Placebo effects in the extreme

[BE718]

It would probably go smoother if measurements were posted and objective statements made as to what electrical and sonic effects should be expected from a certain product. Further comments that someone is stupid if they paid money for a certain product are where things seem to go downhill. I also believe that many subjectivists would object far less to demands for testing if that process were not accompanied by personal comments. I further believe that subjectivists could learn a few things from well-conducted measurements, if they were not engaged in fighting over personal insecurities and buying decisions. It all boils down to how we conduct our conversations. I've posted as moderator that "it's not the song, it's the singer" and I sincerely believe that the free exchange of information without personal focus (by both "sides") would be extremely beneficial.

People don't buy Rolls Royce automobiles based on their 0-60 measurement, although that is a solid objective performance factor. Instead, the feel & sound of the door closing (the CD tray closing, in other examples) also form some of the buying decision criteria. We MUST refrain from placing our own preferences and values upon others as we consider equipment. There are simply more factors in play.

For every subjectivist "sucker" that buys a tweak that measures worthless, there remains the fact that he may be perfectly happy. Folks also spend several hundred dollars oer month to buy coffee from Starbucks.... Your personal funds are exactly that, and none of us on a forum should deny each other their personal indulgences. The person who buys this tweak should not resent those who measure it and report on its performance, rather, they should appreciate the information and realize that not all happiness is measurable in this manner.

Likewise, objectivists have a hard road with subjectivist audiophiles, in that they do not always have the deep, cultural appreciation for music that is the true raison d'etre for high-end audio. One well-known objectivist did not know what the Solti "Ring Cycle" was (one of the most famous recordings of all time), nor did this individual know Bach's "Toccata and Fugue in D Minor", the most famous organ work of all. The music-lover's "camp" may then immediately infer that the objectivists care not about the art and culture of music, but merely post to interfere with the love of music and art.

See, both sides have valid points and both sides have shortcomings. Welcome to the human race! Hopefully, as we move forward, my comments here will cause everyone to consider the correctness of others' posts, rather than seek the conflict.

Lee

I am not aware of forum members being personally criticised, any objective comments (and sarcasm) have been directed at the products. As I said before, some maybe insecure in their purchasing choices and infer personal criticism that isnt there. No-one expects people to be technical experts a decipher the marketing technical BS from reality. I certainly dont expect others to accept my preferences, but I do expect to be allowed to post about products (negative or positive) without being accused of being a troll.

Thing is the complaints seen from some recently indicate they are far from happy and totally insecure about there purchases, if they were happy they wouldnt be screaming "troll" as soon as someone else has the audacity to point out that the product may not work.

Of course people buy products based on desirability, qudos etc, and of course factors cultivated by marketing.

I dont think we have much disagreement, however I did furrow my brow at you comment highlighted. I think that it is such a generalisation that its pretty meaningless. It may even be true that someone who is overtly interested in "high end" audio equipment is more interested in said equipment, its qudos of ownership and insignificant differences that bizarre tweaks may or may not make than the music it is meant to play. I have certainly met many hifi enthusiasts like that.

From what I have observed both in this forum and others is that the angst is predominantly coming from one side.

 

[BE718]

OK, there is a theory that ground noise modulation accounts for many of the brittleness & brightness issues with digital audio - have you any interest in this & what measurements are you aware of that investigates this?

Is there? yes, sure I am interested. Can you provide a link to somewhere you have seen this discussed. You need to be more specific in regard to what you are referring to. Which ground where?

 

[RBFC]

I am not aware of forum members being personally criticised, any objective comments have been directed at the products. As I said before some maybe insecure in their purchasing choices and infer criticism that isnt there. No-one expects people to be technical experts a decipher the marketing technical BS from reality. I certainly dont expect others to accept my preferences, but I do expect to ba allowed to post about products (negative or positive) without being accused of being a troll.

Thing is the complaints seen from some recently indicate they are far from happy and totally insecure about there purchases, if they were happy they wouldnt be screaming "troll" as soon as someone else has the audacity to point out that the product may not work.

Of course people buy products based on desirability, qudos etc, and of course factors cultivated by marketing.

I dont think we have much disagreement, however I did furrow my brow at you comment highlighted. I think that it is such a generalisation that its pretty meaningless. It may even be true that someone who is overtly interested in "high end" audio equipment is more interested in said equipment, its qudos of ownership and insignificant differences that bizarre tweaks may or may not make than the music it is meant to play. I have certainly met many hifi enthusiasts like that.

From what I have observed both in this forum and others is that the angst is predominantly coming from one side.

Each side feels the other is responsible....

As to your quoted section, that is why I said "not always". I understand clearly that not all folks fit that description. But, if you're going to post in a high-end audio forum, it would make sense to know the foundational recordings that will be used to assess gear. Many of these recordings are a solid reason that high-end audio gear thrived.

