Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen? (Read 15136 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #25 –
The internal link didn't work for me, but I found this:
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/to-s...y.176362/page-6
Quote
The discussion and/or debate of "double-blind testing" (DBT) is forbidden in our forum. Note that you may discuss the outcome of such testing, whether published in print or during a listening session among friends, for example, but the debate of the validity or methodology of DBT is not allowed.

I wonder what would happen if we had this rule in addition to TOS8.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #26 –
Quote from: greynol on
The internal link didn't work for me, but I found this:
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/to-s...y.176362/page-6
Quote
The discussion and/or debate of "double-blind testing" (DBT) is forbidden in our forum. Note that you may discuss the outcome of such testing, whether published in print or during a listening session among friends, for example, but the debate of the validity or methodology of DBT is not allowed.



From a rational, free speech perspective that's pretty weird.

I checked it out, and the actual policy is indeed a broken link. What does that mean? ;-)

But catering to unintentional placebophilia is such a strong element in the audio market place that many people are very afraid of anything that rocks its boat.

Placebophiles have always seemed to get very emotional when they even hear of something that challenges their illusions and denials.

The uproar they create is a sight to see but not for long. If I were running a forum and didn't know what I know, I'd probably ban ABX just to keep the peace and cut down on the moderation load.

It is what it is, but that doesn't mean we have to contribute to it! ;-)

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #27 –
Quote from: 4season on
McGurk Effect videos, Meyer & Moran white papers, web sites of NWAVGUY, Sean Olive, Tom Nousaine, Rod Elliott, The Audio Critic, et al have no effect on people who simply Want To Believe. To an audio nut job, rhetoric carries at least as much weight as scientific evidence if not more.



On AVSF, there's more than one guy who consistently refers to the M&M paper as 'the discredited Meyer and Moran study'


 

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #28 –
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote from: 4season on
McGurk Effect videos, Meyer & Moran white papers, web sites of NWAVGUY, Sean Olive, Tom Nousaine, Rod Elliott, The Audio Critic, et al have no effect on people who simply Want To Believe. To an audio nut job, rhetoric carries at least as much weight as scientific evidence if not more.



On AVSF, there's more than one guy who consistently refers to the M&M paper as 'the discredited Meyer and Moran study'



I think you might be aware that in a way, I might agree with the M&M critic. 

Meyer and Moran presumed that all of the recordings that were labelled as being hi-rez were in reality hi-rez..

We discovered a few years later that so-called hi-rez recordings were about a 50/50 mixed bag and that is being very generous to the hi-rez viewpoint.

One could get up on their high horse and call this fraud on a large scale, but of course you know I'd never do that. I don't have that much respect for the record company exec's involved.

BTW Moran and I conversed about this issue, a few months back in the context of the Meridian award winning, peer reviewed paper we all know about. We're cool! ;-)

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #29 –
Quote from: greynol on
The internal link didn't work for me, but I found this:
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/to-s...y.176362/page-6
Quote
The discussion and/or debate of "double-blind testing" (DBT) is forbidden in our forum. Note that you may discuss the outcome of such testing, whether published in print or during a listening session among friends, for example, but the debate of the validity or methodology of DBT is not allowed.

I wonder what would happen if we had this rule in addition to TOS8.

Verbatim it seems a good policy: you can discuss the results of DBT but you can't discuss whether DBT is or is not valid.  Its intent would seem to be to shut down all the name-calling and soapboxing.  It's unfortunate the policy is not enforced.

In a sense we do have this policy on HA.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #30 –
After reading the explanation for the rule it is clear that we don't, as evidenced by the recently closed 60-page discussion, and many, many others.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #32 –
Of course they would equate asking the question "did you do a proper test?" with 'thread-crapping'.

You also wouldn't want people asking that in a magic bracelet (a piece of rubber) impressions thread... Instead of being honest and answering "NO, no proper test, this are my personal feelings about this product that need not be based in objective reality - you could feel completely different about this product" they censor even asking the question.
"I hear it when I see it."

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #33 –
Quote from: xnor on
Of course they would equate asking the question "did you do a proper test?" with 'thread-crapping'.

You also wouldn't want people asking that in a magic bracelet (a piece of rubber) impressions thread... Instead of being honest and answering "NO, no proper test, this are my personal feelings about this product that need not be based in objective reality - you could feel completely different about this product" they censor even asking the question.


But maybe asking for details of the test that was done could pass?

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #34 –
Maybe. I know that you can get banned just for pointing out that there wasn't even level-matching in a sighted comparison and that differences in level will almost certainly cause people to hear differences.

It disrupts the circle j€rk.
"I hear it when I see it."

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #35 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
I think you might be aware that in a way, I might agree with the M&M critic. 

Meyer and Moran presumed that all of the recordings that were labelled as being hi-rez were in reality hi-rez..

We discovered a few years later that so-called hi-rez recordings were about a 50/50 mixed bag and that is being very generous to the hi-rez viewpoint.


I would say: so what?

For at least a decade in audiophile circles and press, 'hi rez' releases were routinely praised to the skies for their warm creamy analog-like qualities, obviously superior to Redbook, regardless of how they were sourced.  Then after M&M, suddenly analog-sourced SACDs /DVD-As were no longer 'hi rez', and simply *would not do* for demonstrating the superiority of the hi rez formats. 

It was a pretty contemptible example of goalpost-moving but it showed the desperation of 'high end' to uphold its belief system.


And now witness the contortions Stuart et al. had to go through to generate their evidence for a mild audible difference between certain digital filters.  *That* is supposed to be the reason for the night and day, veils lifted, my wife can hear it etc difference between Redbook and hi rez?

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #36 –
Quote from: krabapple on
...my wife can hear it...

Laughed out loud as I'd forgotten that one.  It's a classic!

I wonder has a wife ever called out from the kitchen, "Honey, that sounds crappier than usual."

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #37 –
This reminds me of a story of a person who had spent hundreds of euros on small, plastic (?) discs that supposedly improve the sound of your speakers. The storyteller of course heard claimed improvements...
His wife, of course, did too -- from another room.

She must have thought: "Do I tell him no and that he is batshit, gullible and wasting money and get into a lengthy argument/fight, or do I just tell him 'yes' and let him be happy and busy with his new toy?"
"I hear it when I see it."

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #38 –
Quote from: xnor on
This reminds me of a story of a person who had spent hundreds of euros on small, plastic (?) discs that supposedly improve the sound of your speakers. The storyteller of course heard claimed improvements...
His wife, of course, did too -- from another room.

She must have thought: "Do I tell him no and that he is batshit, gullible and wasting money and get into a lengthy argument/fight, or do I just tell him 'yes' and let him be happy and busy with his new toy?"

If it were my wife then she would take one look at what I had spent all of that money on, and immediately confiscate all of my credit cards.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #40 –


Audiophile wife jokes are the best.

I miss this cartoonist, Charles Rodrigues. His cartoons in Stereo Review magazine were hilarious. His book of them, "Total Harmonic Distortion" is a classic.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #41 –
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
I think you might be aware that in a way, I might agree with the M&M critic. 

Meyer and Moran presumed that all of the recordings that were labelled as being hi-rez were in reality hi-rez..

We discovered a few years later that so-called hi-rez recordings were about a 50/50 mixed bag and that is being very generous to the hi-rez viewpoint.


I would say: so what?

For at least a decade in audiophile circles and press, 'hi rez' releases were routinely praised to the skies for their warm creamy analog-like qualities, obviously superior to Redbook, regardless of how they were sourced.  Then after M&M, suddenly analog-sourced SACDs /DVD-As were no longer 'hi rez', and simply *would not do* for demonstrating the superiority of the hi rez formats. 

It was a pretty contemptible example of goalpost-moving but it showed the desperation of 'high end' to uphold its belief system.

And now witness the contortions Stuart et al. had to go through to generate their evidence for a mild audible difference between certain digital filters.  *That* is supposed to be the reason for the night and day, veils lifted, my wife can hear it etc difference between Redbook and hi rez?


Exactly.

I find it interesting that  38+ years after I did  my first ABX test so many people are still fighting the battle of the Placebo. That test pretty much settled it for me, right then and there. It was as they say, the evidence of my ears! 

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #42 –
Quote from: mzil on

Ha. There's a related one where the audiophile worrys 'What if I die and my wife sells off my stuff at what I told her I paid for it...?'.

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #44 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
I find it interesting that  38+ years after I did  my first ABX test so many people are still fighting the battle of Placebo.


More epic than Thermopylae, no doubt

And about as one sided

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #45 –
Quote from: Joe Bloggs on
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
I find it interesting that  38+ years after I did  my first ABX test so many people are still fighting the battle of Placebo.


More epic than Thermopylae, no doubt

And about as one sided



it is one-sided the way I like. We were right and stayed that way. They did what they did but it didn't help them that much.

The ongoing motion of their goalposts shows that the only way they can come up with is cheating.  Not that it works, but cheating and being abusive is all they can do. Let them!

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #46 –
Where I stand it feels one-sided the way I don't like

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #47 –
I see no reason in fighting the placebo effect or placebos per se.

What needs to be opposed however is the fallacy of concluding some people's experiences* with "therefore, there is an audible difference between these devices" and spreading these purely subjective experiences / opinions as some sort of objective facts.

If you conclude from the placebo effect that the placebo has to have some magical properties or do not even accept that it was one, then you are crazy or in denial.


*) I have the feeling, that the majority of differences heard are due poor comparisons. People fail to even realize how important level-matching is.
"I hear it when I see it."

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #48 –
Quote from: Joe Bloggs on
Where I stand it feels one-sided the way I don't like



Well, first we straighten out the SS forum on HF where we have reasonable freedom, then we tighten up our missionaries' debating style, and then we take over the world! ;-)

Best explanation of rationale for ABX for laymen?

Reply #49 –
I suspect that you could actually tell me, at least approximately, how much the "hi-fi" cables and accessories world is worth these days; just the "mainstream," not the way-out-weird market, that is. Head-Fi is very much a part of that world, as are other audio forums, and this thing is not going to go away.

Am I allowed to say "P'ing into the wind" on this site?

There is no hope. But please don't stop trying! 
The most important audio cables are the ones in the brain