Audio Science Review the name the myth the confusion

[Thomas savage]

Hi,

Thought I'd put forward my take on our name as it seems to create confusion.

We review audio science here and some of the guys take measurements and discuss the meaning of them.

Lots of other things go on but the name pertains to the above. It does not mean everything that members do or say ( including amir) is of irrefutable scientific standard though of course it's the ambition to maintain high standards concerning our testing and measurements..

Feel free to pass on your thoughts ..

 

[dallasjustice]

Science is meant to be proven wrong. If someone claims their scientific conclusion is irrefutable, they don't understand basic scientific method.

 

[Thomas savage]

Science is meant to be proven wrong. If someone claims their scientific conclusion is irrefutable, they don't understand basic scientific method.

Precisely but this seems to escape folks and we get bashed for it somehow

You present theory and or test data for scrutiny, other folks discuss it ( review it)

Audio Science Review....

What we are missing is proper challenge but that's not the fault of amir nor is it some how a indication the forum is explicitly anti science.

There's a individuals threshold for holding a conviction of fact, maybe that's a varying perspective and can be challenged but amir is careful to present his conclusions as his alone and open for challenge.

In the invitation for challenge that's always offered is the key, a invitation to question .. science is a informed invitation to question.

If there was no invitation for challenge/question then I would understand the issue some have, BUT THERE IS SO....

We are not making science.

 

[dallasjustice]

The problem comes from folks who don't realize they are positing a scientific theory. When they announce their theory as of it's a fact, they shouldn't be surprised when others test their theory. Those who dislike others who test their theory are often post-modernists. Unfortunately, post-modernism is an acceptable mode of thought at university in America.

 

[Thomas savage]

The problem comes from folks who don't realize they are positing a scientific theory. When they announce their theory as of it's a fact, they shouldn't be surprised when others test their theory. Those who dislike others who test their theory are often post-modernists. Unfortunately, post-modernism is an acceptable mode of thought at university in America.

Post-modernists don't like it up them

 

[Sal1950]

I've got a suggestion, that ASR (Amir) start doing little listening myth busting seminars at the various Hi Fi shows.
Rather than the time and money spent on all the picture taking and room visiting, get some small space and do some A-B testing some of the most contentious claims.
We could shine the light on some of the most well known "ears" in audio with gracious public invitations around the web to attend.
The show coverage he's been doing is appreciated but basically redundant of that being done at least half a dozen other places.
Just my 2 lira

 

[Thomas savage]

I've got a suggestion, that ASR (Amir) start doing little listening myth busting seminars at the various Hi Fi shows.
Rather than the time and money spent on all the picture taking and room visiting, get some small space and do some A-B testing some of the most contentious claims.
We could shine the light on some of the most well known "ears" in audio with gracious public invitations around the web to attend.
The show coverage he's been doing is appreciated but basically redundant of that being done at least half a dozen other places.
Just my 2 lira

I'm not keen on the listening tests done on mass at least at shows, from what Iv seen they resemble those quack religious healer events where everyone is in a hysterical homogeneous zen and can be easily lead to believe anything , raising their hands out of fear of being the last to hear more than anything else.

It's also a bit negative, I'd rather we concentrate on positive reinforcement of technologies that subscribe to sound audio engineering rather than trying to bust a myth. We will just end up with more ' us vs them' else and I'm well past that dynamic .

Just my 5 Drachmas

 

[Sal1950]

I'm not keen on the listening tests done on mass at least at shows, from what Iv seen they resemble those quack religious healer events where everyone is in a hysterical monogynous zen and can be easily lead to believe anything , raising their hands out of fear of being the last to hear more than anything else.

A much better job of it could be done with it than that.............
Maybe blind listening over some good headphones and a paper voting pole, anonymous or not.

It's also a bit negative, I'd rather we concentrate on positive reinforcement of technologies that subscribe to sound audio engineering rather than trying to bust a myth. We will just end up with more ' us vs them' else and I'm well past that dynamic .

LOL, good luck with that, I've tried the "win the hearts and minds" approach before, a big club is always more effective.
The hard core faith healers always end up telling us to shove the measurements up our butts in any case.
I'd like a platform of "trust you ears, not your eyes".

In any case it's not my time and money to spend,

 

[Thomas savage]

A much better job of it could be done with it than that.............
Maybe blind listening over some good headphones and a paper voting pole, anonymous or not.


