The Great Debate (again)

PolkThug

I think its cool when you hear somebodies voice in a dream, and you haven't seen or heard from that person in years.

heiney9

bikezappa wrote:

bpadget
That's correct. I'd be very interested in these type of experiments and test results. Let's do them. I can help.

It's been done before on a professional level. I know one study is at the Stereophile website. This particular idea has been discussed and I feel it's a waste of time. Basically because of EarlyB's auditory hypothesis among other idea's. Do a search here if you want the details....I'm not writing them out again. Anything discussed on the "experiment" has been said in other threads. Happy hunting .

I would agree that more often than not people with great auditory memory are in the "believers" camp. I have no scientific proof I just base it on reasonable conclusions and experiences.

H9

F1nut

bikezappa wrote:

There are laws of physics that are true. That is these laws are in agreement with experiment. If you can do an experiment that shows the law in wrong then you could win a Noble Prize.

Tell that to the woman who lifted a 2 ton car off of her child to save it's life. The laws of physics would state that it's impossible, yet it has happened. Just another exception to every rule.

Polkersince85

IMO, with the average age of the (male) members of this board, most of us have probably lost the upper end of our hearing range anyway, so most of the changes (heard) in copper wiring are probably from memory anyway. The aspirin we take for our heart probably makes our ears ring, too.

TroyD

Anybody change thier opinion yet?

Thought not.

BDT

wingnut4772

I have been listening to music with a critical ear since I was a wee lass. I even tought myself how to read music and play the piano in high school. My first complete piece was 'Moonlight Sonata' and then I eventually moved on to the likes of Prelude in C sharp Minor by Rachmaninoff...but I always remember having an almost tape recorder-like version of the sound in my head. I have had 'audiophiles' play their expensive systems for me and I have wanted to put my fingers in my ears with the harshness I was hearing but I think that women are more sensitive to brightness in sound...but I digress...

I believe that some people do just have a better or more sensitive ear for these things. I guess that's why we are drawn here...

VR3

Wingnut,
Im going to go ahead and tell you. My system is bright. I like it that way.

Early B,
"brotherhood of the boombox." - THAT...is PRICELESS. LOL!!!

I dont have much to say about the debate, it sounds epic though..almost like we've never chartered it before - ....

Dennis Gardner

wingnut4772 wrote:

I think that women are more sensitive to brightness in sound......

and men have learned to tune out that high pitched whine...........that comes from women.;)

schwarcw

Music schools (good ones) and colleges that grant degrees to recording engineers teach critical listening skills. I don't know what they teach. My son has taken a course or two in this as he is a recording engineer. They are taught how to listen for nuances and how it compares to the live or studio sessions. He can hear the white noise they plug into a snare drum pop. I can't hear this.

But in order for a double blind test to work, the persons tested would have to have some critical listening training to be a little more scientific than the "boom box boys"

One scientific observation that I can personally validate is that I upgraded the power cord on my Halo and noticed the heat sinks were much cooler. I believe that I heard a little more punch to the music. The amp must be working a little easier and not straining to meet the amp's power demand.

Cables are another story. I haven't heard much difference in my limited experimentation with interconnects.

I have noticed additional clarity or detail with higher grade speaker cables. Specically the PS Audio Preludes I got from Doro, were better than my Home Depot 12 guage bi-wire.

amulford

You will hear differences if you have a good memory perception of the music. Others may not, or may.

I do, but I have tracks I specifically use for the purpose. I also know what the characteristics of my rigs are to me. The only way for me to be able to tell is the memory of what I expect to hear/feel. I use that to guage against the present experience, and thus note differences.

Along that line of thinking, I'd have to be inclined to agree.

wingnut4772

and men have learned to tune out that high pitched whine...........that comes from women.

Hmmmm....and I wonder why not more of us women are into this 'guy' hobby with that kind of response!:D

I know a TON of guys like their stuff bright because that's all I know that are into this hobby and that's all I hear. I actually prefer a neutral sound and that's what I try to achieve but the LSIs are a smidge warm. IMO

Dennis Gardner

Just Polkin' fun at ya Darla......

wingnut4772

Oh I know...:p

Early B.

schwarcw wrote:

Music schools (good ones) and colleges that grant degrees to recording engineers teach critical listening skills. I don't know what they teach. My son has taken a course or two in this as he is a recording engineer. They are taught how to listen for nuances and how it compares to the live or studio sessions. He can hear the white noise they plug into a snare drum pop. I can't hear this.

