Imho

[RickH]

For the last thirty years I have ben involved with audio and video.
On a retail level, a wholesale level, an end user, and to a small degree,
with various manufacturers.
There are very few absolutes in this crazy world. Seems like yesterdays myth becomes todays truth.
My father used to tell me that it wasn't the things you didn't know that
got you into trouble. It was the things you knew for a fact that just "wernt"
so. When you are born in Nashville in 1916,"wernt" is even ok to use in scrabble. But I digress. My point is this. To the degree that something sounds better or worse is entirely dependant on your "reference standard".
Maybe your standard is live music. Maybe your standard is a pair of minimus
speakers and a "Fisher all in one". But lets asume that we all have the same reference. The question then becomes, do we hear exactly the same thing?
Some people have difficulty hearing a 60 HZ signal. Others claim they can hear 20K hz. The other factor that comes into play is that we really don't hear with our ears. We hear with our brain. And the ultimate end is that based on a set of preconcieved expectations, our brains can play some very clever tricks on us.
Do I believe that different high and low level cables can make your music sound better? I believe any cable introduced into a system is going to create a difference. Maybe audible.....maybe not. And based on the electronics in your system that cable might exhibit totally different characteristics in different systems. I guess what's really important is how it sounds to you.
No need to defend your personal taste in cables. It's far too subjective to assume that the worlds "best" cable is the same for all of us. On the bright side...you can determine what the worlds best cable is. It's the one YOU
feel brings out what you percieve to be the best attributes of your system.
Sometimes we listen to the equipment more than we listen to the music.
Recently I attended an exhibit of oil paintings. My companion was very knowledgeable about the different artists and their style of painting.
Frankly I didn't see a damn thing that I would hang on my wall! I discussed
my opinion with my friend who calmly looked me straight in the eye and said,
"look dumb s--t". "If you like it, it's art". "If you don't, It's not".
Nuf said. Hope I havn't offended anyone. If so,please accept my apology.
I just felt that I needed to state my opinions.

 

[stratman]

Yeah, but can you really hear the difference between cables?

 

[flyv65]

What if he says "yes"? How are you going to prove that he *isn't* hearing a difference, on that gear, and in those situations? Furthermore, even if he is only imagining a difference, does that mean he's not really enjoying the music as much as he thinks he is? What about the placebo effect?

I've never heard a difference in cables, but if somebody else says they can I'm not inclined to call them liars based on the ABX testing I've seen so far...although I might call them crazy for spending sums equal to the cost of my first three pick-up trucks on wire, fer cryin' out loud.

Bryan...so what about it, Rick? Do you really hear a difference?...

 

[stratman]

What if he says "yes"? How are you going to prove that he *isn't* hearing a difference, on that gear, and in those situations? Furthermore, even if he is only imagining a difference, does that mean he's not really enjoying the music as much as he thinks he is? What about the placebo effect?

I've never heard a difference in cables, but if somebody else says they can I'm not inclined to call them liars based on the ABX testing I've seen so far...although I might call them crazy for spending sums equal to the cost of my first three pick-up trucks on wire, fer cryin' out loud.

Bryan...so what about it, Rick? Do you really hear a difference?...

Pssst.......I was kidding Talk to to Mtry about double blind testing, he'll fill you in.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Talk to to Mtry about double blind testing, he'll fill you in.

Right behind you You saw this coming. You are getting psychic.

 

[stratman]

Well I remember that Hydrogen Peroxide fiasco, whew!!

 

[mtrycrafts]

[/b]

...How are you going to prove that he *isn't* hearing a difference, on that gear, and in those situations? [/b]


Actually, if he made that claim, it is testable, right? Then, if he really want others to believe his claim to be factual, it would be up to him to demonstrate it, right?
But, existing evidence would not favor him at all.

Furthermore, even if he is only imagining a difference, does that mean he's not really enjoying the music as much as he thinks he is?


Not at all. You are twisting this inside out.


What about the placebo effect?

