his questions will be put aside from the back of their hand by pure sheer arrogance and ignorance so evident , anyone could see it.... For those who think this is a cable marketing/blindtest thread go elsewhere... |
This thread is much too long to read.
Is there a verdict yet? Sorry if you confuse it with a cable thread... |
Writing trivialities like fire is hot, bias exist, and walking on water is not possible are NOT arguments they are parrott matters...
Describing electricity is not understanding it....Even if the diagram equation is complex...
" Nobody understand quantum mechanics" Feynman
Then through the holes in our brain perhaps something new could appear.... WHY NOT ?
Because someone reducing pitch to be only a variation on frequency technology said so? Ideology is NOT fact....
Sorry but it is false...
Reducing human experience to some external facts is IMPOSSIBLE save for those who prefer to use blinders...
Physical acoustic science is a branch of physics, the neurophysiology of perception is not physics, the CORRELATION between the 2 is another science psychoacoustic... Pitch perception is ALWAYS a mystery for those who are able to think....
And for the time being, we are not robots and this distinction maintain itself....
Human perception is NOT always and ONLY an illusion to eliminate for the sake of some equations...
Sorry but some people are able to think....
|
There's nothing new in this thread.
no comment... |
Repeating thirty times a common sense evidence like " you dont take into account your own bias" instead of reading the facts is borderline bad faith...
What about your own bias when repeating this bias mantra to others for how many posts here?
This thread and the site of Anton are the most interesting thread in audio here i have ever read...
All the other thread are sparse useful trivial technical details about gear at best and at worst almost all socializing with no completely new ideas at all... Filled with DETAILS easy to found answers for in any other forums than audiogon or in a book...
It is so true, that save for sparse clues from others, i learned to install my system by myself almost completely...Because no one here adress it really...Save to sell costly "tweaks" and the costly products that will give the illusion of the BEST Hi-fi experience...
People most of the times partake opinions about their "taste " and best branded names products here...Or their obsession for or against cables sellers...And blindtest....And they called that science because they own voltmeter and James Randi Operational book....Or they vouch for the end of S.Q. because of one cable purchase...
It is one of the rare thread with new original ideas instead of few advices in electricity or electronic connexions of the gear easy to found anywhere...
I am astounded by the lack of interest, thinking, judgement, and good faith....I am ashamed by the bashing of something interesting by lack of brain and conditioned stupidity by EGO motives and short sights....And knowledge of the old and the trivial, parading like the only eternal truths...
I will repeat something simple you must think about that: we use water in many complex technology and study it and we know almost nothing about water....We use prime numbers distributions tools in cryptography sophisticated technology and we understand NOTHING about primes distribution... Maxwell equations described what Faraday observed by experiments but we understand nothing about electricity...The list goes on.... Only first of the class pupil by heart recitation of their lesson think they understand their child play....
Technology is tool for science not science....
«The universe is in front of their eyes and in themselves and idiots think they understand it»-Anonymus Smith
|
Who care if he sells cables. He is still wrong. Is anton_stepichev wrong like Essien when he was claiming in his book that pitch cannot be reducible to frequency? If so, guess who is wrong a second time perhaps ? Contrary to you i respect people idea and experience and i have no opinion about Anton experiments... NONE... His site is well designed and interesting, his idea original, and his thread here interestings and NOT ABOUT cable brand name pretense.... But i dislike religious zealots, in any field or any religion...It seems you are a zealot and you overestimated your knowledge at the expanse of ANYONE here....Anton is NOT the first victim....I have seen many.... By the way i am ignorant myself but i can learn and i can read .... |
Now the most important point about true science: Even if pitch could be reduced to frequency, which is absolutely demonstrated false and simplistic in these 2 books in some experiments in the last 50 years, the perception of pitch is a human subjective experience, and All science is based not on the technological reduction of human experience to a mathematical model like with A.I. for example but on the contrary science is the ultimate way to ENLARGE and UNDERSTAND human perception and experience.... Replacing human perception by A.I. is a technology irrealisable feat anyway which will never replace understanding and could not do it... Confusing technology or a question about "what" or "how" with a deeper question about "why" is technological idolatry, a religious belief and not science at all... True scientist can use blindtest but they dont promote this like if it was a science replacing experiment and a tool for defending "status quo" in research.... It is a statistical tool and a statistical tool is not science by itself save without taking enormous precautions about the "How" and "When" they will or would be used for ... And what could be justified with dealing about a cables sellers claiming something, if the sellers wanted to; is not justifiable in this case.... He does not sell cable , he describe an idea and his experiments.... then this must be discussed and replicate by someone BEFORE any public blindtest.... Then we are very far here from a blindtest with a cable delivered by post.... Any other opinion is a belief, not an experiment....Or worst a scientist ideology....Eliminate your own bias and experiment yourself.... Or forgeot this thread and blindtest Ted Denney cable....He wait for that who knows....Or buy one and listen.... |
