Sdallnct

This is part of my point. The "scientific" crowd is no different than the "everything makes a different" crowd. They each have their own beliefs. Neither will ever be swayed. And I mean never. If a double blind test did show a difference say between two different speaker wires then the scientific crowd would just dismiss it as "the control wasn't correct", "the science was followed", "there must have been an issue".

And of course I don't want to leave out the other side. If a double blind test showed there was no difference, then the everything makes a difference crowd would say "the test wasn't fair", "you didn't allow enough listening time". "you didn't use a good enough source or source material".

Sdallnct

1. I'm not sure we need to continue the debate. I respectfully disagree with you that two product "must" be the same unless they are proven different in a double blind test.

2. I was pointing out the spikes on a high end subwoofer as a "tweak". People are quick to jump on tweaks as not making a difference or making really, really subtle differences that are not worth the trouble. Yet where exactly do you draw the line? By your own admission you cannot believe the spikes on this subwoofer can make different. If you say it can, then you must post the double blind test to say it does with those 3 criteria that you posted. This is your standard not mine. See it is a dubious slope isn't it? In fact, you cannot believe the high end sub I linked sounds any different than the $50 Onkyo subs that come in a HTiB set up. Or do you pick and choose which items and which tweaks need a double blind test? And by "you" I me literally you or some other "scientific" group?

People seem to agree with me on the feet and vibration in a turntable. Have there been any double blind tests to prove it out? No? Then you cannot believe it. By your own standard.

I posted a link to a $15,000 CD player, in a high end set up do you really believe is sounds no different than a $29.00 walmart CD player? Do you really think you need a double blind test? If the answer is no, you don't need a double blind test, than where exactly do you draw the line?

Jay G.

Define "works". I don't need a DBT to prove whether a toaster can create toast, or whether a BD player can produce an HD image on my screen and output digital audio to my receiver. However, when testing something subjective like which of two devices does something "better," a DBT is preferred.

Take Pepsi vs. Coke. People who prefer Coke are going to say Coke is better in a non-blind taste test. However, under a DBT, that same Coke lover may prefer Pepsi. Preconceptions cloud our judgement, and a DBT is the only purely scientific way to try and eliminate and normalize personal bias.

For example, even if the "Black Hole" does reduce "microvibrations" in an optical playback device, the question still remains: does that real-world reduction even matter, i.e. does it translate to any improvement in audio/video quality like the seller claims?

I'm cheap, and I don't want to ruin my discs by placing a sticker on them. At the speeds Blu-ray runs at, a slightly misaligned sticker placed on it is likely to cause more problems than it solves.

See here about labels on DVDs:
http://www.osta.org/technology/cdqa11.htm
Now, BDs spin even faster than DVDs, so I'm not really inclined to risk my personal collection / equipment to test this out myself.


There are potential differences between two types of speaker cables. The simplest difference, and the one most likely to make any sort of impact, is gauge. The difference between wires of two different gauges is detectable in a DBT, assuming the cables are at a distance long enough for the gauge difference to matter.

The problem isn't that two speaker cables can't be different, but what that difference is and whether that difference makes a perceivable difference to the human experience.

Here's a link explaining speaker cable, what matters, and what doesn't:
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

Here's an interesting few articles about HDMI cables, comparing expensive Monster Cables to cheaper Monoprice ones:
http://gizmodo.com/tag/hdmicablebattlemodo/

The point is: there are certainly real-world differences in components and cables that can affect quality. However, at some point the differences are either going to be a) so small that they're not perceivable, or b) not applicable to the case at hand. For example, if I dunked a roll of speaker cable into a pot of honey, it certainly make the cable sweet and sticky, but it wouldn't affect audio performance.

Just because someone says their product will make a difference doesn't mean it will; it could just as likely mean there's a bunch of suckers out there.


http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/11/25/

Jay G.

Redacting all your posts doesn't really help your side at all though, it just makes it look like you have something to hide, and that you don't think your posts successfully argued your case. I can see not posting further, but removing already posted replies makes it look like you concede defeat.

Not to mention that others have already quoted and responded to some of your replies. So now all newcomers have to go on is the potentially out-of-context quotes in other posts, potentially damaging your position further.

audiolab

You're right. I should not have deleted my posts. Funny you should mention out-of-context quotes though, because you have posted out-of-context replies repeatedly.

