Originally Posted by Jinjuku
No, preference never need be tested. It simply doesn't. Now broad claims is a different story. I'm ok if you as a listener are in to 'burned in' cables. You're welcome to your preference. The thin red line is when you go and say burned in cables sound better than non-burned in cables as a matter of fact vs preference and attempting to influence another persons purchasing decision.
No? Pretty definite there.
Look, I am starting to think I am doing a terrible job of explaining myself, apologies all. Unless of course you are mistaking the two very different cases, the personal preference (inviolate) and the general preference. I would have thought I was clear about it being that latter, but maybe not.
Same with the harmon studies on speaker preferences, 'in general listeners prefer smooth accurate and extended FR with even dispersion or power response'...or whatever the more accurate statement is. Not for one second does that ever say everyone
will like that, like any statistical group there will be a Bell curve with either end of the spectrum present. The majority will, however lie in the middle of that curve.
The interesting thing about that is when repeated sighted, there will be a very different result. We all know that. So if sound quality is the only basis a person wants then they need to at least be aware of the findings blinded.
We all accept those studies and 'act' upon them in some way, if only intellectually (how can we realistically test different speakers ion out own room blind, well we can't).
So here, in this current 'debate' we have the analogous (now narrowed down) posit...'FR's are best absorbed, and most prefer them absorbed'. That is stated as a general preference as opposed to a personal preference, and as such can and maybe should be tested. As always, we will find a Bell curve with the outliers on either side, but we can also draw general population conclusions about that premise.
You may still stick with your answer of 'No', and if so all I'll say is I don't agree that it is not needed (if need can ever be applied to audio) or that it would not produce useful answers.
Look, for all I know the result could come back positive, I am not for a second saying it is wrong, all I am saying is that it is as valid a thing to test in audio as testing speakers blind (or cables, or amps) and for all we know could turn up results that make us go 'well, waddya know, another 'everybody knows' bites the dust'.
That and I would still like to see some one take up my cable burn-in challenge. I'll even give you some money if you complete it successfully
Umm, are you suggesting I take up your challenge?
If that is true, then it is kinda very funny and might be one of those times when someone says something meaning it one way, and it turns out to be the best joke ever made even if only inadvertantly. We all know those occasions!
I think I'll pass on that particular challenge if it is alright with you.
Originally Posted by rnrgagne
Well I can't speak for others but I love to debate, because I find it one of the best learning tools there is. I order to do that you sort of have to take one side of an argument. I am open minded when it comes to these things.
Yeah, I agree with you. The learning however can only really be effective when the debate itself is effective and free from emotion and reaction. Once you see the snide comments and anger, innuendo etc coming in then you immediately know you are NOT in a situation where people are willing to learn. You see people digging in to the already entrenched opinions and that is that.
One of the really effective learning tools is to take the 'opposing' side
. A powerful technique, not often used in life I'd hazard. You could very well walk away with not only a better understanding of the other argument, but a much better appreciation of your own, win win in my book.
I simply use the term "snake oil salesman" because it's a coined phrase on these forums, everyone knows what grouping or philosophy it identifies. I don't know of a more politically correct name....
I get it, and also get the point about it being a ready identifier in these here parts.
Still, it becomes a habit dontcha reckon? Habit meaning it becomes a snide mindset which in itself prevents to some degree the honest exchange of viewpoints and data. We often proclaim grandly that we 'are trying to educate', yeah deep down I do think we are, but what we are not recognising is how ineffective we are being at educating with the snide undertones we use. I mean if education is the end goal then why are we unknowingly sabotaging that education?
It happens all the time in so many subtle ways. I mean, it simply 'just cannot be' that someone prefers vinyl over cd. Really, does it matter? It's a preference after all, it is no skin off my nose if HE prefers vinyl, it does not belittle my system or my ears if he does, just as much as if he loves avocado (that green slimy snot stuff haha). But no, 'they are used to and love the ritual, the cleaning of the album, the gentle placing on the table and lowering the needle, very akin to the drug users ritual actually!'....or.....'they prefer the lower fidelity and the distortions it brings'....or whatever.
Can't they simply prefer it? Where's the big deal in that?
Anyway, thanks so much for your response.
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer
That's exactly my point. But if I had articles on my web site saying it's important to verify your speakers are wired correctly, would you think it reasonable for the likes of Amir to come after me with a hatchet demanding I either spend $100,000 to verify this with exhaustive blind studies or admit I'm blowing smoke and I'm no more ethical than Joe the wire vendor? This is the real issue. Not blind testing, but one (sales)man's inability to have a discussion without accusing others of fraud and incompetence.
So in your estimation there is nothing
so obvious and self-evident that a test is not needed? (Though I do like your other post saying the stuff everyone accepts as true is often the most fun and most necessary to debunk.)
Let's take it one step further: How about a broken tweeter that buzzes at certain frequencies at loud volumes? I could argue that this is similar to the euphonic distortion from vinyl records that some people prefer. So am I wrong to say it's not necessary to blind test preference for working tweeters?
Hi ethan, first let me say something I have been meaning to say for a few posts now whilst I remember. It may have felt to you that I too have been hounding you or coming after you with a hatchet (?), sorry if so, but truly it has only ever been an 'intellectual' thing along the lines of 'why is an acoustic principle above being blind tested when all other audio matters are ripe for blind testing', summat like that.
What however I have not said during that is I applaud and acknowledge the wealth of diy info on your site, your complete willingness to share it with anyone. For that from here on out and for all eternity you shall get your reward in the land of milk and honey surrounded by a never ending supply of willing virgins. There could even be a menagerie of cats there for you too, let us know would ya?
(not about the cats)
I think the 100 thou has been plucked out of thin air tho.
The direct question, or maybe questions, in a perfect world, or maybe another galaxy, do you think it worthwhile to test maxims in acoustics like 'it is generally preferred in the general population that FR point reflections are absorbed'. I mean even from an acoustician viewpoint surely such data is valuable? Would you also agree that data from a properly done study is better than anecdotal evidence?
After all, it is NOT like your sales would dry up, all we are talking about is the distribution of acoustic products, NOT that there should be no treatment at all.
To your specific questions to me. (we're trying to find a situation where blind testing is not needed) I get your point, I mean there SHOULD be situations where blind testing is not needed, but I am not sure your example is the one? I am not sure, especially when (again) we are talking general, not personal, preferences. As that is what we are idly curious about I don't think introducing broken speakers into the equation helps. Unless the question is 'do people generally prefer non broken speakers to broken ones'. spose then I'd agree with you they'd prefer non broken...maybe not the bose guys cause how could they tell
But if we get away from broken speakers and move to a 'bad tweeter' (meaning a poor one), it rings like a bell at certain frequencies say. Well to the owner he might think that it 'brings out the detail that no other speaker does' or something. 'Ha, this speaker does not have David Gilmours glorious finale soaring our over the music like MINE does'..nahh the bloody tweeter just rings ya know. There's an interesting thought, maybe (as that is what he listens to) he'd still pick it in a blind test and mark his up and the other down. I mean it IS a sonic trait in this example, it is there to be heard.
Oh well then, a perfect example of personal preference not being applicable to the general. As we know, there are always outliers.
Anyway ethan to me at least this has only ever been an interesting facet of human nature
to explore, nothing at all personal with you, your products or your business practice.