By the way he seems that our friend dletch2 need to refresh his knowledge about hearing... This is the post he wrote about pitch after my defense of Essien he characterize to be a fraud : The brain is effectively a computer, I don’t think that is disputable and pitch, by definition at least is, quite literally, frequency. You can dispute how the brain computes, but still a computer. now this is from this very interesting book of 2017 : https://www.amazon.ca/Human-Machine-Hearing-Extracting-Meaning/dp/1107007534 All the book is free to read here: ( uppercases are mine) http://dicklyon.com/hmh/Lyon_Hearing_book_01jan2018_smaller.pdf «Ohm’s and Helmholtz’s view of hearing as Fourier analysis, and THE CONFUSION OF FREQUENCY WITH PITCH, continued to permeate, if not dominate, thinking about hearing in the early twenty-first century, even though problems with the approach had been repeatedly demonstrated, and arguments against it published continually over a century and a half.» P16 in "the hear as a frequency analyser?" Then perhaps if our friend is WRONG about pitch being equal to frequency and if his immediate judgement about someone research is so expeditive without even trying to study it for a few minutes, is it possible than his judgement about Anton_Stepichev experiments and ideas coming from the same arrogance perhaps are also wrong? I will add another reference to enter the nail in his hole and this remark will contradict our friend about the fact that we are supposed to know WHAT PITCH IS WITHOUT DEBATE today, a view totally opposing the book of Essien our friend describe being a fraud and this world authority in the field Erik Heller: «Since melody is based on pitch, there must be a pitch present—at least when it is called to our attention. There is no correct answer to whether a pitch is present in the sound of a wood block, since the human subject is the ultimate authority, by definition. If the pitch was not heard, it was not present. It is difficult to reason in a detached way about subjective sensations. If two people are coming from a different place in that debate, then something obvious to one person might be vehemently rejected by the other. This is a recipe for debate going around in circles, and INDEED TODAY YOU CAN FIND THE SAME CONTROVERSIES that flared up in the mid-1800s.... The subject of pitch perception heated up in the mid-nineteenth century with a debate between physicists Hermann von Helmholtz and Georg Ohm on one side and Rudolf Koenig and August Seebeck on the other (figure 23.5). They went to extreme lengths to try to achieve control of sound sources in order to settle ambiguities of human hearing. At some risk of oversimplification, we can state in a few words what the controversy is all about: Are human beings essentially walking Fourier analyzers? The debate continues today, although it is slightly more subdued.» P.549 Why You Hear What You Hear An Experiential Approach to Sound, Music, and Psychoacoustics by Eric J. Heller These 2 writers are top notch acoustic world known researchers...The two dont equal pitch and frequency at all like Essien.... Then Essien is perhaps Not just a " fraud from a third class university from Nigeria"....like claimed our friend in a past post 😁 And if his judgements are so wrong and expeditive and his claim simplistic, like equating pitch with frequency, and reducing any human perception to be ONLY an impediment and less accurate than a simple measuring tool, PERHAPS he is also wrong about Anton-stepichev experiments... I have no opinion myself but i like truth and truth is never a number... |
I’m so glad you have no opinion. It makes my day. Sarcasm is not a replacement for intelligence... I CANNOT have and HAD no opinion about wiring direction from a tube amplifier...I say it from the beginning but i am interested by the person who created the contour site yes... YOU HAVE ONE OPINION, YOU ARE THE ONE WITH A BELIEF and no experience and no experiment ... I have myself an opinion about the WAY to treat people tough ...Especially people who propose something related to decades of work, EVEN IF they are wrong.....It is called respect and fair listening...We are supposed to be equals human beings here speaking between themselves ... A bias coming from a belief or an arrogant " knowledge" is not on the same footing than a bias coming from experiments... These biases cannot be put on trial BEFORE experiments.... And in this case a blindtest CANNOT replace the experiment save for idiots or conditioned mind... Are you able to think or you repeat dletch2 arrogance? dletch2 I just read another thread where you reject with the back of your hand another person which was talking about his own design experiment with cables by the way... You have not improved in the last month contrary to my belief .... Arrogance does not reflect intelligence only conditining of the working mind....Then your competence so great they are, and i dont doubt they are great, are also blinders .... Must i repeat that this guy here did not sell cables..... |
