JPLAY Responds: An Open Letter

[jkeny]

It's always funny when only one side of biasing is considered i.e that the expectation is to hear something even though there is nothing actually there. The opposite is not considered. So please, Tim ,explain why the negative expectation wouldn't apply here?

And while you are at it explain your confusion about expectation bias - you assigned this to the example I gave even though you claimed that he heard no difference between his system with & without the USB converter. So how can this be expectation bias when no difference is heard?

A lot of effort being expended here into trying to put up all sorts of reasons to reject this guys report. I'm sure DBTs will be trotted out pretty soon too!

 

[Vincent Kars]

As to jriver, if you use it to stream, and jremote as your client, do you then have access to all of its tags?

Yes, JRiver allows you to configure what it should broadcast for tags.
This works using Gizmo as well.
The moment you use a “standard” UPnP client, it doesn’t

 

[amirm]

All choices we make are based on recommendations, research, evaluation of options, evaluation of opinions. To then say that all our choices are flawed because we take advice from someone is ridiculous.

I am not questioning anyone's choices. I am questioning you telling us someone is providing feedback without expectation bias where in reality you planted the very seed. Fine to say so and so thinks this sounds great. Just don't say there was no expectation. You set the expectation. It couldn't be more clear case of doing that when it is coming from such a strong advocate, i.e. you.

I'm sure you recommend products in Madrona - so all your customers are equally subjected to expectation bias. The simple fact that you carry a small portfolio of products is in itself suggesting to the customer that these are the ones you consider best & therefore you are already setting up expectation bias.

I didn't say 90% of Madrona customers liked something and that was an unbiased opinion and lets draw some conclusions from that which is 100% disputed by actual measurements as is performed on JPlay.

I'm of the opinion that people are adults & have an ability to evaluate products themselves!

But you didn't let them do that. You pushed them into a corner. You didn't say, "here is this software, it may do nothing, it may make the sound worse, it may make it better." If you had done that with that entire 90% of the population you talked about, you would have had something to hang your hat on. But as it is, you invalidated any weight that data had by saying you told people it is something good.

 

[jkeny]

I am not questioning anyone's choices. I am questioning you telling us someone is providing feedback without expectation bias where in reality you planted the very seed. Fine to say so and so thinks this sounds great. Just don't say there was no expectation. You set the expectation. It couldn't be more clear case of doing that when it is coming from such a strong advocate, i.e. you.

I didn't say 90% of Madrona customers liked something and that was an unbiased opinion and lets draw some conclusions from that which is 100% disputed by actual measurements as is performed on JPlay.

But you didn't let them do that. You pushed them into a corner. You didn't say, "here is this software, it may do nothing, it may make the sound worse, it may make it better." If you had done that with that entire 90% of the population you talked about, you would have had something to hang your hat on. But as it is, you invalidated any weight that data had by saying you told people it is something good.

As I said, "It's always funny when only one side of biasing is considered i.e that the expectation is to hear something even though there is nothing actually there. The opposite is not considered. So please, explain why the negative expectation wouldn't equally apply here as I outlined it - I've spent X already, why do I need to spend more, it better be worth it"?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

And tell me why this doesn't apply "One could take the contrary view that they have just spent an amount of money on an audio product & are reluctant to accept that they need to spend more to achieve even better sound. The bias here would be to reject Jplay as not worth the extra, would it not?"

It absolutely could apply. I'm certain a subject could be biased to not hear a difference, though typically, when something changes, we expect change, when we're asked to listen for a difference, we expect to hear a difference. The opposite reaction would be unusual and would require the subject to have a specific reason not to hear anything. This makes this bias very easy to avoid with a little forethought and decent methodology; Pick your test subjects well; screen them to make sure they can and do hear measurable, audible differences, don't tell them what they're listening for. Do a straight AB/X -- This is A. This is B. This is X. Is X A or B? They will expect to hear a difference. You determine whether or not they actually do by the frequency with which they can accurately ID the thing being tested. In addition, there are a number of controls that can be put in place to keep the test clean, the most common of which is double blind, in which the person conducting the test doesn't even know which sample is being played, so he or she can't deliberately or inadvertently influence the results. And you still haven't proven anything. That requires statistically sufficient samples, verification through other studies with the same results, etc. Then you've only proven it until someone comes along with another buttoned-up study that proves something different.

As I've said before, casual blind listening is not proof and it's not perfect, it's just a lot better than "This is the new XYZ. See the beautiful case, the high price tag and the respected audiophile brand? Six audiophile reviews and all my customers agree that it reveals more detail, and presents a much deeper sound stage than brand X here. Hear that? You're an intelligent, sophisticated audiophile. Of course you do"

I exaggerate for effect, but not by much.

Tim

 

[jkeny]

Ah, this crap has gone on long enough - as I said people who try Jplay initially baulk at the price (much the same as the price was used here as a criticism) so they are predisposed towards thinking that it "better be good". When using a free trial at home on their system they make their own decisions.