If I were to go into a technical audio engineering forum without knowledge of basic circuitry, etc, how would I be respected?

Lee

 

[BE718]

Accept you can't hear any difference. Does this mean it is more than an anecdote of your personal listening impressions? Maybe if there are many others reporting they can hear a difference you might consider investigating further or not?

As I did with the Regen, I started measuring to investigate whats was going on after I found I could hear no significant difference. When measuring I found no technical improvement in the DACs output, in fact only situations where it degraded it. (as did other people who measured it in different situations with different measurement kit and dacs).

Others subjective impressions are pretty meaningless. Its a fact they are subject to a number of different biases so simply cannot be relied upon. People often exaggerate the differences they allegedly hear. Have you seen the Floyd Tool video stickied on this forum? Where he talks about reliable data only being obtained when people did not know what they were listening to.

 

[BE718]

Each side feels the other is responsible....

As to your quoted section, that is why I said "not always". I understand clearly that not all folks fit that description. But, if you're going to post in a high-end audio forum, it would make sense to know the foundational recordings that will be used to assess gear. Many of these recordings are a solid reason that high-end audio gear thrived.

If I were to go into a technical audio engineering forum without knowledge of basic circuitry, etc, how would I be respected?

Lee

You are right, my opinion was too subjective to be taken as fact. Perhaps someone could perform some objective analysis of the entreq thread thread for example and see where the most aggressive ad hom originated from? I think that would be interesting.

I'm sorry but I dont know what "a "foundational recording" is. Is it a recording some personally find of artistic merit, one they just enjoy, or one they feel is well recorded? Or one that peers insist is of importance, whatever that may mean????????

Dont know about you, but my hifi plays music that I personally like (for various reasons). What others opinions in this regard is irrelevant to the discussion of hifi.

 

[jkeny]

Is there? yes, sure I am interested. Can you provide a link to somewhere you have seen this discussed. You need to be more specific in regard to what you are referring to. Which ground where?

You don't have to look far, I believe you will find lots about noise modulation in this thread

You could also search for posts by Rob Watts chief engineer at Chord on noise floor modulation - see here for starters

 

[esldude]

You are right, my opinion was too subjective to be taken as fact. Perhaps someone could perform some objective analysis of the entreq thread thread for example and see where the most aggressive ad hom originated from? I think that would be interesting.

I'm sorry but I dont know what "a "foundational recording" is. Is it a recording some personally find of artistic merit, one they just enjoy, or one they feel is well recorded? Or one that peers insist is of importance, whatever that may mean????????

Dont know about you, but my hifi plays music that I personally like (for various reasons). What others opinions in this regard is irrelevant to the discussion of hifi.

It means if you are an objectivist by extension in Lee's mind you already are the hoi polloi. So first we have this sub-forum to keep the little people separate. And it is especially convenient as you can then go there and denigrate them by insinuations at any point in time. Even when the little people without culture might have a point (not that they ever will) they are deficient in culture sufficient to speak well enough to be heard by the real people like Lee.

 

[opus112]

There's the objectivist inferiority complex for ya, writ large.

 

[RBFC]

It means if you are an objectivist by extension in Lee's mind you already are the hoi polloi. So first we have this sub-forum to keep the little people separate. And it is especially convenient as you can then go there and denigrate them by insinuations at any point in time. Even when the little people without culture might have a point (not that they ever will) they are deficient in culture sufficient to speak well enough to be heard by the real people like Lee.

Well, that was meant to smart! If you're designing anything, don't you think it would be wise to have reasonable knowledge of the conditions under which it would be tested? Don't you feel that having a better understanding of "subjectivist" history and development would allow you to deal more effectively with them? For the record, I am a "hybrid", neither camp is sufficient alone to me. I have learned a great deal from "objectivists" and perhaps you're tying me to a group because of other conflicts currently on the forum. My position there has nothing to do with subjective vs. objective.

Lee

 

[BE718]

Well, that was meant to smart! If you're designing anything, don't you think it would be wise to have reasonable knowledge of the conditions under which it would be tested? Don't you feel that having a better understanding of "subjectivist" history and development would allow you to deal more effectively with them? For the record, I am a "hybrid", neither camp is sufficient alone to me. I have learned a great deal from "objectivists" and perhaps you're tying me to a group because of other conflicts currently on the forum. My position there has nothing to do with subjective vs. objective.

Lee

Yes, I think it should be tested with all sorts of music, not ones that conform to someones notional idea of importance.

 

[Don Hills]

There's the subjectivist inferiority complex for ya, writ large.

Fixed it for you...
It explains the number of "subjectivist" posters in a forum where posters are specifically enjoined from taking subjective positions. If such people were confident and comfortable in their view, they'd feel no need to post here.

