or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports › Audiophile CD Player? Which One?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audiophile CD Player? Which One? - Page 14

post #391 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Since you are an advocate for the existence of an audible difference, you are a far better listener for a blind test providing the results you claim. So, where are your results?
Why is it that people who agree with you are congenitally incapable of doing level matched, time synched, bias controlled tests that back up their claims?

How do YOU prove that they can't?

I don't. I don't want to prove that they can't. I'm not sure that I could ever prove that they can't.

I take it that you never ever seriously thought this issue through. I take it that you don't know that negative hypotheses are difficult or impossible to prove. I didn't go there. I don't want to go there. My enthusiasm for fool's missions is low.

I also take your post above as prima facie evidence that your reading comprehension is zero. Right, zero point zero. Nothing. Nada. Because my post does not mention proving that people can't hear something. It's an irrelevant and basically stupid issue that your post plucked out of the air and suddenly you demand that I treat it like its the most important thing in the world. If you don't respect my post, I feel no compulsion to respect your irrelevant post.

The post you falsely purported to respond to asks for you prove that you can hear what you claim is audible. That's the exact opposite of what you are talking about.

Please respond when you learn how to read and comprehend what others write.
post #392 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

...

Blind tests are not needed by science. Are just the law, made to protect the big pharma from liability claims. You don't have blind tests to prove gravity law.

Are you serious or just pulling our chain here???eek.gif

If you are serious, you have no concept, knowledge or anything about testing nor science itself. And, I get the impression you are not interested in learning just confirming what you think you know. Sad.rolleyes.gif
post #393 of 467
WOW....I know you all know what side of the fence I stand on regarding different subjects....but sonic,I'm sorry, that was one of the most unexplained, boggling thing I have read in quite some time!...thank you!
post #394 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by esh516 View Post

WOW....I know you all know what side of the fence I stand on regarding different subjects....but sonic,I'm sorry, that was one of the most unexplained, boggling thing I have read in quite some time!...thank you!

Seems quite similar to some of your beliefs....why is his so different?
post #395 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post

Seems quite similar to some of your beliefs....why is his so different?
Ha!... There is a difference.. As I have said many times before!!..define similar?..close but no cigar!
post #396 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post

Seems quite similar to some of your beliefs....why is his so different?[/quote
The universe is full of stars,does not mean that they all shine just as bright as each other.
post #397 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I take it that you don't know that negative hypotheses are difficult or impossible to prove. I didn't go there. I don't want to go there. My enthusiasm for fool's missions is low.
That's a fallacy that is perpetuated on the 'other' site. There is no 'negative' hypothesis. Only hypothesis. Did you heard that gravity law is the same on Earth as on Saturn? Or that the speed of light is the same here as is on Proxima Centauri? Did you heard that at zero Kelvin the atoms/molecules stop moving?
Do you think they PROVED those affirmations? Do you challenge them with a placebo (or ABX)?
When you see a rainbow, can you PROVE that you see it? Do you believe that you saw it only if you ABX it with another portion of clear sky? If a gun discharges next to you, what ABX test do you need to confirm what you heard?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

Are you serious or just pulling our chain here???eek.gif
If you are serious, you have no concept, knowledge or anything about testing nor science itself. And, I get the impression you are not interested in learning just confirming what you think you know. Sad.rolleyes.gif
Tell the guys at CERN to build another fake accelerator, they needed for their placebo testing. What scientific experiment do YOU know that needs a placebo lot? You are clueless and indoctrinated by big Pharma and FDA in thinking that what they do is 'science'.
Edited by SoNic67 - 10/29/13 at 5:19pm
post #398 of 467
Quote:
That's a fallacy that is perpetuated on the 'other' site. There is no 'negative' hypothesis

It is called the null hypothesis.
Meaning when parameters change, no change in the experimental data is observable.
You have also as a counter proposal the alternate hypothesis stating the data will change with the change of parametres.
Quote:
Did you heard that gravity law is the same on Earth as on Saturn

That is not a hypothesis, it is a Law: Newton's law of universal gravitation states that every point mass in the universe attracts every other point mass with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation

Laws are derived from empirical observation, nothing to do with hypothesizing anything.
Quote:
A physical law or scientific law, according to the Oxford English dictionary, "is a theoretical principle deduced from particular facts, applicable to a defined group or class of phenomena, and expressible by the statement that a particular phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions be present."[1] Physical laws are typically conclusions based on repeated scientific experiments and observations over many years and which have become accepted universally within the scientific community. The production of a summary description of our environment in the form of such laws is a fundamental aim of science. These terms are not used the same way by all authors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_law

Maybe you get your terminology straight before arguing nonsense.