What about it? I rather not pay extra for that placebo pill.

but if somebody else says they can I'm not inclined to call them liars


Have you seen anyone call other liars over this? Or, just taking them to task about their testable claims? I bet the latter is the case, right???


based on the ABX testing I've seen so far.

And what about those ABX tests so far? Do you have better evidence so far?

 

[mtrycrafts]

..There are very few absolutes in this crazy world.

But, does that really matter? Who is asking for absolutes anyhow, in audio?

Seems like yesterdays myth becomes todays truth.

Well, that may be what some think. I wonder what myth is today's truth is?

To the degree that something sounds better or worse is entirely dependant on your "reference standard".

Usually in audio, people say this when they compare components or products in audio, not live versus dead sounds.

. The question then becomes, do we hear exactly the same thing?
Some people have difficulty hearing a 60 HZ signal. Others claim they can hear 20K hz.

Well, this may be the case, but real audiophiles do not claim to have these limitations. I haven't seen one do this, hence, they have great hearing.


The other factor that comes into play is that we really don't hear with our ears. We hear with our brain.


Well, the ears do play a major roll in that, right? It was the ear mechanism that prevented that audiophile from hearing that 60Hz, not the brain, right?

And the ultimate end is that based on a set of preconcieved expectations, our brains can play some very clever tricks on us.

Now you hit the very fundamental issue here, the brain and what it can or will do to mislead you about perceptions, be it audio or video or touch or taste.

I believe any cable introduced into a system is going to create a difference. Maybe audible.....maybe not.

Yes, but again, this is testable.

And based on the electronics in your system that cable might exhibit totally different characteristics in different systems.

And this too is testable, right?

I guess what's really important is how it sounds to you.

Reality might be important as well, don't you agree?

No need to defend your personal taste in cables.

That we also agree on

Sometimes we listen to the equipment more than we listen to the music.

Hey, that is two we agree on.

 

[flyv65]

Pssst.......I was kidding Talk to to Mtry about double blind testing, he'll fill you in.

I've been here long enough to see Mtry's take on the Fuzzys verses the Woodies: I personally think he doesn't question the Scientific Method with the same vehemence he does the the subjective approach (but only by *that* much!): still, if I was going to err, it would probably be in the same direction as Mtry. The only reason I responded to this thread at all is that I sometimes feel that we allow personal hubris to permit us to think that the things we measure so well are the only things to measure at all. Like most conflicts, I believe the Truth lies somewhere between both factions.

The written word in most forums is written in the same, casual fashion most folk speak and can seem harsher than the author intends. I hope you didn't take what I wrote as an attack-I didn't take your post that way but felt that sometimes we (on this forum at least) can be harda$$es and I hoped to support a seldomly seen viewpoint here, if only because Rick was well spoken and fairly articulate in his opinion. That, and because I'm not convinced at this point that he's full of $hit.

Bryan...perhaps I'm a bit fuzzy on this, myself...

 

[stratman]

I've been here long enough to see Mtry's take on the Fuzzys verses the Woodies: I personally think he doesn't question the Scientific Method with the same vehemence he does the the subjective approach (but only by *that* much!): still, if I was going to err, it would probably be in the same direction as Mtry. The only reason I responded to this thread at all is that I sometimes feel that we allow personal hubris to permit us to think that the things we measure so well are the only things to measure at all. Like most conflicts, I believe the Truth lies somewhere between both factions.

The written word in most forums is written in the same, casual fashion most folk speak and can seem harsher than the author intends. I hope you didn't take what I wrote as an attack-I didn't take your post that way but felt that sometimes we (on this forum at least) can be harda$$es and I hoped to support a seldomly seen viewpoint here, if only because Rick was well spoken and fairly articulate in his opinion. That, and because I'm not convinced at this point that he's full of $hit.

Bryan...perhaps I'm a bit fuzzy on this, myself...

