Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Heat11]

@Heat11 PM him

i did try to but, rather embarrassingly, a spam filter keeps blocking me. not sure what i am doing wrong?

 

[Newman]

Click on the PM ‘envelope’ icon, see red arrow below, select “Start a new conversation”, type amirm in the Recipient box, and off you go?

 

[Heat11]

Click on the PM ‘envelope’ icon, see red arrow below, select “Start a new conversation”, type amirm in the Recipient box, and off you go?

View attachment 233317

yep i tried that, i think my account is "too new." like i dont have enough activity and I am being flagged.

 

[jayking8]

Unfortunately for you nothing on the power side can have any influence on sound quality. It isn't possible, and you are therefore mistaken.

Unless you have sat in a room and done a blind test where somebody else controls the experiment, this is a totally ludicrous claim to make. Yes, I have heard the difference that power products can make in blind tests. I was also able to pick out when the conditioner was being used and when it was not. So there was obviously an audible difference.

Whether or not you consider the difference to be "better" is subjective. In some cases I thought it was much better.

 

[Robin L]

Unless you have sat in a room and done a blind test where somebody else controls the experiment, this is a totally ludicrous claim to make. Yes, I have heard the difference that power products can make in blind tests. I was also able to pick out when the conditioner was being used and when it was not. So there was obviously an audible difference.

Whether or not you consider the difference to be "better" is subjective. In some cases I thought it was much better.

Measurements do not support what you are saying.

I think you might have wandered into the wrong forum. It's best you have some background on what to expect:

A bit about your host....

This is a bit about your host, Amir Majidimehr. I am writing this as to give more context to people reading my technical reviews and measurements. I have realized that without this context, many assume I am yet another blogger spitting out graphs. That is very true but let’s see if we can...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[jayking8]

How do you know it wasn't subconscious biases influencing your perception of what you heard? What would be the theory behind such "massive" improvements?

Blind listening tests. I do not have a "theory" behind the improvements. But I was able to hear them and distinguish when the conditioners were being used.

Yes, we all want gear that measures well. But we want it to sound good too! So why not do unbiased blind testing to see if a product makes your ears happy? It costs you nothing but a bit of time.

Then again this forum is full of cranky people that want cheap gear with good measurements regardless of how it sounds. I am very lucky to have access to tons of gear to test and some of the stuff on hear that measures well sounds like crap in real life.

 

[jayking8]

Measurements do not support what you are saying.

I think you might have wandered into the wrong forum. It's best you have some background on what to expect:

A bit about your host....

This is a bit about your host, Amir Majidimehr. I am writing this as to give more context to people reading my technical reviews and measurements. I have realized that without this context, many assume I am yet another blogger spitting out graphs. That is very true but let’s see if we can...

www.audiosciencereview.com

LMAO. I asked if anybody here has done a blind listening test and not one of you has confirmed that you have tried it. Just dodging the question while clutching your calculators.

 

[BDWoody]

Then again this forum is full of cranky people that want cheap gear with good measurements regardless of how it sounds.

I'm just going to move this here to this thread. We really need to get that 'but my golden ears' thread started...

 

[BDWoody]

LMAO. I asked if anybody here has done a blind listening test and not one of you has confirmed that you have tried it. Just dodging the question while clutching your calculators.

It's about understanding what's worth the time, and what isn't. Let's keep this to the thread we moved to please. It's all been covered... No need to pollute the review threads.

 

[ahofer]

So why not do unbiased blind testing to see if a product makes your ears happy?

Don't think you'll get much disagreement on that here, the forum is dominated by people who believe properly controlled blind testing is critical. The problem in this case is whether people believe you (because what you claim is very unlikely). But why does it matter?

 

[jayking8]

Way to go ASR. Delete the posts of someone who has more experience with this product than all of the other posters combined. There is clearly a real thirst for knowledge on this forum.

 

[BDWoody]

Way to go ASR. Delete the posts of someone who has more experience with this product than all of the other posters combined. There is clearly a real thirst for knowledge on this forum.

Nothing was deleted. Just moved where it is more appropriately discussed.

 

[Doodski]

Blind listening tests. I do not have a "theory" behind the improvements. But I was able to hear them and distinguish when the conditioners were being used.

Yes, we all want gear that measures well. But we want it to sound good too! So why not do unbiased blind testing to see if a product makes your ears happy? It costs you nothing but a bit of time.

Then again this forum is full of cranky people that want cheap gear with good measurements regardless of how it sounds. I am very lucky to have access to tons of gear to test and some of the stuff on hear that measures well sounds like crap in real life.

Do you have ears that are better than the average mortal's sensitivity? I think you are full of beans and are here to raise sheit.

 

[DonR]

Blind listening tests. I do not have a "theory" behind the improvements. But I was able to hear them and distinguish when the conditioners were being used.

Yes, we all want gear that measures well. But we want it to sound good too! So why not do unbiased blind testing to see if a product makes your ears happy? It costs you nothing but a bit of time.

Then again this forum is full of cranky people that want cheap gear with good measurements regardless of how it sounds. I am very lucky to have access to tons of gear to test and some of the stuff on hear that measures well sounds like crap in real life.

Double-blind listening tests are the first step in eliminating biases. Well done to you for doing that as they are very time-consuming to pull off correctly. It is possible that you have a lot of noise on your power line and the equipment that benefits from the Niagara's rather simplistic filtering may have either faulty or poorly designed power supplies that make them susceptible to that noise. That would be my theory. It would have to be a very particular set of circumstances that enables such a situation however as the Niagara does no filtering within the audio band so it would have to be RF interference that then gets demodulated into the audio band.

There is quite a bit of cheap gear that sounds truly horrible but I have yet to see or hear any gear that measures well that doesn't sound good to my ears. Then again, my hearing falls off around 13KHz and I can't hear distortion for the most part below 1% or so (depending on other factors) so I guess I am lucky not to be blessed with overly sensitive hearing.

 

[Raindog123]

Do you have ears that are better than the average mortal's sensitivity?

 

[tmtomh]

Unless you have sat in a room and done a blind test where somebody else controls the experiment, this is a totally ludicrous claim to make. Yes, I have heard the difference that power products can make in blind tests. I was also able to pick out when the conditioner was being used and when it was not. So there was obviously an audible difference.

Whether or not you consider the difference to be "better" is subjective. In some cases I thought it was much better.

I understand and can appreciate your point. In my view it's a serious difficulty that's probably never going to be solvable within the limits of internet-based discussion that does not involve scientific studies.

What I mean is this:

- You state you have done multiple blind tests, and if I read your comment correctly, you are saying that in those blind tests you have heard, to a degree of statistical significance, the difference a power conditioner makes and you have also heard differences that other power products make.

- Your claim is what many here would describe as an extraordinary claim. They would describe it as such not because they think it's really, really hard to hear such sonic differences, but rather because there is no plausible or sensible explanation for how a power conditioner could even make any difference in the audible sound, given how a power conditioner works, what it does, and what it does no do. (Unless, as someone suggested above, there's an unusual level of audible interference of a particular kind in the system in the first place.) So the root cause of people's skepticism isn't that they doubt you for any personal reason, but rather that your claim simply doesn't seem to add up.

- Given that, there are only two possible explanations: (1) your blind tests were not actually properly blind tests and you are glossing over key details that would allow listener bias to creep in, or (2) our knowledge of electronics, physics, human hearing, and possibly math must be fundamentally wrong or incomplete in a way that does not manifest itself in other areas (like, say computer data transmission or video performance) but somehow only manifests itself in the narrow realm of hi-fi sound product listening.

- Option (1) is pretty much impossible for anyone to articulate without you feeling like they're calling you a liar, a fool, or both - so naturally you take offense, and I understand how you might feel that people are simply hypocrites because they say they are for the scientific method but when you present them with a scientific result they don't like, they refuse to accept it.

- Conversely, option (2) is pretty much impossible for anyone to accept simply based on your assurance that you've done blind tests and you've reliably detected these differences. If that were the standard - "you don't know me, you don't even necessarily know my real name, and this is my first post here but take my word for it" - then there would be no reliable basis for scientific knowledge.

So I see it as an impasse. And the only way to resolve it would be for a researcher to conduct the kinds of blind tests you have gone through and document the procedure and results in a peer-reviewed study. (Really two peer-reviewed studies, since repeatability of results is also key.)

Unless or until that happens, this same pattern is going to be repeated, and the same arguments and slogans will be employed: "your claim of blind tests is not evidence, it's just what you're claiming"; "you say you want blind testing but if you don't like the results you reject them"; "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - there's no way these devices can make a difference so the onus is on you to suggest a hypothesis of how they could"; "science is about observation and open-mindedness to what we don't know - how arrogant to think that it's impossible for us to hear things we haven't figured out how to measure yet"; and on and on and on.

I don't have a solution; I just think it's worth trying to understand this as a communicative problem, so we don't go around and around in circles forever.

 

[Mart68]

Blind listening tests. I do not have a "theory" behind the improvements. But I was able to hear them and distinguish when the conditioners were being used.

Yes, we all want gear that measures well. But we want it to sound good too! So why not do unbiased blind testing to see if a product makes your ears happy? It costs you nothing but a bit of time.

Then again this forum is full of cranky people that want cheap gear with good measurements regardless of how it sounds. I am very lucky to have access to tons of gear to test and some of the stuff on hear that measures well sounds like crap in real life.

Equipment with good measurements will sound like whatever music you listen to on it. It will not have a sound of its own.

Full documentation of your blind testing is required before anyone is even going to entertain the idea that you can 'hear' a power conditioner.

Your last para is nonsense which reduces your credibility.

 

[Peluvius]

I don't have a solution; I just think it's worth trying to understand this as a communicative problem, so we don't go around and around in circles forever.

I don't really have a solution either however to approach this particular conundrum from a perspective of logic;

If a properly conducted blind test was able to reliably demonstrate that power conditioning was able to deliver audible benefits wouldn't this be a marketing bonanza for legitimate suppliers? Just like we do for speakers, wouldn't we see legitimate and scientifically valid data supporting the excellent and audible benefits of one particular power conditioner over another?

And no, I don't know how the concept could actually work however I have been wrong before and I am sure will be again. I would happy to be wrong if it meant a relevant improvement to my sound systems....

 

[TrevC]

Unless you have sat in a room and done a blind test where somebody else controls the experiment, this is a totally ludicrous claim to make. Yes, I have heard the difference that power products can make in blind tests. I was also able to pick out when the conditioner was being used and when it was not. So there was obviously an audible difference.

Whether or not you consider the difference to be "better" is subjective. In some cases I thought it was much better.

Ah, but I don't need to listen to anything in order to know there can't be any sound differences between mains products. This test was essentially a waste of time and Amir knows that. It was to prove it using measurements to those with 'golden' ears and zero knowledge of electronics.

 

[TrevC]

Do you have ears that are better than the average mortal's sensitivity? I think you are full of beans and are here to raise sheit.

His hearing is so acute he can hear differences that don't exist.