|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.135.149.73
In Reply to: RE: Moved on from brushes and rollerballs posted by Dawnrazor on November 09, 2020 at 07:25:34
One of the first responses to naysayers by someone in the "everything makes a difference" crowd who has a favorite theory to improve sound is to ask if they've tried it, saying they can't possibly reject the idea if they haven't.
Your response is a clear example that shows that even the most willing adherents of the everything-makes-a-difference philosophy have a point at which they draw a line and say "nah, that couldn't possibly change anything."
The only real difference between the two groups is where they draw the line. ;-)
Follow Ups:
I might have a different response if I could AB things. Even then AB is not a must. But in this case I am making no claims. I decided to change things because the roller balls especially were a pain. I also think its probably fair to say that there probably is not much difference in performance between the 2 methods in handling vibration.
I have new headphones now so I can't say if the rope is better or worse and didn't care really.
That said the brushes/ rollerballs once I put them on everything really made a sizeable difference. It was surprising because I am using headphones..
Its a good point. Seems like usb cables and routers are most people lines and they don't test anything before dismissing things out of hand.
Cut to razor sounding violins
... in itself is a point of contention in the audiophile community. Particularly with fervent subjectivists, this method of evaluating components is looked down on with great disdain.
That doesn't make much sense to me. Its not like the "subjectivists" just say omg this is more expensive so it has to be better. Certainly people listen to things and make up their own minds right?
Cut to razor sounding violins
A/B testing is an altogether different matter than double blind testing. Swapping-out one device vs. another to hear if something may sound different is the foundation of the audiophile experience, and must be done by audio designers/manufacturers when developing a product. For example, evaluating one cap or resistor to hear if it performs better, or simply more to one's liking is often directly compared with another, rather than only relying on audio memory. Double blind testing is often considered definitive by objectivists who may not hear any difference, while a subjectivist often hears a difference right off the bat, since they tend to have better trained ears.
Many associate A/B testing with rapid switching but would prefer long(er) evaluation periods. I think everyone should find a testing period that suits them - rapid or slow. But, IMHO, good testing should be unsighted because knowing what you are listening to undoubtedly influences the result.'Double blind' is a rigorous sub-set of unsighted testing that seems to be a pejorative term among subjectivists. It is probably impossible to achieve unsighted testing for long(er) evaluation periods and likely only practical under controlled A/B or A/B/X testing. People don't like the pressure of A/B testing and conflate it with the unsighted aspect. Regarding objectivists and subjectivists I think the underlying question is of expectation bias. If you expect to hear no difference then you probably won't hear one under any circumstances. If you do expect to hear a difference then unsighted testing is the best way to prove a difference is heard and not seen.
Regards
13DoW
I don't think so. If you have a trusted friend, you give him your house key and he does the swap once a week while your at work. Sometimes he swaps, sometimes he doesn't but you don't know. This could be cables, caps or power amps if they are in a closed cabinet with a external (to the cabinet) power switch. You just listen your normal way. No pressure, no feeling "under the gun". You just follow your normal listening habits. He keeps notes on what he did (or didn't do) each week, you keep notes on how the system sounded each week. At the end of the, let's say, two month trial you compare notes.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
The entire premise of blind testing is based on a duality. In one camp, folks either don't trust their own ears and/or don't trust what other folk's claim that they hear. The other camp goes about their own business, trusting their own senses and cognitive processes, with no interest in the controversy of blind testing. When folks in one camp accuses the other camp of somehow being delusional as to what they observe and evaluate, all discussion comes to an end. I have zero interest in what is said by those who either don't hear any differences via their own ears, or have not taken the time needed to find-out for themselves, which tends to be based on a stubborn disbelief system, fear of the unknown, tribal identity, or willful ignorance.
,
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: