Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 128

Thread: Null Hypothesis

  1. #51
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Now you are gaining some insight into how real scientific knowledge is acquired. The statistical analysis of data is only one aspect of it.

    The scientist who wants to test his hypothesis sets up the fairest test he can think of. He then conducts the test with enough participants and enough trials to be statistically significant. If he prequalifies all of the participants or segregates them into sub groups he tracks that too. The data is analyzed using statistical means to determine if the results are significantly different from the null meaning no statistical difference from random chance. He publishes his results including every aspect of his test procedure in a respected scientific journal which will be subject to review and discussion as well as repetition by his peers. If he finds the results statistically significant from the null, then his hypothesis is assumed to have validity until someone else comes along with a different test to challenge him. When that happens, there must be an investigation to determine why the first test got different results and plausible explanaitons convincing to the profession. When a body of knowledge is built up leading to the same conclusion over a long period, the hypothesis becomes the prevailing theory but is never immune to being challenged.

    Now how do audiophiles come to their scientific conclusion about cables? They disconect one pair, try another, and proclaim one far superior to the other without ever having gone through even the most rudimentary analysis of what else might be different of if the comparison is even fair such as their old cables being corroded from years of sitting exposed to the air.

    Can cable manufacturers do this? Do they know about this type of test? You can bet your last dollar that every single one of them does. Then why don't they do it? Why wouldn't they want to prove to scientists, engineers and audiophiles alike the superiority of their products? I can only assume the answer. And the answer is a) they know that they can't because their own electrical tests already has shown them that no usable difference exists and b) they don't have to because they already have a market that would only be diminished by the negative results of a test. Or maybe they have already conducted the tests and just don't want anyone to know the real results.
    I don't know why cable makers don't do DBT's to prove the worth of their products, but my guess is somewhat different than yours. Suppose a cable maker finds through blinded testing that listeners can hear a difference between one of their expensive cables and lamp cord. What would be the point of publishing such a finding? Wouldn't prospective buyers already assume there was a difference? Wouldn't the firm's competitors in the cable business be laughing their butts off.? I can't think of any business where firms voluntarily do testing on their products in an attempt to make less money.

  2. #52
    Forum Regular Monstrous Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by rb122
    Let's just say that if I see you coming out of a restroom, I ain't shaking hands with you!
    Just to clarify, I do wash my hands in public restrooms because it is good general hygenic practice and a way of avoiding infectious viruses like the cold virus or flu virus. But this has nothing to do with urinating. I wash before I urinate and then don't touch anything afterwards if I can avoid it, using my elbow to flush for example. Of course, washing after a number 2 is a given.

    So washing in public restrooms or in your own home is not related to the act of urinating. Ask your doctor if you don't believe me.
    Friends help friends move,
    Good friends help friends move bodies....

  3. #53
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    I can only assume the answer. And the answer is a) they know that they can't because their own electrical tests already has shown them that no usable difference exists and b) they don't have to because they already have a market that would only be diminished by the negative results of a test. Or maybe they have already conducted the tests and just don't want anyone to know the real results.
    or d) they are responsible businessmen making sound economic decisions.

    Set aside cables for a minute. I can't think of a single audio manufacturer, be they low end or high end, that uses DBT or any other kind of statistical results in their marketing. Do you ever see an ad like this?

    Double blind testing shows that four out of five dentists prefer Panasonkyo receivers.

    It doesn't happen. Why? Well for one, properly run statistical testing is not inexpensive. Many audio companies, especially cable manufacturers, are small businesses. Most importantly, it is only the techie geeks who give a rat's ass as to the statistical outcome. Why waste precious marketing funds on tests that are judged irrelevant by your target market? You must have worked for the government at some time.

    rw

  4. #54
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by okiemax
    I don't know why cable makers don't do DBT's to prove the worth of their products, but my guess is somewhat different than yours. Suppose a cable maker finds through blinded testing that listeners can hear a difference between one of their expensive cables and lamp cord. What would be the point of publishing such a finding? Wouldn't prospective buyers already assume there was a difference? Wouldn't the firm's competitors in the cable business be laughing their butts off.? I can't think of any business where firms voluntarily do testing on their products in an attempt to make less money.
    Assuming is inconclusive. Knowing is definitive.
    But, the real reason for their lack of DBT is the obvious, no differences.
    mtrycrafts

  5. #55
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188

    Cable testing

    Quote Originally Posted by okiemax
    I don't know why cable makers don't do DBT's to prove the worth of their products, but my guess is somewhat different than yours. Suppose a cable maker finds through blinded testing that listeners can hear a difference between one of their expensive cables and lamp cord. What would be the point of publishing such a finding? Wouldn't prospective buyers already assume there was a difference? Wouldn't the firm's competitors in the cable business be laughing their butts off.? I can't think of any business where firms voluntarily do testing on their products in an attempt to make less money.
    Wouldn't the other cable makers be laughing and ridiculing the ONE AND ONLY competitor who could PROVE his cables were better than lamp cord. On the contrary, If I ran that company, my add compaign would be, "I can prove you are getting something of real value for your money when you buy MY cable product. Nobody else can.)

    "I can't think of any business where firms voluntarily do testing on their products in an attempt to make less money"

    If you feel that your cable is superior, you test it to prove to the world that it really is and then you sell more and make more money. Why would you think that testing would result in making less money? Only one logical reason and that is if you test it and the results show it is no better than a much cheaper alternative, and this test becomes publically known, then there would be no reason for anyone to buy it.

    Most companies test their products or send them out for testing for many different things for many different reasons. They also test their competitors products. It was funny. I once worked for a subsidiary of a large pharmaceutical company that manufactured surgical needles. They tested their own and their competitors needles endlessly. In fact, when I was there, seeing all of that industry's leadng company's products they kept buying for testing, I said that they were their competitors number one customer.

  6. #56
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Wouldn't the other cable makers be laughing and ridiculing the ONE AND ONLY competitor who could PROVE his cables were better than lamp cord. On the contrary, If I ran that company, my add compaign would be, "I can prove you are getting something of real value for your money when you buy MY cable product. Nobody else can.)

    "I can't think of any business where firms voluntarily do testing on their products in an attempt to make less money"

    If you feel that your cable is superior, you test it to prove to the world that it really is and then you sell more and make more money. Why would you think that testing would result in making less money? Only one logical reason and that is if you test it and the results show it is no better than a much cheaper alternative, and this test becomes publically known, then there would be no reason for anyone to buy it.

    Most companies test their products or send them out for testing for many different things for many different reasons. They also test their competitors products. It was funny. I once worked for a subsidiary of a large pharmaceutical company that manufactured surgical needles. They tested their own and their competitors needles endlessly. In fact, when I was there, seeing all of that industry's leadng company's products they kept buying for testing, I said that they were their competitors number one customer.

    I thought you were calling on cable manufacturers to demonstrate the worth of their products in blinded testing and to make the results of these studies public through advertising or other means Am I wrong? If not, can you give me specfic examples of manufacturers in other industries who have done blinded testing on their products, if not compelled to by law, and have made the results of these studies public. Perhaps there have been some, but I don't know if the practice is widespread, since no examples come to mind. What I am asking for is the names of companies and products, and how the results of the studies were made public. Only scientific studies are of interest.
    Last edited by okiemax; 03-04-2004 at 08:12 PM.

  7. #57
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Assuming is inconclusive. Knowing is definitive.
    But, the real reason for their lack of DBT is the obvious, no differences.
    Actually no it's not obvious...that statement requires proof.

  8. #58
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    365

    NO, No, No - You just don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Actually no it's not obvious...that statement requires proof.
    Mytrycrafts and his followers don't need proof for their claims. They are "scientists" and they are above having to produce the kind of proof they demand of others. One might call them hypocritical, but one can't, because, after all, they're "scientists" and therefore beyond reproach.

