Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Newman]

I'd encourage everyone to watch the whole of that video and read the whole of the ensuing thread. Amir rejects your scepticism :
And just to re-iterate that he did multiple ABX tests , not just the one in question, and he did it just using a laptop and in-ear buds, so hardly state of the art gear.
One of the reasons I'm sceptical about CD being transparent is because 7kHz sine and square waves are audibly different, which theory says should be impossible.
I can't explain that, except that just because a 20kHz tone is inaudible doesn't mean a 20kHz filter is inaudible - which is the assumption used for the CD spec.

Incorrect. The important bit is at 18m50s, and if you don't understand it, come back to me. Better still, see if you can describe in your own words, or quote him if you prefer, what he says at 18m50s. Just to be sure that you 'get it'.

cheers

 

[peng]

Incorrect. The important bit is at 18m50s, and if you don't understand it, come back to me. Better still, see if you can describe in your own words, or quote him if you prefer, what he says at 18m50s. Just to be sure that you 'get it'.

cheers

I watched 18m50s a few times, and I get your point but I do think with his vast experience and knowledge in this hobby, his point(s) may not be what you think they are and there may not be much disagreement, could have been a matter of interpretation of what he's trying to say?

 

[antcollinet]

and works very well

Since you've not provided your measurements, I assume there aren't any. So subjective testing?

Any controls implemented when you did that?
How long was it between listening to the unmodded and modded version?


And obviously no statistically relevant blind comparisons.

Lets just put it down to cognitive biases shall we?

 

[john11]

Your doubt is noted, but I assume you haven't made any calculations to verify the effects of the capacitance? What does "works very well" mean?

Why are you so totally and utterly obsessed with calculations, what's wrong with playing some music and enjoying it, which is what most people will do.
And this whole " cognitive bias " immediatly suggests that people are so stupid, so deaf, that they can't hear the difference between one piece of hardware and another, yet amir in his tests, time and time again, states he can and does, and gives his opinion, as do all the members who reply.

 

[Talisman]

Why are you so totally and utterly obsessed with calculations, what's wrong with playing some music and enjoying it, which is what most people will do.
And this whole " cognitive bias " immediatly suggests that people are so stupid, so deaf, that they can't hear the difference between one piece of hardware and another, yet amir in his tests, time and time again, states he can and does, and gives his opinion, as do all the members who reply.

If you say you like an amplifier we have no problem with that. If you say that by making a DIY modification you can certainly and obviously improve the sound quality then you allow me to be wary, as with any subjective consideration that is passed off as absolute truth.
There are plenty of sites out there where at least questionable statements are made based only on one's beliefs, but not here. We want evidence.

 

[Julf]

Why are you so totally and utterly obsessed with calculations, what's wrong with playing some music and enjoying it, which is what most people will do.
And this whole " cognitive bias " immediatly suggests that people are so stupid, so deaf, that they can't hear the difference between one piece of hardware and another, yet amir in his tests, time and time again, states he can and does, and gives his opinion, as do all the members who reply.

I guess you don't really get the meaning of the word "science" in the name of this forum - but thanks for demonstrating the standard audiophile clichés and beliefs.

 

[welwynnick]

Why are you so totally and utterly obsessed with calculations, what's wrong with playing some music and enjoying it, which is what most people will do.
And this whole " cognitive bias " immediatly suggests that people are so stupid, so deaf, that they can't hear the difference between one piece of hardware and another, yet amir in his tests, time and time again, states he can and does, and gives his opinion, as do all the members who reply.

Here, here!
If cognitive bias was so important, then the most expensive kit would win every time.
That is most certainly not my experience.

 

[Talisman]

Here, here!
If cognitive bias was so important, then the most expensive kit would win every time.
That is most certainly not my experience.

This is not how cognitive bias works, it is not only linked to price but to many factors that we do not consciously consider. Wood finish amps sound warmer and cool shiny metal amps sound colder and more analytical. Even if they entirely hide the exact same elements. The cognitive bias is there and you never know how it will act, and the only way to avoid it is to listen without seeing.
It seems paradoxical that many audiophiles say they trust their ears more than measurements, but when asked to really trust ONLY their ears they are so reluctant to do so.

 

[Julf]

Here, here!
If cognitive bias was so important, then the most expensive kit would win every time.
That is most certainly not my experience.

