or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Burn-in: Real Or Imagined???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Burn-in: Real Or Imagined??? - Page 8

post #211 of 665
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

You giving lessons on politeness is pretty rich.

Really, what's the point of this thread?? I'm thinking it exists only draw Chu or speco out. Your first post basically asks people to post their objective *or subjective* reasons for their stance on burn-in. Way to set the bar high, Steve. In other words, say anything that 'feels' right to you! Then after a few days of the usual bickering, some subjectivists start saying they don't really CARE why they hear what they hear, they just DO! So much for giving reasons. Hilarious.

If you read at the start of the thread, the point was to direct all the discussion on burn-in to this thread instead of hijacking the Enterprise thread, as burn-in was an ancillary topic. Is that so bad?

By the way, for the past few years I have largely stayed out of these types of threads and yet there was still lotsa bickering anyway. To blame it ome me is quite childish, don't you think.

For many months at a time I was quite polite and disengaged from this crap. Eventually I got tired of being polite and started giving some of it back. HA!

Bulldogger and I are a tag team. I'm in the ring right now!!!@@@
post #212 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

Reread my post. I said there were no randomized controlled data SPECIFICALLY to say that someone SHOULD HAVE THEIR APPENDIX REMOVED WHEN APPENDICITIS HAS BEEN DIAGNOSED. I didn't say there was no data about diagnosing appendicitis. Are you and Q related?

I'm not a surgeon, but I know how to do a Med Line inquiry.

My bad was I left out the Swedish trial randomizing 240 pts to immediate surgery vs antibiotics. So yes, there is randomized data pertaining to the surgery question.

1st point: Medicine should be evidence based. It is not acceptable to ignore evidence in clinical practice.

2nd point: MD (or DOs) posting that Medicine is highly subjective and we do all kinds of things without evidence that they work, puts a bad light on all physicians.

3rd point: No one cares you're a surgeon, and no one is intimidated by it. Nor, does it make you an expert on audio.
post #213 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneobgyn View Post

The mantra is "a chance to cut is a chance to cure"

My table saw has a sticker on it's side to that effect. It is constantly trying to "cure" my appendages.

So far, I can still count to 21.

Cheers, John
post #214 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky View Post

Shawn, why can't everyone be a gentleman/person like you?

Steve, I agree w/you. Shawn is one of the most knowledgable and articulate members of this Forum. I always enjoy reading, and learning from, his contributions.
post #215 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swampfox View Post

I'm not a surgeon, but I know how to do a Med Line inquiry.

My bad was I left out the Swedish trial randomizing 240 pts to immediate surgery vs antibiotics. So yes, there is randomized data pertaining to the surgery question.

1st point: Medicine should be evidence based. It is not acceptable to ignore evidence in clinical practice.

2nd point: MD (or DOs) posting that Medicine is highly subjective and we do all kinds of things without evidence that they work, puts a bad light on all physicians.

3rd point: No one cares you're a surgeon, and no one is intimidated by it. Nor, does it make you an expert on audio.

Mark Rubin is gonna erase our posts.

I was tempted to just ignore your post but foolishly won't. I was just making a point that not every "accepted belief" is based on "rigorous analysis", but sometimes it's correct anyway. There are very few cases of appendicitis managed "conservatively" with antibiotics but sometimes it is appropriate. I know the data that is out there, it is my profession. BTW, I wasn't talking about operation vs antibiotics...just operation vs nothing. I was using it as an example not as a comprehensive session on appendicitis.

Not trying to imply that medicine is subjective. It's taught based on experience, anecdotes as well as "scientific evidence".

Not trying to intimidate anyone either. Never claimed to be an "expert" on audio, whatever that is. My patients and wife DO care that I'm a surgeon.
post #216 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

My table saw has a sticker on it's side to that effect. It is constantly trying to "cure" my appendages.

So far, I can still count to 21.

Cheers, John

That mantra is comforting isn't it?

