AudioBanter.com - View Single Post - Why DBTs in audio do not deliver (was: Finally ... The Furutech CD-do-something)

(Audio Guy) wrote in message news:pIgPa.28021$ye4.21152@sccrnsc01...
In article 6a8Pa.25318$ye4.20777@sccrnsc01,
(ludovic mirabel) writes:
(Audio Guy) wrote in message news:HWZOa.20234$H17.5464@sccrnsc02...

Thus spoke Audio Guy:
"I also have a much deeper and through knowledge of
how electronics work than you have and so KNOW (my italics L.M.) that the
difference... etc"

I said I didn't know how exactly the brain processed the reproduction
of music.

No, I do not know what the brain can do, but I do KNOW (my italics L.M.)that
sound is the mechanism that allows one to recognize either speech or music,
and if there is no difference in the sound reaching the ears, there
can be no different information getting to the brain for it to
analyze.
And again you show how little you yourself comprehend the topic.

Please show where I "instructed" you, I merely asked how the brain
could determine a difference if no difference in sound was presented.

"Difference in sound" between a Stradivarius and a corner store
violin? To whom ? To 10.000 psychology students and electronics' engs.
or to Oistrakh?
Somebody's, anybody's brain says to its owner: "No difference". Which
proves to somebody, anybody that there IS no difference. Somebody's,
anybody else's brain says:" Good Lord, how very different!"
"Scientific" (thanks to ABX ) demonstration that the difference
enters "the sound" and leaves it again because it doesn't want to make
enemies amongst our homegrown scientists.

Ludovic Mirabel

P.S.I said:
This is the time to remind you that you took on the job of instructing
me once before. Kindly and tolerantly I demonstrated to you in this
thread that not only you did not have a clue about the intended
purpose of ABX but did not even know how it was done.
Audio Guy:
Please quote this since I have never said I don't know how it is
done. I KNOW (my caps L.M.) exactly how it is done and how DBTs in general is
done as I also studied psychology at the university and that is one of the
prime subjects.

By request a quote from July 3rd Subthread (...Was......Furutech)

Audio Guy said:
"Again, you MISUNDERSTAND (my capitals L.M.) what ABX was designed
for. It is a tool to
determine if differences exist, not for determining which unit is
better. There are DBTs for that purpose, but ABX is not one".

L.M. answered:
"It is kind of you to straighten me out. I'll pass it on to Carlstrom
the "objectivist" Godfather and codeveloper of the ABX switching
device.
... here is a quote of his from the official ABX website:"

Carlstrom:---" A second common misconception about ABX is the claim
that an ABX
test result is not a preference: it does not tell which audio
component sounds better. While literally true, if an ABX test confirms
a difference is heard, selecting one's preference is easy and
completely justified." I commented:
"I think that to find out that: " This is different" and leave
it at that may be of fascinating interest to pure searchers after
truth like you but not to an unsophisticated audio consumer like
myself.." (And Carlstrom seems to agree)
I continued:
"I'm even more confused about your explanation of the ABX test:. I
said: "I can easily hear 1db difference between channels, and a change
of 1 db.
What I can't do is to have 80 db changed to 81 db, then be asked if
the third unknown is 80 or 81 dbs. and be consistently correct."

You answered:
"Not what ABX tests do. They are used to determine if you can
determine if there is a difference, not if you can identify which is
which"..
I said:
"Curiouser and curiouser as the Red Queen said. . First we have cable
A, producing 80 db. Then cable B -81 db.. Then one of these two not
known to you (cable X) and you're asked "Is it like A or like B?"
What kind of ABX protocol have you been following?"
No comment.
__________________________________________________ ____________
__Remainder of previous posting:
I also have a much deeper and through knowledge of
how electronics work than you have and so know that the difference
between two signals can be measured to a much finer degree than can
be heard. So don't try to lecture me on ABX, please, especially since
you've never done even one while I have done many. And talk about
someone who has no clue about what ABX is used for, ABX is a test of
sound differences, not music recognition nor speech recognition.

You chose not to
answer then but now you're back instructing me again in neuroanatomy.

Please show where I "instructed" you, I merely asked how the brain
could determine a difference if no difference in sound was presented.
This is something you seem to have no clue about, so please explain
how it could happen.

Well, if you have to... be my guest.
Any time you want me to quote from our past discussion just say so.
Ludovic Mirabel

I said:
and that their beloved ABX involves also BRAIN functions we know
little about; like for instance a cortical centre for MUSIC
processing.
You answered:

"If the auditory peripheral system is not presented with
auditory stimuli which result in a different response by the
auditory periphery, and thus the auditory periphery is not
capable of presented a different response to the auditory
cortex, then whatever DIFFERENCE in action of the "cortical
centre for MUSIC processing" cannot be due to a difference in
SOUND and thus must be due to non-sound differences."
"Unless you are proposing some magic like telepathy. Or simply
engaging in argumentation".

I tried to translate for my own use this pretentious,
pseudoscientific gobledygook and failed.

And again you show how little you yourself comprehend the topic. He's
just repeating what I myself also posted. Audio reproduction systems
reproduce sound, not music, and that is what ABX is for, to determine
differences in sound. If there is no difference in the sound of two
units, it is impossible for there to be any audio difference of any
kind.

At least Marcus says" hearing" when he means hearing- not "auditory
peripheral system".. What does "...auditory periphery is not capable
of presented a different response to..." mean I haven't a clue.

Change "presented" to "presenting" and it makes perfect sense. As if
your posts never make simple tense or spelling errors. Again,
demonstration of poor comprehension on your part.

Quoting me;
Language- what's that?
You retort:
"Something used by some to corrupt, to twist, to manipulate, to
misrepresent as the prime tool of argumentation."
You forgot "to bore into stupor'

Yes -it is the the *non-sound* differences that make us distinguish
the reproduction of SOUNDS made by the violins in a Beethoven quartet
from the SOUNDS made by a Gipsy violinn or the pink noise.

How in the world does it get from the speakers to the brain except
via SOUND? That's the point, it is either via sound or via some
non-physical mechanism.

I haven't a clue how it hapens. It is not science- just my gut
feeling.

Please keep your guts to yourself.

I feel also that the gulf between myself and someone who KNOWS how
brain differentiates Missa Solemnis from the pink noise pink noise is
unbridgeable.
I also feel tired of anticipating your manufactured outrage: "I
didn't say that!" Say whatever you DID say in plain and count me out.
This particular trick is wearing out threadbare.

As if you always speak clearly and never use 100 words where 5 would
do.

I have no intention of exchanging speculations with you (or Mr.
Audio Guy or Mr. Marcus) about some of the most controversial topics
in current pharmacological brain research and brain imaging- that I
know little about but am quite certain that any of you know even
less.

Again, if you know so little, how can you judge how much another knows
or understands of the topic?

Also ever since my army days I have a thing about being hectored in
a seargent-major voice.

Then stop using it yourself, we're tired of hearing it too.