Quote:
There has been a new type of religious science invented. It is the faith based 'HiFi Science'. It's followers need no evidence or fact, they need only their ears to find the truth.

Isn't religious science an oxymoron?
If they are using their ears to find the truth where does "faith" come in?

I'm sorry, but your post has been said so many times, in as many ways, it probably takes up a whole server's worth of space on this forum! And yet, it NEVER goes anywhere- just pages of "I'm right, you're not; listen to how right I am."

It's old news, and to me, boring, like the opposite poles of a political debate calling each other crazy, dumb or delusional. Yes- SOME people ignore all reasonable science in favor of personal experience and emotional projection above all. And yes, some OTHER people ignore all personal experience and subjective imput over what they belive to be established textbook maxims and scientific "law."

Both sides are a little right, but mostly wrong because they cannot see out of the comfortable box they have chosen to inhabit. To bad- it's a big and facinating world out there, with something new to learn every day if you choose to peer out of that box.

And that's all I'm going to say on that subject.

How long ago was it that we said CD players sound different even though they measured the same? Then we learned how to measure word clock jitter.

Quote:
How long ago was it that we said CD players sound different even though they measured the same? Then we learned how to measure word clock jitter.

and then, another thing reared it's ugly head in subjectivsm land: The 'people with discernment and hearing all tied together'..said that ..."CD players with lower jitter have the best bass', which totally flies in the face of the measurements..or more correctly... does not, on the surface, seem to apply very well to the commonly understood directions that the measurements of 'better jitter characteristics' might take a given CD player.

Quote:
How long ago was it that we said CD players sound different even though they measured the same? Then we learned how to measure word clock jitter.

And amplifiers with vanishingly low IM and THD measurements that sounded worse and worse as these measurements improved.

Then we learned about TIM and its adverse affects on sound reproduction.

We observe first. Then we investigate, learn and ultimately explain.

There is, however, a willingness by some to believe all the hype they read - and then convince themselves they hear consistently with the hype. This is unfortunate.

I've never understood why it is so hard for some to accept that not everything they try in their system will make it sound better, or even make it sound different. If a component, piece of wire or tweak does not improve the sound - send it back. Easy.

I think its healthy to question things. Too often I notice when people raise questions or challenge concepts about [what have become] commonly held beliefs, they are immediately shot down, and worse, ridiculed. This is not healthy.

In the spirit of trust in what others have found, and by my own experience, I do accept some of the claims and solutions, that while are scientifically un-substantiated, are embraced by the hobby in general. I've invested as such, and not altogether wisely somtimes - BUT, I've concluded that some of the vehemently defended products and 'truths' are not on the up-and-up. This whole thing about expensive powercords for example is bad, because its like throwing a lot of money down the drain. The worst thing is that if one questions the validity of powercords, the proponents go on the attack, or throw thinly veiled insinuations that one must be deaf not to hear the difference. I've tried and tested powercords over the past several months, and have found no improvement whatsoever over the standard powercords my gear came with.

I recently looked through an extensive photographic review of the latest CES show in Vegas, this done by a dealer of sorts. The report began quite promisingly, but then I started to raise my eyebrows at some of the comments. For a start, the reviewer utterly dismissed so much good gear, and suggested that components sounded bad because they were not adequately isolated. This is taking a concept to ludicrous levels. For me, the review and opinions lost all credibility after this. I should think that manufacturers can make great-sounding gear without having to add after-market 'feet' to make that component sound good. Too much balogni!!!

"Balogna".

Actually, Bologna (the city) - but in this context "baloney".

Why Oscar Myer decided to pronounce Bologna as baloney is a mystery to me, as is why this particular concoction of meat products is called bologna. It's a nice city - why name bad sausage after it?

Powercords have never really done anything for me either.

I do however have a nice set of single meter cords from when Ps Audio was selling out a discontinued line. They are stout enough to handle the biggest amps (smaller gauge cords can get warm to touch), have wonderful IEC connectors and plugs - both of which really grip, and even look nice. They were also inexpensive.

My system sounds better with them in place, put this may be as much a function of good cord dressing as the short power cords make it easy to keep signal carrying wires away from them. I can imagine unshielded power cords bothering the delicate little signals carried from phono cartridges for example. It's a small improvement in any event.

Vibration isolation can really make a difference. I really like Aurios. These things are amazing when combined with a good solid, rack.

In my mind tweaks should be relatively inexpensive and fun ways to improve the sound a bit. Some of these things have gotten completely out of hand - where the tweaks are more expensive than good quality components. I have trouble accepting that there is a worthwhile cost/benefit ratio to some tweaks.

Others can be tried very cheaply. For example, try putting your speaker cables on ceramic coffee mugs rather than buying expensive risers. If you really can hear a difference, but the risers if you think they look better. (I have trouble thinking that either would make any difference given that there is already a a nice dielectric surrounding the signal carrying innards of the cable -but try it and see).

