The audio mystics, agnostics and atheists thread

[aardvarkash10]

OK, this thread is to drag all the noise out of threads placed by others.

Well intentioned or otherwise, there is a tendency for threads that touch on the more contentious areas of audio products to move toward a sectarian war between those who reject any requirement for empirical evidence and scientific method, and those for whom numbers and measurement are all important.

I allow that there is a large group that sit somewhere in between - agnostics so to speak.

I'm putting this thread in place as a location for those discussions to move to so that, if they are off - topic, don't disrupt the threads they arise in.

Lets see how it goes...

[flavio81]

OK, this thread is to drag all the noise out of threads placed by others.

Well intentioned or otherwise, there is a tendency for threads that touch on the more contentious areas of audio products to move toward a sectarian war between those who reject any requirement for empirical evidence and scientific method, and those for whom numbers and measurement are all important.

I allow that there is a large group that sit somewhere in between - agnostics so to speak.

I'm putting this thread in place as a location for those discussions to move to so that, if they are off - topic, don't disrupt the threads they arise in.

Lets see how it goes...

I'm all for measurements and tests and specs. However, 90% of the tests that are usually quoted when discussing turntables and cartridges, say little about the actual perceived sound quality, unless the figures are very bad. So, listening tests and impressions are VERY important.

However, the ears' and the brain' response is sensitive to many external factors, so we always have to factor this in. Just cleaning your ears in a proper way makes a system sound radically different...

Now, there are other things that are simply bullshit to anyone with proper engineering knowledge. For example, that ultra expensive cables are going to make a difference to the sound. Or "audiophile" USB cables that somehow are going to give better sound. Those kind of products and their supporters make claims that simply have no base in accepted scientific facts.

[aardvarkash10]

A recent thread was opened to discuss inexpensive silver turntable interconnects. This led to some discussion on sonic behaviour of silver wire and possible causes.

Open discussion - is there an audible difference between silver wire and alternatives when used as interconnects. If so, what is the mechanism that leads to the difference?

[aardvarkash10]

I'm all for measurements ... simply have no base in accepted scientific facts.

All agreed from my pov Flavio. I guess I'd like ot try and contain that discussion here so it doesn't contaminate other threads. Also, over time a method of reasonably understanding each pov may come to pass.

[Ldg]

Hmmm. I don't think it's sound to move one of the axioms of debate, establishing veracity of a premise, away from the debate itself. What I mean is a thread will become pointless if the classic means of proving things true or false are not there.

For example, it's pointless discussing why smearing horse manure on cables makes them sound fantastic without establishing that it does. If one moves the principle of establishing that horse manure influences the way cables sound away from the thread just because people can't agree, what's left is a thread discussing mechanisms for how horse manure affects cables, without fear of being challenged whether it does. Which is absurd on a number of counts.

Then debates and threads are better for inclusion of establishing the premise(s) on which they are based. This might be unpopular, and quite a few threads should rightly fall because of it IMO, but challenging such things can't ever be off topic.

It's about the basis of debate, discussion and persuasion. I reckon it's impossible to have a thread of enduring interest about why horse manure affects the way cables sound, because it doesn't. And that point belongs in the original thread, because it is the single most useful thing to know about it.

Ultimately, threads become more useful for including proper challenge and debate.

IF I've got the gist of what you're suggesting wrong, aadvarkash10, then shout ! But I reckon it would weaken many threads here, horse manure is better to be described as such !

[Ldg]

A recent thread was opened to discuss inexpensive silver turntable interconnects. This led to some discussion on sonic behaviour of silver wire and possible causes.

Open discussion - is there an audible difference between silver wire and alternatives when used as interconnects. If so, what is the mechanism that leads to the difference?

I predict a riot........!

Your question could have its own thread, aadvarkash10. But any thread that discusses, say, audible value of silver cables must surely establish at least the first part. Or at least face a challenge to do so, or face contradiction, without being considered off-topic, IMHO. See the above horse manure example. That's where the thread you cite fails, addvarkash10, as I see it.

[aardvarkash10]

Hmmm. I don't think it's sound to move one of the axioms of debate, establishing veracity of a premise, away from the debate itself. What I mean is a thread will become pointless if the classic means of proving things true or false are not there. ...

IF I've got the gist of what you're suggesting wrong, aadvarkash10, then shout ! But I reckon it would weaken many threads here, horse manure is better to be described as such !

I get your gist.

My mean attempt here is to disengage the philosophical and scientific argument from the "Hey I just bought a neat bit of kit, the earth moved and heavenly choirs sang!" threads. I hope that by moving the heat elsewhere it will encourage a more considered approach.

There is imo ample scope for unevidenced rhapsodising - we do it all the time over food and the such. That should continue. The analysis and argument over why this effect should be experienced can happen here if it is not explicitly invited in the thread.

waddayareckon?

Might be wrong.

[aardvarkash10]

This is a core starting point for the discussion - what evidence would be required to prove that (insert contentious claim of your liking here) is real?