And people wonder why malpractice insurance is so high nowadays and medical care costs are soaring out into the stratosphere. LOL

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneobgyn View Post

Absolutely

The mantra is "a chance to cut is a chance to cure"
post #217 of 665
Quote:


As for trashing the bulk of the subjective community, why does Q's null result do that? I do not believe it is that simple.

It isn't that simple, no. My dispute is with The Bogg's immediate characterization of QueueClimber's null test as a limitation in his equipment or hearing. Now that is oversimplification. And it's also bullcrap. High-end audio snake oil salesmen tell people at all price levels that they ought to be spending a sizeable fraction of their budget on cabling. And they don't ask us to take a hearing test before they say it, either.

Statistically, I agree that QueueClimber's single null test doesn't invalidate subjectivism. I have said before that it takes one validated test to prove that a given tweak can be heard. But subjectivists need to be very careful when they go down the path of arguing that it takes a certain level of equipment or capability to hear them---because nobody selling the stuff makes that claim.
post #218 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueueCumber View Post

That mantra is comforting isn't it?


Actually, it's not that bad...it can be taken badly, however, if one wishes. As in all professions, a wide range exists, some perhaps knife happy, others knife shy, and the bulk do what is necessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueueCumber View Post

And people wonder why malpractice insurance is so high nowadays and medical care costs are soaring out into the stratosphere. LOL

People who consider litigation the solution to their lot in life have a lot to do with malpractice insurance. An easy buck. Consequently, all pay.

Rising medical cost is partly the increasing age average of our population and partly our ability to create and use increasingly expensive diagnostics and procedures. NICU facilities have fought this battle for years, giving the provider the unsettling choices of astronomical costs or giving up...not an easy question.

Perhaps the medical discussion is best left off this thread...I hope everybody could refrain from further talk along this vein?

Cheers, John
post #219 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Grant View Post

It isn't that simple, no. My dispute is with The Bogg's immediate characterization of QueueClimber's null test as a limitation in his equipment or hearing. Now that is oversimplification. And it's also bullcrap. High-end audio snake oil salesmen tell people at all price levels that they ought to be spending a sizeable fraction of their budget on cabling. And they don't ask us to take a hearing test before they say it, either.

Statistically, I agree that QueueClimber's single null test doesn't invalidate subjectivism. I have said before that it takes one validated test to prove that a given tweak can be heard. But subjectivists need to be very careful when they go down the path of arguing that it takes a certain level of equipment or capability to hear them---because nobody selling the stuff makes that claim.

You're taking more offence from my initial statement than was necessary. Q asked why he couldn't hear the difference. IF there is a difference and he doesn't hear it then it's because of either his ears, his equipment, his room or a combination. BTW, I'm not saying there is or is not a difference. I try to keep my beliefs on this topic to myself as it only affects me when I'm in my listening room.

I'm done with this thread as it seems like too many people need anger management counselling.
post #220 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

People who consider litigation the solution to their lot in life have a lot to do with malpractice insurance. An easy buck. Consequently, all pay.

* * *

Perhaps the medical discussion is best left off this thread...I hope everybody could refrain from further talk along this vein?

Perhaps the Republican Party talking points about litigation also are best left off this thread.
post #221 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Party View Post

Perhaps the Republican Party talking points about litigation also are best left off this thread.

I certainly agree. I did not know it was a talking point for the Republican party. It would appear that I have at least one thing in common with them.

My opinion in that regard was based on personal experience and not intended as a political statement. Since it can be misconstrued as such, I will indeed refrain from embellishment on that topic. Sorry.

Cheers, John
post #222 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

You're taking more offence from my initial statement than was necessary. Q asked why he couldn't hear the difference. IF there is a difference and he doesn't hear it then it's because of either his ears, his equipment, his room or a combination. BTW, I'm not saying there is or is not a difference. I try to keep my beliefs on this topic to myself as it only affects me when I'm in my listening room.

I'm done with this thread as it seems like too many people need anger management counselling.

I try to keep this saying in my mind as I travel through life: "wherever you go, there you are."
post #223 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky View Post

I don't like folks tellling me that I am pschologically nutso or hearing things

The fact that your hearing is subject to the same limitations as the rest of the human species is not something you should be taking as a personal insult. It just means you're human. Nothing more complicated than that.

