|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.169.2.66
In Reply to: RE: Perhaps I did... posted by Steve O on January 22, 2015 at 10:56:48
The evidence is pretty clear to those with experience.
A belief is an opinion held outside experience: in this case, experience is the most significant form of knowledge.
Objectively, the differences in different cables are beyond obvious & are not worth discussing. There is no way that a Nordost Valhalla cable is the same as a River cable: even though both are relatively flat.
People with experience have (relative) consensus. A naysayer is a believer, who doesn't test for themselves, uncreatively remaining inexperienced and therefore ignorant. They become a "naysaying believer" when they assert knowledge that they do not possess.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Follow Ups:
...you state: People with experience have (relative) concensus. [that cables make a significant audible difference] . That statement ignores the people with experience that arrive at the opposite concensus. You seem to be implying that the only valid experience is the "positive" one. Why should this be so?
You also state "Objectively, the differences in different cables are beyond obvious & are not worth discussing. There is no way that a Nordost Valhalla cable is the same as a River cable: even though both are relatively flat." So the objective differences aren't obvious and aren't worth discussing and yet there MUST be differences between the cables in your example. Why must this be so?
I think cables make a difference in your world because you want them to....not that there's anything wrong with that.
Overall, pretty unconvincing.
FAITH
""ignores the people with experience that arrive at the opposite concensus""
No, - it doesn't IGNORE, - it places them in the proper context, - as true, - as small minority. We can't ignore them, as like many people with "faith" they shout louder in their insecurity and lack of knowledge.
""objective differences aren't obvious and aren't worth discussing""
You mis-quoted me, (why not cut and paste).
OBJECTIVE DIFFERENCES ARE OBVIOUS, and mostly irrelevant.
""Why must this be so?"
????? are you trying to assert that the Nordost Valhalla is the same as the other mentioned? Really? Should I post pictures?
""Overall, pretty unconvincing.""
Only if you're completely outside reason, and foolish
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
You wrote: """objective differences aren't obvious and aren't worth discussing""
You mis-quoted me, (why not cut and paste).
OBJECTIVE DIFFERENCES ARE OBVIOUS, and mostly irrelevant"
Not a misquote because they're not your words, they're mine. You wrote "Objectively, the differences in different cables are beyond obvious & are not worth discussing." What you quoted of me above is a misinterpretation on my part of your original statement...as in "quantum physics is beyond the comprehension of most laymen". The word "plainly" or similar might have been a better choice.
>
>
>
You wrote: "????? are you trying to assert that the Nordost Valhalla is the same as the other mentioned? Really? Should I post pictures?"
No, I'm not asserting Nordost Valhalla is the same as a River cable. I'm asking why they MUST be sonically different. Assuming the function of a cable is to get an electrical signal representing music from here to there with as little change as possible, good, well designed cables ought to sound the same even if they employ radically different designs. That you think I need to see a pic of them to understand the differences causes me to wonder if what you hear is influenced by what you see.
>
>
>
You wrote: """ignores the people with experience that arrive at the opposite concensus""
No, - it doesn't IGNORE, - it places them in the proper context, - as true, - as small minority. We can't ignore them, as like many people with "faith" they shout louder in their insecurity and lack of knowledge."
How do you arrive at the conclusion "they" are a small minority?
What makes you believe they're insecure and unknowledgeable? Neither of those statements ring true from my experience. Seems like your attempting to bolster your position by diminishing anything that doesn't support it.
>
>
>
You wrote: """Overall, pretty unconvincing.""
Only if you're completely outside reason, and foolish."
No, not at all. You've presented opinion as fact and little that really supports your position other than opinion. Your argument remains unconvincing and the arrogant , condescending tone of this statement doesn't help your case because there's a desperate quality about it.
Later!
""I'm asking why they MUST be sonically different.""
They may not be sonically that much different, - especially if used out of context: like with a Sharp boombox. I never asserted anything about whether they are different or not sonically.
""That you think I need to see a pic of them to understand the differences causes me to wonder if what you hear is influenced by what you see."
You've wasted that sentence, - as mentioned, - not sonic.
""How do you arrive at the conclusion "they" are a small minority?""
