Is the Measurement Forum the place for objectivists to be attacked by subjectivists?

[Phelonious Ponk]

What one really learns to appreciate as one grows older is the great importance of being tribal for many people - being on one side, or other of the fence. The fact that "truth" lies on both sides of that divide generally gets trampled on in the rush to mount ever better defences ...

I'm more than old enough to appreciate the importance of tribalism, and I'm sure there are many truths on both sides. But when fundamental, conflicting truths are apparent, something is probably false. Science seeks to weed out the false and find the truth. She seeks evidence and verification and is, no doubt, amused at the things old men like myself think we hear. I suspect she's even more amused that so many believe so strongly, with so few questions beyond what they think they hear.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I can understand the confusion as it does appear to many that only high end has the ability to produce high fidelity.

It does appear that way to many, yes.

Tim

 

[Robh3606]

I can understand the confusion as it does appear to many that only high end has the ability to produce high fidelity.

Wonder how they manage to do that without a baseline??

Rob

 

[Gregadd]

Objective is simply

No objectivist is saying you did not hear something you said you heard. As an objectivist I simply say I don't believe you when you haven't controlled for multiple bias.

Those two sentences sound exactly alike. Both appear to imply disbelief.

John Curl could not pick his own product in a blind test. So I heard.

 

[Jinjuku]

Objective is simply

Those to sentences sound exactly alike.

John Curl could not pick his own product in a blind test. So I heard.

I think that a person listening to a Power Cable believes they heard a difference regardless of what we know about a 3 foot section of PC after miles of power lines.

As an objectivist I simply say I don't believe those claims when bias hasn't been controlled for.

 

[RayDunzl]

I think that a person listening to a Power Cable believes they heard a difference regardless of what we know about a 3 foot section of PC after miles of power lines.

As an objectivist I simply say I don't believe those claims when bias hasn't been controlled for.

The "miles of power lines" should (probably) be reduced to the distance to the local transformer near your house.

Mine is just beyond the house next door.

I had some power complaints, the utility measured, then monitored, then replaced that transformer.

 

[Jinjuku]

The "miles of power lines" should (probably) be reduced to the distance to the local transformer near your house.

Mine is just beyond the house next door.

I had some power complaints, the utility measured, then monitored, then replaced that transformer.

You would have to take that up with a person that goes with the mantra that the last 3 feet are the only ones that matter.

 

[fas42]

But when fundamental, conflicting truths are apparent, something is probably false. Science seeks to weed out the false and find the truth. She seeks evidence and verification and is, no doubt, amused at the things old men like myself think we hear.

Conflicting truths do need to be resolved, and measurements will have to come to the party here. If there is a preference in the hearing then it needs to be thoughtfully considered, rather than being dismissed as some form of delusion as is often done by numerous parties. As an example, vinyl often rounds the edges, but digital leaves them perfectly sharp - if the playback incorrectly exaggerates the sharpness, then people will prefer the vinyl - here there is definitely something "real" in the final sound which is causing the preference.

 

[amirm]

Conflicting truths do need to be resolved, and measurements will have to come to the party here. If there is a preference in the hearing then it needs to be thoughtfully considered, rather than being dismissed as some form of delusion as is often done by numerous parties. As an example, vinyl often rounds the edges, but digital leaves them perfectly sharp - if the playback incorrectly exaggerates the sharpness, then people will prefer the vinyl - here there is definitely something "real" in the final sound which is causing the preference.

What if I played both without you knowing which is which and your preference changed? How real would that make the first set of data?

 

[fas42]

What if I played both without you knowing which is which and your preference changed? How real would that make the first set of data?

I would differentiate "preference" from "real" - if there were differences between two playbacks, then both would be "real", but I might "prefer" one. Consider old recordings - the only versions we have, the "masters", are derived, say, from less than pristine 78's, that's the sole reference point from which we can work.

 

[FrantzM]

I would differentiate "preference" from "real" - if there were differences between two playbacks, then both would be "real", but I might "prefer" one. Consider old recordings - the only versions we have, the "masters", are derived, say, from less than pristine 78's, that's the sole reference point from which we can work.

Some things never change Welcome back fas42

 

[fas42]

Thanks, Frantz ...

 

[Gregadd]

You would have to take that up with a person that goes with the mantra that the last 3 feet are the only ones that matter.

You mean the countless manufacturers of scientific and medical equipment.