Your placebo is a stinking red smelly herring based on your misunderstanding basic principles of science. Way to go, boy.
Your ignorance goes from entertaining to utterly boring fast
post #399 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraut View Post
 
Maybe you get your terminology straight before arguing nonsense.

Your placebo is a stinking red smelly herring based on your misunderstanding basic principles of science. Way to go, boy.
Your ignorance goes from entertaining to utterly boring fast

 

+1. But the confidence with which the ignorance is stated is breathtaking!

post #400 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kraut View Post

 
Maybe you get your terminology straight before arguing nonsense.


Your placebo is a stinking red smelly herring based on your misunderstanding basic principles of science. Way to go, boy.

Your ignorance goes from entertaining to utterly boring fast

+1. But the confidence with which the ignorance is stated is breathtaking!

Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?
post #401 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraut View Post

 
Maybe you get your terminology straight before arguing nonsense.


Your placebo is a stinking red smelly herring based on your misunderstanding basic principles of science. Way to go, boy.

Your ignorance goes from entertaining to utterly boring fast

+1. But the confidence with which the ignorance is stated is breathtaking!

Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?

 

LOL - yes, excellent point. Never thought of it like that.

post #402 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I take it that you don't know that negative hypotheses are difficult or impossible to prove. I didn't go there. I don't want to go there. My enthusiasm for fool's missions is low.
That's a fallacy that is perpetuated on the 'other' site.

So you wish to claim that the fundamental tenets of classical statistical analysis are false? It seems likely to me that you must lack any formal education in science or statistics.
Quote:
There is no 'negative' hypothesis.

Oh, so you wish to use the emotional proposition of unsupported personal denial in order to allegely prove your position? LOL!
Quote:
Only hypothesis. Did you heard that gravity law is the same on Earth as on Saturn? Or that the speed of light is the same here as is on Proxima Centauri? Did you heard that at zero Kelvin the atoms/molecules stop moving?

"Did I heard"? So you are adding illiterate sentence construction to the flaws in your argument? LOL!

Since any of the hypothesis that you state above can be easily stated as a positive or negative hypothesis, it is easy to show that your argument is grievously flawed:

Positive hypothesis:

The rules of gravity are the same on Earth as on Saturn.
The speed of light is the same here as is on Proxima Centauri.
At zero Kelvin the atoms/molecules stop moving.

Negative hypothesis:

The rules of gravity are not the same on Earth as on Saturn.
The speed of light is not the same here as is on Proxima Centauri.
At zero Kelvin the atoms/molecules do not stop moving.

Since your own propositions have been shown to be capable of being stated as positive or negative hypothesis, your claim that positive and negative propositions do not exist is proven to be false.

There is also another fallacy underlying your statements - the idea that science is about proving things. Science is about evidence and logical findings based on that evidence. All findings of science are provisional, and are subject to change in the future as the balance of evidence may or may not change.

The preponderance of evidence available today seems to show that:

The rules of gravity are the same on Earth as on Saturn.
The speed of light is the same here as is on Proxima Centauri.
At zero Kelvin the atoms/molecules stop moving.

and

All good DACs are indistinguishable from wire when listening tests adequately control all known sources of bias. When measured, they are obviously different, but listening is of the essence.
post #403 of 467
What a great hallows eve night!
All lights off, candles light, carving pumpkings
and welcoming the spirits with great music from black sabbath vol 4, ozzy and pantera!
The issue is really not cd/dac players...its the disc!
Not all cds sound the same becuse of transfer/recording issues....some discs are sonic heaven
others..older disc are mediocre sounding.
Anyway the wife will be home soon...replace sabbath with sade..leave candles going...and hope for a treat and not a trick!
Enjoy the music!....no matter what dac/converter cables/ gear ya got.....life is to short to get into the technical way they change what you hear!
Happy halloween!
Enjoy the season....enjoy what you hear!
post #404 of 467
The weather here is pretty bad. The wind is howling, the sky is dark and the air is cold. Good day to stay indoors. I'm not going anywhere. Out here in the country we don't see trick-or-treaters so it won't be any different than any other night.
post #405 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

The weather here is pretty bad. The wind is howling, the sky is dark and the air is cold. Good day to stay indoors. I'm not going anywhere. Out here in the country we don't see trick-or-treaters so it won't be any different than any other night.

 

I have found it can be amusing to drape oneself in black velvet (left over from the HT room build) with a suitable scary mask on your face, get some raw meat/liver and a toy knife, dim the house lights and wait for the trick or treaters to come a-knockin'.... then burst through the door, rubber knife in one hand, raw meat/liver in the other hand, making suitable scary screaming noises as you do. This turning of the tables usually qualifies you for the Boo Radley Award and also gives the kids a Halloween night to remember.... 