Because people who've heard many cables do not assert that position.
""Neither of those statements ring true from my experience"
Would you care to enumerate your experience(s)? Please be specific.
""What makes you believe they're insecure and unknowledgeable?""
When queried, and asked for specifics, we (almost always) find that they haven't done much of any experimentation on their own: and/or applied tests out of context, = performed bad tests, - that set up obvious straw men.
""You've presented opinion as fact""
No, I have not. The only "facts" I've presented are that (outside sonics), there are some very real, physical, [objective] differences in various cables. And, - that when most everyone who conducts good scientific investigations through decent controls, in the proper context, - assert that different cables affect the sonic character of the system.
""Your argument remains unconvincing""
I am not trying to convince anyone of anything, I am not making any universal claims. I am convinced by the evidence that I have, for myself.
My claim is my claim. OTOH, I do gain a measure of confidence by having people with the same, and more, experiences corroborate those.
"and the arrogant"
Me asserting what I hear, and repeating the claims of others?
I don't think so...
IT IS FAR MORE ARROGANT for people to make the untested, inexperienced, and baseless claim that I did not hear a difference.
IT IS FAR MORE ARROGANT for someone to say that they are GOD and claim that I am lying for asserting that I heard something: especially if they were not there, and/or have any experience with my system(s) in my home. Or, - attended the 20 + shows that I've been to, or been to the 20+ homes of friends that I've been to... etc etc. etc.
""because there's a desperate quality about it.""
Likely a mis-interpretation on your part, considering that I have nothing to "prove"
"Later"
Much...
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
There are plenty of people who have tried many types, have even performed tests of various sorts, and claim no material differences.
try it! you know you want to!
can you cite some please?
Please make sure that you list people who have experiences with all different levels of systems.
And of course, you don't mean material differences: can you clarify? You may mean sonic differences; or do you mean significant sonic differences?
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"The controversy surrounding the claim to audible improvements due to cabling are widely known and the effects of wire are generally reported as insignificant by many sources outside of subjectivist audiophile circles. Numerous engineering experts in various fields of electrical, audio, and loudspeaker engineering have also stated this opinion. Such experts include Dr. Howard Johnson of Signal Consulting Inc., John Dunlavy most recently of Dunlay Audio Labs, and Roger Russell formerly Director of Acoustic Research for McIntosh Laboratory. Each of these gentlemen has spoken out against exaggerated claims of cable effects on audio reproduction in various venues; Mr. Russell, the man behind the McIntosh Loudspeaker Division from its inception in 1967 until 1992, goes as far as actively criticize exotic cable performance claims on the web site he maintains."
try it! you know you want to!
...every person in your citation will be criticized as not involved with current high end SOTA audio and/or being effectively deaf and therefore opinions expressed will be summarily dismissed as not valid and entirely irrelevant to the current cable discussion, esp those of Roger Russell and the speakers he was responsible for while at McIntosh. I also predict that someone will eventually point out that Roger Russell's latest speaker offering, the IDS line source column contains some kind of Cardas cable for internal wiring, a seeming inconsistency with his published views.
Of course, that citation conveniently leaves out incomparably larger portion of people involved with audio at the highest level, who DON'T share views of the few naysayers mentioned there.
However, as I said, it's all irrelevant - the only things that matter are my system, my hearing, my brain.
nt
try it! you know you want to!
Sorry to disappoint, but it doesn't seem that way.
I mean, in a nutshell - you don't hear it, and support others who don't.
That's fine with me.
... if you want to convince the more discerning masses that they're real, well, that's gonna take a bit more than a few people clustered together saying so. Just because they are touted in advertisements for marketing purposes doesn't make them any more real, either.
Edits: 01/22/15
N/T
Hey, a little scientific proof would go a long way to wipe the smirk off their faces.
is what is going on, and it absolutely is not magic.
Calling it "belief" is simply wrong.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
What's that river in Egypt again???
It comes with a lack of understanding of scientific inquiry.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Prove it. If you can't, then it's just an opinion shared by a relative few. Remember Elvis sightings?
""Prove it.""
What, - a scientific investigation doesn't provide you with proof. The results could be inconclusive.