~Steve
Herbie's Audio Lab

kefrank

Are you sure? How do you know a toaster really created toast or whether you are just perceiving the output as toast? Just because it seems obvious to you doesn't mean it's objectively true. Your approach seems inconsistent, or at least you're using a sliding scale.


So spend $10 on a CD and do the test. If you're really too cheap, then your cheapness is stronger than your passion on this subject, which certainly seems inconsistent with the passion you've communicated in this thread. I can only assume your passion is feigned and your arguments are empty.

Jay G.

There's a difference between an objective perception, and a subjective perception.

Objectively, I put bread in a toaster, and it comes out warmer and crispier than when I put it in. Subjectively, one toaster may make "better" toast than another, or one bread may be "better" than another for toasting.

Objectively speaking, a BD player outputs audio and video. I don't need a DBT to determine that. However, this "Black Hole" device is all about subjectively making that output "better," which means a DBT is needed to make sure any perceived differences aren't just bias.

Why would I want to ruin a CD I just spent $10 on? Also, you glossed over the part where the sticker could potentially damage the player.

I'm "passionate" enough to argue it online, and require more proof from the vendor, which is where the burden of proof lies. If someone is trying to sell something, they have to prove to the customer it's worth purchasing; the customer doesn't have to prove it's not.

Jay G.

You're right, I assumed the spikes on the subwoofer affected the sound quality of it, they could just as easily be a cosmetic addition for style purposes.

True. It's often accepted as "common wisdom" that a more expensive item is of better quality than a less expensive item, but it's not always true. It's entirely possible that the cheaper sub is as good as, or even better than, the expensive sub. A DBT would be the best way to determine which is better.

I can only speak for myself, I don't represent any group, scientific or otherwise. Ideally speaking, a DBT would be the best method for determining quality of any device/method/tweak, especially in comparison to other devices/method/tweaks or, in relations to tweaks, a non-tweaked control.

However, since DBTs can be costly and timely to implement, they're not done for everything, and I don't have the time/money to do them myself. Thus, secondary, less reliable, methods of determining quality have to be used. Reviews from a reviewer site would be one, a third party that at least aims to be as objective as possible. They may do comparisons between different devices/setups, and while not usually DBT, the reviewers typically don't have a vested interest in anything but relaying to the consumer the best info possible.

Lacking that, or perhaps in addition to, peer reviews on a third-party site can be somewhat helpful, although these can fall into the trap of being too anecdotal and possibly skewed (those with extremely negative experiences may be more inclined to post a review than someone with a positive, but moderate experience).

Do you know that a DBT has never been performed? Also, arguing about vibration in a turntable, which relies on vibration caused by the needle rubbing on the record to generate electrical signals to transmit as sound, at least makes sense. Arguing about "microvibrations" in a device that uses optics and electricity, or possibly just electricity (such as a DAC) is a lot more dubious. If I don't buy the underlying logic, I'm much more likely to require better evidence.

I'd need a DBT test for a definitive answer. Also, due to the advances in electronics, I'd be willing to believe that a moderately-priced player purchased today, (say something like a $100 Sony), could have the potential to sound as good as, or even better than, a 20-year old $15,000 player. Even with the $40 Walmart player (is that a Walmart brand player, or just a player bought at Walmart), if the audio from both is being output digitally to my receiver, there may be zero difference in audio quality.

van der graaf

This thread is too entertaining to end....let's get some DBTs going!!!

kefrank

So do you objectively measure the temperature of the toast or do you just trust that your perception is accurate (subjectively)? "This feels warmer" and "this sounds better" are both subjective assessments.

You're really reaching. If you're that concerned about damaging the disc or the player with a product that is sold by a reputable dealer and has a number of testimonials from other consumers, then you're exhibiting a lot of irrational paranoia for someone who is otherwise so concerned with objectivity and rationality. I believe that your concerns about damage are disingenuous and not at all the reasons that you don't want to perform a double-blind test. More likely is that you're a) too lazy and b) more interested in arguing your skepticism on the internet than actually backing it up with anything of substance.

