@scottwheel let me get to the point. Anyone who says they can’t hear a diffference. I trust that THEY CANT HEAR A DIFFERENCE! But those that do I’m more apt to agree with them and trust their judgement more. That’s just being straight up!
WHY IS THERE SO MUCH HATE FOR THE HIGH END GEAR ON AUDIO GEAR?
It seems like when I see comments on high end gear there is a lot of negativity. I have been an audiophile for the last 20 years. Honestly, if you know how to choose gear and match gear a lot of the high end gear is just better. When it comes to price people can charge what they want for what they create. If you don’t want it. Don’t pay for it. Look if you are blessed to afford the best bear and you can get it. It can be very sonically pleasing. Then do it. Now if you are also smart and knowledgeable you can get high end sound at mid-fi prices then do it. It’s the beauty of our our hobby. To build a system that competes with the better more expensive sounding systems out there. THOUGHTS?
429 responses Add your response
Let me get to the point. I don’t trust anyone who claims to hear differences but are afraid to put their claims to a proper level matched ABX DBT. And so far you have dodged the question multiple times here. Anyone can claim to hear anything. And apparently you will believe it on faith. But if the differences are real that can be demonstrated with a positive result in a proper ABX DBT. If someone posed this question to me they wouldn’t have to ask twice. The answer is yes I’d be happy to demonstrate that everything in my system that I claim makes an audible difference does so under double blind level matched conditions. so you believe anyone who says they can hear a difference no matter how dubious the claim. I believe anyone who can reliably demonstrate they can hear the difference in a proper controlled test. We just have different standards for what we believe |
“Double blind test are not practical for everybody in his OWN room with his OWN gear and his OWN listenings habits ..”
|
I find no need or reason to try to convince anyone, especially who has clearly different thoughts about it...I love how my system sounds, and certainly hope you are very happy with yours....some of my components and cables selected after double blind testing, others not...all bought with full return option... |
We are not in the same business here ... Since you came here you seems to be in the business of debunking audiophiles , style James Randi; myself i am neither a subjectivist waiting to be debunk by you , nor an objectivist with scientism blinders ... I am interested by fundamental questions about sound, music, mathematics and hearing ...i believe everyone of good faith ... And it is better if the person is rational for sure ... I am also guy who look for the way to improve in an incremental way, at the lowest cost, my sound/musical experience and perception using basic principle of acoustics for experiments and for designing my speakers/room/ears relation ...I never bought any tweaks i prefer to create mine for my own use... When you own a low cost but good system , there is many design limitations to compensate for a bit ... I succeeded in my modest way so much i am happy , i call it the minimal acoustic satisfaction threshold resulting from a relative balance ratio between all acoustics factors implied ... With more money in the next year, because i cannot really mechanically eradicate destructive crosstalk effect successfully by myself , with a bit more money i will buy as you did already the BACCH filters ... Only reading the Dr.Choueiri explanation is enough for me to be convinced ... I believe anyone of good faith anyway , and i can read science then i understand and believe Choueiri ... You describe it by the way very well yourself, it is an acoustic revolution not a toy and not a mere tool ... Now you can debunk people here with your interpretation of science facts , i prefer to hear them without judgement as friends ...Even if some testimonies can be debunk, it is not my career occupation nor my hobby ... Remember that there exist no unanimous theory of hearing , to know why this is so , we must understand very deep problems in many fields from maths theoretical and applied , physics, neurophysiology psychology of perception , and last but not least philosophy problems related to Qualia and meanings ... Knowledge is more than science and science is more than technology ... Wisdom is knowing it ... Transhumanism is the only cult i want to debunk , not some deluded audiophiles buying a cable with or without any effect ... I dont care ... I wish you fun with your debunking blind testing company ... I advise you to submit your CV to big pharma ...😁 I read that they need to "debunk" low cost non profit solutions effectiveness to replace them by highly profitable costly drugs ( safe and effective for sure ) ...😊
|
By the way because i dont buy any tweaks...then i do not sell anything and i had nothing to prove to you or to anybody ... Because i tuned my room/speakers relation in an incremental long process, if i never used DOUBLE blind test in an objective environment for sure, for the period of one year full time when i worked on my acoustics i used simple blind test systematically each week voluntarily or unvoluntarily ... For example pieces of shielding materials i designed to protect my central electrical panel fall on the floor unbeknowst to me etc ... I used others devices for which as anybody who use them a blind test is not only fun but necessary by the way ... The goal is not debunking but refining the number of devices and their location effectivity etc ...
