Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Agreed

Posted by E-Stat on June 19, 2010 at 12:20:33:
If a difference can not easily pass a rigorous blind test then it is probably not sonically significant.

Other than codec type tests where the only variable is which computer-controlled source file is played, are you aware of any double blind test ever peddled here that could be considered "rigorous", i.e. controlled and not governed by unproven assumptions? I certainly cannot. Your buddy E Brad doesn't understand the control concept, takes a Scarlet O'Hara "I'll worry about that tomorrow" approach or demonstrates a "I can't hear you - la la la la la la" stance. When every recording engineer has compared the direct feed of a recording through multiple resolutions and found Redbook lacking, why would E Brad ever consider that his test is fatally flawed?

The most amusing cases of control-and-logic-failure have come from our dear departed inmate Soundmind, aka SM. Don't know if your were here before his anti-social behavior got him banned here (elsewhere as well). He was a unique combination of one part engineer (not audio at that), ten parts music listener (he had a wonderful grasp of classical music), ten parts arrogance, twenty parts pomposity and another ten parts of ignorance. The first example is his "proof" that a cable is audibly perfect:

I are intelligent

Obviously, SM doesn't consider that in the real world, cables interact with sources and amplifiers that aren't in a buffer loop. Obviously, SM doesn't consider that some cables reject RFI better than others when in proximity to high concentration generators, i.e. CD/SACD players. Obviously, SM doesn't understand the circular reasoning of his assumption that because all of the $2 cables in his system are perfect, that his system itself couldn't affect the outcome. Perfect and arrogant ignorance.

The other example is explained in a series of deleted posts where he never addressed my observations, but used similar logical fallacies. He used two mediocre preamps, a Marantz 3800 and an H-K Citation 11 (I owned one of those myself thirty some years ago). He *determined* that both were audibly perfect because - and this is priceless - that because when he piped one of them through the other using his $2 interconnects, he couldn't tell any difference. Conclusion: both are audibly perfect!

I am willing to discuss these topics with anyone who demonstrates intellectual honesty. No doubt, we will see yet another fleeting appearance of one who most does not fit that description. :)

rw