How to say "I don't understand how cognitive bias works" without saying "I don't understand how cognitive bias works".

 

[Killingbeans]

And this whole " cognitive bias " immediatly suggests that people are so stupid, so deaf, that they can't hear the difference between one piece of hardware and another,

For the umpteenth time: Please stop assuming that cognitive bias has anything to do with intelligence/physical abilities or the lack thereof.

It's just biology, and we are all susceptible to it all the time, no matter how capable we are both mentally and physically.

yet amir in his tests, time and time again, states he can and does, and gives his opinion, as do all the members who reply.

We are all just humans, including @amirm. Besides, in the rare cases where he delivers subjective impressions with little or no measurements to verify them, he makes it perfectly clear that we should take it with a grain of salt.

This is honestly just a question of probability. The added capacitor is extremely unlikely to be the cause of anything audible, and cognitive bias, on the other hand, is extremely likely to be so.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

Here, here!
If cognitive bias was so important, then the most expensive kit would win every time.
That is most certainly not my experience.

I think that’s an oversimplification.

Cognitive bias doesn’t say you’ll definitely do/believe something, it says you’re more likely to do so than you would if the bias wasn’t there.

 

[Killingbeans]

And it works both ways.

If you are biased to believing you have a "giant killer" in you hands, it very likely will sound better than the expensive stuff.

 

[Julf]

And it works both ways.

If you are biased to believing you have a "giant killer" in you hands, it very likely will sound better than the expensive stuff.

But above all - if you believe there is a difference, you will hear a difference, even if there isn't any difference in the actual sound wave.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

And it works both ways.

If you are biased to believing you have a "giant killer" in you hands, it very likely will sound better than the expensive stuff.

I’m sure that’s not impossible, though I’d be surprise if the mechanisms were as strong.

Whatever, it only underlines the need for proper controlled testing.

 

[welwynnick]

But above all - if you believe there is a difference, you will hear a difference, even if there isn't any difference in the actual sound wave.

I've had enough of this. That is simply not true. I can prove it.

Some time ago I borrowed some equipment to prove a point that I'd long been theorising about. I expected that compressed soundtracks sounded better when they were decoded by the processor rather than the player. It was a longstanding obsession, and I'd heard other people's listening impressions (about which I was somewhat sceptical) but I had never heard it for myself.

Then the opportunity came and the anticipation was overbearing. However, in a sighted, level-matched comparison I couldn't hear any difference. Everyone else must have been imagining it, or I must be deaf, or my understanding of audio electroncis wasn't as good as I thought it was. I had nailed my colours to the mast, and this was embarassing, but I immediately wrote about what I heard. On this ocassion the expectation bias (nothing to do with shiney or expensive) was overwhelming, but try as I might, player and processing decoding sounded just the same to me.

Price list for new Onkyo PR-SC886

Right, some impressions. There's a great deal to say, and I won't be able to do it all at once. I've had the golden opportunity to answer a lot of questions, many of which relate to the Denon DVD 3800BD. For the purpose of this thread, though, I'll just consider it as a good HD MC audio...

www.avforums.com

As it happened, I had made a mistake and unwittingly compared the same things. It was a dummy control test that I didn't realise I had set myself. #I was expecting to hear a significant difference, but there was none, and that was what I heard. I then fixed and repeated the test and did hear the difference I was expecting (processor decoding did sound better).

I'm only speaking for myself there, and I'm sure that cognitive bias does have a significant influence on sighted listening, but not in this instance.

This is why my signature says I didn't imagine what I heard.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

Yes Nick, I’d apply the same principle as previously. We shouldn’t be saying ‘all’ when we mean ‘some’, or ‘definitely’ instead of ‘more likely’.

At the same time, I’m sure we all appreciate that there’s often a bit of necessary internet shorthand at work.

 

[welwynnick]

When I said the "most expensive kit would win every time" it was an ironical reposte to the usual ASR attitude that sighted listening is subject to congitive bias every time.

 

[Julf]

I've had enough of this. That is simply not true.

Fair enough. Just add "in most cases" to make it true.

 

[welwynnick]

Agreed.

And if someone hears a difference in sighted listening, then it is "probably" cognitive bias.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

As I say, we can guess all we like, but do a proper controlled test, and you know the truth.

Funnily enough, I believe Fosi Audio have just released a device which can make this easier.