Your repeated insistence on DOUBLE blind test for others is very revelatory of your understanding and attitude ... A marketing company must use this DOUBLE blind testing because they need statistical results , simple blind test in an incremental designing process as in my room acoustics is also rational; but asking others to be double blind tested to debunk them is children play ... Have fun ... Scepticism is defined by 5 modalities and levels of experience in history of philosophy ...It is way more than a method of debunking ... James Randi was running a business of his own it was never about science ...I am not a disciple of this showman... I read not only about mathematics but mystics by the way ... 😊 Did you know that the founder of all modern mathematics was a christian mystic ? ( it was in fact three christian mystics separated in time and disciple of one another the last is Georg Cantor ) i bet you did not know that Cantor was a mystic who taught theology and use the three methods of Dyonisos to create set theory limitation of size principle before the axiomatization and use the intuition of the mystic mathematician bishop Nicolaus of Cues about the absolute and relative infinite to create set theory ... ... He was difficult to debunk trust me ... No one succceeded yet ...
|
@scottwheel thats good for you. We can agree to disagree. That’s perfectly fine I don’t have anything to prove to you. Even if someone did you are stuck to how you feel. Take care. |
“We are not in the same business here ...” I’m not in any business here. I work in film not in audio. ”Since you came here you seems to be in the business of debunking audiophiles , style James Randi;” again I’m not in business here. But when I look at the state of the hobby it is clear that there aren’t enough voices in it calling out the shady and dubious products on the market. Those products dominate the market. Here we have a thread that attempts to rationalize the existence of audiophiles such as myself by trying to dismiss us as haters of high end audio, jealous of audiophiles who buy expensive cables and power cords etc. Or lack any experience with “real” high end audio. I chimed to debunk that mischaracterization of audiophiles such as me that don’t buy into high end cables and power cords. I’m not jealous. I used to own “high end” cables back when I believed in them. It’s not an affordability issue it’s an issue of spending money ineffectively. It’s not about hating high end audio. I am quite passionate about audio and music. It’s certainly not from any exposure to “high end” audio. I have heard many a million dollar plus system over the years at shows, dealerships and the hom s of affluent audiophiles on four different continents. And I am not the only one. “myself i am neither a subjectivist waiting to be debunk by you , nor an objectivist with scientism blinders ... I am interested by fundamental questions about sound, music, mathematics and hearing ...i believe everyone of good faith ... And it is better if the person is rational for sure ...” I’m just an audiophile who is passionate about sound quality and music. But I am also a skeptic who believes in science and seeks genuine expert advice. There are a lot of posers in the audiophile world and few genuine experts. I don’t believe everyone in good faith. Dishonesty abounds in this world. I know enough about how humans hear, process and remember sound to understand how we can honestly reach erroneous conclusions about sound and I accept those limitations in myself.
|
Then i believe you are of good faith ... We are in the same boat ... I dont buy anything very costly because i can be satisfied with acoustic basics and relatively low cost gear ...I listen to my music and i had invested more in them and in books than in audio gear by far ... I am not an expert in audio, only someone able now to embed any system at any price not in the best possible ways as an acoustician but on a reasonnably good ways ... But i like to read about hearing theory and acoustics and music a lot ... Welcome here ...
|
“thats good for you. We can agree to disagree. That’s perfectly fine I don’t have anything to prove to you. Even if someone did you are stuck to how you feel. Take care.”
