or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy? - Page 62

post #1831 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post


I think I already said that I think measurable differences can result in audible differences but provided the differences are large enough to be audible.

rolleyes.gif

Thanks for clarifying the obvious.
post #1832 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

You never provided anything. Kindly provide me a link to the actual documents. Not a line of text .. but actual information that is USEFUL. I mean, that's all you have? Just cite a reference that I can't see ... which is just wonderful. Case closed.

This whole discussion is over because ... you cited a line of text. What does that tell me? Nothing. Were those tests independently verified? How does anyone know if those results were reliable? Well I suppose I'll have to have faith ...
He provided a book with no clickable link...hardly proof from someone trying to make a valid point wouldn't you say?
post #1833 of 3048
post #1834 of 3048
Great, now I need to be a member and pay to see the results. Things just get better and better. Were those results independently verified? You know ... someone else verified to make sure the results were legitimate? Someone who does not have a bigoted view on the subject ... whose opinions are perhaps not prejudiced? How do we know the results were all legit? Must I take it based on the authors word? Nothing behind the scenes I need to worry about? No shenanigans ... of any kind?

You guys just blindly accept the purported evidence without further investigation. That seems like quite a comprehensive method of analysing the evidence. Just cite it and forget about it. eek.gif
Edited by Heinrich S - 3/7/13 at 2:41pm
post #1835 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

For the Google impaired:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=5549
So you have to pay 20 bucks to see the results...I'm sure all the nay sayers will jump on that...smile.gif
post #1836 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Great, now I need to be a member and pay to see the results. Yeah! Were those results independently verified? You know ... someone else verified to make sure the results were legitimate? Someone who does not have a bigoted view on the subject ... whose opinions are perhaps not prejudiced?
On the link did you read the first sentence?...the results are summarized...smile.gif....as in not complete...smile.gif...it also says listeners OFTEN fail...not that they completely fail.I'm just analyzing the words...smile.gif
post #1837 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Great, now I need to be a member and pay to see the results. Yeah! Were those results independently verified? You know ... someone else who does not have a bigoted view on the subject ... whose opinions are perhaps not prejudiced so we can review the available evidence in a more comprehensive, fair light?

Put up the $20 and buy it. You don't need to be a member to do that.

You're setting an impossible bar and you know it. If you have doubts AFTER reading the document, raise them then. Don't simply question the entire AES membership's intellectual honesty - at least not until you catch them doing something like plagiarizing. For example, using quotes found via Google without proper attribution.
post #1838 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

Put up the $20 and buy it. You don't need to be a member to do that.

Have you seen the whole paper?
post #1839 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

Put up the $20 and buy it. You don't need to be a member to do that.

Have you seen the whole paper?

Someone asked for the link to Arny's document. I simply provided it for those that chose not to Google it.

Whether I've read it or not is irrelevant to the request for the link.
post #1840 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma 
Someone asked for the link to Arny's document. I simply provided it for those that chose not to Google it.

You are a dedicated student.
post #1841 of 3048
The one thing I am finding with all of these tests be it with amps,cables ect is that the tests are not 100% one way or the other...in my mind that doesn't prove or dissprove anything....just the findings of groups that post or publish results and think no matter the outcome proves something.
post #1842 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

Whether I've read it or not is irrelevant to the request for the link.

I wonder how many people here have actually read it...???

Not many or next to none I would imagine.

BS has a life of its own on the interweb.
post #1843 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

You are a dedicated student.

You asked for the link and I provided it.

A thank you would have been more appropriate than a weak attempt at an insult.
post #1844 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

I wonder how many people here have actually read it...???

Not many or next to none I would imagine.

BS has a life of its own on the interweb.

Please explain the relationship between the number of readers and the accuracy of the paper in question.
post #1845 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma 
You asked for the link and I provided it.

I said I wanted a link to the actual documents. Technically you sent me a link to another link where I need to pay money to see the results. Thanks for that.
Quote:
A thank you would have been more appropriate than a weak attempt at an insult.

Thanks for sending me a link to another link where I need to pay to see the results in that link. I am most grateful for all the effort you put in. Results that I can only assume have not been independently verified and since none of it is good enough for prime time, you know, for public consumption and all, so it would have been nice to know what other people think, not just the people in that fraternity. Oh well, I guess you can't expect miracles.
post #1846 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

Please explain the relationship between the number of readers and the accuracy of the paper in question.

How do you know the accuracy of the paper if you haven't read it?