This article explains it nicely in the context of medicine and specifically a claim that a "healer's" body (faith or touch or massage healer) emits a particular energy that is the mechanism of cure.

Take all the medical references out and replace them with the appropriate electrical/audio equivalents and you start to get a good idea of what might constitute scientific evidence and more, what we need to think about when considering if a proposed mechanism is plausible.

[Hanuman]

For example, it's pointless discussing why smearing horse manure on cables makes them sound fantastic without establishing that it does. If one moves the principle of establishing that horse manure influences the way cables sound away from the thread just because people can't agree, what's left is a thread discussing mechanisms for how horse manure affects cables, without fear of being challenged whether it does.

If the original question was framed as you suggest then your position is fair enough. If the question was more of a: "I've been getting good results with Clydsedale but now I'm ready to try Arabian, who sells this in my area?" then it's possibly poor form to attempt to disabuse the poster of their belief that such things make a difference. They've clearly bought into it and probably would reasonably expect useful responses from others with similar experiences.

[aardvarkash10]

^exactly

[cairns4me]

Hmmm. I don't think it's sound to move one of the axioms of debate, establishing veracity of a premise, away from the debate itself. What I mean is a thread will become pointless if the classic means of proving things true or false are not there.

For example, it's pointless discussing why smearing horse manure on cables makes them sound fantastic without establishing that it does. If one moves the principle of establishing that horse manure influences the way cables sound away from the thread just because people can't agree, what's left is a thread discussing mechanisms for how horse manure affects cables, without fear of being challenged whether it does. Which is absurd on a number of counts.

Then debates and threads are better for inclusion of establishing the premise(s) on which they are based. This might be unpopular, and quite a few threads should rightly fall because of it IMO, but challenging such things can't ever be off topic.

It's about the basis of debate, discussion and persuasion. I reckon it's impossible to have a thread of enduring interest about why horse manure affects the way cables sound, because it doesn't. And that point belongs in the original thread, because it is the single most useful thing to know about it.

Ultimately, threads become more useful for including proper challenge and debate.

IF I've got the gist of what you're suggesting wrong, aadvarkash10, then shout ! But I reckon it would weaken many threads here, horse manure is better to be described as such !

ld... For those of us living in Cairns and my "virtual neighbour" CafeLatte living just "up the hill" on the Tableland, we prefer the sonic benefits of Cane Toad s.h.i.t spread over interconnects- reduces the famed "skin effect" tonal twist on the electron flow

[Ldg]

For example, it's pointless discussing why smearing horse manure on cables makes them sound fantastic without establishing that it does.

If the question was more of a: "I've been getting good results with Clydsedale but now I'm ready to try Arabian, who sells this in my area?" then it's possibly poor form to attempt to disabuse the poster of their belief that such things make a difference.

Is it really ? Isn't the belief misleading and damaging to the quality of helpful content on the forum generally if it isn't true ? The discussion would effectively be about what type of horse manure to apply and where to obtain it.

They've clearly bought into it and probably would reasonably expect useful responses from others with similar experiences.

But on the other hand, there are so many cases where threads contains real and helpful information, and it would be far harder or impossible to tell the difference from those which don't. I venture that already there are decades worth of mixed up myth and verifyable truth out there, and sorting them out is hard enough.

Personally, I invest significant time in establishing the veracity of most of the the stuff I post here, and explaining the basis for it. It's open to challenge, and it should withstand it if its true, it's not an affront.

Is this denying someone's right to believe horse manure affects cable ? No. The proper place, is always at the root of debate of matters relating to it. It must always be fair game to challenge and resolve the basis for such things.

[Ldg]

...My mean attempt here is to disengage the philosophical and scientific argument from the "Hey I just bought a neat bit of kit, the earth moved and heavenly choirs sang!" threads. I hope that by moving the heat elsewhere it will encourage a more considered approach.

Hmmm, no i reckon it would create a fertile ground for posting unverifiable nonsense on the original thread, and a means of avoiding challenge. As such it might avoid conflict, at the expense of content of the thread and the forum quality generally, as I see it.

There is imo ample scope for unevidenced rhapsodising - we do it all the time over food and the such. That should continue. The analysis and argument over why this effect should be experienced can happen here if it is not explicitly invited in the thread.

No-one is suggesting contradicting experience, and generally that doesn't happen anyway. But exploring the basis for it is always relevent. No, I disagree that removing challenge to premise(s) promotes quality content. When challenge is disinvited in a thread it's often just a vehicle to avoid proper discussion, IMO, and fundamentally poor in the process of proper debate. Unlikely to result in content of enduring interest, IMO, and likely to appear misleading when unchallenged.

Now, I'm off to try some of CFM's toad poo, are you really interested in my experience if you can't explore it ?

[Josey Wales]

I tried horse manure and believe it or not it got rid of all unwanted noise completely from my system.

The wife just took one sniff and left the room and listening is definitely more enjoyable now, so I can vouch for the miraculous effects of horse manure.