Your error is accepting the belief of those who claim to "confidently perceive " there is a difference in the sound. In science you don’t accept beliefs you test for proof. Are you serious? He himself listened to a difference with his directed wiring amplifier... You are THE ONE with a belief...you believe it is IMPOSSIBLE.... Are you insane and unable to think by YOURSELF and only able to repeat the technological credo of some other here because he said so? I myself have NO OPINION in this matter.... But i want to listen and discuss with someone who had an experience...Without putting him on a tribunal writing his own rule for the judgement... Blindtest is a tool at most, not a PROOF of reality for complex phenomena....His experiment must be take at heart by someone else...And repeated.... Anyway a blindtest in this case is IMPOSSIBLE... It is not a cable sellers here...He will not give you a cable to verify.... ask Ted Denney for one... Think without repeating scientist mantra.... |
If someone wants to test a theory by jumping off a building to see if they will really die, do we praise their curiosity and be polite and civil? NO. You act like Edison saying to the ignorant crowd that Tesla idea will kill people and they are evidently absurd... Who knows if his ideas are absurd? What is the difference between Edison and you here? Your blindtest impossible to realize here with a blunt rejection of the person ideas in this case are bad faith ... Your accusation here BEG THE QUESTION....I can understand that your "knowledge" could not justify your belief, but accusing him of lying is absolutely in the actual sitruation totally inappropriate...Save by arrogance... I will go walking my steam outside..... If someone claimed to make a perpetual motion machine, do we blindly accept their claim, or do we first explain to them why that is impossible, and then, after they show their experiment, point out all the flaws? This is what we have done, but the person is still claiming their perpetual motion machine works while refusing to validating their work, effectively saying, "trust me". This is not respectful behavior.
|
Standard practise is when designer blindtest for himself in the course of his work..
No one organize blindtest when he sells nothing...
The test is trying for ourself first what can he do?
Do you want that he deliver the amp to be test to you by postal service free of charge?
And what you would say the day after your own private blindtest ? That you hear something ? Whithout even knowiing what listen to and how ?
Your instantaneous test for a minute will be equal his years of dedication?
What is your "standard practice" is a blind belief in tools measures or placebo effect allegation is a childish attitude to say the least...
|
Proposing ideas are justifiable under ALL circonstances... It is the way i read his site and listening him... HE DOES NOT SELL CABLES... He is accused of lying here and assigned to a blindtest tribunal like a cables sellers...BEFORE ANYONE LISTEN HIM FIRST.... THAT IS MY POINT.... Blindtest dont replace politeness and civility and curiosity... Mahgister, some things are not justifiable under any circumstance. The way you accused an unknown researcher like Essien whitout even reading it and the way you treated an interesting stranger with unorthodox original complex ideas speak volume.... EVEN IF ANTON OR ESSIEN ARE WRONG.... Your behaviour is more wrong.... I will never mock someone BEFORE listening to him if he wrote a book or a site with in the 2 cases some experiments proposed .... I could stand stupidity, or even hate, but i had difficulty with injustice....Sorry.... |
I am not talking about Ted Denney cable nonsense. HIS TEST IS FLAWED . Comprehend?? are you a child? How can Ted Denney could pass a blindtest before creating his cable design first and TESTING for himself his cable.... Blindtest are public test AFTER the design is already created.... Anton only give us his design procedure... Accusing him on lying because blindtest is the only way is pure bad faith....He blindtest his own design for himself like Ted Denney did...Save if it is a pure fraud... But accusing someone of fraud before trying for ourself is also a fraud.... Blindtest comes AFTER that.... Not FIRST.... Anton dont sell cables... He explain how to create a wiring directed amplifier to TEST ourself what he speak about... He comes to discuss his own experiments not to be accused of lying before any further good faith communication and discussion.... How could you accuse him to speak non sense because he has not blindested his own design before his creation? Even God could not blindtested something before having created it.... After creating it God blindtested it in private like anton did... Accusing God of lying after his private blindtesting is illogical and impolite to say the least...Because you must try by oyourself before accusing someone.... Even Ted Denney could not be treated like that.... Believers of "science" asking for blindtest and accusing INSTEAD of discussing are only religious people here.... |
To use the words of one who seems to think he’s a God above such mundane effects like bias are thinking like Children. Are you able to think without speaking accusation? He proposed himself a test and how to do it.... You cannot test wiring directions in a tube amplifier like a sold miraculous cables you just bought asking for someone in a crowd to test it... You must create the conditions of the listening axperience FIRST.... A test did not exist before that.... You cannot equate what he speak about to the Ted Denney cable situation....it is not the same context at all... it is insulting for him to do so....Why not quitting bad scientism faith and circus for experiments and thinking....
