Originally Posted by scientest
If so, we've got the A to D section of the PC involved here as a complete unknown, but they ignore that, so let us also ignore that.
I think they did emphasise that even unknown, it was a constant.
4) We now look at the difference between the modified CD player and the same PC reference signal. This time the difference between the two signals is much smaller; "about half" according to the video. Now comes the surprising conclusion: this is touted as being a good thing! We have taken the analogue output of a high end CD player and made it look more like the analogue signal as recreated in the noisy electrical environment of a PC!
I took something slightly different from it. They kept reminding us these were new, groundbreaking and preliminary measurements.
So new in fact, that how could they know already what was good or what was bad? Something that was different was oohed and aahed at. Ok. How significant was it??
Didn't matter, it somehow backed up everything they had ever heard (which according to borg is completely obvious anyway). Which everyone there would have heard if they had done a demo. Oops. hahaa. (also typical demo routine..'you will hear the better bass, the highs over here'...yad yada. Coaching before e demo. Yawwn.)
Except NO demo haha, so it switched from 'you will hear..' to 'you would have heard..'. Same patter.
The biggest irony of all?? We have been saying 'if there is an audible difference, there WILL be a measured difference', AND we have ofetn given diffmaker as an example of what type of technique to use. (look it up, the program is called diffmaker)
Now looky here, what technique are these guys using??
Originally Posted by theborg7of7
I guess the bottom line of all of this, and the saving grace of objectivists who try so hard to ignore the senses of so many, is that 'people don't know what they hear.' Plain and simple. It always comes back to that. It doesn't matter that any number of people can clearly hear a difference between different power cords, that is the quick reply. That's why I said this discussion was an seemingly easy victory for the objectivists. All they have to reply to someone who has heard a positive or 'negative' difference, even consistently over days of cable swapping is 'no 'ya didn't!' 'Did not!' And, also bring up homeopathy, faith, magic just for a few self-fulfilling belly chuckles.
No, the bottom line is you kept asking us to watch the video you obviously creamed your jeans over, and we did, made our thoughts known and then you just ignore all that??
How about addressing the points raised from us watching the video you were gushing over???
What is truly amazing is that objectivists tend to avoid at all costs experimenting with power cords. 'I know it won't work,' is the usual reason. That, in other words, is called 'I'd better not ever go there just in case it does sound different. But then I could just convince myself that I was hearing things.'
Who said we have not done any testing?? I WILL admit I have not done testing on exotic aftermarket power cords
, but that just happens to be your
personal thing. The next guy might be mingpo discs or whatever.
But I have done testing (blind of course) on interconnects and cables.
Oh, BTW, can you please answer me on how much those improvements in the graphs cost?? The power cord, their aftermarket stand and the quantum purifier.
Ohh, have YOU found out what the group delay of YOUR speakers are yet?? That is after all the cause of the HUGE improvements you hear with power cords. Would you not want more improvements by tackling those things in your speakers??
As for listening tests, here is a clip from a diyaudio forum -
Ahh yes. Michael Fremer. What a lovely character he is.
Originally Posted by WilliamZX11
I have read this story before. You realize they turned in there picks, AFTER the results had been announced. What a load of bs.
Know, I did not know that at all. Could you explain further what you mean?
In any case, if Fremers story is true as he described, I have a lot of sympathy with him. At the very least, he and his mate John Atkinson (who could only pick four out of five..a bit worrying surely given how big these differences are??) should have been selected out and put into the second round of more in depth testing. If the true goal was learning about amp differences detectable via DBT. Which it wasn't.
That it was only five tests not being statisically significant cuts both ways. NO conclusion one way or the other should have been drawn.
I feel it likely that it was simply to show that under blinded conditions these huge obvious differences no longer exist. Dunno. As the conditions were not anything approaching what is needed to do a proper test.
And the editor of stereophile himself could not pick them all???
Originally Posted by jpjibberjabber
And yet, your post follows. Ironic. Clearly you found enough merit to respond.
haha, merit?? Interesting choice of word. Merit, hahaha.
A common fallacy, debunked eons ago. "You lot" also think that way about amplifiers, CDP, et al.
Cool. How so debunked. Show us.
I can just imagine jibberjabber jibber jabbering at the demo at rocky mountain fest..'You fools with your power cords, trying to show us that measurements help point out audible differences. Fools. That is a common fallacy debunked aeons ago by us subjectivists, how dare YOU subjectivists come in and undermine us all'.
Nope. You would have been panting and surreptitiously rubbing your 'inner thighs'.
Point is, some are willing to explore further to find out what we're missing.
Now THIS is the point that you and borg keep missing. You keep telling us there are some willing to investigate, and *we* are not. That is your essential complaint is it not?
You have NOT shown there is anything to investigate. THAT is the problem. IF it had been shown that there was a phenomenon to be investigated, then it would have been investigated by now.
But every time one of you guys show us these huge obvious differences exist (that if we cannot hear them should find a different hobby, they are SO obvious)...and you have no idea of which is which...then you simply cannot do so.
Why the flying **** should we investigate that??
If either of you had any balls you would put your hand up and be willing, for the sake of the advancement of the knowledge you are so passionate about, to show us that you DO in fact audibly hear these differences.
Hmm, I wonder if that will be responded to??
People need to get over the fact that effective luxury items cost money, just like anything else they can't afford.
Ahh. You think that is the problem. See, we have a different definition of effective it seems.
You gonna man up and show us that these are effective?? Excellent.
I'd advise you do it on your system, that will be the one you are most intimate with and have the best chance of being successful.
Should we start a new thread on the protocol or just continue in this one??
Maybe a common thread, that way we can work out borgs at the same time.
After all, neither of you are just being keyboard warriors are you??