• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

High Bitrate FLAC - Can YOU even hear the difference?

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
Let me rephrase in simpler less condescending terms too.

With regards to the above quote, "we" do not accept. End of discussion.

And yes @SIY ,feeding time is over.
I didn't mean to be rude, my apologies.

Hopefully, you were still able to see the point I'm trying to make.
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
5,220
Likes
14,822
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
As far as I know, not scientifically, however that's pretty much the point.

Absolutely right.

If a claim can't be demonstrated, it can be dismissed until it can. That's the job of those making the claim, not those who believe it to be silly.

Once you move from anecdote to evidence, we have something to talk about (on this forum at least). Until then, you are going over well trodden ground.
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
Some people say that the earth is flat because they percieve it as flat, doesn't mean that it's true.
True.

However, there is unequivocal, scientific evidence corroborating that it isn't flat.

That is not the case here.
 

Jim Taylor

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 22, 2020
Messages
810
Likes
1,572
If we accept that the reason why so many people are convinced of being able to perceive high res audio differently, cannot be explained with current science,

This is the basic premise of subjectivism, in audio and in other realms. Accept first, try to explain later. That's backward.

Explain first, then accept. If you cannot explain, then you do not accept until you can explain. That is science.

Many people seem to be threatened by science because they don't understand it. Therefore they construct a defense that denies science. That makes them feel better, feel safer, and feel more valued. It's an emotional response.

But that is a misconception. The truth is that science doesn't threaten anyone, and science is not emotional. Jim
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
Absolutely right.

If a claim can't be demonstrated, it can be dismissed until it can. That's the job of those making the claim, not those who believe it to be silly.

Once you move from anecdote to evidence, we have something to talk about (on this forum at least). Until then, you are going over well trodden ground.
Well, it's not a claim, simply an observation.

The definition of empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation.
Obviously, myself and many others don't have the time and resources to conduct any legitimate research, but I believe we should all at least afford each other the respect of having an opinion.

That's all this is, not a scientific fact or substantiated claim, but merely a personal opinion.
 

Jim Taylor

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 22, 2020
Messages
810
Likes
1,572
Information acquired by observation is the literal definition of empirical evidence.

The literal definition of empirical evidence is observation that is independently repeatable. If it is not independently repeatable, it is dismissed as having no value. Jim
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
That IS a claim.
If you honestly can't tell the difference between a claim and an observation, this topic is probably not for you lol. :rolleyes:

The literal definition of empirical evidence is observation that is independently repeatable.
"Empirical evidence for a proposition is evidence, i.e. what supports or counters this proposition, that is constituted by or accessible to sense experience or experimental procedure. Empirical evidence is of central importance to the sciences and plays a role in various other fields, like epistemology and law."
 

voodooless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
3,915
Likes
6,137
Location
Netherlands
Obviously, myself and many others don't have the time and resources to conduct any legitimate research, but I believe we should all at least afford each other the respect of having an opinion.
It's not that hard. People here can give you a downsampled, properly noise-shaped, 16/44.1 version of the high-res files, and you can then ABX with Foobar to find out if you can "perceive" the difference. It's not rocket science
 

voodooless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
3,915
Likes
6,137
Location
Netherlands
If you honestly can't tell the difference between a claim and an observation, this topic is probably not for you lol. :rolleyes:


"Empirical evidence for a proposition is evidence, i.e. what supports or counters this proposition, that is constituted by or accessible to sense experience or experimental procedure. Empirical evidence is of central importance to the sciences and plays a role in various other fields, like epistemology and law."
Oh, It's not me not knowing the difference.. it's the exact opposite. Citing Empirical evidence when we're talking about observation and claim is quite useless. from: https://www.westga.edu/~mmcfar/ClaimsversusObservations.htm

Observations: An empirical or practical observation about the text that is obvious, conclusive and not debatable
Claims: Claims are theoretical statements (derived from a hypothesis or driving theoretical question) that are debatable, matters of interpretation, and therefore require justification and elaboration

If your so-called observations would not need debate, we would not be here. So no, these are not just observations. You're making claims! it's anecdotal evidence.

Anecdotal evidence is a factual claim relying only on personal observation, collected in a casual or non-systematic manner
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
It's not that hard. People here can give you a downsampled, properly noise-shaped, 16/44.1 version of the high-res files, and you can then ABX with Foobar to find out if you can "perceive" the difference. It's not rocket science
The result of such a test would be irrelevant, given that we don't even understand what exactly it is that might allow people to perceive this difference.
There must first be a theory explaining this phenomenon, before any tests or experiments can be conducted to support or refute it.

Thus once again, the subjective, human listening experience is all the empirical evidence currently at our disposal, to explain this.

It's really no rocket science, but apparently the bar is sinking.
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
This practice of only partially quoting people or completely out of context, seems quite dishonest and lazy.
 

Jimbob54

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
8,323
Likes
10,098
This practice of only partially quoting people or completely out of context, seems quite dishonest and lazy.
So is the constant recycling of straw men.
 

voodooless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
3,915
Likes
6,137
Location
Netherlands
That's very plausible, but it might also not be.

Like many others I'm simply describing an observation that I've made. Whether we are all victims of confirmation bias remains to be determined by science, but of course I can't rule it out.
The whole point is that you can rule it out, by doing said ABX test.

Absolutely, unequivocally incredible.

Theren isn't just a difference, it's a different universe.

Should be easy to ace the thing then...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom