Amir, when I stated on your forum that I heard a difference by using the Shakti's, I meant it! Now, I couldn't give a rats ass whether that happens to fit into somebody's idea that this could not possibly be true unless there was some kind of scientific paper behind my experience.
We do give rat's ass about the science on ASR Forum. Indeed, the purpose of ASR forum is to a) have fun and b) discussion audio science. It says so on its mission statement. Pure statements of I hear this and that belong to plethora of other forums including this one.
Your ear brain comment is something that makes little sense to me....you might as well have said that we cannot hear anything if we are dead...or that we have a hearing issue if we are deaf. Hello!! kind of obvious...no??
No, I made a distinct point that is not obvious to audiophiles all around or they would not keep saying they "hear" this and that difference when they did not disentangle a highly willing mind to manufacture differences as my simple test I presented earlier clearly shows. Run that test and if you don't hear a difference then we can talk. Otherwise, that should be a revelation to many here and elsehwere.
I have been a pro musician and a'phile for over 30 years, does this make me unable to hear something in music when I experience it...you tell me?
Of course. I tell you that. And I tell myself and everybody else. And so does the entire body of audio science (both medical and for pleasure). I lived that way for 20+ year until the harsh reality was drilled into me. I took tests where the outcome was known and I flunked them so badly that putting the tail between my legs would have not remotely sufficed.
You could be in this hobby for a thousand years and still not know what we are talking about. You have to at some pointer entertain the idea of such tests, take them and then make the realization that I and thousands of other researchers have. And not just in this science but elsewhere. This is so conclusive that is not even subject to debate outside of these forums.
Just FYI, my young daughters who have no "training" in any of the areas that you profess...BUT who I will wager have far better hearing than you...or I...easily heard the difference with the Shakti's in my room and without. Sure science is there to build tests, but it is also there to VERIFY something that is reliably experienced by humans. IMHO, if the science doesn't exist yet to validate the experience, then that is simply because the science has not yet caught up with the reality. To state that something that is being experienced by somebody in a reliable fashion ( and BTW, I am clearly not the only one to have the same experience) is bogus, because the white paper doesn't exist, or the current science doesn't explain it--is highly unscientific and closed-minded/arrogant, IMO!
No, the science does exist to assess their value.
First let me dispense with the argument that i must not have heard them. I have. Here is a picture at
friend's house that has them:
I attributed nothing to them being there.
Here is how to validate things:
1. Apply science. In this case acoustics which we can easily model. Such an analysis will show that the effects of such a device in the room with respect to soundwaves that hit it, is minute. It acts as a diffuser of sorts but due to very short and small dimensions, its effect is infinitesimal. So the notion we have no means to evaluate the device is just wrong. We absolutely know how to evaluate objects in a room and their effects on the sound waves.
2. Apply measurements. We can make measurements of difference and apply psychoacoustics analysis -- i.e. how we hear -- and determine the difference being audible or not. I bet that such a difference will get lost in the noise.
3. Use controlled listening tests. That means do an AB test and see if the person when using only their ear can detect they are even in the room let alone have a positive difference. Such tests will surely results in a negative outcome. It is like expecting one to know the dimensions of a room have changed after painting it, by just walking the room using one's feet.
Now you could challenge me to say these tests have not been done. But you can do them. Use your daughters as testers and do an AB test. You can take the test or they can. See if you can tell the difference and then we will all listen, pun intended.
In summary, there are no unknowns here. We know how acoustics of rooms work and can measure and simulate them. If no one wants to put any data forward to show their effectiveness, that is cool but that is the end of discussion. You can't keep stomping your feet saying folks who believe in proper analysis of such devices to accept your statement at face value. How would we ever find ineffective devices that way???
BTW, I hope after all of these discussions we walk away as friends.
It is only audio. The level of animosity is just through roof on these topics. Passion is fine but let's just discuss the topic or abandon it if it becomes uncomfortable.