I am genuinely happy for you that you enjoy your stereo. But your last remark strikes at the very heart of this matter. You have continually tried to give your beliefs credibility by attacking the credibility of those such as myself with very different views. You want to agree to disagree but you also want to characterize me as “stuck in my position.” A mischaracterization that I suspect makes you feel better about your own beliefs. Because there is something unsettling about someone who has such different beliefs but can’t be discredited or dismissed some how some way. There is a very easy test to see if someone is stuck in their position. Let’s try it. It goes like this. What would it take to persuade you that you are wrong about cable sound and power cord sound? Answer that question honestly and I will do the same. And then we can see who is stuck in their position. |
@jacobsdad2000 , I am having a flashback from the audio asylum days. It is not a good trip that I am experiencing. |
@scottwheel im not attacking your credibility I’m just never going to agree with you. |
“ I’m not attacking your credibility I’m just never going to agree with you.” let’s take this moment to think about what it means to be stuck in one’s position. It is often mistakenly believed that open mindedness and skepticism are diametrically opposing ideologies. They aren’t. True skepticism is the ultimate form of open mindedness. It means being open to possibilities that something might be true or that something might not be true. Including our own current beliefs. I don’t take the position that I would never agree with you. I take the position that my disagreement with you is subject to change should new compelling evidence come to light. But evidence needs to be verifiable and repeatable. Not anecdotal. |
@immatthewj never participated at audio asylum. Has come up in searches is it the equivalent of the Wild West? For audio forums? I thought this place was pretty raucous. I will have stroll through it. |
@jacobsdad2000 , I don't know if I would describe it as the "Wild West", but this identical discussion has reared it's ugly head there and I'd bet a lot of money with one of the original participants. I left after I unintentionally offended or insulted the moderator. He had a hissy fit and called me a dick and a liar. I tried to aplologize for unintentionally insulting or offending him and he called me a liar a second time and then he deleted my response to that.
|
|
Nice description of a parlor trick. It's a sad commentary that people take it upon themselves to deceive others and at the same time, conduct ABX tests under their conditions and not the way Harmon, Toole, Barton and the other real experts did it back in the day. They just use their terms and phrases and twist things. Barton spoke of how frustrating it was to do the tests as what they supposed was incorrect from the beginning. Test subjects valuations were all over the map with the first half hour of testing. Turns out they were listening to the room and not the devices under test (being an unfamiliar room). Having them acclimatize their hearing to the room took another 1/2 hour of rest before proceeding. Nothing was done on the fly, in short bursts of time. It was 1/2 hour listening, 1/2 hour rest, and so on. Then and only then did the results start to gel, to get a consensus. The test subjects were gaining much more accuracy and could pick out which speaker and which sound corresponded to it and whether they preferred it or not. After it was over, they had a pretty good understanding of what the general public preferred. Did you conduct your tests in such a manner? From what you described, I think not. You just set them up for a fall that any hack street magician can do and has done since the beginning of time. Yes, the power of suggestion is strong but when used as a weapon, can easily deceive and/or disorient someone. It doesn't mean they can't hear things they prefer as that takes time (the thing you deprived them of). All the best, |
| Post removed |
I once took a group of so called audiophiles and gouged their eyes out so that they had no visual reference to rely on, and then I led them around what they thought were a labyrinth of rooms and told them that some of the rooms had acoustic panels installed and some had none. In reality I was just leading them around in a circle in my two car garage, but you should have heard those suckers rave about how good a JVC surround sound receiver hooked with lamp cord to a pair of JBLs from Crutchfield sounded when they thought that they were in a treated room. Oh, and I conduct tests such as these all the time. It's really no big deal.
|
“ So how did this thread become about cables and and a pile on by Cable Deniers like @andrewdrouin @scottwheel and other Audioholics subscribers.” The thread is still about the bogus rationalizations for the existence of audiophiles such as myself. Cables and power cords are just examples. We can switch out cables and insert DACs, SS amplification and a number of other things if you like. It’s still the same issue. “High end audio is not cables well all cables. There are high end cables. But when I think of high end audio I think of brands like like Gryphon, Atma-Sphere, AGD, ARC, Simaudio, Pass Labs, T&A, Sonus Faber, QLN...Not Roskan, Pioneer, NAD, Marantz, well the stuff you buy at Best Buy or Crutchfield.”
So you base what is high end on status symbols? It’s the name on the label and the store? You do know that Magnolia, the stereo branch of Best Buy sells Martin Logan right? |
“Nice description of a parlor trick. It's a sad commentary that people take it upon themselves to deceive others and at the same time, conduct ABX tests under their conditions and not the way Harmon, Toole, Barton and the other real experts did it back in the day. They just use their terms and phrases and twist things.”