There is no "burden of proof" in the marketplace. A retailer need only convince enough people to buy their product in order to be profitable. Beyond that, it's up to the skeptics (particularly the vocal ones) to justify their skepticism. Otherwise, their skeptical sermons are just as hollow as a snake-oil sales pitch.

kefrank

Sdallnct

Your reinforcing my point. "YOU" have your own set of rules. Others in the "scientific proof" group each have their own rules. So each person will have their own "scientific proof" what what makes a difference. So how is this different then the other crowd that any little thing can make a difference?

My turntable example, was just and example. You seem to agree that vibration can make a difference. My point being that is on one extreme end. Your digital from front to back is could be considered at the other end and if we believe you that no difference can be found (or no DBT has proved a difference) where do you draw the line?

I didn't post a $15,000 20 year old CD player. I posted a link to a CURRENT $15,000 CD player. Are you really saying ONLY a DBT would show a difference? You don't ever believe you could just hear the difference?

cpgator

Something I wondered... no one would really worry about tweaks so much on a cheap CD/DVD player, because anyone buying a $50 player probably doesn't care too much about the quality. Tweaks are usually for people who already spend a lot on their player, such as that one for 15k.... So my question is - wouldn't a company making such an expensive player, already have something in place to deal with the vibrations and such? I would be rather upset if a $1 'tweak' made my $15k CD player sound better.

Jay G.

No, something being warmer is an objective observation, as you point out it can be measured with a thermometer. There's no "sounds better" thermometer equivalent.

How do I know it's a reputable dealer? How do I know those testimonials are real? If real, how do I know those positive testimonials are not outnumbered by the negative testimonials the seller didn't put on their site?

I don't have to back up skepticism of the product, anymore than a skeptic of UFOs or Ghosts has to actively disprove every sighting. The burden of proof is on the ones making the claims, not on the skeptic.

The sane thing to do when presented with an outlandish claim is to say, "I won't believe that until presented with evidence that substantially proves it." That's what I'm doing with the product.

True, to some extent at least. Medicine does have a burden of proof, both that the medicine in question does what it says, and that it doesn't have overly harmful side effects. This is why DBTs are so common in medicine. Car manufacturers have to pass certain quality and safety ratings, as does food. Electronics have various safety and FCC ratings they need to get.

Where there isn't vigorous testing of things is in the area of subjective "quality" determinations. A toy doesn't have to be "fun" to be on a store shelf, just safe enough so a toddler won't choke on it (or have a warning about the chocking hazard, if it's not designed for toddlers), or not be painted with toxic lead paint. A movie doesn't have to be "good," to be sold on DVD. And there's no standardized image or audio "quality" tests that an electronic item has to pass in order to be sold.

As a result, people should be skeptical of claims of quality on certain items. I'm not going to buy a DVD just because it has 5 favorable critic blurbs on the cover, anymore than I'm going to be swayed by customer testimonials on the Black Hole website. The words "digitally remastered" on a box mean nothing to me. If an electronic item is markedly cheaper than comparable products from other manufacturers, it's likely to be "too good to be true." And if the maker of a sticker to put on DVD/BD disc claims it improves quality based on dubious reasoning, I'm going to say "prove it."

Dr Mabuse

Nice.

Yes of course that company would. As I stated earlier, the claims made about these discs, the mats, the 'feet', etc, all the vibration reduction stuff are complete nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense that will only work on those who... well who are ignorant and/or outright gullible, and thus susceptible to, if not eager for a placebo effect. PT Barnum had some thoughts on how common such a person is.

Vibration has no effect on: processors, DACs, op amps, capacitors, comparators, etc, even at very, very high vibration levels. Engineers get sick of studying the data on such things, that comes most often from the military and space programs in post graduate courses. The military and space program engineers do incredibly detailed studies of very high level vibrations and shocks on circuit boards and the various components on them before they are used. Decades of study has proven, and slightly refined these components and the circuit boards the are on to be immune to vibrations even at very high levels. Levels that occur in fighter jets landing on an aircraft carriers, during the launch of space vehicles, used in satellites, used in tanks slamming across the landscape firing 100mm+ guns, etc. The expensive consumer electronics devices of today are using components that would have been exclusive to the military only a few years ago and are immune to vibration.

In the few cases like... like the piezoelectric effects on a specific component like a ceramic capacitor(used in specific types of devices) due to shock and vibration, patents made people a lot of money because they designed circuit boards to isolate the section of the board from vibration that such a component would be located on. The noise that comes from such a capacitor due to the piezoelectric effect is audible, you can hear it with your ears coming from inside the device.

