05-14-14: FrogmanI for one would certainly not exclude the possibility that those theories may require revision or refinement at times. And I would go further, in that I would emphasize that even if those theories should happen to be entirely correct as they presently stand (and I do not assert that they are), those theories are inherently incapable of either predicting or explaining everything about how a system will sound. I have often had occasion to say just that in other threads, this recent thread being a typical example.
If we are willing to concede that the tiny impact of "extraneous variables" like changes in contact integrity may be audible and may explain the experience of the believers; if the sound of music is that vulnerable to the effects of such seemingly unimportant physical variables (and I believe it is) then it makes sense to me that the inevitable gray areas in electrical theory would also have an effect. Or are these electrical theories absolutely ironclad; with absolutely no possibility of revision? Al? Logic tells me that they probably are not.
More broadly, I think that my feelings about the philosophical questions you raise are summed up pretty well in a post I made a couple of years ago in a thread entitled "Do You Believe In Magic". I'll quote the relevant post in its entirety:
01-22-12: AlmargBest regards,:01-21-12 BryoncunninghamHi Bryon,
I honestly don't know if I'm a Believer or a Skeptic.
That is a good thing, as I see it, because IMO the positions at both ends of the ideological spectrum are fundamentally flawed in numerous ways (that I wont belabor here), and go hand-in-hand with dogmatism and closed-mindedness. If I may make a somewhat presumptuous comment, your intellectual sincerity and open-mindedness are both refreshing and commendable.
No, I do not believe in magic (although I do like the John Sebastian song :-)).
But my background in electronic design (unrelated to audio) has taught me that many things can occur in a system that are subtle, counter-intuitive, and inherently unpredictable.
Coupling of electrical noise between circuits that are ostensibly unrelated is a leading example. EMI/RFI effects are another example. While those kinds of effects can often be explained in a general sense, once the design has been implemented they can only be addressed by experimentation and trial-and-error. I dont see anything that is technically implausible, btw, in the experience you described with the particular tweak.
Concerning the broader philosophical questions you raise, my feeling is that each issue and each tweak should be considered on an individual basis, and broad latitude should be allowed for the possibility that subtle and counter-intuitive phenomena may be at play. But that latitude should remain WITHIN FINITE BOUNDS OF PLAUSIBILITY!! A technical understanding of how the elements of a system work and how they interact, and of the theory behind a specific tweak, if applied with a reasonably open mind, can help assure that perceived effects are being attributed to the correct variable, and to better distinguish between the plausible and the implausible, the reasonable and the outlandish, and between pointless overkill and the possibility of significant benefit.
Rather than a believer or a skeptic, I guess you could call me a pragmatist with a technical background.
-- Al