And, - how do you define proof?
And, - what constitutes proof?
""then it's just an opinion shared by a relative few.""
No, - The one is not a logical deduction from the other. Sorry.
"" Remember Elvis sightings?""
This also harms your case.
""just an opinion shared by a relative few.""
Do a little reversey on that pal. Piling up experiences & tests shows the opposite....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
A lot of people get into trouble listening to what the little voices in their head tells them.
Face it, y'all were the Jehovah's witness' of the audiophile world before Rod so kindle created your cable asylum and your own, personal "no-go zone", replete with your own muhammed. But, they have their own houses of worship too.
And, just like the witness', when you leave your house of worship and go out knocking on doors, you can expect to either have the door slammed in your face or, even worse, ridiculed.
So, some guy dared transgress your beliefs in your own no go zone and you had Rod apply sharia law. Now you get to dance your war dance.
But, again, if those differences are so apparant, how come nobody has ever convinced the world they are all that significant? After all, nobody disagrees that speakers sound different. Where's that proof?
"I can hear it" doesn't quite cut it in the real world.
it does....
And, - the "burden on proof" is on the person making the claim. And "proof" is a dynamic term, that applies differently to different subjects/objects.
""A lot of people get into trouble listening to what the little voices in their head tells them.""
In this case, that "straw man" and childish over-exaggeration outside reason holds no water. So, without any evidence you are calling people liars? If so, you know where you can stick it.
""Face it, y'all were the Jehovah's witness' of the audiophile world before Rod so kindle created your cable asylum and your own, personal "no-go zone", replete with your own muhammed. But, they have their own houses of worship too.""
I speak for myself, and the only religious dogma, is your unfounded, (outside reason, and outside the application of science and logic), behavior and insults.
""And, just like the witness', when you leave your house of worship and go out knocking on doors, you can expect to either have the door slammed in your face or, even worse, ridiculed.""
Yes, - for years, - fanatics like yourself, outside reason, persecute the truth: it's what, (as a cowardly bully), you do. What makes it worse, is it that you hide behind the work of cowards, instead of investigating & thinking for your self.
""So, some guy dared transgress your beliefs in your own no go zone and you had Rod apply sharia law. Now you get to dance your war dance.""
I'm not the one preaching here, especially the dogma that different cables sound the same. The supreme arrogance is the religious nutter who tells others what they can, and can not hear.
"""I can hear it" doesn't quite cut it in the real world.""
Yes it does actually, like most people here, I own, 4 different audio playback systems. Do you really think that people purchase audio systems that are never used?
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
see my posts below.
i did not hear something....
It also could make you incredibly wrong, - because I further claim that if you sat down with me, - you would hear it as well.
That, emphasizes the most important thing, - actually having experiences for YOURSELF, actually testing things for YOURSELF.
The best way to know about whether or not something sounds different is to experience it, to try it. You don't know if you like sushi until you try it. You don't know what it's like to ride a bike through the forest until you do it....
This goes to the fundamental issue of the denigration of empirical data, and the lack of understanding of what "science" & testing, & comparative analysis actually is. People who do the testing, come to the same conclusions. And that's why they stopped unscientific, inexperienced, naysayers disrupt the cable asylum. Because the goal is to enhance the listening experience and try to achieve good sound.
Namely, people with lots of experiences, and who've tested different cables, have found, (and relatively agree), that cables with different properties cause the final sound to SOMETIMES be different: this is a (relative) consensus amongst the MAJORITY of people with experience.
If there was no need for a cable asylum, it wouldn't be here.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
If I have to work that hard to try to convince myself I hear a difference, the reality is that I probably don't and an simply realizing a wish.
But, again, if those differences are so apparant, how come nobody has ever convinced the world they are all that significant? After all, nobody disagrees that speakers sound different. Where's that proof?
Who cares?
Nobody has convinced the world that high end audio reproduction is a worthy pursuit. There's no point in trying to validate one's hobby with the rest of the world that doesn't care.
The only people whose opinions matter to me regarding audio are people who have heard what high end audio systems are capable of and who appreciate it enough to make it their pursuit and who can listen critically and then articulate the aspects of sound quality they are hearing.