This is interesting. I'd like to sit in on a class like that. It would be dangerous to do it, though, because it could quickly lead to severe upgraditis.

On a similar note, one would think that most musicians would be audiophiles, but that's not the case. It would be interesting to see the kinds of audio gear professional musicians have in their homes.

dorokusai

You would think that JohnK would be running around with his "You're all stupid..." flag by now....hmmmm

dragon1952

Almost every musician I have known has been fairly uninterested in listening to music. They like to play but they are casual listeners at best.

madmax

dragon1952 wrote:

Almost every musician I have known has been fairly uninterested in listening to music. They like to play but they are casual listeners at best.

Ditto.

I think most of them are used to too much loudness and couldn't care less about the quality.
madmax

steveinaz

I know I have excellent "hearing memory" as my wife can attest. If you call me on the phone, 1 time, you could call again 6 months later and I'll know exactly who it is. Seriously. It mystifies my wife when I know who is on the phone as soon as they speak. I've always been good at recognizing voices, even voices of people I speak to rarely.

We have 120 employees upstairs, any one of them can call me and I'll know exactly who it is as soon as they speak. My wife says I have built-in caller ID...LOL

schwarcw

I forget what my wife looks like:eek:

fredv

schwarcw wrote:

I forget what my wife looks like:eek:

I am sure she is not a member of this board; otherwise, you wouldn't said so

Joey_V

What mystifies me is why some people dont add a dedicated circuit for their system but spend upwards of $500 for a power cord. Atleast, IMO, if you're going for the $500 cord, might as well have the bases covered and get a dedicated line.

Is there a difference between cables, interconnects, and wire? I'm sure there is.

wingnut4772

Yep. A dedicated circuit is a great thing to have. I wish I had put in more.

Ferres

wingnut4772 wrote:

Yep. A dedicated circuit is a great thing to have. I wish I had put in more.

Yes, a dedicated circuit are a must for av set ups. I had a flicker issue with the plasma and it went away when it was plugged into the dedicated circuit.:p

bikezappa

F1nut wrote:

Tell that to the woman who lifted a 2 ton car off of her child to save it's life. The laws of physics would state that it's impossible, yet it has happened. Just another exception to every rule.

I have no idea if these stories are true or not. But if a women did lift a 2 ton car off her child the Law of Physics would still apply.

Force= Mass times Acceration

or

F=ma

The amazing thing is where this women got the strength to lift or move the car. I don't think the laws of physics changed however. I don't know the answer to the question of how she did it. Maybe the car was supported and balancing on or by some rocks and she pushed it such a way that the child was set free. Who knows?

If you are going to state an exception to the laws of physics, you need to do it in a controlled scientific manner. This manner then allows anyone who wants to to verify your data.

heiney9

Not that Jesse can't argue for himself.....I believe in your above example the force was what being referred to breaking the law of physics. Not claiming that I know how a human can gain that kind of strength, but to generate that kind of force might challenge a law of physics and be an exception.

H9

F1nut

Ed Z

madmax

Obviously it takes a certain amount of force to lift a car and that woman possessed at least that amount given the conditions. Otherwise the car would not have been lifted. While we may feel it odd for a woman to be able to generate that amount of force it certainly doesn't break any laws of physics, only our perception of what amount of force we think a woman can generate.
madmax

bikezappa

madmax wrote:

Obviously it takes a certain amount of force to lift a car and that woman possessed at least that amount given the conditions. Otherwise the car would not have been lifted. While we may feel it odd for a woman to be able to generate that amount of force it certainly doesn't break any laws of physics, only our perception of what amount of force we think a woman can generate.
madmax

Correct.

Maybe this story is about a women lifting a car occurred on the moon.

dragon1952

It's called adrenaline rush.

shack

I know in the past I have stated that I don't really care what anyone else thinks about the "Great Cable Debate" so I made it a point to stay out of this thread.

However, given the new parameters....I would also like to state that I could give a rat's **** whether or not a woman can/can't lift a car and whether it does/doesn't defy the laws of physics.