adamslim;156950 Wrote: > I agree, but what is proof? The seller says, "I can hear these are > better", and he is convinced, but you can never replicate that (a > requirement for a proof) as you can't use his ears. Therefore you have > to use your own ears; this is where the self-doubt and delusion issues > creep in. > > Ultimately, I am not convinced that the seller has to provide any > evidence if he is not actually forcing his product upon you. The > parallel with religion is good, isn't it?
No, the seller doesn't _have_ to prove anything. But my claim is that he _should_, and sensible people should not take him seriously until he does. For most of these tweaks, simply proving that they had _some_ audible effect would be enough for me, and I think for most other sceptics, as well. The methodology for doing this is well known (blind a/b/x tests, etc), and many manufacturers use such tests in their development processes. The opposition to these tests seems to arise principally from proponents of tweaks which can't seem to pass them, unsurprisingly. To make an analogy, what would you think of a pharmaceutical firm that said of their products: "don't worry about the fact that X hasn't been shown to be efficacious. Just take it, and if you feel better, that's enough"? -- totoro squeezebox 3 -> mccormack dna .5 -> audio physic tempo 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ totoro's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5935 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=29972 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