In short, such claims about 'micro-vibrations' are complete and utter nonsense. But as I stated earlier I have no issue with this fella selling such things, as he is selling the consumer a placebo effect, and thus a greater appreciation of their equipment, for a fairly low price. It's not exactly ethical I suppose, but it is business and I say he should run with that ball as far as he can. If he truly believes his own pitch then he is not lying.

The effects of vibration on the lasers reading the disc were dealt with decades back as I stated earlier in this thread. This is why multiple lasers, improved laser focus, tighter spindle rotation speeds, etc, came into being. Because of lots and lots of research by intelligent people on this topic.

The main principle to consider here is this: electrical energy vs. mechanical energy. The only effect mechanical energy(vibration, shock) would have on the electrical energy in a capacitor or the like is a gross effect. Meaning if you took a hammer and delivered mechanical energy to the capacitor it would be crushed and would fail, if you delivered such incredible vibration levels that the solder connecting the capacitor the the circuit board were to break(which the military, aerospace industries, NASA, etc, were dealing with in the 60's). Stuff like that. That component is otherwise virtually immune to vibration even at very large levels as to the electrical energy flowing through it. To suggest some effect of 'micro vibration' effect is beyond ridiculous.



I love it man. Stick to your guns I say. If you are able to sell these things, sell as many as you can!

Jay G.

I think a DBT would satisfy nearly anyone looking for scientific evidence that something made a discernible difference in quality.

Where I was speaking for myself was in regards to what I'll accept as a less scientifically rigorous indicator of quality.

The difference is that believing every claim at face value is called being gullible. Between being gullible and being skeptical, I'd rather be skeptical. I tend to have more money in my wallet that way.

It's an "extreme end" in the sense that I think vibrations have an effect on a system where vibrations are a major part of the transport stream. It's like saying that EMI has an effect on electrical cables. It makes sense. Saying that EMI has an effect on optical cables, however, makes zero sense. It's not just the "other extreme," it's a completely different case.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. If a DBT can't prove a difference, then there likely isn't one. If a DBT does prove a difference, then there likely is one. The line is the DBT.

If a DBT hasn't been performed, then start with the assumption that there isn't a difference, and look at any other semi-reliable evidence available (like third party reviews), until you're personally convinced one way or the other. Customer testimonials on the sellers website don't count. Look for solid reasoning behind the product and its features. If, for example, a company claims that brass is better at reducing vibrations, look for evidence that this is true. If the reasoning seems sloppy with no evidence to back it up, that's a major red flag.

Only a DBT would definitively prove a difference.

I could possibly hear a difference myself, but I couldn't be certain that my perception wasn't biased somehow, if my comparison was done outside a DBT.

van der graaf

Isn't there anyone who posts on here who has an engineer/physics background that could actually tell us if the argument has any validity as far as vibration, etc.???

Dr Mabuse

Nice.

van der graaf

rcortez

When you guys watch a movie do you know what you see? If so, how come you don't know what you hear? Oh, I know...Placebo!

Sheesh.

R

X

I can tell you that I've banged on electronic components and heard a corresponding sound come out of the speaker.

I don't remember if those components were capacitors or coils (I doubt they were resistors or transistors), it might have been due to bad solder joints for all I know, but the physical effects did manifast themselves in a change in sound.

Spiky

Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case. DBTs on such things have been done, esp wires, and mostly the extremists go home without changing their minds. "But you messed up the test like xxx." "No, you screwed up the test like yyy." Yawn, my kids are more creative in their petty arguing, and none of them have hit teens, yet.

Frankly, it's more fun to argue about it online. Obviously.

kefrank

But the observation is only objective if measured with a thermometer. I was asking if you observe it objectively or if you just trust your own subjective assessment of the temperature. Your non-answer tells me it's the latter.

Herbie's Audio Lab is a well-respected company, particularly among the turntable crowd. A simple google search of various forums will yield plenty of independent reviews of their products from various consumers. Seriously, it takes a negligible amount of effort to ensure that they're not just some scam artist who set up a website last week to sell you something for $1 that will destroy your media and components.

