[turkey]

I certainly agree with Mr. Haskins' statement. In the modern world that we live in it's unfortunate that it's become acceptable to give equal weight to opinions verses facts. It been suggested since the 1960s that "there is no right or wrong, only shades of gray" or the Marxist idea of a situational context or validity regarding facts.

In some cases, opinion is ok.

How would you factually compare two movies for relative quality? Two wines? You could perhaps provide some facts to be used in making a comparison, but there would be plenty of opinion too.

[Ethan Winer]

Is this a philosophical statement Ethan?     "If a man runs naked in the woods and nobody was there to see it, did it happen?"

Yes, I'm just full of philosophy today. The more compelling question is, "If an attractive young woman prances naked around a bunch of acoustic treatment, does that make the room sound better?"

--Ethan

[Ethan Winer]

it seemed to me pretty cukoo after he had just proven that he couldn't tell the difference.

And this surprises you why exactly?

--Ethan

[JoshK]

Thankyou Occam.

I don't quite understand what some others here are talking about, it sounds like when questioning a cables validity the nay sayers require proof and when it is provided they question the meaning of the word proof.

I think they question whether the data that was presented actually proved anything, not what is a proof.  [fair disclosure: I have no real interest in this topic, and therefore have not read the whitepaper]

[Kevin Haskins]

Is this a philosophical statement Ethan?     "If a man runs naked in the woods and nobody was there to see it, did it happen?"

Yes, I'm just full of philosophy today. The more compelling question is, "If an attractive young woman prances naked around a bunch of acoustic treatment, does that make the room sound better?"

--Ethan

The answer is unequivocally YES!   

At least it has proven to sell more and that is all that really matters in an advertisement.   

[*Scotty*]

Frankly the presence of the naked young woman in the room makes the sound of the room wholly irrelevant which is perhaps the point of her being there in the first place.
Scotty

[Kevin Haskins]

it seemed to me pretty cukoo after he had just proven that he couldn't tell the difference.

And this surprises you why exactly?

--Ethan

It didn't but just the same, it scared me to think how twisted the industry has become.   In a lot of places, there is scorn and ridicule of genuine engineering efforts.   There is this intense dislike of any method that doesn't involve purely subjective evaluation.   I don't pretend to know a percentage, but based upon the magazines and what sells, I'd say there is a very high proportion of audiophiles that give little to no credit to research or valid engineering principles.    Part of that is because of the marketing materials masquerading as science.    Part of this is because engineers often are irrational too, they would rather chase easy to measure metrics than meaningful ones.  

This thread struck a nerve for me because it is the "marketing masquerading as science syndrome".   It just leads the consumer to think that engineering and science are pretty much useless tools in developing good sound.   That is unhealthy for the industry.  It leads to bad products at very high prices.   It pretty much insures that high-end audio will forever be a small inconsequential industry.    

I guess I should get over it and move on with life because I'm not going to change it.  

 

[Occam]

Its good to see that anecdotes are being used by both the subjectivists (my wife heard it from the other room) as well objectivists (and the capacitor's marked polarity was random), with equal validity.  

Good reading for all, including myself - A List Of Fallacious Arguments
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#goalposts

Regarding purely technical issues hearabouts, it is inevitably proven that no good deed goes unpunished. What an impressive group of master debaters, who make such pithy comments, without ever having read and studied Horowitz & Hill, let alone Ott. (use google ya lazy SOBs)





FWIW

PS - Kevin - Your last post has much validity, but your stand deserves its own thread.


Edited - because I'm sooo confused I can't tell the difference between the objectivists and subjectivists anymore.

[Browntrout]

I believe that the tests carried out were good enough to satisfy the Electronic Engineers Association, the organisation that the original complaint was upheld by. So that is good enough for me.
    As for Ethan and Kevin Haskins and Turkey your comments mean little to me and I hope anyone else who has taken the time to read my original post.
    I ask you more directly not to post here unless you are going to write something other than pathetic nonsense. I understand you have your own products to further but not at the expense of this thread.
    Is it possible to have admin remove spurious comments from a thread in the interests of pursueing a proper disscusion?

[Kevin Haskins]

I believe that the tests carried out were good enough to satisfy the Electronic Engineers Association, the organisation that the original complaint was upheld by. So that is good enough for me.
    As for Ethan and Kevin Haskins and Turkey your comments mean little to me and I hope anyone else who has taken the time to read my original post.
    I ask you more directly not to post here unless you are going to write something other than pathetic nonsense. I understand you have your own products to further but not at the expense of this thread.
    Is it possible to have admin remove spurious comments from a thread in the interests of pursueing a proper disscusion?

Since it seems that I'm wanting to be silenced, I'll depart peacefully.    Feel free to delete my post if they upset the apple cart.   

[Browntrout]

I'd much rather you stayed and discussed the technical paper seriously.

[turkey]

Is this a philosophical statement Ethan?     "If a man runs naked in the woods and nobody was there to see it, did it happen?"

