Is the entire audio industry a fraud?

[Dr. X builds a ... what?]

I seriously thought ChatGPT was better than this... I guess I was misled.

It's less specific as it lacks real world experience.

He has a PhD but word vomits, how did he defend his dissertation? I call bullshit on that. Both my parents have PhD's and their english is incredible (Physics and Neuroscience) and English isn't their first language.

Okay, Mr. PhD, what was your PhD thesis in?

Magnetism and superconductivity, actually making magnet materials (arc melting in a flowing argon atmosphere) and superconductors (solid state reaction technique).

 

[Dr. X builds a ... what?]

Most audible things are easier to hear than to measure (measuring audio properly is not trivial) but I don't know what that has to do with fraudulent / false advertising in the industry.

There are plenty of examples of cable manufacturers in particular flat-out lying about what their cables do, or even heavily implying they do things that cables simply cannot do. That's a totally different consideration from whether people want to spend too much money on stuff, or hear differences in styli, or whatever.

I think you answered your own question.

 

[Dr. X builds a ... what?]

Dude, you ever heard of the concept of the paragraph??

Whats a matta? No sensa humor? Ha ha ha!

 

[Killingbeans]

It's less specific as it lacks real world experience.

Magnetism and superconductivity, actually making magnet materials (arc melting in a flowing argon atmosphere) and superconductors (solid state reaction technique).

That's really cool. But having a PhD in physics and working with awesome things doesn't make you immune to the placebo effect.

Judging from what you originally wrote, you simply have a tendency to hear what you'd like to hear.

You can claim that's not the case all day long, but until you dish up some reliable evidence to cement it, I chose not to belive a single bit.

You pose an extraordinary claim, and taking that at face value is just nuts.

 

[Killingbeans]

It was indeed an AUDIBLE difference! Why? Gold is a much better electrical conductor than chromium (and aluminum) even though it is poorer than copper and especially silver.

A notable difference in specific resistance, yes. But did you calculate the resistance of the actual platings?

Haven't done it myself, to be honest. But I really doubt it's anywhere near frequency response altering territory.

Some platings are nice for avoiding oxidation, but that's not exactly a revelation.

There's no excuse for "high-end" cables, other than misguided attempts at using them as remedies for placebo fueled upgraditis.

 

[Earthbound]

That's really cool. But having a PhD in physics and working with awesome things doesn't make you immune to the placebo effect.

Judging from what you originally wrote, you simply have a tendency to hear what you'd like to hear.

You can claim that's not the case all day long, but until you dish up some reliable evidence to cement it, I chose not to belive a single bit.

You pose an extraordinary claim, and taking that at face value is just nuts.

So your baseless claim that he can’t hear a difference is more correct than his baseless claim that he can. The countless studies on how we hear and process sound differently show that many of these hearing differences between people can be on the genetic level, due to structural differences within each ear, neuron related etc…A lot of which can’t be measured. You two could just go round and round forever. Science shows we don’t fully understand why people hear the same music differently. There are no absolutes, even with ASR’s sound measurements. Accurate doesn’t sound “better” to everyone. The constant bashing of people who don’t believe that sound or hearing sound can be summed up by Amir’s machine measurements is infantile. Understanding sound and how we perceive it may be an exact science in the future, but we a far from it today. To pretend otherwise is pure arrogance.

 

[ahofer]

So your baseless claim that he can’t hear a difference is more correct than his baseless claim that he can.

One claim at least has a lot of controlled testing on its side so I wouldn’t call it baseless. Furthermore, our measurement instruments are vastly more sensitive than human hearing, and we understand and can measure the principle ingredients and thresholds of human hearing (as backed up by decades of science on human hearing). If we don’t see a difference in measurements, humans are unlikely to perceive one. When you consider this basic background, your own assertions (which confuse preference with audibility) ring a bit hollow.

 

[SIY]

So your baseless claim that he can’t hear a difference is more correct than his baseless claim that he can. The countless studies on how we hear and process sound differently show that many of these hearing differences between people can be on the genetic level, due to structural differences within each ear, neuron related etc…A lot of which can’t be measured. You two could just go round and round forever. Science shows we don’t fully understand why people hear the same music differently. There are no absolutes, even with ASR’s sound measurements. Accurate doesn’t sound “better” to everyone. The constant bashing of people who don’t believe that sound or hearing sound can be summed up by Amir’s machine measurements is infantile. Understanding sound and how we perceive it may be an exact science in the future, but we a far from it today. To pretend otherwise is pure arrogance.

My baseless claim that a guy who says he can jump 10 meters in the air is full of shit is more correct than his baseless claim.

This is basic E&M, which makes me somewhat suspicious that the "PhD" may have come from the back of a cereal box.

 

[Earthbound]

One claim at least has a lot of controlled testing on its side so I wouldn’t call it baseless.