Actually Toole and Olive essentially did exactly the same test using speakers. And they published the entire experiment in the peer reviewed AESJ. This is a very common method used in many clinical studies. So is that a sad commentary on how science does research on human perception? |
No one can be against blind test ... We use them in an informal manner when we must verify some thing, location, effect, etc... But the ideological stance using this tool as a method for the elimination of any qualia perceived as delusional in a systematic way against anyone claiming something about any piece of gear or any factors , rightfully or wrongly, nevermind , is irritating for many ... Anybody using a new devices can and must take a blind test in his own way if there is a doubt about a product ... I did it with my Schumann generators grid to test if the effect is an illusion or real ... I did it twice , the first time unvolontarily because i forgot to switch them on ... The next time i try them in a blind test with my wife ... And perhaps the systematic proposition of these test at all interventions about any qualities experienced by someone also may reflect an erroneous take on audio and on acoustics experience , a focus more on the gear than on acoustic circonstances and factors ... So yes, the anger of some subjectivist audiophiles can be a defense mechanism , but the systematic rejection by professional blind tester objectivist of the subjective experience resulting from the trained biases of some audiophiles is also a problem ... it is why i cannot be an objectivist nor an objectivist ... But i prefer subjectivists which at least trust their ears ... Because i believe in acoustics i trust my ears too ... This does not means that my ears cannot be deceived but they need to be trained and tested by my own blind test on the spot because blind test is a tool for me not a show to debunk people ... And if audio is not about gear taste first and last , it is not either about electrical measuring tools first and last , it is about acoustic training and psycho-acoustics knowledge first and last ... in the incremental process of tuning a system mechanically, electrically and acoustically there is no big place for placebo effect and delusion and negative biases ... Tuning a room system ask for hundred and hundreds of modification that add together in some direction ... No need for a double blind test at the end to know that our system is metamorphosed completely by these many hundred of modifications ... For sure if someone claim that a mere cable had completely transformed his system we dont need double blind test to debunk his claim as an exageration at best and at worst a deception or a self deception ... Cables made generally small changes compared to vibration/resonance mechanical control, compared to electrical noise floor level control, and especially compared to acoustics modification which are hugely impactful... Even compared to some other minor optimization devices , cables are less spectacular changes generally in my experience ...I had observed more positive changes by the way i myself modify my own cables but this is another story and i dont sell anything anyway ... And yes i blind tested these addition i use with my cables .. 😊 .. 😁😊
...
|
@scottwheel no one is piling on you. You just want to push how you feel on those who will not agree with you. Agree to disagree and move on. |
“@scottwheel no one is piling on you. You just want to push how you feel on those who will not agree with you. Agree to disagree and move on.” where did I say anyone was piling on me? What happens if I don’t agree to disagree? 😎 but please don’t try to tell me what *I* want. It’s obnoxious. You want to challenge the merits of my position great. Do so using facts and logic. But ascribing fake motives to me is a bit of a dick move. |
@calvinj + Infinity |
| Post removed |
@scottwheel let it go. Time to move on. The rest of us are willing to trust our own ears and not yours move on |
“@scottwheel let it go. Time to move on. The rest of us are willing to trust our own ears and not yours move on” Is it your ears you trust or your eyes? I’ll move on when you drop the cliche excuses and ad hominem arguments. Keep doing it and I’ll keep calling you on it. |
Anybody knowing how to design a room know that seeing the room as we want it done so beautiful it is ,will not improve acoustic...😊 I am not in a contest where the look of a beautiful piece of gear can influence the impression some people ask me to write in front of a veil masking the gear ... I just returned a piece of gear supposed to be better costlier and more beautiful than my vintage not so beautiful amplifier... i paid it the same price than all my system and i loose 300 bucks returning it ... I returned the upgrade because all acoustic factors were worst save the electrical noise floor which was better with a tremendous power supply ( synergy problem probably ) Did i needed a double blind test to mask the more advanced new technology piece and the more beautiful and the costlier one or the opposite ? No ...😊 I was biased in favor of this upgrade though ...I decided listening few minutes for my vintage piece ... I trusted my ears ... What has a meaning statistically as a useful tool is preposterous when applied for one person system optimization especially when this optimization process is incremental in a very well known specific environment ...I used informal blind test for sure in my system optimization as a tool not as a debunking practice circus ... You think like an ideologue who sell a salad with a hidden goal ... Throwing a gauntlet to all people here with a statistical tool ( blind test) which you used as a debunking tool is propaganda ... James Randi acted the same to prove that no " miracles" exist... The poor dude never looked too hard...there is even books written about hundred miracles right now no science can explain ... Nothing is more easy than to exhibit "miracles" around the world... Some are not provable but many are proved even by science ...James Randi at least was a showman not only an ideologist ... The same materialism and transhumanist today debunk the "existence of free will " ... Without even realizing the complete contradiction implied by the free will intention of doing such debunking of the free will existence ... Sam Harris did not know better , he conflate free will thinking with free choices and no choice ... What a deep thinker indeed ...😊 Some are more gullible than me ...