Unless the so call differences that are heard from the wire direction in his tube amp were done with a CONTROLLED BLIND LISTENING TEST then the result are WORTHLESS.
It seems that you walk in circle: cables are worthless without being blind test, his wiring is a cable then without blidtest it is worthless.... Repeat it.... Like a chicken walking... He dont sell cable , his site is very detailed and interesting he proposed some other complex experiment with the way we wire an amplifier.... He come here to ciscuss this and how to hear and what to hear.... and more... And like a chiken brain you repeat the mantra that all he was doing ewas worthless from the beginning... Think about yourself and draw your own conclusion... i quit for now .... |
A " learned bias" like someone listening a musical instrument and learning how to hear it in his most subtle behaviour under the hand is not something to be put in the "placebo/ drawer... Someone designing a tube amp with "wiring" direction is in the potentially same situation not in the placebo drawer ... Then someone reducing all biases to the same category, all to be eliminated only, and explaining everything not there by the virtues of his numbers measuring tools to be placebo, create a childish simplification... It will be a pity if a so interesting thread would be put at rest by too stuffed ears/brain... I will not speak of your other accusations because anybody could read this thread and make his mind.. I don’t do blind tests on everything I buy but I don’t make blanket statements that something definitely sounds better, especially cables. You just disguise and distort his claim here to make your point...is it not evident for anyone to read? He claimed something about "wiring" direction in a tube amplifier experiment .... He does not sell cables and assimilating him to the pretense of any "cable" marketer is not fair at all.... It is evident that testing what he speak about has anything to do with " picking" some audiophiles to test the claims about cables on a theater.... Someone must do the experiment with the directed wiring of an amplifier before that and after that testing this "direction" differences with the same amplifier and learn how to characterise it... It is a learned bias experiment not something to be erased right on the spot with a placebo accusation.... All biases are not equals.... Some are beams and some other are only a speck of straw.... Read your classic.... |
He is not here to satisfy your desire for a test on the spot....It is not Ted Denney to whom you could ask for a cable...
By God! are you intelligent?
test yourself his ideas are open there to be read by anybody...
HE DOES NOT COME TO SELL BUT TO DISCUSS... with intelligent people not narrow mind who will assimilate him to a peddler...
I am flabbergasted by, how can i call that respectfully?
narrowness of mind.....
Ok pass a good night i will go out before being out of my bound...
|
Mahgister, you are just making excuses. It is not me ....it is you who are not interested by any discussion... You hide yourself behind this blindtest idea... HE DOES NOT SELL CABLE... Is it clear to read in big letters? He give all instruction to test his idea on his site... You insult him like a cable peddler... Maybe he is wrong, but this is not possible to say without understanding his motivation and recreate his experiment... Try his experiment dont insult him without listening or discussing... This is an interesting thread not about the usual trivialities or audiophile marketing ideas or stupid branded name product boasting.... I dont need audio product i am interested in ideas.... This is not ABOUT CABLES...... This about other ideas in audio and wiring.... And sound..... |
Anton made his own test....
He does not sell cable...
He come here to discuss his ideas...
You reject him like a peddler of cable...
You speak like a " sckeptic of the sunday club" ...
A scientist is interested to understand idea BEFORE dismissing them...
I already say that HIS SITE does not promote cable purchase...
Are you able to read?
