"...so there must be many tests, by different individuals on different systems with different people running the tests."A single test, complicated and sophisticated as it may be, could be enough. The sample size is what matters more.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something that has happened countless times happened again last night. Ordinary people over for a party listening to some music easily hear things audiophiles argue endlessly don't even exist. Oh, its worse even than that- they not only easily hear but are stunned and amazed at what they hear. Its absolutely clearly obvious this is not anything they ever were expecting, not anything they can explain- and also is not anything they can deny. Because its so freaking obvious! Happens every time. Then I come on here and read one after another not only saying its impossible, but actually ridiculing people for the audacity of reporting on the existence of reality.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Okay, concrete examples. Easy demos done last night. Cable Elevators, little ceramic insulators, raise cables off the floor. There's four holding each speaker cable up off the floor. Removed them one by one while playing music. Then replaced them. Music playing the whole time. First one came out, instant the cable goes on the floor the guy in the sweet spot says, "OH! WTF!?!?!"
Yeah. Just one. One by one, sound stage just collapses. Put em back, image depth returns.
Another one? Okay.
Element CTS cables have Active Shielding, another easy demo. Unplug, plug back in. Only takes a few seconds. Tuning bullets. Same thing. These are all very easy to demo while the music is playing without interruption. This kills like I don' know how many birds with one stone. Auditory memory? Zero. Change happens real time. Double blind? What could be more double blind than you don't know? Because nobody, not me, not the listener, not one single person in the room, knows exactly when to expect to hear a change- or what change to expect, or even if there would be any change to hear at all. Heck, even I have never sat there while someone did this so even I did not know it was possible to hear just one, or that the change would happen not when the Cable Elevator was removed but when the cable went down on the floor.
We're talking real experience here people. No armchair theorizing. What real people really hear in real time playing real music in a real room.
I could go on. People who get the point will get the point. People who ridicule- ALWAYS without ever bothering to try and hear for themselves!- will continue to hate and argue.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something almost all audiophiles insist on, its like Dogma 101, you absolutely always must play the same "revealing" track over and over again. Well, I never do this. Used to. Realized pretty quickly though just how boring it is. Ask yourself, which is easier to concentrate on- something new and interesting? Or something repetitive and boring? You know the answer. Its silly even to argue. Every single person in my experience hears just fine without boring them to tears playing the same thing over and over again. Only audiophiles subject themselves to such counterproductive tedium.
What is wrong with audiophiles????
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Okay, concrete examples. Easy demos done last night. Cable Elevators, little ceramic insulators, raise cables off the floor. There's four holding each speaker cable up off the floor. Removed them one by one while playing music. Then replaced them. Music playing the whole time. First one came out, instant the cable goes on the floor the guy in the sweet spot says, "OH! WTF!?!?!"
Yeah. Just one. One by one, sound stage just collapses. Put em back, image depth returns.
Another one? Okay.
Element CTS cables have Active Shielding, another easy demo. Unplug, plug back in. Only takes a few seconds. Tuning bullets. Same thing. These are all very easy to demo while the music is playing without interruption. This kills like I don' know how many birds with one stone. Auditory memory? Zero. Change happens real time. Double blind? What could be more double blind than you don't know? Because nobody, not me, not the listener, not one single person in the room, knows exactly when to expect to hear a change- or what change to expect, or even if there would be any change to hear at all. Heck, even I have never sat there while someone did this so even I did not know it was possible to hear just one, or that the change would happen not when the Cable Elevator was removed but when the cable went down on the floor.
We're talking real experience here people. No armchair theorizing. What real people really hear in real time playing real music in a real room.
I could go on. People who get the point will get the point. People who ridicule- ALWAYS without ever bothering to try and hear for themselves!- will continue to hate and argue.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something almost all audiophiles insist on, its like Dogma 101, you absolutely always must play the same "revealing" track over and over again. Well, I never do this. Used to. Realized pretty quickly though just how boring it is. Ask yourself, which is easier to concentrate on- something new and interesting? Or something repetitive and boring? You know the answer. Its silly even to argue. Every single person in my experience hears just fine without boring them to tears playing the same thing over and over again. Only audiophiles subject themselves to such counterproductive tedium.
What is wrong with audiophiles????
- ...
- 355 posts total
glupson A single test, complicated and sophisticated as it may be, could be enough. The sample size is what matters more.Sample size matters, no doubt. But a test with even a large number of subjects, but that relies on a single room and single system for the purposes of the test, isn't likely to produce meaningful results. |
cleeds, Well, any test of any validity has to be reproducible. Which would make it into conducting another ("clone") test. Some tests are too complicated for many people to make them. Not necessarily these audio tests, but in other fields. Now, what you are saying is accounting for variables. That is the tricky part for any test/experiment that a person does in any field. With careful design and method selection, it can be reasonably achieved. If the room will influence the cable, result is worthless as the test has not been designed sufficiently well. That is one of the reasons to read methods before reading article as a whole. |
@millercarbon, "But think of it: audiophilia nervosa. Unlike pseudophile derangement syndrome, I didn’t just make that one up. Its been around a while. A very long while. Which has got to make you wonder ... wait for it... - What is wrong with audiophiles?!" Are you asking whether audiophiles can be classified as victims of audiophilia nervosa? If so, then the answer must be a resounding Yes! This is the age of labels, (amongst other things) and that’s a good label as any to illustrate the ways in we are different or 'special' if you prefer. Of course whilst social norms and values are never fixed in stone, I still bet most societies would regard our obsession as being slightly unhealthy. No doubt Audiophilia Nervosa is currently awaiting it’s ultimate rightful cataloguing place between ADHD and Autism in the encyclopedia of mental disorders. Merely being ’lumped in’ with OCD hurts my long time held sensibilities. https://hifi-opinions.com/en/audiophilia-nervosa-2/ The good news is that it’s already made the pages of the urban dictionary under its own name... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.urbandictionary.com/define.php%3fterm=audiophilia%2bnervosa&... |
- 355 posts total