What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?


Douglas Self wrote a devastating article about audio anomalies back in 1988. With all the necessary knowledge and measuring tools, he did not detect any supposedly audible changes in the electrical signal. Self and his colleagues were sure that they had proved the absence of anomalies in audio, but over the past 30 years, audio anomalies have not disappeared anywhere, at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned. It's hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).

For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.

As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.

If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?

Regards.
anton_stepichev
teo_audio,


Now find me a scientist who uses argumentum ad populum as a justification for their arguments in their doctoral thesis. There went 4-8 years down the tube. You appear to have a lot to learn about science, and engineering and what actually happens in those disciplines but in either one, they have very strict rules for what they consider evidence. 
Why is it too far fetched?
Because the 2 arms of the bias accusation are too large and encompass everything...

No Biases can explain or debunk 2 years of incremental changes in my system and no blind test is necessary... You dont need a policy guide to pilot you on a straight line road called listening experiments...Blind test is a scientific rigorous  " statistical" tool or a marketing tool for companies and sunday scientist....

All those who use this rethoric against someone are most of the times  consumers who never create their own system.... they believe only specs sheets  redacted by others it seems...

Spec sheets are not sound experience.....Only minimal assurance of some standard design quality....
It’s hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).
I must thank you anton_stepichev very much for Essien article...

I already read many articles from him in the last 2 days and i wait for his book coming  in thursday...

All his experiments and theory go in the same direction than my own research on language, phonetic/phonology....It also join to the deep thinking of Ernest Ansermet in musical meaning experience...

It also complete the Pythagorean and Platonic direction of science by a Goethean phenomenology of the sound body...
This book was the missing link for me .....

This book is a treasure for me really, then my deep thanks....



«Dying before reading some books is like living missing encounter with unknown   friends»-Anonymus Smith
Because the 2 arms of the bias accusation are too large and encompass everything...

Bias is large and it encompasses everything. 

No Biases can explain or debunk 2 years of incremental chganges in my system and no blind test is necessary..


Bias can explain and debunk everything  you have ever changed in your system if blind testing wasn't used, it is necessary. 


Bias is large and it encompasses everything.
You dont even understand the meaning and consequence of what you just write...

Sorry.....

In one word, biases are everywhere for sure but you cannot use them to debunk and protect each of your step or stop everybody barefoot on his road....

Your solution is like the fool who before the invention of the sandal wanted to cover the entire earth with some huge pieces of fabric to walk more easily....

Put fabric on your foot "if necessary" and called it a sandal .....
Do you understand what "if necessary" means in the context of our discussion ?

I guess not....

End of dicussion for me...I will go barefoot for my journey....Buy a pair of sandal for you....And if someone want to use one pair it is ok, if he does not wanted to, dont ask for a "protected" earth for all of us....

My best to you.....

Bias can explain and debunk everything you have ever changed in your system if blind testing wasn't used, it is necessary.
Are you serious?
😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😎