Wine tasting competitions are done with the labels covered. That's not because they believe the judges are psychologically nutso. Even with their discriminating palettes, they understand that taste (and smell and all our senses) can easily be influenced by bias. So they simply minimize extraneous variables (price, brand, etc). Certainly not something that their egos should take personally.

Sanjay
post #224 of 665
Quote:


Bulldogger and I are a tag team. I'm in the ring right now!!!@@@

Yeah, but I know Roy Jones. My oldest played basketball with him a number of years back when he took a break from training (strict coincidence) and I had him over the house for BBQ. He'll kick your ass
post #225 of 665
Quote:


It just means you're human.

Ummm...he's a lawyer? Duh!

Quote:


Wine tasting competitions are done with the labels covered. That's not because they believe the judges are psychologically nutso. Even with their discriminating palettes, they understand that taste (and smell and all our senses) can easily be influenced by bias.

You know the story about how some tasters were fooled because one of two identical wines was colored red?
post #226 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post


Not trying to intimidate anyone either. Never claimed to be an "expert" on audio, whatever that is. My patients and wife DO care that I'm a surgeon.

Peace.
post #227 of 665
Quote:


I'm done with this thread as it seems like too many people need anger management counselling.

Rule #1---don't sweat the small stuff
Rule #2---it's all small stuff, especially on threads like these
Rule #3---but I do likes me a good fight

Bogg, I assure you that once I leave this forum I don't think particularly negative thoughts about anyone here. I assume that people are quite a different in person (where it matters) than they tend to be on this forum. That has certainly proven true for everyone I have met so far...
post #228 of 665
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Grant View Post

Statistically, I agree that QueueClimber's single null test doesn't invalidate subjectivism. I have said before that it takes one validated test to prove that a given tweak can be heard. But subjectivists need to be very careful when they go down the path of arguing that it takes a certain level of equipment or capability to hear them---because nobody selling the stuff makes that claim.

Do you know how much it pains me to be in full agreement with the "DOG" on this one!!!@@ But I am. High end audio salons will try to sell you whatever cables you will spend the $$$ on, no doubt about that, regardless of how expensive your gear is.
post #229 of 665
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

The fact that your hearing is subject to the same limitations as the rest of the human species is not something you should be taking as a personal insult. It just means you're human. Nothing more complicated than that.

Sanjay

Thank you. That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me on this forum.
post #230 of 665
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Yeah, but I know Roy Jones. My oldest played basketball with him a number of years back when he took a break from training (strict coincidence) and I had him over the house for BBQ. He'll kick your ass

But will Roy post on the web in your place - instead of Speco. Or are you telling me that Speco is really Roy Jones?? (KIDDING!)
post #231 of 665
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Grant View Post

Rule #1---don't sweat the small stuff
Rule #2---it's all small stuff, especially on threads like these
Rule #3---but I do likes me a good fight

Bogg, I assure you that once I leave this forum I don't think particularly negative thoughts about anyone here. I assume that people are quite a different in person (where it matters) than they tend to be on this forum. That has certainly proven true for everyone I have met so far...

I can't wait to meet you and find out. Meanwhile, I have a lot of praying to do. Please leave the "DOG" home!!!@@
post #232 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

Mark Rubin is gonna erase our posts.

I was tempted to just ignore your post but foolishly won't. I was just making a point that not every "accepted belief" is based on "rigorous analysis", but sometimes it's correct anyway.

Lots of 'accepted beliefs' in medicine and otherwise (btw, what you really mean, is 'beliefs based on anecdotal evidence rather than scientific evidence' ) turn out to either be untrue, or else empirically true, but not for the reason the believer thinks. So the question becomes, how can we tell if an 'accepted beliefs' is true, or, for a treatment that 'works', that it works for the reason people think? Enter evidence-based medicine.
post #233 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

or this lady, a foremost scientist in the field of psychology of music and sound perception:

http://psy.ucsd.edu/~ddeutsch/

Really, it's not just *physics* that some of you goofs need to bone up on, it's human psychology -- *that's* the key factor that has to be accounted for in reports of 'burn in'. The fact is, the human brain can make up all sorts of 'phenomena' that just aren't real.


