Extreme Snake Oil

[Spkrdctr]

Any views out there on dedicated mains circuits - I ask because during my saddo Naim years it was seen as the great (relatively cheap) upgrade. Split the incoming supply, separate consumer unit (fuse board ) Chunky 32A cable , 1 MCB per cable run to Unswitched socket .

On reflection another idiotic thing I did in the interests of an ‘inky black background and cleaner bass’

I'm sorry you had to live through that.

 

[Spkrdctr]

Hi folks the "Placebo Effect", is when a Placebo has an actual effect, not an imagined effect.
I see this term commonly misused on ASR.
If there indeed was a placebo effect, the sound would actually be changed for the worse or better not imagined to be different. Think about what "effect", means. It is not the proper term here.

If you are given sugar pills(placebo) and your heart rate actually goes down(effect)or your acne actually goes away(effect) that is the, Placebo Effect.
You heart rate could also go up(another effect) or the acne get worse(another effect) or a myriad of effects from the placebo to create the "placebo effect".

You are actually more or less referring to "confirmation bias". That is a perceived change based on expectations and may or may not be real, verfiable, correct or definitive.
It was $20k and you trust expensive things and you imagine that it all sounds better to validate your belief and your purchase.

There is also various types of "attribution error". Very commonly the music does sound better with the new cable so you "attribute", that to the cable rather what is more common in audio - simply paying more or different attention.

In any case the term Placebo Effect is being misused.

-------------------------------------
"confirmation bias, the tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with one's existing beliefs. This biased approach to decision making is largely unintentional and often results in ignoring inconsistent information."

I agree with you. I also kind of feel that Placebo effect is misused. I let it slide as I know what they mean, but confirmation bias and about 10 other biases do apply though.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Well the term "placebo effect" is generally used in discussions of treatment of purely mental conditions such as depression and anxiety, where the effect is entirely on how the person feels subjectively; nothing physically measurable is involved. See e.g. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00407/full

That would seem to be the same concept as an audiophile reporting that the sound is sbetter with the expensive cable, so I think the term "placebo effect" is appropriate for this.

No, the placeboo effect is not in any way shape form or otherwise, a term limited to discussions of reported metal health benefits. Absolutely not. It is all good in the grand sceme of things but in this little matter you are off the base.

Additionally you are currently performing what I described as "confirmation bias" amoung others.
And that is cool, we all do but that is what it is.

Betond that, in mental health, if a placebo has some effect on something then yes it is an example of the "placebo effect". However it is only correct to use the term if the effect can be substantiated as real. Such as you had such bad anxiety that you could not sleep, you took sugar pills and now you can sleep. This change can be validated. Or you had throuble concentrating and took a sugar pill and now can concetrate.
A lot of mental health issues are nuanced a tough to study. Depression can really only be reported, but there are ways to test something like , Prozac against a sugar pill and find out in a large study if it is effective.

In other words the placebo effect would pass a blind test. It is real. The sound is really better(or worse/ it has changed) not imagined to have changed. So imaging cables change the sound is not an example of Placebo Effect.

 

[MarkS]

No, the placeboo effect is not in any way shape form or otherwise, a term limited to discussions of reported metal health benefits.

That's not what I said. I said that mental health is an example of a purely subjective evaluation in which the placebo effect can occur.

I will quote from the abstract of the paper I linked to:

"The aim of this review is to evaluate the placebo effect in the treatment of anxiety and depression. Antidepressants are supposed to work by fixing a chemical imbalance, specifically, a lack of serotonin or norepinephrine in the brain. However, analyses of the published and the unpublished clinical trial data are consistent in showing that most (if not all) of the benefits of antidepressants in the treatment of depression and anxiety are due to the placebo response ..."

My point is that there is no objective measurement for depression: it is diagnosed by asking about the patient's subjective experiences.

So, you give the paitent a sugar pill, the patient reports feeling better: that's the placebo effect.

Or, you give the audiophile a fancy cable, the audiophile reports hearing better sound: that is also the placebo effect.

