Is the entire audio industry a fraud?

[ahofer]

So that's Fry and Laurie, what a treasure.

Nearly everything they did is on Youtube. My favorite comedy show.

 

[ahofer]

The argument of "Quantum uncertainty = anything is possible at the macroscopic level!" is absolute bulls¤¤t, and anybody, who has had just minimal real world contact with quantum physics knows it.

It’s been very useful at spreading FUD. E.g.

Bybee V2 Quantum Signal Enhancer

Bybee V2 uantum Signal Enhancer Is a versatile system and room tweak. Call 303-653-6341 to order

www.tweekgeek.com

 

[Dr. X builds a ... what?]

It’s been very useful at spreading FUD. E.g.

Bybee V2 Quantum Signal Enhancer

Bybee V2 uantum Signal Enhancer Is a versatile system and room tweak. Call 303-653-6341 to order

www.tweekgeek.com

Wrong! The rotation of a bucket of Helium 3 which is macroscopic and can be seen with the naked eye follows the "microscopic" quantum rules.

 

[Dr. X builds a ... what?]

We've been over that nonsense a million times already.

I'm usually a positive guy (to the point of toxicity), but this actually makes me belive the other posters, who says you are flat out lying about your credentials.

The argument of "Quantum uncertainty = anything is possible at the macroscopic level!" is absolute bulls¤¤t, and anybody, who has had just minimal real world contact with quantum physics knows it.



Sorry to break it to you, but that's not how bias works.

Read a review of any kind of indisputable snake-oil product, and you'll notice that they all start out with that same "disclaimer".



No. But the possibility of it not being caused by placebo is infinitesimal.

Either that, or you simply removed some oxidation or fixed a loose connection in the process of the swap, meaning that the precious metals had nothing to do with it.

That was not my argument. It was an allusion to the idea that if you can't measure it, it is not real. We do not have instruments capable of measuring everything.

 

[Dr. X builds a ... what?]

And yet another person who doesn't understand unconscious biases... and a person with 6 posts arguing bad science. Probably another bogus account.

You engage in ad hominem arguments when the debate is lost.

 

[fpitas]

And yet another person who doesn't understand unconscious biases... and a person with 6 posts arguing bad science. Probably another bogus account.

Yes. At this point, random posters claiming to have advanced degrees just makes me suspicious.

 

[Killingbeans]

We do not have instruments capable of measuring everything.

There's no need to measure everyting.

Do a reliable test for audibility first, and then find a way to measure whatever seems to have slipped by conventional physics.

I'll almost guarantee you that you'll stuggle to find something the human ear can do better than a set of "dumb" measurements.

 

[Hatto]

...Not everything is revealed with the current machines and testing parameters.

Everything, and I mean absolutely everything, involving any and all electronics from recording to storage, playback and sound reproduction can be measured beyond the accuracy of our sensory capabilities.

In the coming years, we will understand these things better.

No. We have been able to understand anything and everything in the realm of audio electronics for more than half a century now. These are all human made devices, direct and complete products of science and engineering, there is no mystery or work of the divine there.

Not saying measurements are super useful in some cases, they are, but it’s not an exact science as some claim.

Signal processing is pure science and engineering, the very definition of exact science. The only part that might not be considered an exact science is the ear-brain interface which is the topic of psychology rather than electronics and signal processing. Any differences you claim to hear is not a matter of electroacoustics, but that of psychology or sociology.

 

[fpitas]

Yes, I've noticed that it's rare for someone who has truly been educated to bring attention to the fact. There is, after all, no need. The focus is usually on abilities and the use of those abilities in real life, not certification. The few people I have seen that use a designation after their name are rather humble about it. If doubts are raised about their education level or professional expertise, they don't get defensive. They just ignore doubters, because their work speaks volumes about them ..... volumes greater than all the degrees in the world.

Based on those observations, I'd say that people who trumpet their degrees are insecure and defensive, and the question of whether they actually have said degrees or not may be moot.

Jim

Yes. If you start hearing about their degrees, at best they're floundering for validation. At worst they're simply trolling us.

 

[fpitas]

Trolling us? Really? You mean someone has trolled us here at ASR? You must be kidding! Why would anyone troll us at ASR?

Jim

I'm certain that any number of noted scientists take the time to tell us that there are things that science can't measure.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Was it Einstein that talked about spooky education at a distance?

 

[fpitas]

Was it Einstein that talked about spooky education at a distance?

I assume that's the closest our trolls get to reading a book.

 

[antcollinet]

That was not my argument. It was an allusion to the idea that if you can't measure it, it is not real. We do not have instruments capable of measuring everything.

But we do have instruments that are way (way) more sensitive than the human ear - especially for measuring audio signals in the electrical signal domain.

You are again coming with the statement that because we don't know everything then anything is possible. That is a fallacy. Audio is the first, and pretty much the simplest application of electronics. We've been doing it for around 150 years. We can measure everything in audio that matters for human hearing.

I would expect anyone with a PHD in physics from any field to be able to see that.

 

[fpitas]

I would expect anyone with a PHD in physics from any field to be able to see that.

Not if you knew the physicists I worked with!

/I kid

 

[Ken1951]

I'm convinced some of these cats are members of Zeno's Audio Club.

 

[SIY]

I'm certain that any number of noted scientists take the time to tell us that there are things that science can't measure.

There are many, but audio electronics isn't one of them.

 

[fpitas]

I'm convinced some of these cats are members of Zeno's Audio Club.

Battling the tyranny of simple reasoning?

 

[Sal1950]

These lyrics were just about written for High End Audio. LOL
Check em out.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Yes, I've noticed that it's rare for someone who has truly been educated to bring attention to the fact. There is, after all, no need. The focus is usually on abilities and the use of those abilities in real life, not certification. The few people I have seen that use a designation after their name are rather humble about it. If doubts are raised about their education level or professional expertise, they don't get defensive. (Kuncher seemed to be an exception.)They just ignore doubters, because their work speaks volumes about them ..... volumes greater than all the degrees in the world.

Based on those observations, I'd say that people who trumpet their degrees are insecure and defensive, and the question of whether they actually have said degrees or not may be moot.

Jim

+1

 

[Philbo King]

+1

Before retiring I worked daily with numerous PhDs for years doing microwave and pulsed-laser fiberoptics design work. Although they are rather messy (getting them to keep a neat lab space is like herding cats), I never encountered arrogance or dismissal of my idea inputs from the good ones. In fact, one suggestion I made resulted in including my name on a couple of patents (involving a photonics-based A/D converter scalable to 20 GHz sampling rate).

Conversely, those rare souls who insisted they had all the answers just because they had a PhD never lasted very long there.