Yes, I'm just full of philosophy today. The more compelling question is, "If an attractive young woman prances naked around a bunch of acoustic treatment, does that make the room sound better?"

--Ethan

I find that it all works out better if you use young and attractive naked women as your room treatment.

[whubbard]

Whoa,
Kevin might be joking around, but it is perfectly okay for him to question the validity of the setup.
We should be having a discussion here and this paper isn't the be-all and end-all, so your going to have to put up with both sides...
I think Kevin's comments were fine!

-West

[turkey]

I believe that the tests carried out were good enough to satisfy the Electronic Engineers Association, the organisation that the original complaint was upheld by. So that is good enough for me.
    As for Ethan and Kevin Haskins and Turkey your comments mean little to me and I hope anyone else who has taken the time to read my original post.

Why would you hope our comments mean little to other people?

    I ask you more directly not to post here unless you are going to write something other than pathetic nonsense. I understand you have your own products to further but not at the expense of this thread.

I didn't see anyone touting products here other than you. (Why else would you want to make sure everyone went to look at the marketing white papers?)

[turkey]

I'd much rather you stayed and discussed the technical paper seriously.

He did, but it looked like you didn't want that.

[TerryO]

I believe that the tests carried out were good enough to satisfy the Electronic Engineers Association, the organisation that the original complaint was upheld by. So that is good enough for me.
    As for Ethan and Kevin Haskins and Turkey your comments mean little to me and I hope anyone else who has taken the time to read my original post.
    I ask you more directly not to post here unless you are going to write something other than pathetic nonsense. I understand you have your own products to further but not at the expense of this thread.
    Is it possible to have admin remove spurious comments from a thread in the interests of pursueing a proper disscusion?

I don't sell anything and I'm not pushing an agenda, but I think that your seeming lack of maturity in discussing this in a rational manner is pathetic. You come out looking like a shill for a certain company when you dismiss any view that doesn't coincide with your own.

The important thing to remember is that the survival of the human race isn't going to depend on the outcome of this discussion and good-natured banter is often the lubricant that keeps the topic from getting stuck and becoming abusive. There are obviously some very knowledgeable people in this discussion, so keeping a light heart will prevent you from getting overly defensive when, in fact, you (and I) might be able to learn something.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[TerryO]

I certainly agree with Mr. Haskins' statement. In the modern world that we live in it's unfortunate that it's become acceptable to give equal weight to opinions verses facts. It been suggested since the 1960s that "there is no right or wrong, only shades of gray" or the Marxist idea of a situational context or validity regarding facts.

In some cases, opinion is ok.

How would you factually compare two movies for relative quality? Two wines? You could perhaps provide some facts to be used in making a comparison, but there would be plenty of opinion too.

I agree. You should measure what can be measured, and discuss what the measurements mean. Beyond that, as in the examples of movies or wines, it calls for an "informed opinion" as the nature of a subjective evaluation can, to some degree, be rated by the magnitude of experiential familiarity with the subject matter.

What the problem seems to be, in many of these discussions, is where fact ends and opinion begins. An ethical approach would be to identify the demarcation from one to the other, instead of blurring the line between them as many marketing types seem to do.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[Ethan Winer]

This thread struck a nerve for me because it is the "marketing masquerading as science syndrome".   It just leads the consumer to think that engineering and science are pretty much useless tools in developing good sound.   That is unhealthy for the industry.  It leads to bad products at very high prices.   It pretty much insures that high-end audio will forever be a small inconsequential industry.

Agreed on all counts.

This thread reminds me of another in a different forum a few months ago. As I recall it ended up being locked.

Anyway, in that thread someone offered what he claimed was proof that an expensive power conditioner was effective and thus a useful purchase. The "proof" was examining the AC power to an amplifier with and without the filter device connected. With the filter in place there was a miniscule reduction in high frequency grunge on the AC line. So I pointed out that the proper place to look for an improvement is at the amplifier's speaker output terminals. Man was he PO'd at me!

[woodsyi]

I am convinced.  I am going to plait all my mains.  Wait till I post pictures of all my cornrowed PCs. 

[BobM]

What the problem seems to be, in many of these discussions, is where fact ends and opinion begins. An ethical approach would be to identify the demarcation from one to the other, instead of blurring the line between them as many marketing types seem to do.

TerryO - this is certainly the issue on any of these cord related or boutique capacitor related or DIY modding related discussions. The problem is that most people can't fully understand what they are reading, or can't adequately and accurately convey in writing what they mean.

Even using the specific words "subjective opinion" gets ignored and the badgering and fighting starts between "it can" vs "it can't". This has been tickled to death for years now and it will never stop. Whether the opinions are formed from practical experience or hearsay or textbook "knowledge" doesn't seem to matter. People will be people and forums make it real easy to type before you think. It is generally easier to type in an insulting or derogatory manner, saying things you would never ever say to a person face to face.

My mom always said, never write anything in a letter (or e-mail or post, by extension) that you wouldn't say to a person directly. A good rule of thumb in my book and something I only wish more people would follow.

Bob