 

[Audiofire]

I hate to say this but in the USA many Federal agencies are useless. The Federal Trade Commission is one of them. They "pretend" like they will do something for you. But, try calling them up and getting something done. It will never happen.

People can submit complaints online here:

Report Fraud

Protect your community by reporting fraud, scams, and bad business practices

reportfraud.ftc.gov

They have taken care of cases that seem most relevant, and the limited budget doesn't necessarily mean an agency is useless. But indifference to their complaint function is certainly not gonna make the case more relevant, and users can easily send the link to real engineers like Amir and Gene (Audioholics) that expose for example Audioquest (the burden of proof should be on the blatant marketing lies anyway).

 

[ROOSKIE]

That's not what I said. I said that mental health is an example of a purely subjective evaluation in which the placebo effect can occur.

I will quote from the abstract of the paper I linked to:

"The aim of this review is to evaluate the placebo effect in the treatment of anxiety and depression. Antidepressants are supposed to work by fixing a chemical imbalance, specifically, a lack of serotonin or norepinephrine in the brain. However, analyses of the published and the unpublished clinical trial data are consistent in showing that most (if not all) of the benefits of antidepressants in the treatment of depression and anxiety are due to the placebo response ..."

My point is that there is no objective measurement for depression: it is diagnosed by asking about the patient's subjective experiences.

So, you give the paitent a sugar pill, the patient reports feeling better: that's the placebo effect.

Or, you give the audiophile a fancy cable, the audiophile reports hearing better sound; that is also the placebo effect.

No it is not.
You are misunderstanding that quote. You need to dive in a bit further if you are interested in this stuff it will be fun.

Really though 5minutes on the internet will show you that your statement, "Or, you give the audiophile a fancy cable, the audiophile reports hearing better sound; that is also the placebo effect." Is not correct in terms of what the Placebo Effect is.
I will say it again tounge and cheek, the placebo effect would pass a blind test in the Harman labs. It is a real change it is not imagined. If it turns out to be imagined it something else, not the Placebo Effect.

Anyway while this is sort of related to the topic of Extreme snake oil, I prolly should not take it any further on this thread.

---------------------------------------------------
"The placebo effect or response represents a phenomenon whereby a fake treatment (usually a relatively inactive substance such as saline or sugar) can mimic the action of a real, active treatment and lead to an improvement in a person’s symptoms because they are expecting the fake treatment to be effective."

Placebo Effect in Depression Treatment

People with depression who benefited from a placebo showed signature changes in the brain and also responded better to subsequent medication.

www.nih.gov

"People with depression who benefited from a placebo showed signature changes in the brain and also responded better to subsequent medication."

For something cheesy try this episode of Science Vs. An entertainment based podcast that does work hard use some real science and is fun.

Placebo: Can the Mind Cure You?

Listen to this episode from Science Vs on Spotify. [REBROADCAST] Could fake medicine actually take away your pain or treat a disease? We dig into the science of placebos to find out more about the power of the mind to heal. We speak to medical researcher Prof. Ted Kaptchuk, neuroscientist Prof...

open.spotify.com

Also check out the "Bias Codex" if you have not yet done so. Super sick stuff.

File:Cognitive bias codex en.svg - Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

 

[IPunchCholla]

Hi folks the "Placebo Effect", is when a Placebo has an actual effect, not an imagined effect.
I see this term commonly misused on ASR.
If there indeed was a placebo effect, the sound would actually be changed for the worse or better not imagined to be different. Think about what "effect", means. It is not the proper term here.

If you are given sugar pills(placebo) and your heart rate actually goes down(effect)or your acne actually goes away(effect) that is the, Placebo Effect.
You heart rate could also go up(another effect) or the acne get worse(another effect) or a myriad of effects from the placebo to create the "placebo effect".

You are actually more or less referring to "confirmation bias". That is a perceived change based on expectations and may or may not be real, verfiable, correct or definitive.
It was $20k and you trust expensive things and you imagine that it all sounds better to validate your belief and your purchase.

