Originally Posted by 2obed
I don't really have a problem with modern equipment, the progress of technology or rigorous testing. I just don't understand how some people can be so dogmatic about things, or why they believe they have the right to be rude to someone who has a different experience. Somehow they seem to think that they get more credibility by throwing blankets around liberally.
What you call dogmatism are simple recitations of well-established science. There is a well-known saying - A sufficiently advanced technology appears to be magic to those who are scientifically backward. Being frank with people is the most polite thing to do, especially as compared to telling them fairy tales as if they are truth.
They make reference to testing that they did not actually do,
In the case of a number who post here, that is a false claim. I did much of the testing that I reference and so have several others. However, who did it is not as nearly important as you mistakenly make it out to be. It is the outcome of the testing that matters far more.
but that if they were to do it, it would certainly bear out their predictions.
That is true. Why fight it?
If they cannot hear a difference, then a difference must not be possible.
Many of these experiments were done with a number of people, and the people were often experienced audiophiles and audio engineers.
Everyone else must have the same limitations.
Science has been studying the limitation of the human ear for over 80 years. This knowledge has great practical value to people who are in the communications business.
There is considerable wisdom and experience in the matter. It is possible and reasonable to look at the technical performance of audio gear and make accurate estimates of whether or not it makes audible changes to the music it handles.
There are human limitations that are what they are and are unlikely to change because they are based on the structure and design of our hearing apparatus. The high end audio industry wants you to think that you can hear differences between DACs whose dynamic range is > 100 dB and whose response is flat within 0.05 dB. The probability of this actually happening has about the same probability that there is of a person running a mile in 10 seconds, and for similar reasons - the laws of physics say it can't happen.
People who purchase something that they would not have bought are the victims of snake oil salesmen.
Your mistake here is believing that people with a scientific orientation and knowledge never buy high end audio gear. Just because someone doesn't buy the snake oil sales pitch doesn't mean that they don't spend lots of money on audio gear.
It has got to be awesome to say all these things and still be able to believe that you are scientific and more intelligent than the naive and gullible idiots who would use their own perceptions to base decisions on.
You appear to be insulting me because I understand and believe in science that is appears to be beyond your education or experience. I didn't call you gullible or idiotic and I don't think that anybody else did.
I must admit that I enjoy needling these people a bit. I also realize it won't make any difference. They are truly faithful to their beliefs.
As if you are not being truly faithful to your own belief in audiophile myths. Thanks for admitting that you derive personal satisfaction from insulting other people.
They have found acceptance with the other faithful, and will reinforce each other's beliefs rather than take a critical look at the underlying assumptions that guided the people who actually did the research.
If you believe that a critical look at the underlying assumptions would find something awry, why haven't you presented your findings? Since you haven't, you obviously lack faith in your own beliefs.
Oh well, not everyone can be a thinker.
Wow! You call your post above, which at the most is based on innuendo and mythology to be characteristic of high grade thinking? Wow!