There are as many controlled tests that prove we all hear and process sound differently. Sorry. Not everything is revealed with the current machines and testing parameters. In the coming years, we will understand these things better. Not saying measurements are super useful in some cases, they are, but it’s not an exact science as some claim.

 

[Newman]

Accurate doesn’t sound “better” to everyone.

Well, it kinda does. Because it sounds like reality. Your claim is that lots of people wish singing sounded better than singing, pianos sounded better than pianos, etc.

The constant bashing of people who don’t believe that sound or hearing sound can be summed up by Amir’s machine measurements is infantile.

No, it’s rational. Please grow up enough to stop calling others childish.

 

[Earthbound]

And I do appreciate the science with some aspects of audio components because there certainly is a considerable amount of false claims. But, every claim needs to be viewed with some skepticism and open mindedness.

 

[Earthbound]

Well, it kinda does. Because it sounds like reality. Your claim is that lots of people wish singing sounded better than singing, pianos sounded better than pianos, etc.

No, it’s rational. Please grow up enough to stop calling others childish.

It is childish since your beliefs are not absolutes. Perhaps the way a person processes a particular piano sound, which all sound different based on design, brings more pleasure to their brain. It has been shown that past exposure to sounds influences what people find enjoyable later on. Perhaps they grew up hearing a Yamaha B1 and not a Steinway. Perhaps accurate to them is comparing it to the Yamaha. All relative.

 

[ahofer]

There are as many controlled tests that prove we all hear and process sound differently.

We are discussing whether people can perceive a difference strictly from audible stimuli. Everyone here is fully aware of the other influences on how you “hear and process”. This is a discussion of whether a difference in signal exists and can be perceived by hearing, please don’t create confusion by mixing up those two very different concepts.

 

[wadude]

Ah, this is the one I was trying to find earlier;

Hi-Fi is All a Scam - Roger Skoff Finally Admits All

Hi-Fi is All a Scam - Roger Skoff Finally Admits All

positive-feedback.com

JSmith

Much appreciated! The name suits the personality. Still, in terms of sales and marketing he didn't personally cop to one darn thing. In fact, he left every opportunity open for exploitation.

 

[Earthbound]

We are discussing whether people can perceive a difference strictly from audible stimuli. Everyone here is fully aware of the other influences on how you “hear and process”. This is a discussion of whether a difference in signal exists and can be perceived by hearing, please don’t create confusion by mixing up those two very different concepts.

I’m not confused. Just because our current ways of measuring such things cannot reveal differences, doesn’t mean those differences don’t exist.

 

[SIY]

I’m not confused. Just because our current ways of measuring such things cannot reveal differences, doesn’t mean those differences don’t exist.

Please name one, just one, demonstrated audible difference that isn't trivially measurable.

Just one.

 

[Mart68]

Just because our current ways of measuring such things cannot reveal differences

You state that as a fact with absolutely no basis. It may be true but all available evidence to date suggests that it isn't and is highly unlikely to be so.

There's a difference between a belief and adopting a position based on the currently available facts and evidence.

 

[Newman]

It is childish since your beliefs are not absolutes. Perhaps the way a person processes a particular piano sound, which all sound different based on design, brings more pleasure to their brain. It has been shown that past exposure to sounds influences what people find enjoyable later on. Perhaps they grew up hearing a Yamaha B1 and not a Steinway. Perhaps accurate to them is comparing it to the Yamaha. All relative.

It doesn’t matter “what way a person processes a particular piano sound”. If reproduction gear reproduces it accurately, that person will process it in the same way as he or she processes the live piano sound.

 

[Ricardus]

It is childish since your beliefs are not absolutes. Perhaps the way a person processes a particular piano sound, which all sound different based on design, brings more pleasure to their brain. It has been shown that past exposure to sounds influences what people find enjoyable later on. Perhaps they grew up hearing a Yamaha B1 and not a Steinway. Perhaps accurate to them is comparing it to the Yamaha. All relative.

And with all of the different mics, and miking techniques out there, you think that a Yamaha grand is going to sound just like they heard it in their house growing up?

As I have pointed out to the mods across all forums that I am on. Lots of new members are promoting junk science. So my guess is they're bogus and they're here to troll. Are you one of them?

 

[Killingbeans]

So your baseless claim that he can’t hear a difference is more correct than his baseless claim that he can.

My claim is based on two things: The fact that the resistive difference between two 0.5 micron thick metal platings is vanishingly small, even with one "good" and one "bad" metal, and the fact that every single one of these audible differences has disappeared completely when poper test with controls has been carried out.

It's not about personal preference. It's about the probability of audibility.

Just because my taste buds are different than yours, doesn't mean either of us can taste a grain of salt dissolved in an olympic swimming pool full of tap water.