Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Agreed....

Posted by thetubeguy1954 (A) on June 7, 2007 at 05:47:17

In Reply to: RE: to sum it all up... posted by mls-stl on June 6, 2007 at 15:00:26:

mls-stl: In the world of science that would mean your side would be posting something like "at 50 hours we noted a 10% change in the driver's widgit factor." At that point, someone could run their tests and say "we found that, too" or "excuse me, you failed to control for the sprocket variable...."

TG1954: The problem is I'm not a scientist. I've stated many times here I'm not very technically adept. That said I still try to understand why I hear what I hear and I perform tests to verify I'm actually hearing them. I don't know about you but I cannot afford to throw away my very hard earned dollars on imagined differences, can you? I'll grant you my particular tests won't satisfy the scrutiny of an ardent scientific exam, but they're good enough for me.
=========================================================================
mls-stl: You can't treat "expectation bias" as a simplistic "hearing what you're told to hear" response. Humans don't react consistently and I don't think anyone has mapped out all the variables that impact us. Psychologists, advertisers, marketers, and others go to great lengths to try and influence us in many areas of our life. I don't think we cease to have human responses when the subject switches to audio.

TG1954: You're claiming "expectation bias" can't be treated as a simplistic "hearing what you're told to hear" response. Yet that's EXACTLY what many of the "supposedly" rational, measurements & specifications, scientifically oriented, objectivists here claim when a subjectivist such as myself speaks about differences I hear between wires, amps etc! I cannot tell you how many times one of these objectivists has chalked up the differences I've heard to "expectation bias" caused by being previously told (either in a magazine or by a salesperson) one wire, amp etc would sound better. Yet now you're claiming it's not that simple? With all due respect this is a perfect example of why I cannot believe anything objectivists say. You guys will use a specific arguement like "expectation bias" to support your POV, but once that same arguement is directed against you, you claim that's not how it works. Nor do any of you correct other objectivists when they use an arguement incorrectly like you're claiming I did here. "IF" objectivists really wanted the scientific facts about what happening in audio and really don't have a hidden agenda of just being correct at all costs, you'd correct each other as well, not just subjectivists.

So yes we're back to the point that you and I disagree. I believe/know that speakers require a 50-100 break-in and you think those things are pretty easily taken care of well within the first hour. But I propose a possible test that can be done with the speakers hidden* to examine this phenomenon:

1) Take two identical sets of new unbroken-in speakers and play one song on both to see if they sound the same to a group of people who:
a) listen to the speakers individually.
b) record whether the speakers sound the same or not individually.
c) leave individually.

2) If the consensus is the two identical sets of new unbroken-in speakers do sound the same:
a) disconnect one set.
b) play the other set for 50-100hrs.
c) leave the disconnected pair next to the pair breaking in (that way they're both exposed to the same affects of heat, humidity, sunlight etc)

3) After 50-100hrs reconnect the one set that wasn't broken in, have the original group of people return and have them:
a) listen to both sets of speakers using the same song used in step #1 individually.
c) record whether the speakers sound the same or not individually.
d) leave individually.

4) If the two sets of identical speakers now sound different to these same people that previously thought these speakers sounded the same, it would make sense that the differences heard would be due to the one pair being broken in for 50-100hrs. For in this case the ONLY thing that has changed between the two sets of speakers is one pair was played for 50-100hrs. Other than that both sets have been exposed to the same affects of heat, humidity, sunlight etc.

If that isn't a satisfactory test for you than that we'll just have to agree to disagree. It's the best this non-scientist can do.

* the reason I suggest hiding the speakers is to prevent any biases objectivists are always complaining about from interfering with the tests. This is one time where I'll agree that seeing two identical sets of speakers might bias the people in the test from believing there could possibly be a difference in how two identical sets of speakers sound. Especially if they are objectivists!

Thetubeguy1954

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

Sonic Craft

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---