He propose experiment any electrician with 2 ears coud do...
Do you think he will send you a pair of cable to blindtest? He is not a seller of cable...You confuse him with a company of cable?
It is very disturbing for me because you are intelligent....
Do you fake misunderstanding? |
I am not interested at all by cables market...
Nor by cables promoters....
Nor by cables debunkers...
I am not interested by debates between these 2 categories of people...
I am interested by dedicated researchers, nevermind if they are wrong or right....I like good faith and truth....
Then those who reduce any debate to their own pettyness are not welcome under my gaze....
I am interested by understanding, sound, hearing, audio and others scientific and philosophical matters exceeding my own competence and anyway the competence of most of us but very interesting for me anyway...
|
The whole basis of this thread is cables have a sound that is directional. Unlike you i want to understand... They are more than cable marketing war here... We must LISTEN to someone before imposing a test on him...Politeness is necessary....Especially for a Russian in an english audio site.... Anton is not here to market a cable...THIS IS CLEAR TO ANYONE LOOKING AT HIS SITE.... This is not about synergetic research cable test here....Are you able to see the difference? Anton is not an audiophile advocating about a branded name cable product.... You treat him like if he was one.... The Contour System – Directional Wiring of Audio Parts – Back To Music The title of the site is about direction wiring OF AUDIO PARTS , not marketting of cables.... You complety throw the baby ( wire direction/hearing process/ electronic and a deep question about that) with the muddy waters of cable marketing.... Are you a scientist or a debunker of cable sellers? i am not sure anymore..... This thread is pointless as the whole basis is purely presumption. The 2 threads of Anton are LINKED to His site where are discussed his ideas and experiments....Nobody is in the obligation to believe him, but it is evident that there is experiments behind his ideas.... Reducing him to be a cables sellers waiting to be put a test on insulting.... He is not Ted Denney....He is someone devoted to some years long research without anything to sell here.... Before texting his ideas here which are complex one we must discuss and listen his explanations... Is it not simple to understand? If you are a scientist you will understand.... If you are a cable debunker after retirement say it i will know.... But probably if you are able to dismiss Essien who wrote his doctorate and after that a book to be a crook, you will do the same for anyone? Essien is not a crook even if he is completely wrong.... My definition of a "crook" is not yours it seems.... I hope i am wrong and i hope you are the scientist you seem to be for me..... |
Real scientists either prove and peer review or find themselves in a 3rd rate college teaching those that could not get in anywhere else. Your arrogance is wonderful.... Do you know Nikolai Kozirev? Probably not.... and if you know him you will probably dismiss him , without even having the competence to dismiss his ideas... You are not a physicist then your dismissal will be based on a "belief" in the general scientific consensus... My point is some ideas of Kozirev are behind the inspiration source for the idea of the research group linked to Anton .... Am i right? Only Anton can say..... |
Science does not give out participation awards true knowledge is not a race for Nobel prize...Save for children.... It is cute that you think the depth of my knowledge is electronics. If you read my post you must admit that i respect your knowledge.... but i am perfectly able to read most of the times where you are right and where your answer are debatable.... You are not Einstein by any means sorry.... You have dismissed all others opinion or experience in a rude way each time....Sometimes you were right for sure you know more in Audio than most.... But sorry you dont know all... And it is evident to see it even for me.... |
No mahgister, really it is not stupid, arrogant, or otherwise.
It is like me trying to tell a PhD biologist how a complex biological process works because I read some articles on the web written by people who are no where near the level of that PhD biologist. That is where we are at in this conversation. I dismiss things out of hand, because that is the appropriate response. It is like discussing calculus with someone who has not mastered basic arithmetic or functions. I am not knowledgeable in electronics or electricity, but only a slight reading of Anton site demonstrate some dedication and knowledge.... A big part of your strategy is dismissing ad hominem...then why are you here if we are all under you? The first one were Essien ....He is not a crook by all means but a very honest researcher... And he knows what he speak about, i cannot argue with you in electrical matter but you will not sell me fish for a piece of red meat in other fields... If you dont let the opponent argue his point perhaps no discussion will be possible... You are knowledgeable but the problem is that you listen to no one and understand not at all your own limitation, perspective and blindspot... I say that without any acrimony or anger against you on the contrary, i learn a lot arguing with you....Thanks to you....I am only sad that an interesting matter is dismissed with the back of the hand.... But there is more at stake here than cables matter.... It seems nobody see that or very few.... |
Sound position of a plug?
Is there a freeze position for my freezer?
English is not his mother tongue but Russian but even me i understand what he want to say here... Then all your post here present no argument only your insulting nose abilitity.... Be honest.... |
Insults and rebuttals or pretense of competence versus incompetence are the sure signs at best of ignorance, at worst of stupidity...Even if those mocking are more competent...
An argument must be posed on the ground and the question accepted by all...
After that debating around it suppose a COMMON good faith enonciation of each one arguments WITHOUT acrimony and without mocking the other perspective...
By the way i dont doubt dletch2 or Anton_stepichev respective competences...
This is why it is an interesting thread...
But refrain the insults....We are not idiots here i hope....
All spirits must be also open minds facing new possibilities...
In wire, sound, or hearing or in any other linked matters....
No one own reality....Even the more knowledgeable did not know so much....
|
What I hear is a bunch of nuts on a Russian website running in Vector circles of confusion. I dont think that the site is a simple cable threads... But perhaps the matter exceed your understanding and then insults replace arguments.... I prefer myself to think and trying to understand.... |
I found the missing link:
https://www.emilianotoso.com/en/who-i-am/
"epigenetics is the science that studies how our beliefs shape who we are" You are very right and Toso is more than right... Chosing our belief is ouw own way to create our body and our consciousness... «I chose the more encompassing rational belief to let each other human his own place in my heart....Music is only a manifestation of this rational belief in each of us»-Anonymus Smith |
They say that Vladimir Sofronitsky was the most interesting performer of Scriabin’s miniatures, and I think so too. Here are a couple of examples - https://www.backtomusic.ru/19684 track 8 and 9.
No less ingeniously did David Oistrakh on his Stradivarius - https://www.backtomusic.ru/19612 tracks 3 and 4. Nocturne just mesmerizes me.
These are all 78 pre-war records. Thanks the poem on the ninth side is one of my favorite piece... Sofronitsky playing Scriabin is a God .... I know very few pianist on par with him ... Neuhaus and Ervin Nyiregyházi in Liszt are.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLk6vqaxU1Y Oystrakh "singing" is stupendous.... The recording is particularly revelatory...I never listen to him with so much hypnotic power to be truthful....especially piece no 3... I know what great soul Menuhin was and so great young violonist; it is him who introduce me to Ostad Elahi a musician god also and one of my favorite...On par with the greatest musician god of the century....Menuhim says after listening him that listening him plays was one of the greatest musical event in his life.... After that who will not look for him? Listen carefully in this short presentation the way Elahi modified the Tanbur and created the modern version of it.... With two strings slightly dissonant for the same pitch... There is hidden some secret about hearing process.... A short presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmXlTSSIFikshort piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6thX7sG9OWc |
Honest mistake. See not so hard to admit that. It’s cold out but a few chill pills can never hurt. Cheers! Even if we disagree sometimes i appreciate you and i appreciate all people here , nevermind our complete opposite view.... The one which i learned sometimes the most is the one with a complete opposite view than mine... Truth interest me, not gaining points in an argument.... Save in the passionate moment of the discussion for sure....😁😊 |
Maghister I think you need a vacation. I was not quoting nor even talking to you. Take a chill pill or two. I think you are paranoiac here ....I say that without being angry at all.. 😊 Read the thread , i was quoting dletch2 who was answering MY POST.... The fact that you come after quoting this answer does not means that i was speaking to you or about your post.... Be relax and let me exist .... I was not criticizing you....I even does not have the time to read your post redacting mine.... You need a vacation....I wrote this post after taking my chill pill thanks.... 😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😉😉😉😉😉 |
Timbre recreation in the listener room ask for more than the signals in the audio system...
We need an accurate acoustic in the listener room to recreate the original acoustical recording process coding result where the recording engineer has made choices of mic. and location possibilities which are a TRADE-OFF imperfect process...
The recognition of the timbre more or less natural perception is always relative and is recreated ultimately in the ears/brain IF some acoustical condition are, in the room where the audio system is embedded , under control...Even an intra ear headphone is a little room....
To these psychoacoustical conditions we must even add some unknown parameters related to each individual and each room... |
