In Reply to: Not certain what you mean posted by David Aiken on November 14, 2002 at 17:06:44:
In principle, all observations - ie perceptions derived from our physical senses - should be verifiable.I think that statement is a fundamental underpinning of the scientific method and if we can’t all mutually agree on the truth of that statement at this forum, then I think it is going to be extremely difficult to make much progress.
Now a designer like Bob Crump may have sufficient confidence that differences he hears are due to actual audible sonic differences and he can attempt to correlate what he perceives with measured differences in order to enable him to improve the design and performance of his products.
Moreover, if I choose to select my cables and components using sighted auditions because I'm happy with the results then that’s my own personable business (or problem, depending on your perspective).
But if what we are fundamentally addressing here at the outset is wheather two different cables of similar gauge and length can produce audible sonic differences (probably the most heated debate in audio for the past 20 years), then the only way we can answer that question is to verify that our perceptions of actual audible sonic differences are in fact due to audible sonic stimuli, as jj would say.
From my observation, this discussion often gets clouded specifically for the reason Rod stated in this post:
All too often, the debate centers on DBT's validity when in reality it should focus on the specific DBT and it's methodology.
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/331.html
Personally, I'm of the opinion that any discussion of DBTs that doesn't focus primarily on specific DBTs and methodology is pretty much a waste of time. And I'll go even further and say that, again solely in my opinion, the discussion should focus primarily on professionally run DBTs, because most of us probably won't run them in our homes, and even if we do, we in all liklihood won't run them in a manner that will produce meaningful results.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Not certain what you mean - Phil Tower 00:08:54 11/15/02 (6)
- Re: Not certain what you mean - jeff mai 00:56:36 11/16/02 (5)
- Re: Not certain what you mean - David Aiken 11:53:11 11/16/02 (1)
- Re: Not certain what you mean - jeff mai 20:33:42 11/16/02 (0)
- Re: Not certain what you mean - Phil Tower 06:25:14 11/16/02 (2)
- Re: Not certain what you mean - sgb 08:16:11 11/16/02 (1)
- Re: Not certain what you mean - Phil Tower 10:53:43 11/16/02 (0)