    They'll tell you, correctly so, that one can't prove a negative (such as "cables don't sound different"). But in the same breath they will declare the negative to be unqualifiedly true. When challenged they resort to sophistry and obfuscation. But they're "right" and you're "wrong", because, after all, they're "scientists".

  9. #59
    Forum Regular FLZapped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    Mytrycrafts and his followers don't need proof for their claims. They are "scientists" and they are above having to produce the kind of proof they demand of others. One might call them hypocritical, but one can't, because, after all, they're "scientists" and therefore beyond reproach.

    They'll tell you, correctly so, that one can't prove a negative (such as "cables don't sound different"). But in the same breath they will declare the negative to be unqualifiedly true. When challenged they resort to sophistry and obfuscation. But they're "right" and you're "wrong", because, after all, they're "scientists".

    And you are what: a lawyer, and by your own admisson not technically competent to make such judgements, yet here you are with the cart before the horse.

    So when someone comes up with information that can show cables behave beyond their LCR parameters, and have DBTs which back up their claims of being able to improve the sound of your system, which would violate the laws of physics, I think you should go back to the sideline. Or go camp out with Jon Risch who also believes cables defy the laws of physics and has made claims of being able to hear the differences between various wire insulations without any evidence of such.

    -Bruce

  10. #60
    Forum Regular FLZapped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    I think you misjudge me. Remember the thread where you dubbed me Mr. Elitist?

    rw
    Yes, I most certainly do remember. Snobbery, elitist, I'll use them interchangeably, if you need clarification: and maybe another term along the way.

    And yes, it is most certainly you. It shows in the attitude of your posts.:

    Exposure to far more what ? Cheap cable? Mid-fi gear?
    Plain as day.


    -Bruce

  11. #61
    Forum Regular Monstrous Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    They'll tell you, correctly so, that one can't prove a negative (such as "cables don't sound different"). But in the same breath they will declare the negative to be unqualifiedly true. When challenged they resort to sophistry and obfuscation. But they're "right" and you're "wrong", because, after all, they're "scientists".
    "Unqualifiedly true" is putting words in peoples' mouths, isn't it? The hypothesis that cables sound the same has yet to be unproven. And given the zeal of the many who oppose that hypothesis, it makes me believe that it will never be unproven because it is true. Anyone who has no interest in this debate that I have asked has agreed with this logic and reason. Go ahead and ask anyone who cares that you have heard differences and many others have heard differences but it has never been shown in controlled test. Go ahead, ask them what they believe.

    No need to qualify anything here. It is quite clear. What do you have to fear? Your gear? Missing an ear?

    Hey, did I just rap?
    Friends help friends move,
    Good friends help friends move bodies....

  12. #62
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188
    Sorry counselor, I don't think you made your case. Nothing in science is unqualified. When something is unqualified, it ceases to be science. The best science can say is; all the evidence so far leads to the conclusion that.....Religion is unqualified. Political dogma is unqualified. Advertising puffery is unqualified. But not science. When people tell you a statement like; these cables sound better than those cables, buy them, without any qualifications, that is advertising puffery and has much in common with dogma and religion and nothing in common with real science.

  13. #63
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
    "Unqualifiedly true" is putting words in peoples' mouths, isn't it? The hypothesis that cables sound the same has yet to be unproven. And given the zeal of the many who oppose that hypothesis, it makes me believe that it will never be unproven because it is true. Anyone who has no interest in this debate that I have asked has agreed with this logic and reason. Go ahead and ask anyone who cares that you have heard differences and many others have heard differences but it has never been shown in controlled test. Go ahead, ask them what they believe.

    No need to qualify anything here. It is quite clear. What do you have to fear? Your gear? Missing an ear?

    Hey, did I just rap?
    You say:" The hypothesis that cables sound the same has yet to be unproven. And given the zeal of the many who oppose that hypothesis, it makes me believe that it will never be unproven because it is true." I doubt your hypothesis that "cables sound the same" can be statistically tested. How would you do it?

  14. #64
    Forum Regular Monstrous Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by okiemax
    I doubt your hypothesis that "cables sound the same" can be statistically tested. How would you do it?
    Unfortunately, that hypothesis would likely be phyiscally, statistically and financially impossible to prove.

    It would be much easier to disprove it by coming up with several examples of comparing basic, good cabling to exotic geometries, special construction, different metals, etc. using controlled DBTs and trained listeners. And then, and most importantly, the test should be documented and published so that any other scientist or capable tester could duplicate the results under the same conditions.

    After a few confirmations of the results, the hypothesis would be settled for whatever particular cables were tested and in general it would be shown that there are cable geometries or materials or constructions that can indeed improve the sound of audio signals.

    And finally, I personally believe nothing will change in this debate as far as someone coming up with some new, astounding evidence either way. I think it is just a fad and eventually people are going to realize that when they have an extra thousand bucks that upgrading the room will give more sonic benefit than upgrading the cables.

    So eventually we may all move on and leave this issue behind without ever knowing what the real answer was, if any at all.
    Friends help friends move,
    Good friends help friends move bodies....

  15. #65
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by FLZapped
    And yes, it is most certainly you. It shows in the attitude of your posts.
    Since your post failed to state the nature of your braggidocio, I could only speculate. I guess I should have included a smiley face.

    We're still wondering. To what do have you more exposure than "any audiophile"?

    rw

  16. #66
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    It is indeed simple for those who do not think. You claim results from tests that do not exist.

    rw
    Oh, really? Which ones don't exist? I cited every one of them. Ah, your imagination run amok.
    mtrycrafts

  17. #67
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Oh, really? Which ones don't exist? I cited every one of them. Ah, your imagination run amok.
    Boy, responding to you sure is a lot of work. Can't you remember what you say from day to day? Look at post # 29 wherein I point out that none of your references is for anything better than a mid-fi receiver and bookshelf speakers. Here is your response followed with the usual unnecessary defensive jabs :

    Hey, I don't have to have a single citation. You still have the burden of demonstration for differences. Rather simple science. But then, you don't understand that stuff.

    Then in the very next post, you pontificate with these comments:

    Subtle or huge, you are still claiming a difference that you just cannot demonstrate under bais controlled listeing, regardless of component quality.

    So, let's look at the pieces.

    I say you have no references beyond the mediocre. You reply that is true. Then in the very next breath you make your tired old claim that proof exists "regardless of component quality"

    So which one of your two conflicting comments is true? If you assert that your latter comments are correct, then cite the source!

    sheesh!

    rw
    Last edited by E-Stat; 03-05-2004 at 09:41 PM.

  18. #68
    Forum Regular FLZapped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    Boy, responding to you sure is a lot of work. Can't you remember what you say from day to day? Look at post # 29 wherein I point out that none of your references is for anything better than a mid-fi receiver and bookshelf speakers.
    There you go again with your audio snobbery. How do you know what "mid-fi" is? Where is your evidence this layering even existsexists? What is it based on? How is it quantified? Or are you just repeating an urban myth?

    -Bruce

  19. #69
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by FLZapped
    How do you know what "mid-fi" is? Where is your evidence this layering even existsexists? What is it based on? How is it quantified?
    I'll be happy to answer your question....once you answer mine. Obviously, we are from two different worlds and I'm trying to understand yours. I'm dying to know the answer from your incomplete statement. This should be simple, no? I'll leave off the humor and let you fill in the blank.

    In thirty years of electronics (which, by the way? - type not brand) research, design, and manufacture, I've been exposed to far more __________ than any audiophile.

    rw
    Last edited by E-Stat; 03-06-2004 at 07:19 AM.

  20. #70
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16

    Question

    Having just purchased a completely upgraded HT system (reciever, DVD player, and front, center and surround speakers) I, like probably many not as knowledgible followers, came to the Cable portion of the A/V forum and this string to find out why I should be spending significantly amount more of my hard earned money on "high priced" speaker cables. Despite the lenght of this thread and the empassioned views of the proponents I still have not heard validation of why I should part with my money. Do others feel that way?

  21. #71
    Forum Regular FLZapped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    I'll be happy to answer your question....once you answer mine. Obviously, we are from two different worlds and I'm trying to understand yours. I'm dying to know the answer from your incomplete statement. This should be simple, no? I'll leave off the humor and let you fill in the blank.

    In thirty years of electronics (which, by the way? - type not brand) research, design, and manufacture, I've been exposed to far more __________ than any audiophile.

    rw

    I'm not stupid enough to answer that question to have you look down your nose at me. Seen that happen too many times. So go ahead, make excuses to prop up your myths.

    -Bruce

  22. #72
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by FLZapped
    I'm not stupid enough to answer that question to have you look down your nose at me.
    Inspirational words from the voice of confidence. Ok, so you simply exposed yourself far more than any audiophile for the last thirty years.

    rw

  23. #73
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikereyno
    Having just purchased a completely upgraded HT system (reciever, DVD player, and front, center and surround speakers) I, like probably many not as knowledgible followers, came to the Cable portion of the A/V forum and this string to find out why I should be spending significantly amount more of my hard earned money on "high priced" speaker cables. Despite the lenght of this thread and the empassioned views of the proponents I still have not heard validation of why I should part with my money. Do others feel that way?
    What's interesting to me is that you would look to this thread, this board or any other board for a reason WHY you should buy cables, as opposed to simply trying a few after-market cables for yourself and seeing whether FOR YOU IN YOUR SYSTEM you experience an improvement that's worth paying for.

    You ask how others feel. Most here feel cables don't make a difference. Most high end enthusiasts (who seldom visit this board) feel otherwise.

    Why don't you just find out for yourself WHAT DOES AND DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU. On the other hand, if you are going to base your decision simply on what you are told, I suggest you visit several audio boards so as not to base that decision simply on majority rule at one particular board populated almost entirely by people of a single view of the subject.

    I guess the approach you choose is whether you are more interested in conducting a scientific research project (in which case I would caution that what attempts to pass for science on this and most other audio boards is laughable) or are more interested in finding out what does and doesn't improve YOUR OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE in the privacy of your own home.

  24. #74
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16
    PCTOWER - I am not interested in conducting any kind of experiment. I just want a valid reason as to why I should expend hard earn money on more expensive speaker cable. Unfortunately, your response did nothing to clarify that. In fact, the only thing it does have the potential to do is drive me away from this board.

  25. #75
    DMK
    DMK is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    332

    Two sides to the story

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikereyno
    PCTOWER - I am not interested in conducting any kind of experiment. I just want a valid reason as to why I should expend hard earn money on more expensive speaker cable. Unfortunately, your response did nothing to clarify that. In fact, the only thing it does have the potential to do is drive me away from this board.
    And you should hear both sides.

    Side one - there are no audible differences between cables that are suitable for audio which would be 16 guage and lower - NO 24 guage cable! The reason for this is that cable performance can be measured with test instruments and when they are, no differences that would be audible to humans are found. Bias and placebo effect account for what differences you do hear, i.e your mind is playing tricks on you. There is documented evidence of these phenomena.

    Side two - measurements don't tell us the whole story of cable sonics. It's important to listen for yourself to determine if you hear differences and if they are significant enough to warrant spending your hard earned money. Cables are very system dependant and if you try something that works for you, it may not work for your friends system. Many audio enthusiasts feel that cables do make a difference and their enjoyment of their systems is therefore enhanced.

    This is an oversimplification of the issue, of course. If you follow this board for awhile, you will see the debate flow in more detail. What I believe PCTower was telling you was that you simply need to try cables for yourself to see (hear) if they're worth it and don't follow the A/R status quo. To be fair, you could go to www.audioasylum.com and see a largely different status quo. PCtower was also telling you not to follow THAT agenda. He's telling you to think for yourself and, quite honestly, that's the best advice you can ever get on just about anything. Just make sure you are exposed to both sides of the issue before you decide.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Proof of placebo effect ?
    By okiemax in forum Cables
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 01-15-2004, 06:06 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •