That is the textbook example of a belief, it is next to impossible to be challenged by facts.Fascinating that he did a null test which produced no difference yet he still believes.
No, there are no alternative facts.... I think that as for each of us, there is enough scientific evidence that can explain in good part every result obtained. ...
They are always being played from the local cache. The streaming downloads them to the cache at least 30s of it before it starts playing. Easy to test. DC does not understand how streaming is done.Never mind that when those songs are played more often, they are actually playing from
local storage cache, and there is no need to get it from the network anymore. You never hear people complain that playing the streaming song a second time makes it sound different…
Well, not necessarily. You can store to file and play in parallel. You could do some caching in memory for this. I have no idea what the actual implementations do, they might be all over the place.They are always being played from the local cache.
Usually an appeal to authority is more subtle than this.He wrote: "To clarify, we’re not conducting formal double-blind testing here; one person plays the files while the other listens, drawing on our experiences as listeners. With over 50 years as a pianist, composer, orchestrator, and producer of nearly a thousand albums, I trust my musical memory, which I believe extends to tonality as well."
He is 68 years old now and trusts his ears and his "musical memory"? One blind test conducted by someone trustworthy (clearly a job for amir) could cure his arrogance.....
David Chesky is certainly not unique in his believe in trusting his hearing or his memory of what he has heard.He wrote: "To clarify, we’re not conducting formal double-blind testing here; one person plays the files while the other listens, drawing on our experiences as listeners. With over 50 years as a pianist, composer, orchestrator, and producer of nearly a thousand albums, I trust my musical memory, which I believe extends to tonality as well."
He is 68 years old now and trusts his ears and his "musical memory"? One blind test conducted by someone trustworthy (clearly a job for amir) could cure his arrogance.....
Many Umg titles had very audible watermarking in Spotify, too. But it was apparently removed several years ago.Watermarking was (is?) on Tidal as well, I thought they were going to stop doing it, but that seems unlikely.
Most services download to the cache and then “play” from the cache. Twiddling is looking for complications and interruptions.Well, not necessarily. You can store to file and play in parallel. You could do some caching in memory for this. I have no idea what the actual implementations do, they might be all over the place.
That's a T-shirt right there.he did a null test which produced no difference yet he still believes.
Perhaps not, but I find it unethical to base un-evidenced claims about the performance of something a vendor is selling based on that wrongness, while they are studiously looking in the opposite direction from that of all the evidence that would show those claims to be false.It is not unethical or necessarily delusional to be wrong.
As to un-evidenced... in David Chesky's case, I believe he feels he has evidence. He is trusting his perception. We may agree that our perception is far from infallible, but it is quite common to trust our perceptions even though they may be incorrect.Perhaps not, but I find it unethical to base un-evidenced claims about the performance of something a vendor is selling based on that wrongness, while they are studiously looking in the opposite direction from that of all the evidence that would show those claims to be false.
In other words, selling falsehoods on the basis of willful ignorance. That is unethical. I think that will probably include a majority of those engaged in this sort of commerce.
Hehe. It' the equivalent of what we in my field call "eminence-based medicine".Usually an appeal to authority is more subtle than this.
After downloading and confirming that the files were identical, the streamed version still sounded different in real-time playback. Perhaps there's an "X factor" not yet captured in current scientific testing.
I'll have you know, my bits are definitely more equal than others!Easy peasy. All bits are equal, but some are more equal than others.
My son, Lucca, is starting a speaker company, and I’ve listened to countless versions of his speakers, testing various brands and sizes of internal speaker cables from the crossover to the drivers. Despite identical setups, we consistently hear significant differences between wire configurations, even when measurements suggest they should sound the same. To clarify, we’re not conducting formal double-blind testing here; one person plays the files while the other listens, drawing on our experiences as listeners.
I just read it as well. Very surprised and disappointed to see David write such things.