There is also various types of "attribution error". Very commonly the music does sound better with the new cable so you "attribute", that to the cable rather what is more common in audio - simply paying more or different attention.

In any case the term Placebo Effect is being misused.

-------------------------------------
"confirmation bias, the tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with one's existing beliefs. This biased approach to decision making is largely unintentional and often results in ignoring inconsistent information."

For those FMRI experiments where test subjects were told about the expensive and rare vintage of wine they were about to taste, whose pleasure centers then activated before tasting the wine, causing the wine to be more pleasurable than it was when they were told it was cheap, was that placebo effect? There was a measurable change in brain activity due to belief in information. I don’t know if any studies of auditory perception, but if we are told the music is being played on 40k speakers, I would assume the same response happens in the brain. It’s just that instead of being told we’re taking a drug and getting a sugar pill instead, we’re being told something is making the music better when no change is happening.

 

[mansr]

People can submit complaints online here:

Oh, you sweet summer child.

 

[ROOSKIE]

11

 

[ROOSKIE]

For those FMRI experiments where test subjects were told about the expensive and rare vintage of wine they were about to taste, whose pleasure centers then activated before tasting the wine, causing the wine to be more pleasurable than it was when they were told it was cheap, was that placebo effect? There was a measurable change in brain activity due to belief in information. I don’t know if any studies of auditory perception, but if we are told the music is being played on 40k speakers, I would assume the same response happens in the brain. It’s just that instead of being told we’re taking a drug and getting a sugar pill instead, we’re being told something is making the music better when no change is happening.

But belief in information is not a placebo. Belief in information is far from a placebo.
They were testing psychological bias. Pycological bias is well known to have effects therefore it can not be used as a form of Placebo.
By definition a placebo is thought to be perfectly benign. Remeber a placebo and the placebo effect are not the same things.

 

[Audiofire]

Oh, you sweet summer child.

Right, but it seems likely that the Danish authorities could be interested given that they have far less blatant marketing lies/omissions to deal with than the United States (some minor violations are dealt with compared with the FTC):
https://www.forbrugerombudsmanden.dk/sager/

 

[Doodski]

Right, but it seems likely that the Danish authorities could be interested given that they have far less blatant marketing lies/omissions to deal with than the United States (some minor violations are dealt with compared with the FTC):
https://www.forbrugerombudsmanden.dk/sager/

I found that a good old fashioned court file number for small claims court handles these bad actors pretty quickly. They fear going to court.

 

[IPunchCholla]

But belief in information is not a placebo. Belief in information is far from a placebo.
They were testing psychological bias. Pycological bias is well known to have effects therefore it can not be used as a form of Placebo.
By definition a placebo is thought to be perfectly benign. Remeber a placebo and the placebo effect are not the same things.

Where is the line between psychological bias and physiological changes in the brain causing perception shifts? I looked at the list of 188 biases. Lots of overlaps and redundancies. You seem to want to draw a line in the physical world for something to be considered a placebo, the disappearance of acne, depression. But is not a change in the brain’s processes also physical? hearing isn’t just reception of sound waves. There are at least three memory mechanisms in play, and quite a bit of mental processing going on before we “hear” something. Just think of all the reflections and interferences we don’t even hear. So how is something that changes the mechanism that hears not a placebo? The placebo is the object, it effects the person, not the target of the non-placebo. A placebo doesn’t change the virus, but it might change your bodies response to it. How is that different from a shiny cord changing my body/brains response to sound waves?

 

[Mark_A]

I am very surprised that some people think the FTC or other government agency should shut down audio companies that sell audiophile snake oil products to a bunch of people who have too much money to spend.

In our society, there is an applicable phrase called caveat emptor (buyer beware). I don't want the government making decisions about what audiophile products can be sold, or what claims can be made about those products. I can understand why the government is concerned about health care products (that are sold to everyone, not just rich people), and whether advertising claims for such products are accurate, but I cannot imagine (nor do I want) them dealing with audiophile products.