 

[stehno]

It would appear that in my thread about people coming to the measurement forum to attack objectivists, you are doing just that

So you're implying I should have read all 915 of your posts before expressing my concern or opinion in a given thread?

Tell me. Objectively speaking, would they be a good read?

 

[Whatmore]

So you're implying I should have read all 915 of your posts before expressing my concern or opinion in a given thread?

Tell me. Objectively speaking, would they be a good read?

Genuinely confused??
How did I imply that?

 

[stehno]

What one really learns to appreciate as one grows older is the great importance of being tribal for many people - being on one side, or other of the fence. The fact that "truth" lies on both sides of that divide generally gets trampled on in the rush to mount ever better defences ...

I certainly appreciate your use of the word "tribal". And I have every reason to believe it applies here as much as it does on the streets of South Central L.A.

Regardless of objectivist / subjectivist labels being tossed around without much apparent thought, I find truth has very little to do with "high-end" audio.

It seems I'm routinely astonished by what I observe.

 

[amirm]

Regardless of objectivist / subjectivist labels being tossed around without much apparent thought, I find truth has very little to do with "high-end" audio.

What are some examples of what is being tossed around?

 

[Jinjuku]

You mean the countless manufacturers of scientific and medical equipment.

I don't know. What do they say? I assume they have rectification and filtration on the inside of the medical and scientific equipment. 'Medical Equipment' and 'Scientific Equipment' is an very broad category.

 

[DonH50]

I have designed and worked on medical and scientific measurement equipment. The vast majority IME use standard power cords. I always assumed a noisy inlet power and anticipated high EMI/RFI environment, plus a lot of the equipment generates copious internal noise, so low-noise design practices were always used. The lab in which I work has many millions in equipment and they all come with standard cords, albeit often pretty heavy gauge since they tend to suck a lot of power (we have a lot of 20 A and 30 A outlets in the lab, like dozens of them). You can add filtering in a power cord, but the right place for it is inside the box, where it can be designed to optimize the performance of the rest of the system.

Every time I say this I get blasted but so be it: If your component is sensitive to AC power, or EMI/RFI, then as a designer you need to revisit your power, shielding, and isolation schemes. I've dealt with systems ranging from fV to kV and noise control is always a pain. Often a compromise for cost and/or SWaP (size, weight, and power) must be made. And (gasp!) there are cases where I have wrapped a power cord through a big ferrite core, added capacitors, or even shielded it, but those were cases where the power to the unit was provided by shielded cables from a filtered source and often in a screen room. For that matter, lighting in a screen room is usually DC as normal lighting causes problems (let alone fluorescents -- those quick-start small ballasts in most fluorescent fixtures operate up around 60 kHz -- not 60 Hz -- and cause all sorts of problems as they are major noise sources). I have often though audiophiles would benefit from a DC lighting system; maybe there's a new business for me!

My 0.000001 cent (microcent) - Don

 

[Jinjuku]

You mean the countless manufacturers of scientific and medical equipment.

I have designed and worked on medical and scientific measurement equipment. The vast majority IME use standard power cords. I always assumed a noisy inlet power and anticipated high EMI/RFI environment, plus a lot of the equipment generates copious internal noise, so low-noise design practices were always used. The lab in which I work has many millions in equipment and they all come with standard cords, albeit often pretty heavy gauge since they tend to suck a lot of power (we have a lot of 20 A and 30 A outlets in the lab, like dozens of them). You can add filtering in a power cord, but the right place for it is inside the box, where it can be designed to optimize the performance of the rest of the system.

Every time I say this I get blasted but so be it: If your component is sensitive to AC power, or EMI/RFI, then as a designer you need to revisit your power, shielding, and isolation schemes. I've dealt with systems ranging from fV to kV and noise control is always a pain. Often a compromise for cost and/or SWaP (size, weight, and power) must be made. And (gasp!) there are cases where I have wrapped a power cord through a big ferrite core, added capacitors, or even shielded it, but those were cases where the power to the unit was provided by shielded cables from a filtered source and often in a screen room. For that matter, lighting in a screen room is usually DC as normal lighting causes problems (let alone fluorescents -- those quick-start small ballasts in most fluorescent fixtures operate up around 60 kHz -- not 60 Hz -- and cause all sorts of problems as they are major noise sources). I have often though audiophiles would benefit from a DC lighting system; maybe there's a new business for me!

My 0.000001 cent (microcent) - Don

Thanks Don. I love actual fact vs mere conjecture.