There are plenty of people who pontificate about the audio hobby based on a simplistic model of audio reproduction who have never experienced really high fidelity systems, or who have but couldn't appreciate the difference. I do not care about these people's opinions on system building. Nor do I care what anybody thinks who isn't into this hobby.
A better example of religious belief in this hobby is clinging to the DBT. It is an experimental technique that has done nothing to advance the state of the art of audio reproduction. Successful researchers select experimental methods that provide new information and help them advance. Only a fool worships a method that brings no results.
Regarding the cable asylum rules, they would be unnecessary if everybody exercised simple forum etiquette. No hobby forum anywhere welcomes people who post there only to tell everyone their hobby is bullshit. It should be tolerable in small doses, but the cable forum had a history where it suffered from a few disruptive posters flooding the forum with the same pointless comments over and over.
.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
So, they don't like people asking uncomfortable questions they can't answer with scientific testing and logic? That's why they need to be segregated into their own no-go zone?
So be it. Whatever it takes to keep the peace. Let the beheadings begin!
Personally, I'll trust my own ears and keep my opinions to myself unless, of course, I form a cult with like minded zealots and we can stroke each others egos. ...and then we can proselytize to the rest of the world until some kind person offers us refuge. where no discouraging words are allowed.
oh the hypocrisy.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
It's just when you propose to tell others what they should believe, or hear, that problems arise.
something......
Worse, - you're calling them liars.
You're like the Catholic church, if you just looked into Galileos telescope, - you'd see that the sun does NOT revolve around the earth. Except in this case, you're one of the lone reactionaries, (with your eyes closed, and your fingers in your ears: singing LALALALA).
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
That makes you the Taliban. so, whose the real dictator here?
.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
nt
try it! you know you want to!
.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Just my opinion but I think power cables can make a HUGE difference in a system!.. Look at my review over on the cable forum here...
Now I have some idea how much weight I can put in your posts.
Edits: 01/23/15
I wonder, has anyone in the history of mankind ever used "scientific testing" to ascertain that the *next step* (the step just below the one they're presently standing on in a stairwell) is actually there as it appears to be? Or, do they tend to keep on climbing or descending in faith-based manner?My point is: Nobody bothers to test everything their senses report to them because, most of the time, we can indeed trust our senses. It's only after some crazy person *sees* the step that isn't there and walks into an open stairwell that the "scientific inquiries" might begin...
Edits: 01/23/15 01/25/15
And many people hear things that aren't so, also.
Asylums are full of them. (see what I did there? ;))
How many illusionists do you think there are, lurking in the shadows waiting to fool us?
Anything's possible, I guess...
Experience tells us that certain things are more likely than others are and that our senses can indeed be trusted, for the most part.
Dunno. Count the hi-bux ads in any number of audio magazines. ;)
How do you know?
Where you there with them, not hearing something that they did?
Do you feel the same way about your sense of sight?
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
One of the things that I've learned in my Philosophy of Science studies is that you can't "prove" that the wall exists, but you have to behave as though it does. This leads us to the truth that our branch of chimp-hominids still have a lot to learn, and that there are different degrees of "proof." I think sometimes that people get really confused between what they call science, and the application of the scientific method.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"Observational application of the scientific method". You're using this phrase a lot. Got any credible references where it's been used in the context of the audibility of cables? A brief search turned up nothing.
.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
...Unsurprisingly, no.
try looking up the scientific method: that is, - if you can't cite any investigations or experiences that you may have had on your own.
Most people, who read/fight on the internet, don't really take the time to gain the knowledge in experience and testing.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
...I'd like to peruse the published literature on observational scientific method as applied to the audibility of cable differences. Apparently there is none. Oh well. Guess we're back to opinions.
Later indeed!
as with any good scientific investigation, one doesn't need to walk the ground already walked, or consult with any other investigation."Personal discovery" LOL.....
The naysayers are making unreasonable claims because they are trying to assert facts based on no evidence. They/you are committing the error of extapolating the "some" to the "all" Again, = playing God, and engaging in belief.
Still waiting for you to cite specific examples of YOUR TESTS.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Well said.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: