Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

  Register / Login

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Re: Please qualify your "scientific method"..

The method needed here is one of repeatability.

The fact that the claim is subjective matters not one bit. The person that took the test claims to be able to attribute UNIQUE qualities to each of three discs.

Since the 'quality sets' for each disc are unique, the person who performed the first iteration SHOULD be able to repeat the process, and identify the discs similarily in subsequent iterations.

For example. Let's say I gave you three pieces of candy. You claim to be able to tell candy apart. The candies are black licorice, lemon, and grape. In ten trials, you correctly identify all three candies, and you have 100% accuracy. Although taste is subjective, the test conforms to a scientific method - repeatability - which means the following statement is true.

"Jack can consistently tell the difference between black licorice, lemon and grape candies just by tasting them over a short period of time".

This same logic can apply to audibility. Lets start with a basic sine wave test. I ask Jack to sit and listen to three test tones, 100Hz, 4000Hz, and 1600Hz. Jack correctly identifies each tone from the other 10 out of 10 times. THe following statement is then true.

"Jack can consistently tell the difference between since waves that are two octaves apart just by listening to them over a short period of time".

Now. Klaus's buddy CLAIMS to be able to DIFFERENTIATE between discs. Using a selection of terms, albeit subjective, he ASSIGNS these terms in a uniqe combination to EACH DISC. Even though the test was probably done sighted (aka he KNEW when he was changing discs), he did NOT know which disc was which since they were physically identical (unless there was a unique manfuacturing ID stamped on the disc if they were from different batches.)

So if somebody else could LABEL these discs in such a way that Klaus's buddy could not SEE or FEEL, and then repeat his listening tests, keeping TRACK of which terms are being attributed to each disc, we have the SAME test in place that was used for the test tones and the candies.

ALTHOUGH THERE IS SUBJECTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH AUDIBLITY, AUDIBILITY ITSELF CAN BE PROVEN OR DISPROVEN.

If Klaus's buddy gets even 8 / 10 accuracy I'm gonna suggest we start looking for physical differences in the discs (including magnetisation, radioactivity... NAME IT) to try and EXPLAIN why Klaus's buddy DID HEAR these differences.

But my money is on Klaus's buddy FAILING to beat, say 55% accuracy in such a controlled experiment with a minimum of 10 iterations. 50 percent accuracy is also known as "coin-toss" or "guess" accuracy.

At the very least, this test has the necessary CONTROLS and the use of REPEATABILITY to provide EVIDENCE.

There is no real evidence provided at all in the original claim. Just a claim.

And now I am repeating myself.

Cheers,

Presto

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Sonic Craft  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]