SR Tuning Discs, Psychoacoustic Bias and Listening Fatigue


By the way the SR Tuning Discs are snake oil. They don’t make a damned bit of difference. Careful about psychoacoustic bias. Fresher ears hear small differences greater than fatigued ears. At first listen, again A-B ing instantaneously with streamer cable plus Disc against exact same master and material on CD player transport digitally into same Bryston DAC, the two sources about 5 seconds apart to hear “phrase” of that duration in instant back to back repetition, I THOUGHT I heard a shocking large difference. But it was the first listen of the day. Then removed Disc from cable and did same thing. A LITTLE less dramatic difference. Ok. Then put Disc back onto cable. About the SAME as last. Hmmm. Then repeated this whole process about 6 more times to be sure. Then left room for hour. Came back in and did test once WITHOUT Disc. BIG DIFFERENCE. Like first test of the day with Disc ON cable. 

CONCLUSION :  THE DIFFERENCES I HEARD WHICH I INITIALLY ATTRIBUTED TO THE SR TUNING DISCS WERE PSYCHOACOUSTIC AND LISTENING FATIGUE BIAS. SYNERGISTIC RESEARCH TUNING DISCS MAKE ZERO DIFFERENCE. 

But that’s my opinion. You can take it with a grain of salt if you so desire. 

tlcocks

A couple of thoughts here on "psychoacoustics":

We are overlooking the aspect of NEGATIVE BIAS, whereas a proposed concept "pegs the needle on our BS meter" yet produced clearly audible benefits.  I'm sure I'm not alone when mentally evaluating the viability of a new "tweak" with a high degree of skepticism, only to discover very positive (mind blowing?) results in many cases.  This would certainly remove the psychoacoustics element of "wanting it to sound better" from the equation, and apply "rational subjectivity" to the testing.

The term "Snake Oil" implies the intent to defraud through deceptive practices.  I would submit that the vast majority of manufacturers make a good faith effort to provide legitimate sonic benefits of their products and have done their due diligence.  Products that have endured for generations have, in my opinion, reduced the "snake oil prospect" to a number approaching zero.  "Snake oil" products are rare, and an exception in this industry.

I have no doubt that some audio enthusiasts have inserted something "new" into their systems with no sonic benefit.  They HEARD what they HEARD.  And, on the opposite end of the spectrum, the same identical "tweak" was clearly beneficial in another system.  And, they HEARD what they HEARD.  it doesn't make one or the other right or wrong.  Just an entirely different set of variables -- including our ears.

I am open to negative bias. That’s why since initially posting I’ve checked over serial days a few times. Same results. Trust me, I was very open minded to a change being heard. I certainly hear not subtle differences between two digital coaxial cables

Who knows if the discs really make any difference? But negative bias is far less likely than good old positive confirmation bias and the venerable placebo effect. What bothers me is that many of these products have stratospheric profit margins because that is the surest way to trigger confirmation bias-- price it high and lard it up with pseudo-scientific claims that are next to, if not impossible to prove or even comprehend. Just my opinion, but most would be far better off if they focused on room acoustics before going for a ride down twisted tweak road.

I have a Don Sachs preamp, & one day I got a bug up my ass & swapped from existing feet to Maple footers & made no significant sound change. I had a set of Panega's feet laying around & tried those, & instantaneously, the music opened up. Tried that a few more times to see if I was nuts but, I haven't move them since.