paul.raulerson;693720 Wrote: > Well, not to belabor the point either, but of course it does. If one > program is a memory player and one is not, it can make all the > difference in the world. >
The programs we are talking about are rippers. If two rippers (of the standard sort that the TAS people are talking about, that used standard library functions to write data to disc) write out bit-identical files, if there are any differences at all due to the location on disc, etc, etc, then those differences BY DEFINITION have nothing to do with the behavior of the rippers. The TAS people even admitted that the files were bit identical. Note that we could change the locations by simply moving the files: would these differences still exist? Would they then be due to the move? They clearly wouldn't be because of different behavior by the rippers. paul.raulerson;693720 Wrote: > > Not meaning this rudely, but you would probably reject an assertation > by someone who told you your conclusions about your system were wrong. > Besides which, Most people are quite capable of a objectively deciding > what is and is not bull crap. > I might or might not, depends what the conclusions I made were. I've certainly been wrong about things before, and had people tell me so: not sure why I would be so quick to reject someone telling me such a thing if it was about an effect I was already dubious of. Not sure that either people are capable in general of detecting bullshit, or that it's strictly relevant here. paul.raulerson;693720 Wrote: > > You conflate hearing differences in audio equipment with UFOs? Just to > point out how absurd that sounds to me (ymmv), note that people do see > UFOs every day. Just because none of them happen to be extraterrestrial > spacecraft does not mean they didn't see something, be that a bird, a > cloud, a jet, or the planet Venus. And thy saw something real. > As I said, pick your favorite counterfactual belief. People once believed the earth revolved around the sun. People somewhat recently rejected the germ theory of disease causation. Sometimes people are just wrong. Sometimes they experience something, and make it into something else in their heads. Honestly, I don't even care all that much about this sort of anecdotal evidence. It just isn't relevant in any engineering related field. If it's reproducible in a controlled manner, then it can be discussed. Otherwise, we may as well be talking about pixie dust. paul.raulerson;693720 Wrote: > > In the same line of reasoning, people who hear a difference really do > hear a difference. Whatever the mundane reason for the difference may > be. Now yes, I believe there will be a mundane reason, I don't think > cables do a lot of quantum tunneling myself... > They THINK they hear a difference. They may or may not actually hear a difference. There is a literature on this stuff. Confirmation bias is often the most likely explanation, and unless it's ruled out, there isn't a lot of point even bothering. paul.raulerson;693720 Wrote: > > As for a large number of people, well, where there is smoke, you can > bet some form of combustion is happening. The reasons or explanations > the give are probably less than accurate, but that something is > happening is probably pretty likely. Again, YMMV. > Not necessarily at all. Confirmation bias needs to be addressed. This is why blind tests are used in the medical field. I truly do not understand why anyone thinks audio is so special that there must be no such thing as confirmation biases. paul.raulerson;693720 Wrote: > > Why bother? What on earth do you have to prove to anyone other than > yourself? And you can already hear a difference, so why not just enjoy > the music? Now, that's within reason. If you are like me, you have a > dollar limit which means crazy insanely priced anything is off the > table. But if you hear a difference between say, a $5 USB cable and a > $50 one, then it is probably not worth the bother to blnid test, and I > would just buy the $50 one and be happy. > Partially I like to argue for the fun of it. Partially because people like item_audio who spew bullshit really annoy me, and I don't see any reason why they should be given a free reign. Partially because all my friends are engineers and scientists, and I'm embarrassed to be called an audiophile, because the term has been brought into disrepute by this kind of stuff, and all during my youth I aspired to be one. paul.raulerson;693720 Wrote: > > To each their own. I personally dislike Internet anonymity -too many > people will say anything about anybody or anything if they feel safe > behind an anonymous screen name. I try hard to not say anything I > would not say face to face. More, because writing lacks the physical > clues that tell people what your intention really is. > I sort of agree with you. And even though I can be abrasive online, I can assure you that I am that abrasive in person (although as you say, it may be mitigated by body language etc). But the increasing lack of privacy online makes any possible real harassment by nutters (and I must hasten to say that I'm not including you in that class) potentially damaging. -- totoro sb touch -> classdaudio sds-450 -> audio physic tempo 4 + rel storm 3 & rythmik f12se ------------------------------------------------------------------------ totoro's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5935 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93549 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