 

[Doodski]

I am very surprised that some people think the FTC or other government agency should shut down audio companies that sell audiophile snake oil products to a bunch of people who have too much money to spend.

In our society, there is an applicable phrase called caveat emptor (buyer beware). I don't want the government making decisions about what audiophile products can be sold, or what claims can be made about those products. I can understand why the government is concerned about health care products (that are sold to everyone, not just rich people), and whether advertising claims for such products are accurate, but I cannot imagine (nor do I want) them dealing with audiophile products.

Government over-reach is a distinct possibility for sure. I think we should persist in discrediting and calling out those that are snake oil purveyors that greedily grab and simultaneously discredit those that are reputable and that have a good and decent business plan with ethics.

 

[Audiofire]

You are actually more or less referring to "confirmation bias". That is a perceived change based on expectations and may or may not be real, verfiable, correct or definitive.

I don't mind if people call audiophoolery confirmation bias, but it is the tendency to select information that already fits with the subjective perception. However, there is often no real information to select, for example from expensive audiophool cables that actually did nothing for the audio.

The Dunning-Kruger effect is an alternative, because we are basically talking about whether people have understood the relevant audio science. The extreme snake oil listed in the pages of this thread is to some extent used by us for humor/entertainment, but this only works due to enlightening information obtained from ASR or similar sources.

 

[Audiofire]

I am very surprised that some people think the FTC or other government agency should shut down audio companies that sell audiophile snake oil products to a bunch of people who have too much money to spend.

In our society, there is an applicable phrase called caveat emptor (buyer beware). I don't want the government making decisions about what audiophile products can be sold, or what claims can be made about those products. I can understand why the government is concerned about health care products (that are sold to everyone, not just rich people), and whether advertising claims for such products are accurate, but I cannot imagine (nor do I want) them dealing with audiophile products.

The Dunning-Kruger effect works just the same for explaining why caveat emptor is the reason for the Federal Trade Commission Act. Consumers are mislead by the lies/half-truths and this is detrimental to the economy/society.

"The term "false advertisement" means an advertisement, other than labeling, which is misleading in a material respect; and in determining whether any advertisement is misleading, there shall be taken into account (among other things) not only representations made or suggested by statement, word, design, device, sound, or any combination thereof, but also the extent to which the advertisement fails to reveal facts material in the light of such representations or material with respect to consequences which may result from the use of the commodity to which the advertisement relates under the conditions prescribed in said advertisement, or under such conditions as are customary or usual."

https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/statutes/federal-trade-commission-act/ftc_act_incorporatingus_safe_web_act.pdf

 

[MaxBuck]

I will support the federal US government getting involved just as soon as it gets involved in shutting down GNC. The whole "nutritional supplement" business is founded on snake oil, and those products can be an actual threat to health.

All these audio tweaks do is lighten the pockets of the gullible, and there's no shortage of products and services that do the same thing.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Where is the line between psychological bias and physiological changes in the brain causing perception shifts? I looked at the list of 188 biases. Lots of overlaps and redundancies.

I included the Bias Codex as I was also discussing a separate and common event "confirmation bias", in the original post I wrote in this thread about placebo effect.
I like the codex so I linked it and for many data and chart lovers it is very informative. Like a spinorama or a radar globe for a speaker.
Yes, there is a lot of over lap in the codex, really it is a continuum with enfolded layers. Like life and so really it ought to have redundancy and overlap and of course exactly where those redundancies and overlap exist will be perceived differently based on your own interpretations of the codex and even bias vocabulary. Just like pouring over the measurements of any speaker here.

As far as where lines are being drawn bear in mind that the placebo, placebo response, placebo effect and nocebo are not well understood by science in general. Just note that all the of terms I just listed are not interchangeable. A placebo and the placebo effect are as different as a soccer ball and a game of soccer.