I didn't take it as an attack, I rather thought that Rick's views were honest and well articulated and yes some people get really uptight sometimes. I find Mtry articulate and honest also, and the way Rick phrased his thread you've must have known that Mtry was right around the corner

 

[mtrycrafts]

Well I remember that Hydrogen Peroxide fiasco, whew!!

That is great. Your memory is still good. Be careful when it starts to go.

 

[stratman]

Well then I'll argue how well HP is curing my dementia

 

[mtrycrafts]

I sometimes feel that we allow personal hubris to permit us to think that the things we measure so well are the only things to measure at all. ...

Well, if it wasn't, then when it is tested, it would not be supported, right? If it is, then the right things must have been measure, no?

 

[flyv65]

[/b]

...How are you going to prove that he *isn't* hearing a difference, on that gear, and in those situations? [/b]


Actually, if he made that claim, it is testable, right? Then, if he really want others to believe his claim to be factual, it would be up to him to demonstrate it, right?
But, existing evidence would not favor him at all.

Actually, it may be "testable" but not "measurable", right? I mean, how is it possible for someone to cry at a specific scene in a movie and someone else to laugh? I'm not questioning that we can accurately measure certain aspects of sound, but I've never seen anything that can measure personal perception (correct me if I'm wrong).

Furthermore, even if he is only imagining a difference, does that mean he's not really enjoying the music as much as he thinks he is?


Not at all. You are twisting this inside out.

Not really: what I've said is that perception can't be quantified, and you're saying that since the signal is the same, the perception must be as well.

What about the placebo effect?

What about it? I rather not pay extra for that placebo pill.

If you doublecheck what I wrote, you'll note I didn't advocate spending more to increase percieved value, merely that percieved value may vary without regard to measurable criteria.

but if somebody else says they can I'm not inclined to call them liars

Have you seen anyone call other liars over this? Or, just taking them to task about their testable claims? I bet the latter is the case, right???

As a matter of fact, I've seen several posts on this forum saying things to this very end (albiet I can't think of an instance when you've done this-you're much more precise in your written staements than most poeple in forums like this).l

based on the ABX testing I've seen so far.

And what about those ABX tests so far? Do you have better evidence so far?

No, I've just been to the ABX website, and I'm not comfortable with the statistical criteria they've accepted for proof one way or the other. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics; I have yet to see a test that isn't constructed (by either side) to support the position necessary (trust me on this...I *really* have seen data bent to the needs of the end user-some still in court).

Bryan

 

[Tomorrow]

Well, if it wasn't, then when it is tested, it would not be supported, right? If it is, then the right things must have been measure, no?

Generally yes, but it is not necessarily so, mtry. While I usually support your positions on these matters, mistakes (and plain ol' faked research/results) are a frequent visitor to those things scientifically measured. Flyv65 made a good, hinted-at-point about the need to question scientific measurements/results. Repeatability and verifiability are important. I'm not so certain we've had much beyond peer review on some of this acoustic research.

'Supporting' and 'proving' are sometimes very different critters. Psychoacoustic methodologies, anyone?

 

[flyv65]

I didn't take it as an attack, I rather thought that Rick's views were honest and well articulated and yes some people get really uptight sometimes. I find Mtry articulate and honest also, and the way Rick phrased his thread you've must have known that Mtry was right around the corner

Oh yeah, it was the thing that spooked me the most about posting here: I'm not really very articulate posting my thoughts 4 IPAs into the evening!

Bryan...by the way, the Breckenridge 471 small batch IPA is worth the money...

 

[Audioholics]

Guys, come on...

 

[flyv65]

Well, if it wasn't, then when it is tested, it would not be supported, right? If it is, then the right things must have been measure, no?

Provided the test is properly and adequately constructed, this is true. If it is not, however, then there is no way to gauge what (if anything) was measured.

Bryan

 

[flyv65]

Guys, come on...

OK, which one(s) of us are the trolls, Clint? Or are you more concerned this is more an issue of picking on your siblings....because you can?

Bryan...got a little sister, done it before...

 

[Tomorrow]

Guys, come on...

Yeah, you're right, of course. The style sounded so....familiar.