It is outlandish to compare the claims of the Black Hole product to UFO and ghost-sightings. It really isn't that hard to believe that a disc-spinning mechanical system might cause interfering vibrations in an analog transport. The degree to which the sound may be affected is certainly debatable, but the possibility is certainly much more believable than the existence of UFOs or ghosts. I am again surprised at the lack of rationality in your argument, when you seem so bent on being rational and scientific.

There are too many factors that come into play to make such a broad generalization. While a significantly lower price may be an indicator of something "too good to be true," the likelihood is based on many other factors. See retailers like monoprice.com to disprove your assertion.

Here's what the site says about the Black Hole:
What is "dubious" to you about that claim? Is it that vibrations can't affect analog components? No, we know that they can. Is it that you don't think there's enough vibration generated to make a perceivable difference? If so, what do you base that on? Do you have some particular knowledge or experience in this area that allows you to assess it as dubious? Or are you just guessing?

Jay G.

Perhaps telling via whether the bread suddenly is so hot it can burn my fingers is a subjective way to measure, but it's a subjective measurement of an objective change in the bread. If I didn't trust my senses to know whether something is hotter than it was, I could use a thermometer, and people have. In fact, thermometers are used all the time in cooking. I can trust grade-school level physics to prove that the bread can get hotter when heat is applied to it.

In contrast, determining whether something sounds "better" is a subjective determination of a non-quantifiable subjective quality. There's no way to objectively measure it if I wanted to. The next best is a DBT.

Just because they do turntables well doesn't mean they know jack about BD players. In fact, I'd rather a company that does turntables well to stick to turntables instead of trying to tackle new technology they don't have firm grip on.

And yet, you didn't provide any links.

Who says they have to be fly-by-night? When it comes to things like sound quality, even the most dubious of devices can sell for years.

Not really, the level of science behind all three is about the same. However, I was using UFOs and ghosts as "extreme examples." If I'm to simply believe customer testimonials that it works, then by the same logic UFO and ghost sightings should be believed as well.

In a modern device, it's hard to believe that the disc spinning is causing vibrations at a level to interfere with the purely electronic analog transport.

True, it's just an indicator to be on your toes. Like the example with the two different subwoofers, just because one is significantly cheaper doesn't mean it's significantly worse. Still, it's best to double-check the evidence in such a situation.


It's that, and it's wondering whether this device even reduces vibrations at all. It's been pointed out that putting a sticker on an optical disc by eye can unbalance it, meaning that this product is just as likely to make the disc wobble more, causing more vibrations than without it, especially at the speeds optical discs operate at (DVD 1x spins at up to 1530 RPM, and BD even faster).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPM

The manufacturer provides no proof even of the basic, objective, measurable data of vibrations on a player during playback, with and without the tweak in use. If they can't even be bothered to measure whether the product reduces vibrations, why should I believe anything else they claim?


Here's an interesting though experiment: take a solely electronic audio device, like a flash memory MP3 player (say iPod nano). These are designed for people to jog with without issues. Now, if an analog output isn't affected by the strong vibrations of being bounced up and down while jogging, how is an optical drive's much more minimal vibrations going to affect it?

Sdallnct

My point was, surely you don't do a DBT on everything. So my question is where do you draw the line? If spiked feet on a turntable do make a difference with no DBT, but they don't on CD players without a DBT, when do you decide if you need the DBT? Or are you truly saying that you couldn't for example see the difference between a VHS tape and a blue ray disc without a DBT? And that you would argue that is simply a placebo effect from spending more money on BD player and DVD?

You keep making the argument the argument that a DBT is the "best". Well I don't need to defend that. I'm asking if it is the only way to tell the difference between two items? Meaning if I can hear a difference between 1 pair of speakers v. another without a DBT, then reinforce that with a DBT does that make the difference bigger? If it doesn't than what is was point?

You say people hear a difference because they want to. You do realize that works in reverse as well don't you? If you never believe there is a difference than you won't hear one. Likely you wouldn't hear one in a DBT either.

See this is my discussion point. I'm not at all arguing that this mat makes a difference. Or am I arguing against DBT's. What I'm saying is either "camp" is exactly the same. They both bring in their own bias. They both have their own "rules". They both have their own beliefs. Neither side to convince the other side. Nether side is right. IMO it be at the extreme end of either is a disadvantage.