I'm not going to get into the stupidity of expectation bias - to me their expectations are more likely to be curtailed by the price (& the fact that they have already spent money) so the criteria for them parting with more money is now higher than it would normally be - therefore the product has to provide incontrovertible evidence to their ears that it is worth it. And >90% buy it so QED.

If you can't understand that then you are denying human psychology - deciding instead to substitute a mantra that you have learned from DBT group-think.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Ah, this crap has gone on long enough - as I said people who try Jplay initially baulk at the price (much the same as the price was used here as a criticism) so they are predisposed towards thinking that it "better be good". When using a free trial at home on their system they make their own decisions.

I'm not going to get into the stupidity of expectation bias - to me their expectations are more likely to be curtailed by the price (& the fact that they have already spent money) so the criteria for them parting with more money is now higher than it would normally be - therefore the product has to provide incontrovertible evidence to their ears that it is worth it. And >90% buy it so QED.

If you can't understand that then you are denying human psychology - deciding instead to substitute a mantra that you have learned from DBT group-think.

There are people who have advanced degrees in this subject, who do this kind of research for a living, who have tested many things, in hundreds of tests, screened thousands of subjects. They disagree with you. They have observed that when you ask a human to differentiate between A and B, the natural expectation is that there is a difference and that more often than not, the subjects will see/hear/taste/perceive one even when one doesn't exist, and they have designed tests to circumvent that flaw. This is the human psychology, at least according to the human psychologists. But let's move on. This tested, verified, established, broadly-accepted, professional group-think crap has gone on long enough.

Your examples? Who knows? That "test" has been so thoroughly buggered it reveals nothing. You're customers could be biased in favor of jplay because you recommended it. They could be biased against jplay because it costs money. All you have is anecdotal information, gathered with so many opportunities to be tainted that it doesn't even point to anything, much less prove it. All you've got is a high percentage of customers who buy an add-on to your product that you recommend. It may indicate that you're a pretty good salesman, but it doesn't do any more than that.

Tim

 

[FrantzM]

Ah, this crap has gone on long enough - as I said people who try Jplay initially baulk at the price (much the same as the price was used here as a criticism) so they are predisposed towards thinking that it "better be good". When using a free trial at home on their system they make their own decisions.

I'm not going to get into the stupidity of expectation bias - to me their expectations are more likely to be curtailed by the price (& the fact that they have already spent money) so the criteria for them parting with more money is now higher than it would normally be - therefore the product has to provide incontrovertible evidence to their ears that it is worth it. And >90% buy it so QED.

If you can't understand that then you are denying human psychology - deciding instead to substitute a mantra that you have learned from DBT group-think.

Emphasis is mine... Curious choice of terms. Do you think you are immune to it? Becaus if you were , that would make you a unique Home Sapiens.

 

[jkeny]

There are people who have advanced degrees in this subject, who do this kind of research for a living, who have tested many things, in hundreds of tests, screened thousands of subjects. They disagree with you. They have observed that when you ask a human to differentiate between A and B, the natural expectation is that there is a difference and that more often than not, the subjects will see/hear/taste/perceive one even when one doesn't exist, and they have designed tests to circumvent that flaw. This is the human psychology, at least according to the human psychologists. But let's move on. This tested, verified, established, broadly-accepted, professional group-think crap has gone on long enough.

Yes but if you had one of these experts here I can bet (s)he would say that you are looking at a very limited subset of how humans make decisions & the influences on them in their decision making. As usual, blindness to this makes people pick up a phrase such as "expectation bias" & incorrectly attribute it to anything & everything. Try not to lose common sense!

Your examples? Who knows? That "test" has been so thoroughly buggered it reveals nothing. You're customers could be biased in favor of jplay because you recommended it. They could be biased against jplay because it costs money. All you have is anecdotal information, gathered with so many opportunities to be tainted that it doesn't even point to anything, much less prove it. All you've got is a high percentage of customers who buy an add-on to your product that you recommend. It may indicate that you're a pretty good salesman, but it doesn't do any more than that.

Tim

Ah, again your rush to firstly claim it is all expectation bias is now replaced by "it's thoroughly buggered" - anything to deny the results of common people making common sense choices at home without any pressure listening for as long as they want on their own playback system to the music they are familiar with. Really, some common sense is needed, please!

 

[jkeny]

Emphasis is mine... Curious choice of terms. Do you think you are immune to it? Becaus if you were , that would make you a unique Home Sapiens.

Frantz, I have common sense which is severely lacking on this thread!! As I said get real & stop living in some "experts" view of the world which by & large is incorrectly interpreted anyway. Stop the pseudo-science approach!!

 

[Julf]

Frantz, I have common sense which is severely lacking on this thread!!

You might not be the best possible judge of that...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I suppose if all the expertise disagreed with what I want to believe, I'd think it was pseudo-science too. Maybe. Nah, I'd actually love to believe that a piece of software that's relatively cheap, not DSP, has no learning curve, and requires no effort on my part, could do all that. I really wanted to believe it when the price of Amarra dropped into the affordable zone. But my ears, common sense, the (real) science, and all the available data say it's not that easy, and all we have on the other side is that some audiophiles hear it.

Been down that road. It's not Common Sense Avenue.