 

[esldude]

Well, that was meant to smart! If you're designing anything, don't you think it would be wise to have reasonable knowledge of the conditions under which it would be tested? Don't you feel that having a better understanding of "subjectivist" history and development would allow you to deal more effectively with them? For the record, I am a "hybrid", neither camp is sufficient alone to me. I have learned a great deal from "objectivists" and perhaps you're tying me to a group because of other conflicts currently on the forum. My position there has nothing to do with subjective vs. objective.

Lee

I don't see much smart there. Implicit in your statement was the idea objectivists inherently have less knowledge of music and what type is important for high end use. The whole idea is ridiculous. Also implicit is a technical naivete that 'important music' is more difficult to reproduce or needs reproducing in a way different than other music. It is an artifact of when things went off the rails as high fidelity became instead high end.

 

[opus112]

Fixed it for you...

No, that's just revisionist as the post I referred to (directly above it) was written by an objectivist.

 

[opus112]

Implicit in your statement... Also implicit.....

There it is again, objectivist projection.

 

[Gregadd]

jeff fritz on subjectivism v. objectiviism

http://www.soundstageultra.com/inde...2-objectivist-or-subjectivist-give-me-a-break a little common sense.

 

[opus112]

His argument falls over here when he says ' To my mind, it comes down to this: I’d rather have more information than less. '

He forgets that what he really wants is more relevant information, not just more information. If he had infinite information (the logical end point) then the haystack would be too vast to find the needle.

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

"The objectivist is nothing more than a subjectivist not afraid to explore what they heard, show why they heard it, and in the face of not being able to either show empirically or by bias controlled evaluation re-evaluate." that's what we are trying to do in the measurements forum and we have done it here a few times and that was sweet.

correct. With the emphasis on WHAT THEY HEARD.

I'll just say that again.

What they heard.

yes...

What they heard.

An just in case you missed it...

What they heard.

And one more time for the slower people.

What they heard.

And when objectivists actually do that consistently then I think you would find a lot of animosity might dissipate.

For those living under a rock this last fortnight, I am of course referring to the massive Entreq war in the general forum where not one single detractor of the product had actually heard it.

So practice what you preach please and you guys might actually garner some respect.

 

[esldude]

For those living under a rock this last fortnight, I am of course referring to the massive Entreq war in the general forum where not one single detractor of the product had actually heard it.

So practice what you preach please and you guys might actually garner some respect.

....this is one forum where the subjectivists will not be allowed to derail or flame an objectivist thread with the comment "I trust my ears".

The above from the entrance to this sub-forum. An idea that seems to be maddening to subjectivists. They can't seem to stay out of the threads with the very idea not welcome as described by bolded text above.

So your contribution is to multi-repeat WHAT THEY HEARD. Then complain that people who were discussing measurements and trying to ascertain what the Entreq did in the General forum had detractors who had not heard the product? Okay, that was/is allowed in that forum and was certainly brought up a few dozen times. But here, in this forum, that is not acceptable as a retort to re-direct discussion. Even in the other forum those 'detractors' were trying to find a reason a measure that would explain the audibility of the device. I know, just too terrible, we should all just hear the magic. This should be one place where it isn't required to have heard a device to have an opinion about it. Outside the crazy high end audio world that isn't nearly the magic mantra some seem to think it is.

Besides, in that thread, there was a recording of the signal with and without the Entreq. The person doing that for us should be very familiar. He said the difference was discernible in the recordings made with the music. Now I guess that doesn't count as having heard it. I think more respect was shown going the other way in the General forum. Others and I said how grateful we were for the measurements and recordings. We really were glad you provided them.

 

[BE718]

You seem to live under the mistaken belief that if there is an audible difference you will automatically hear it? Don't you think focus, attention & training might play a part? What about your system & your hearing being up to scratch? How about your room? Is there any possibility there might be some investigation to be done?

But you do seem to be be the opposite of the objectivist definition Jinjuku gave "The objectivist is nothing more than a subjectivist not afraid to explore what they heard"

I dont think it is an unreasonable belief to hold. Sure, individuals hearing and acuity differs. Sure, equipment capabilities vary. However I dont believe Keith is deaf or is incapable of discerning subtle differences. I know he is a an experienced listener and his kit is good.

So if there is a significant difference why wouldnt he hear it? I think an important point to take on here is just how much some exaggerate the differences they claim to hear. Keith is also aware of the placebo nocebo effects and takes precautions, unlike most subjectivists who seem to go totally apoplectic if you suggest a blind listening test.

 

[BE718]

You asked "how could I investigate further for me there is no difference" I answered
I had previously stated that if a critical mass reported a consensus of opinion, it might be an impetus for investigating further - you answered "whatever impressions others may express are irrelevant."

Keiths asked me to perform measurements to investigate. However he is absolutely right to be very wary of others subjective opinions.