|
Did you hit your head recently? The procedure I mentioned was done in an appropriate way whereas the one I addressed was not. That, and Barton was part of the team you mentioned, which may explain your misunderstanding. All the best, |
rational thinkers , scientists and logicians know that design of experiments is difficult at best with large groups of subjects…. science is messy and unsettled… Barton who i admire certainty voiced some frustration ( with the D in DOE )…. For example, i would never setup a group test with a large panel radiator… even the 100% measure crowd should be able to figure out WHY… and anyone who has owned panels will know why as well. Of course a point source is better but still flawed because a wide “ sweet spot” is lossy… Go ahead, use math… ignore the blowhard know it all…. focus instead on those actually seeking to improve the complex ear / brain DOE |
@calvinj It seems that you were given the ultimatum, "I’ll move on when you drop the cliche excuses and ad hominem arguments", to get @scottwheel of your and 99% of this tread participants backs 😁. And I thought it could not get more entertaining. |
@knock1 been on Audiogon long enough to know you can win arguments with I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I WAS A PERSON! It’s all good. I just don’t care to engage with folks that don’t hear the difference that is clearly there. lol. |
“Did you hit your head recently?” Are you this much of a dick in person or only online? ”The procedure I mentioned was done in an appropriate way whereas the one I addressed was not.”
can you cite the difference? My prediction is you dodge that question because there was no difference and you fire back with more dickish insults. “that, and Barton was part of the team you mentioned, which may explain your misunderstanding.”
There was no misunderstanding. Feel free to show me otherwise. Not holding my breath |
| Post removed |
@scottwheel 20k. Lol. Anyway. You are not interested in hearing differences. You wanna win arguments. lol. Whatever man. Look like most on this forum. We see guys like you on repeat. Its ok. It’s not about cables that I represent. It’s more than just our cables. It’s many cables will give you a different sound. But I don’t have to prove anything to you. I have heard the differences myself. In my my system and other well put together systems. Take care. |
“scottwheel 20k. Lol. Anyway. You are not interested in hearing differences. You wanna win arguments. lol. Whatever man.” you didn’t even bother to make excuses. But you did fall back on the same B.S. and just make crap up about me to fit your fantasy. I’m quite interested in knowing what makes a difference. That reality doesn’t fit your narrative so you literally have to make crap up like that. If the cables I use are in any way coloring the sound I am very interested in knowing about it. And if anyone can demonstrate it with reliable, repeatable evidence I definitely want to see it. |
scottwheel are you secure in your shoes? If yes why trying to convince others people who trust their ears rightfully or wrongfully ? My self i know with my ears that the cables i tried made a small difference ... Perhaps some can make a bigger difference ... I dont know and i am not interested by cables , especially costlier one, not because they will not affect my S.Q. but because for me it is minor ... Why in the hell are you so obstinate to negate other people ears experience, even if they are deluded ? I believe them myself because cables make a difference but a very small one compared to electrical, mechanical and acoustical working controls ... Is you mission in life is transmission of the double blind test scripture ?😇 Why not explaining to people instead of asking for blindtest what is the BACCH filters and why it matter more than cable or amplifier upgrade? this is way more important... 😊
|
I thought double blind was a dead issue. No one, regardless of which side of this fence they occupy, can assert that the knowledge of the test does not alter the very act of listening. One of the few things that J. Atkinson has said with which I agree. If you hear a difference this difference exists. If you dont it doesnt. I dont try to convince anyone of anything and remain secure in my own experiences. By the way, setting up a quasi-viable double blind test is not a simple undertaking. |