I don't understand the impassioned arguments. Either these things work in your system or they do not. If the don't, return the product. If they do, determine for yourself if the benefit is worth the cost.

Sit back and enjoy your music of choice.

Quote:
Either these things work in your system or they do not. If the don't, return the product. If they do, determine for yourself if the benefit is worth the cost.

Everyone has their own scale when it comes to cost/benefit. I see this rant as something directed at people who don't limit themselves when it comes to items that cost a bundle (they have the resouces) even if the difference (perceived or otherwise) is small or non-existent. Its not right for a person who owns Timex or an Omega to say anything about someone who owns a Rolex.

Quote:
Why Oscar Myer decided to pronounce Bologna as baloney is a mystery to me, as is why this particular concoction of meat products is called bologna.

Actually it's mortadella. It was brought over with the Italian immigrants and someone named Oscar Meyer couldn't figure out "mortadella". Would you buy "mortadella"? (You would if you ever tasted the real thing.) Bologna made it appealing to the immigrants and baloney made it American for those people who just can't figure out "gn" with a vowel after it. In some dialects in Italy, "gna" is interchangeable with "gne" depending on the proximity to the French border just as "lasagne" can also be "lasagna". Therefore, "bologna" became "bologne" which to a German/Dutch/Swede became "baloney". Hell, Oscar couldn't even spell his own name right when it came time to put the bologna in a package.

Still, no one with a "gne" on the end of their name will spell it "baloney". So this remains bologna to me.

I agree with you both!
If someone can't hear a difference in say a power cord, but someone else can, who is "right"? Isn't it all fairly subjective? If someone wants to spend gobs of their money on some upgrade, why does anyone else care?
If someone writes here asking for opinions great by all means give your opinion. But if not, why get all worked up over what someone spends on something?

Quote:
If someone can't hear a difference in say a power cord, but someone else can, who is "right"? Isn't it all fairly subjective? If someone wants to spend gobs of their money on some upgrade, why does anyone else care?

The current vogue in this discussion format consists of allowing that the subjectivist listener of reasonable experience and intellect might actually hear whatever improvements they claim to hear since only they can say with any certainty what they experience. Then in the same paragraph the person who has just allowed for subjective impressions berates the gullible listener for being so stupid they do not know what they are hearing cannot - by all the laws the poster has memorized - be happening in the real world of on paper numbers and textbooks. The discourse then proceeds to upbraid the listener since only idiots and madmen would spend so much of their own money for such frivolity which usually takes the poster to a condemnation of the manufacturer and the seller as "snake oil" salesmen out for a fast buck by skinning the unwitting and impressionable public using an example of an imaginary product with an outrageous price that doesn't really exist at all. So, all in all the anti-cable/tweak poster is benevolent enough to allow for the possibility the listener hears an improvement but tells them they are stupid for hearing it and idiotic for spending their own money for something that cannot be at all, no way, no how on the basis of an example that doesn't exist.

If that all seems confusing to you, I can show you specific examples of just what I mean. It has happened several times in the last month on this very forum.

Unbelievable I know but none the less true. Can we stop this BS now?

Quote:

If they are using their ears to find the truth where does "faith" come in?

I have faith that my amplifier weights 24Kg's

Quote:

Sit back and enjoy your music of choice.

It's Pink Floyd right now, Elk m8

and I have the beers out ---- anyone for beer n pizza?

btw -- I just put a pepperoni on the centre spindle of my turntable -- it sounds way better

I think that is a bit of an extreme portrayal, Jan.

I am a subjectivist but I appreciate the views of objectivists and think there is a reasonable middle ground.

One thing I have learned to accept is that, absent a blind test , I can't rule out the role of placebo in hearing subtle differences.

The benefit of this is that I spend a bit more time considering a purchase for what I think I hear as subtle improvements.

I'm not offended anymore when an OB "denies" my aural reality.

Quote:

Quote:

If they are using their ears to find the truth where does "faith" come in?

I have faith that my amplifier weights 24Kg's

How Newtonian!

Quote:

I have faith that my amplifier weights 24Kg's

Your amplifier has a MASS of 24 Kg and that mass is a constant independent of its location. Earth, Mars or even Uranus. It's WEIGHT is based on earths gravity and varies because of many factors. But maybe the mass vs weight ratio might be an important sonic factor.

Also, psychology is a science and a very significant factor in what one hears regardless of measurements.

yeah...but the Heisenbergian/Schr

Quote:
The benefit of this is that I spend a bit more time considering a purchase for what I think I hear as subtle improvements.

Yes.

Additionally, it is always good practice to actively consider whether subtle improvements are worth the money - even if the improvements are consistently repeatable.

I don't know what the rabid objectivist does. How do you make a decision when your posture is:

"I can hear differences in cables and other wires."

"Except when I decide I don't."