Harry Lavo wrote:
"chung" wrote in message
...
RBernst929 wrote:
You know, Mr. Pinkerton, Im getting a little peeved reading about your
100%
certainty of objectivity. If YOUR belief system includes so called
"objective"
paradigms then i accept that as your perogative. However, your
assertions that
other people's perceptions are wrong because they dont correlate with
measurements is pompous. If you really believe that we currently know
all
there is to know about equipment, measurements and "objectivity" that is
your
right. But, im here to tell you that everyone lives through their
perceptions
including scientists and objectivists. Please be so humble as to leave
room
for perceptions as reality because i do hear a difference in cables and
bi-wiring even if you say i should'nt.

That's why he and some of us are putting up the $4K pool: to motivate
you to prove us wrong.

The difference between us is, i can
acknowledge your point of view without disparaging it or saying its
wrong. If
science has taught us anything, it is that we know very little about
physical
processes.

That's not true. We have a good understanding of the human hearing
limits, and of the psychological effects leading to perceived
differences. Sure, we don't know everything, but we know a lot.
Esepcially about electrical engineering as applied to audio reproduction.


As you know from previous discussions Chung there is widespread belief among
audiophiles that the test itself is flawed in revealing most audible
perceptions other than volume differences, frequency differences, and
distortion artifacts.

What else is there?

The test is good enough for designers like Paradigm, Harmon Kardon, KEF,
etc., no? You trust the so-called audiophiles, some of them believing a
cable needs to be burned in, or you trust the engineers at Paradigm or
KEF, or the designers of codecs?

Also has been pointed out, no control tests have
*ever* been done on these techniques against other forms of open-ended
evaluative testing of audio components. *THAT* is why most of us are
totally disinterested in the $4000 challenge (in addition to the fact that
it has only been vaguely promised and the money itself doesn't physically
exist in a pool...but it does make a great stick to wave at people, doesn't
it.)

Why don't you all pool your $4000, do a definitive control test, and if it
supports your position write it up and submit it for peer review.

Which self-respecting scientific journal will be interested in
publishing an experiment that agrees with existing knowledge? Now if you
can show that cables that measure within 0.1dB from 20Hz to 20KHz can be
distinguished, *that's* worth publishing.

Then if
it gets accepted you'll get your $4000 worth, and all the free time you
won't have to argue here will allow you time to enjoy more music.