2. tech-talk
  3. 132494-92873

Snake oil, fraud, confirmation bias

It is becoming increasingly apparent that many threads about legitimate topics devolve into one or more of the contributors here making claims of snake oil, fraud, or confirmation bias thereby derailing the conversation beyond the valid and relevant thread topic and this is getting ridiculous. For anyone here who honestly holds the position that there is snake oil and fraud in the world of Music Reproduction Systems I challenge them to prove their claims in court it should be an easy task based on the claims they make here in Audiogon  AND they will make a fortune because in the US once proven they can file a class action suit and profit enormously from the efforts of others to deceive. These people regularly claim that "there is no evidence" that things such as cables or fuses make a difference when in actual fact Audiogon is filled with evidence that these things make very real differences in Music Reproduction Systems of course those who claim fraud reject that evidence as "confirmation bias" but in absence of any documentation from them they are only repeating the claim they have made so many times that has been refuted many times here by those who have demonstrated to there satisfaction that they make a difference.   I think in actual truth the real fraudsters here are those that repeatedly make these claims of snake oil and fraud and often they have no experience to back up there claims they simply say the claims are impossible!
clearthink
shadorne's avatar
shadorne
7,491 posts
 
This is not necessarily my view but it presents an interesting point of view which adds to this discussion. The whole thing is about the authors view on snake oil - so quite relevant and on topic.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m7ERMu825m4
cleeds
6,262 posts
 
ethiessen1
Knowledge is defined as a consensus of collective observations. That said ...

That's your definition of knowledge, perhaps. But it's not the generally accepted definition at all. Here's Merriam-Webster:

"Definition of knowledge 1 a (1) : the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association (2) : acquaintance with or understanding of a science, art, or technique b (1) : the fact or condition of being aware of something (2) : the range of one's information or understanding
  • answered to the best of my knowledge
 c : the circumstance or condition of apprehending truth or fact through reasoning : cognition d : the fact or condition of having information or of being learned
  • a person of unusual knowledge"
---

 As you can see, there's no need for a " consensus of collective observations ."
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Nope. That’s incorrect. The real definition of knowledge is what’s left after you subtract what you forgot from school. Which, for most people, myself not included, is immediately if not sooner. There is no shared knowledge. There I no learning by osmosis, either. 🌿
rspyder
103 posts
 
I feel your frustration brother.  It won't likely be diminished by the usual vitriol in some of the responses here.  The sad and simple fact is, as others have philosophized; humanity for the most part consists of two types of people: those who are happy in their existence, enjoying life (and their hobbies/passions); and those who are not, who exist to let everone know how misserable they are.  When I read the comments of the latter on Audiogon and other blocs or hear their pathetic and banal rants at social events and store queues, I smile and think of the gum that we sometimes pick up on the bottom of our shoes: one of life's "little" annoyances, which quickly wear off and are easily forgotten.
thinkfreedaniel
2 posts
 
These are just some random thoughts. I think Roger Russels classic article on speaker wire was an objective argument that any differences in speaker cables are small or related to speaker impedance and wire resistance.
( http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm )He quotes Gordon Gow who set up a true blind test and found no discernible difference. Sometimes I wonder if actual audio engineers should be the ones to write equipment reviews. But then again I doubt that all the fun of our audiophilia is based on objective sound alone. If I am listening to the sound of a pair of Tannoy Westminster's with a set of Mcintosh amps I am sure it will sound better than if I am hearing exactly the same sound coming from a cheap ghetto blaster. There is a psychology of beauty and aesthetics  involved here that really does make things sound better. 
More to discover