In Reply to: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... posted by carcass93 on July 2, 2015 at 12:41:37:
Yes. I do think Archimago's is using "adequate" tools for the job. What is wrong with them? But, I am happy to keep my mind open to any critique of those tools or methods. And, I am certainly open to anyone else attempting to do a "better" job of measurement, which essentially does not exist on the Internet as far as I am aware.
I am quite convinced that sighted listening testimonials under unspecified conditions by unknown listeners with their choice of music recordings are inferior to Archimago's attempts to provide more objectivity and repeatability. Subjective listening may convince a poster that his own "tests" provide proof of some benefit, but why should I personally believe them? As I said at the outset, I am a skeptic. I have the same problem with most reviews in high end audio mags, by the way. There are some of USB cables in the current The Absolute Sound, for example, that are garbage in my opinion.
Whose approach about the applicability to everyone else are you referring to? Archimago's? I have never seen that in writing from him. I do not generally see it from subjective testimonials either. So, what is your point?
I looked but I found no measurements by Thorsten. As I said, I would welcome them as opposed to pages and pages in threads here and in CA about how much better XYZ sounded in their system. Or, I could just believe Lavorgna's review of the AudioQuest Diamond Ethernet cable, one of his advertisers, as the end all, be all sonically, even though he eventually was discovered to have induced a noise problem via EMI on the analog side of his system during his careful " listening tests".
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - Fitzcaraldo215 13:50:51 07/02/15 (12)
- What is wrong with them? - fmak 23:36:40 07/02/15 (3)
- RE: What is wrong with them? - Fitzcaraldo215 06:33:59 07/03/15 (2)
- RE: What is wrong with them? - Tony Lauck 10:33:14 07/03/15 (0)
- RE: What is wrong with them? - fmak 07:34:18 07/03/15 (0)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - Bob_C 20:29:56 07/02/15 (0)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - Tony Lauck 18:24:27 07/02/15 (6)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - Fitzcaraldo215 13:41:02 07/03/15 (5)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - fmak 05:14:24 07/04/15 (2)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - Fitzcaraldo215 17:50:23 07/04/15 (1)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - jkeny 17:56:26 07/16/15 (0)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - Bob_C 19:39:20 07/03/15 (1)
- RE: "place no credence in ... uncontrolled tests" - fair enough. But why would you place any credence.... - Fitzcaraldo215 10:04:18 07/05/15 (0)