General Asylum

Could you POSSIBLY explain why?...

24.116.186.171

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ General Asylum ]

Wellfed

(A)

In Reply to: One of the better posts I've ever read at AA. nt posted by sjb on February 7, 2007 at 15:14:57:

I don't recall ever being more mystified. It's much like Seinfeld trying to figure out why his current girlfriend would ever date Newman, let alone be heart-broken over the split.

Follow Ups:

Sure... - sjb 15:47:35 02/07/07 (5)
Overall because there's a lot of truth in it and that truth is spoken concisely.
I especially like this paragragh (and most especially the highlighted sentence -- except perhaps I would change "everything" to "so many things" and add "some" before "audiophiles")...
"This is demonstrated when audiophiles hear differences when they *think* a component was swapped, moved or changed, but nothing was changed at all. Audiophiles believe in everything that comes their way except, of course, psycho-acoustics, the power of suggestion or placebo effects. You can even come out and say your product does nothing or after a very long explanation, end with an admission the "real secret" of the device's operation still remains a mystery of modern science. The latter is perhaps the best explanation. "It works - but we don't know why" is perfect. Your explanation is that the device is beyond explanation, or more impressively yet, beyond our current understanding of electronics or physics or materials engineering. Imagine. A product beyond the collective engineering capacity of the human race. Beyond a thousand man-years of scientific leanings."

Don't piss on my shoe and tell me it's raining.
- That denies all of reality how exactly? [nt] - Wellfed 18:32:44 02/07/07 (4)
  nt
  - Here's what I find most interesting - sjb 19:42:18 02/08/07 (3)
    and this is, I think, at the heart of the post I liked so much.
    Most of the people here who claim to hear changes/improvements from things like the IC and the CLC are willing to believe that something is happening that's beyond and even contradict's scientific knowledge and understanding but they won't even consider psychoacoustics as the cause despite how much is known about how real its effects are.
    It's quite interesting to me -- and would probably make a good psychological/sociological study -- to see people publicly touting hearing things from tweaks no matter how implausible they are while rejecting out of hand things that are known and studied and recorded and repeated, etc (by that I mean psychoacoustics and the placebo effect, etc.).
    I think it comes down to a type of insecurity that doesn't allow one to admit that what they see, hear, touch, smell and taste might not be exactlyt what they think it is. I actually find the fact of our perceptions coloring our reality fascinating. It's more interesting to me and a much deeper mystery in regard to being alive in the world that you could hear an "improvement" in the sound of your system based solely on your mind/perceptions than if the IC actually did anything.
    
    Don't piss on my shoe and tell me it's raining.
    - I find psychoacoustics to be a fascinating subject too... - Wellfed 19:56:39 02/08/07 (2)
      I'm curious, do you lump me in with those you refer to in this post?
      - Yes, but I mean no offense. - sjb 20:02:24 02/08/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: I find psychoacoustics to be a fascinating subject too... posted by Wellfed on February 8, 2007 at 19:56:39:
        
        The insecurity part wasn't meant as an insult - everyone has some kind of insecurities - just wonderng at a reason.
        Besides, I don't believe I've ever seen you admit that what you've heard from the IC or CLC could be psychoacoustics at work ;-)
        
        Don't piss on my shoe and tell me it's raining.
        
        I spend inordinate amounts of time accounting for the placebo effect... - Wellfed 09:10:41 02/10/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Yes, but I mean no offense. posted by sjb on February 8, 2007 at 20:02:24:
        
        ...whether it be in relation to the IC, the CLC, cables, cords, components, what have you.
        I've heard it argued that if you have to strain to hear a difference the difference isn't worth the effort or expense. I entirely disagree with this premise. These things add up, gaining steam along the way. I would go so far as to say that things I've previously dismissed as being ineffective might have a fair chance of exhibiting an effect at this point in my systems development. Maybe, maybe not. I've found the ONLY way to tell is by trial and error. I've always noted that I don't consider my perception to be infallible.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Schiit Audio

You can not post to an archived thread.