LOL, good luck with that, I've tried the "win the hearts and minds" approach before, a big club is always more effective.
The hard core faith healers always end up telling us to shove the measurements up our butts in any case.
I'd like a platform of "trust you ears, not your eyes".

In any case it's not my time and money to spend,

No room up my arse, my heads too big nothing else will fit up there

I like the your idea of the blind ballot listen assessment .

 

[Wayne]

Lots of other things go on but the name pertains to the above. It does not mean everything that members do or say ( including amir) is of irrefutable scientific standard though of course it's the ambition to maintain high standards concerning our testing and measurements..

As a newby to audio forums and a lurker on the "debates,"

Unfortunately this seems to be all to true on the audio forums. I do hope this is not representative of the folks who enjoy HiFi music.

The problem comes from folks who don't realize they are positing a scientific theory. When they announce their theory as of it's a fact, they shouldn't be surprised when others test their theory.

Unfortunately, it is not even a theory per se, only a measurement (that can be challenged by simply replicating the test) and its interpretation.

I've got a suggestion, that ASR (Amir) start doing little listening myth busting seminars at the various Hi Fi shows.

Assuming the parameters for a scientific test can be met -- it is a great idea for those with an open mind who would accept the results, but I question if this would change the minds of those who seem to reject the tests presented here (by Amir and others). So discouraging....

@amirm: Please keep up the good work, I'm sure there is a bigger audience out there who appreciate your (and other contributors) objective testing.

 

[amirm]

Much appreciated Wayne.

 

[March Audio]

I've got a suggestion, that ASR (Amir) start doing little listening myth busting seminars at the various Hi Fi shows.
Rather than the time and money spent on all the picture taking and room visiting, get some small space and do some A-B testing some of the most contentious claims.
We could shine the light on some of the most well known "ears" in audio with gracious public invitations around the web to attend.
The show coverage he's been doing is appreciated but basically redundant of that being done at least half a dozen other places.
Just my 2 lira

Omg, he would run the risk of being lynched by angry audiophiles and manufacturers. A myth busting session at a hifi show would be nothing less than blasphemy.

Burn the heretic!

 

[Sal1950]

I'll get the Hells Angels to do security like they did at Altamont in 69.

 

[Thomas savage]

I'll get the Hells Angels to do security like they did at Altamont in 69.

Well il be there with my trusty eswing hammer...

 

[Brad]

Science progresses from hypothesis to theory to accepted knowledge. As it progresses more contrary data is required to overturn the idea.

However, most of the time people actually discuss hypotheses, but call it a theory or knowledge

 

[tr1ple6]

Science progresses from hypothesis to theory to accepted knowledge. As it progresses more contrary data is required to overturn the idea.

However, most of the time people actually discuss hypotheses, but call it a theory or knowledge

The problem is that once the science has progressed to the stage of accepted knowledge the anti measurement crowd expects anyone objectively testing equipment to reprove the hypothesis over again

 

[Brad]

Yes that is the point where it's generally necessary to trust experts, as even though the hypothesis verification steps are repeatable by anyone in principle, the expertise to do the measurements is not common.

The adage that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts probably applies

 

[Cosmik]

The adage that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts probably applies

Facts are overrated - in my opinion.

I really do mean that. Facts are almost information-free in comparison to ideas. Digital audio is a brilliant idea; sub-ideas flow from it e.g. the idea of packet-based two-way asynchronous communications completely eliminating the physical characteristics of connecting cables. An idea like digital audio explodes with possibilities, giving us first CD players, iPods and now streaming in perfect quality to anywhere in the world.

And what do audiophiles do? They get hung up on tests of individual cables, or instances of bad implementation where power supply noise contaminates the analogue output, and they convert an idea into miserable little factoids. When you study only facts, you lose all sense of progress, scale and perspective. The result is that audiophiles cannot see above the facts, and have no clear idea that digital audio is fundamentally better than what went before. All they know is that such-and-such a magazine said that this CD player measured badly with 0.003% distortion, while this vinyl gramophone had stunning wow and flutter of only 0.05%. It is a fact that the CD player scored 3/10 on their value-for-money survey but the gramophone scored 8/10.

Facts alone are almost useless bits of trivia that mean nothing.