Back to the term "Placebo effect", I get why it seems complicated, however the term literally means "only a placebo(situationally benign "thing") was given and yet there was an effect."
Again remember we are talking about a clinical effect, or one that has been vetted - not anecdotal commentary.
If you say you feel better after being given sugar pills that is not enough to declare the placebo had an effect. What would happen is 300 people in 3 groups of 100 are randomly assigned the drug that "works" and the "placebo"(a sugar pill or something known to have no effects on its own) and some nothing. 68% get better with the drug, 62% get better with just the sugar pill, and 44% get better with nothing, the effect is then delineated in those numbers. These folks will also be monitored in a variety of ways. Some things can be measured like heart rate and blood pressure other things have to vetted with dialog and perhaps test taking (like anxiety reduction or depression).
Also some will report a nocebo effect such as headaches from the placebo, so that is also an interesting aspect.

So how is something that changes the mechanism that hears not a placebo?

because a placebo is something known to be benign meaning that if it changes the mechanism that hears it is NOT placebo but rather medicine or "active". Yes I get it sounds like a catch 22.

In the wine test(at least with what you wrote, I'd have to read up on this particular testing to truly know the methods) there seems to be no placebo, so there can be no placebo effect. Tricking someone into thinking the wine is expensive and tasty is not giving them a placebo. Giving them cheap wine they are told is expensive instead of expensive wine is also not a placebo. Especially as the value and taste of wine are already very arbitrary. There is no inherent reason expensive wine will taste better than cheap, nor that people people will even like either wine. Biases are carefully(hopefully carefully) being tested for their effects against a control (the same wine under a different name)but not placebo. Yes maybe they are all given the same wine but that doesn't make the guiding comments placebos. Bias cues are known active elements not placebos.

Often biases or coaching or "marketing" are involved in the overall study of placebos and placebo effects as additional elements. Maybe you want to see if labeling a placebo as Tylenol works better than an unlabeled bottle or telling someone the treatment is highly effective vs another group being told the odds are slim. Or testing if selling speaker wire for $400 and the same wire for $25 changes anything. These phycological cues are not placebos but they are often studied in tandem with placebo.

You seem to want to draw a line in the physical world for something to be considered a placebo, the disappearance of acne, depression.

Well 1st the term placebo is miss used here, a 'placebo response' or a 'placebo effect' are how changes after being given a placebo are discussed. It is unknown what causes the depression to be reduced, it can not be from the placebo. The placebo must be neutral/not active. This is of course why this is fascinating.

A placebo doesn’t change the virus, but it might change your bodies response to it. How is that different from a shiny cord changing my body/brains response to sound waves?

If I tell you "hey these $40k wires are incredible and make the system sound even better, here have a listen." There is a lot of bias cuing at play but no placebo effect. How would I calculate placebo effect here? We would need to do a study. The placebo effect, is not a random term. It means you have the data to differentiate between how much the music sounds different to folks given various circumstances.
Additionally you also need convincing evidence that the $40k cable does not make a difference before you can even be sure the cable is a potential placebo. So 1st you take measurements of the cable and do double blind testing to ensure it is neutral. Then and only then can you create a study around the effect of the cable itself.
You can do a study like the wine example of simple using the same cable and telling people different things about it but then you still have no idea if an actual $40k cable sounds better than an actual $15cable. You only know if telling people different things about the 1 cable, changes their response to the one physical environment.

Now if you think that wire A and B sound the same and you ABX them in a blind test and folks consistently get X correctly then it is likely A & B do not in fact sound the same. Or if folks can not get X then likely A & B do likely sound the same. That is a good speaker wire test but there is no placebo and no placebo effect. That was my original point. Usually when we talk about audio experiences whether sighted or blind, the Placebo Effect has no place in the conversation and is a miscued term there. We are usually talking about other events, mostly psychological biases and/or folks paying more or different attention - which is very very interesting stuff.

Anyway, I am sorry about my poor writing. I hope what I said makes sense. Plus we likely live in a simulation, matrix or boundless arena of some sorts anyway so all bets are off right? Some sort of Xbox version 1515 level video game.

 

[IPunchCholla]

Thank you, that clarifies it!