Man, that's a name from the past..I was discussing localization testing parameters with her back in 2002..sheesh

She's very nice, and quite intelligent..I like her..

Cheers, John
post #234 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

You're taking more offence from my initial statement than was necessary. Q asked why he couldn't hear the difference. IF there is a difference and he doesn't hear it then it's because of either his ears, his equipment, his room or a combination. BTW, I'm not saying there is or is not a difference.

And IF unicorns exist and I don't see them, then it's because of my eyes, my unicorn-finding gear, or else the critters are just rare as hell.

Or maybe first we need to conclusively verify, that someone, even ONCE, has really seen a unicorn.

I'm aware of no listening data that verifies *audible* burn-in has occurred. I know there are measurement data for 'burnt-in' speakers and I'm guessing there's some out there for electronics, that show change (and I also know there are also things called TOLERANCES built into components, that can account for variance). But we can routinely measure differences in things with a resolution beyond what's audible. So the question is whether any of the measured changes reported, have been verified as audible. Sighted reports of audible change are essentially worthless for this purpose.
post #235 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

But we can routinely measure differences in things with a resolution beyond what's audible.


Single channel only. (one ping only....

But not two, and not very accurately with low impedance circuitry. Why everybody tries to use caddocks and dale NI's for high band low impedance audio, and believes they are being accurate, is beyond me.. repeatable perhaps, but not accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

So the question is whether any of the measured changes reported, have been verified as audible. Sighted reports of audible change are essentially worthless for this purpose.

Without accurate test instrumentation, correlation between measurement and audibility is indeed a difficult task.

Cheers, John
post #236 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

Or maybe first we need to conclusively verify, that someone, even ONCE, has really seen a unicorn.

Inadequate. We need to verify that he saw a real one.
post #237 of 665
Quote:


But not two, and not very accurately with low impedance circuitry. Why everybody tries to use caddocks and dale NI's for high band low impedance audio, and believes they are being accurate, is beyond me.. repeatable perhaps, but not accurate

I'm listening...type away!
post #238 of 665
Quote:


And people wonder why malpractice insurance is so high nowadays and medical care costs are soaring out into the stratosphere.

Right...let's start with home deliveries and all of its potential complications. In my experience it is always that patient who has the home delivery and the impossible "birth plan" that ends up with the unforseen complication who is the one to sue her Ob because she claims she was never given informed consent regarding the perils of home delivery
post #239 of 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneobgyn View Post

Right...let's start with home deliveries and all of its potential complications. In my experience it is always that patient who has the home delivery and the impossible "birth plan" that ends up with the unforseen complication who is the one to sue her Ob because she claims she was never given informed consent regarding the perils of home delivery

Still pissed off we decided to use a midwife rather than an OBGYN? How old are you again?
post #240 of 665
Hey, isn't it about time to break out some jokes?

Confucius say, Man who run behind car get exhausted, but man who run in front of car get tired.
Confucius say, Man who want pretty nurse, must be patient.
Confucius say, Man who lives in glass house must dress in basement.
Confucius say, Man who fart in church must sit in his own pew.
Confucius say, Man who fly airplane upside-down bound to have crack up.
Confucius say, Wife who puts man in dog house may find him in cat house.
Confucius say, Virgin like balloon one prick, all gone.
Confucius say, Man who lays girl on hillside is not on the level.
Confucius say, Man who lays girl in field gets piece on earth.
Confucius say, Man with athletic finger make broad jump.
Confucius say, Man who stand on toilet is high on pot
Confucius say, Man who walk through airport door sideways going to Bangkok.
Confucius say, Man who drop watch in toilet have ****** time.
Confucius say, Man with hand in pocket feel cocky all day.
Confucius say, Baseball got it all wrong man with four balls cannot walk.
Confucius say, Man who marries girl with no bust have right to feel low down.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Burn-in: Real Or Imagined???