 

Scary Smiley Screaming emoticon - scary-smiley-screaming-emoticon.gif 


Edited by kbarnes701 - 10/31/13 at 5:52am
post #406 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post


Tell the guys at CERN to build another fake accelerator, they needed for their placebo testing. What scientific experiment do YOU know that needs a placebo lot? You are clueless and indoctrinated by big Pharma and FDA in thinking that what they do is 'science'.

Proof that you have no clue, no concept of blind testing. Ignorance is free, enjoy.
post #407 of 467
But he does deserve some sort of recognition for the persistence of his trolling, no?
post #408 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

But he does deserve some sort of recognition for the persistence of his trolling, no?

Oh, yes, we keep responding to him wink.gifbiggrin.gif
post #409 of 467
And by responding to him, you amplify his voice. Talk about moronic.
post #410 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post


Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?

Gosh, some of you people sure are arrogant.

post #411 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio4life View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post


Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?

Gosh, some of you people sure are arrogant.

 

Well that's a POV - but the main thing is, he's right isn’t he?  It's way easier to remain ignorant of something than to invest time and effort into learning about it. I’d guess this is why there are more ignorant people in the world than educated people...

post #412 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

Well that's a POV - but the main thing is, he's right isn’t he?  It's way easier to remain ignorant of something than to invest time and effort into learning about it. I’d guess this is why there are more ignorant people in the world than educated people...

You don't respond to a thread since the end of October then see fit to respond to my post directed to someone else.  Why?

post #413 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio4life View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

Well that's a POV - but the main thing is, he's right isn’t he?  It's way easier to remain ignorant of something than to invest time and effort into learning about it. I’d guess this is why there are more ignorant people in the world than educated people...

You don't respond to a thread since the end of October then see fit to respond to my post directed to someone else.  Why?

 

It's a public forum.

post #414 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio4life View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?
Gosh, some of you people sure are arrogant.

i would rather be arrogant then ignorant. wink.gif


also whats the point of dredging up an old post from months ago just to post quasi insulting comment and then call out another member for responding? you were saying something about arrogance.....rolleyes.gif
post #415 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio4life View Post

You don't respond to a thread since the end of October then see fit to respond to my post directed to someone else.  Why?

yer kidding, right?!?

begins with an "h", ends with an "e"
post #416 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

It's a public forum.

No, that's not why you did it.  For some reason the subject matter drew a response from you, I was just curious what that might have been.  But with yours and the other responses, I certainly have all I need and more.  Thanks folks, don't let me upset the apple cart here, I was just making an observation that might have been somewhat impolite on second thought.

post #417 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio4life View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

It's a public forum.

No, that's not why you did it.  For some reason the subject matter drew a response from you, I was just curious what that might have been.  But with yours and the other responses, I certainly have all I need and more.  Thanks folks, don't let me upset the apple cart here, I was just making an observation that might have been somewhat impolite on second thought.

 

Well, it IS a public forum so anyone can reply to any post - that is what I meant with my perhaps overly curt reply. I don't feel that I (or anyone) has to explain why they responded to a post - the response speaks for itself. Anyone who disagrees with the response has the right to challenge it of course. But as you have specifically asked, I was just offering a counterpoint to your "gosh you guys are arrogant" remark. That was/is your opinion and my response was/is my opinion. That's all there is to it really. 

post #418 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

i would rather be arrogant then ignorant. wink.gif

Umm...does no one see the irony in that statement?
post #419 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwv1080 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

i would rather be arrogant then ignorant. wink.gif

Umm...does no one see the irony in that statement?

i do. tongue.gif
post #420 of 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwv1080 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

i would rather be arrogant then ignorant. wink.gif

Umm...does no one see the irony in that statement?
Sure, because he managed to be both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Positive hypothesis:

The rules of gravity are the same on Earth as on Saturn.
The speed of light is the same here as is on Proxima Centauri.
At zero Kelvin the atoms/molecules stop moving.

Negative hypothesis:

The rules of gravity are not the same on Earth as on Saturn.
The speed of light is not the same here as is on Proxima Centauri.
At zero Kelvin the atoms/molecules do not stop moving.

They are all hypothesis. They are all NOT PROVEN (the way you require others to prove their affirmations).
You just call 'positive' the ones that you agree with (so you don't have to prove them) and 'negative' the ones that you don't (so you can dismiss them). Just a fake argument.
Edited by SoNic67 - 12/21/13 at 8:30pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports › Audiophile CD Player? Which One?