Tim

 

[jkeny]

I suppose if all the expertise disagreed with what I want to believe, I'd think it was pseudo-science too. Maybe. Nah, I'd actually love to believe that a piece of software that's relatively cheap, not DSP, has no learning curve, and requires no effort on my part, could do all that. I really wanted to believe it when the price of Amarra dropped into the affordable zone. But my ears, common sense, the (real) science, and all the available data say it's not that easy, and all we have on the other side is that some audiophiles hear it.

Been down that road. It's not Common Sense Avenue.

Tim

It's pseudo-science as used by you guys who have latched onto "expectation bias" as the one bias of importance ignoring all other psychological factors. It's pseudo-science as used by you guys because you have half a notion & no more than that - Tim, your confusion over expectation bias was clearly shown when you claimed that my customer's quote was the best example of expectation bias yet you went on to say that he did not hear any difference!!

 

[Julf]

It's pseudo-science as used by you guys who have latched onto "expectation bias" as the one bias of importance ignoring all other psychological factors.

No, we are not "ignoring all other psychological factors". We are focusing on the psychological factors relevant to the discussion at hand, instead throwing up smoke screens - and pointing out that "psychological factors" are the most likely explanation to people feeling JPLAY sounds better than other software.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

It's pseudo-science as used by you guys who have latched onto "expectation bias" as the one bias of importance ignoring all other psychological factors. It's pseudo-science as used by you guys because you have half a notion & no more than that - Tim, your confusion over expectation bias was clearly shown when you claimed that my customer's quote was the best example of expectation bias yet you went on to say that he did not hear any difference!!

That's precisely why it was such a great example, John. He didn't hear anything he could put his finger on yet he still managed to experience a transformation in listening pleasure that he attributed to the converter (or was it the software? Really, I'm losing track of the fantasies...). Perhaps more wishful thinking than expectation bias. It's a fine line. You need to do some reading, John. You're condemning everyone (who disagrees with you) of simplicity, pseudo-science and generally misusing the concept of expectation bias at the same that your conversation with Amir has made it clear that you don't understand what it is on the most fundamental level.

Tim

 

[jkeny]

No, we are not "ignoring all other psychological factors". We are focusing on the psychological factors relevant to the discussion at hand, instead throwing up smoke screens - and pointing out that "psychological factors" are the most likely explanation to people feeling JPLAY sounds better than other software.

Says the expert in psychology. I have given you just as valid a psychology to the choice made by my customers - yet you choose to ignore it. Give me the psychological detail behind this rejection then!!

 

[jkeny]

That's precisely why it was such a great example, John. He didn't hear anything he could put his finger on yet he still managed to experience a transformation in listening pleasure that he attributed to the converter (or was it the software? Really, I'm losing track of the fantasies...). Perhaps more wishful thinking than expectation bias. It's a fine line.

Ah right, it's wishful thinking now - see what I mean you haven't a notion what is important, just guess work to suit your agenda.

You need to do some reading, John. You're condemning everyone (who disagrees with you) of simplicity, pseudo-science and generally misusing the concept of expectation bias at the same that your conversation with Amir has made it clear that you don't understand what it is on the most fundamental level.

Tim

 

[amirm]

As I said, "It's always funny when only one side of biasing is considered i.e that the expectation is to hear something even though there is nothing actually there. The opposite is not considered. So please, explain why the negative expectation wouldn't equally apply here as I outlined it - I've spent X already, why do I need to spend more, it better be worth it"?

The opposite is not on the table because I didn't report that I asked 100 to evaluate the software, told them it does nothing, and 90% reported that. But let's say I had. That would show that effect of such a suggestion dwarfs the audible differences. Or else you and I would not walk away with such drastically different outcomes just because the suggestion was different. So you can't just run off with "trust your ear" argument.

Also please keep in mind that we need to first establish there is a difference. The data so far says there is not: null tests were performed and found no difference to the depth they measured and no one else has provided any that says otherwise. If there is no measured difference, then the vote of the people who are not hearing the difference is more likely to be correct than the other way around.

 

[amirm]

It's pseudo-science as used by you guys who have latched onto "expectation bias" as the one bias of importance ignoring all other psychological factors. It's pseudo-science as used by you guys because you have half a notion & no more than that - Tim, your confusion over expectation bias was clearly shown when you claimed that my customer's quote was the best example of expectation bias yet you went on to say that he did not hear any difference!!

Let's do this: please outline what science you have drawn upon to reach your conclusions. Right now, all I have heard is "trust your ear." Was there something else you said that I missed or is that the bit you say is scientific?

 

[jkeny]

The opposite is not on the table because I didn't report that I asked 100 to evaluate the software, told them it does nothing, and 90% reported that. But let's say I had. That would show that effect of such a suggestion dwarfs the audible differences. Or else you and I would not walk away with such drastically different outcomes just because the suggestion was different. So you can't just run off with "trust your ear" argument.

Exactly, I gave equally valid psychological reasons for them not choosing Jplay, stronger reasons I would suggest than expectation bias (money), yet they purchased it. Obviously the value that they heard was worth the money. QED