Did you just assume someone else had actually read the paper when they referred to it on an interweb forum?

Or did that person also just assume someone had actually read the paper when they were reading about it on an interweb forum?
post #1847 of 3048
Often times, If you can get the author's email address (a web search can often turn that up), you can contact them directly and tell them that you're interested in their work and see if they'll forward you a copy. Journal articles do go through a peer review process and while that's not infallible it does inspire a measure of confidence.
post #1848 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

The one thing I am finding with all of these tests be it with amps,cables ect is that the tests are not 100% one way or the other...in my mind that doesn't prove or dissprove anything....just the findings of groups that post or publish results and think no matter the outcome proves something.

They'll never be 100% one way or another. When subjects cannot distinguish, they'll end up guessing and so will be correct some of the time. The important thing is whether the results are statistically significant or not.
post #1849 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 
I wonder how many people here have actually read it...???

Not many or next to none I would imagine.

BS has a life of its own on the interweb.

Their entire argument hinges on that document! But they haven't read it! But they swear by it. They fulfilled their 30% of the burden of proof, the rest I need to shoulder on my own because ... I need to pay to see the evidence. Woweeee...

Don't you find that the least bit compelling?
post #1850 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

I said I wanted a link to the actual documents. Technically you sent me a link to another link where I need to pay money to see the results. Thanks for that.
Thanks for sending me a link to another link where I need to pay to see the results in that link. I am most grateful for all the effort you put in. Results that I can only assume have not been independently verified and since none of it is good enough for prime time, you know, for public consumption and all, so it would have been nice to know what other people think, not just the people in that fraternity. Oh well, I guess you can't expect miracles.

Only research available for free is valid. Got it
Information created by non experts ins more significant than information created by experts in the field. Got that as well

You are aware that almost every technical organization follows the paid subscription model, right? I'd certainly rather go to a doctor who utilizes for pay research from, for example, the New England Journal of Medicine than one who relies on the free info available on sites like WebMD
post #1851 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

The one thing I am finding with all of these tests be it with amps,cables ect is that the tests are not 100% one way or the other...in my mind that doesn't prove or dissprove anything....just the findings of groups that post or publish results and think no matter the outcome proves something.

Not sure I'm following you. Would a 50% correct response in a blond test surprise you? Would you perhaps think that means half the people can hear a difference, and half not?
post #1852 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Don't you find that the least bit compelling?

Compelling but not surprising. This is the AV pseudo science forums after all.
post #1853 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

How do you know the accuracy of the paper if you haven't read it?

Did you just assume someone else had actually read the paper when they referred to it on an interweb forum?

Or did that person also just assume someone had actually read the paper when they were reading about it on an interweb forum?

Another bad assumption on your part. Just to put an end to this absurdity, yes, I've read the paper. And?
post #1854 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma 
Only research available for free is valid. Got it
Information created by non experts ins more significant than information created by experts in the field. Got that as well

It's okay, you fulfilled your burden of proof ...sort of ... somewhat ... maybe 30% ... if that, so I'll just pay to see the evidence on your behalf. It's a nice way to get that monkey off your back ...
post #1855 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

Another bad assumption on your part. Just to put an end to this absurdity, yes, I've read the paper. And?
Can you then quote what it says after these words: "For the consumer, the choice is clear,...."
post #1856 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma 
Just to put an end to this absurdity, yes, I've read the paper. And?

I suspect you have not read it. The burden is on you to prove that you have read that paper! Show me a link to the file ... or PDF.
post #1857 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm 
Can you then quote what it says after these words: "For the consumer, the choice is clear,...."

Interesting. smile.gif
post #1858 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Can you then quote what it says after these words: "For the consumer, the choice is clear,...."

I read it some time ago, so clearly I can't quote it verbatim.

If you're accusing me of lying, come right out and say it Amir.
post #1859 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

I suspect you have not read it. The burden is on you to prove that you have read that paper! Show me a link to the file ... or PDF.

Even if I the paper available, I wouldn't violate the terms of use by publicly posting the PDF for you. Not everyone shares your tolerance of that.
post #1860 of 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma" 
I read it some time ago, so clearly I can't quote it verbatim.

Yeah, I suspect you never read it. biggrin.gif If you paid to see the paper then you'll have a copy somewhere. Unless that got deleted ... somehow. I would be interested to hear the rest of this story but it's a lot LESS compelling now that it was initially.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Audio theory, Setup and Chat
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy?