opaqueice;582211 Wrote: > Well, to my knowledge no one has ever succeeded in hearing differences > between cables in a controlled level-matched blind test.
Well I would be very interested to see citations for a set of serious tests that have been done with cables so that I could evaluate their validity. Years ago I read all of the original David Clark and associates ABX papers in JAES and such, and every single one of those tests had rather serious methodological problems that drastically limit what one can infer from any negative results. So I not going to just take your word for it that there have been "numerous tests" that "scientifically prove" what you claim. This is all I ever hear on here (that there are lots and lots of such tests); I never see even a SINGLE ONE ever cited. If there are so many that support your position on this that you feel this is a scientifically proven fact then you ought to be able to provide me with a list of half a dozen or so of such tests, with detailed descriptions of the protocols available, and I would of course expect that some would have been published in appropriate peer reviewed journals. I would be particularly interested to see reports of tests where an effort was made to establish the resolution of the test setup (using previously established limits of human auditory perception). Otherwise, negative results from the test are quite meaningless in a scientific sense. opaqueice;582211 Wrote: > I think that's a strawman....All we really know (from generations of > experiments in cognitive psychology) is that biases, expectations, > mood, hormones, what you ate for breakfast, etc. all have a very, very > strong and almost completely unpredictable effect on perception and > cognition. What the effect is, or even what direction it will go - > psychology is miles away from being able to predict things like that. Glad to hear you think "bias explains it all" is a strawman. Seems like I already saw that point of view earlier in this very thread, however. Obviously I like my yellow jacketed cable today because it is a sunny day. :) Actually your statements make me feel amazed that fields like psychology can continue to exist when they have until very recently relied almost exclusively on human observation (i.e., "almost completely unpredictable" human perception) to gain knowledge. What completely unscientific quackery. Oh wait, though, you are using psychological experiments, where results were judged and interpreted by humans, to argue that human perceptions are completely and utterly unreliable. Hmm. Me senses a bit of a paradox here! :) -- ncarver ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ncarver's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15905 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82067 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
