ganainm,
I’m totally with you, and have myself reiterated many times: I’m not arguing that anyone shouldn’t buy whatever makes him/her happy, for whatever reason they want. Nor do I advocate turning every purchase we make into a scientific double-blind experiment. I have had numerous bits of gear, even some tweakier stuff, that I’d think is well on the fringe of actual audibility (or well over the cliff). But it’s stuff that makes me happy, and I’ve even been happy enough to avail myself of likely placebo effects here and there. I’d hate for anyone to demand how I spend my money and would never push my own standards on others.
It’s only when people start making objective claims about reality, using their own subjectivity as the apparent standard of reality, that I think becomes problematic. So I add my own opinions and reasons for believing as I do, as a counterbalance. I’ve been very glad over the many years of inhabiting audio forums to have seen rigorous debate about these issues, as they have been quite helpful in guiding my own approach to my system. (And saving money!).
The problem is many people don’t seem that acquainted with the principles of rigorous empirical inquiry, as exemplified in science.
If you question their subjective experience, they react emotionally and defensively, thinking it’s an insult or that you are being dogmatic and arrogant, as in "who are YOU to tell me what I did or didn’t experience??!!"
But of course all we are doing is applying the principles learned and used in science; acknowledging the obvious fact that we are fallible, including our perception and our inferences from our experience, and trying to account for that fallibility. The example I’ve used before: my son is involved in a long term double-blind study w. placebo control group, for a new allergy treatment. The doctors are not allowed to know who is on the real medicine or on the placebo. Why? Because we know their having such knowledge can influence/bias the outcome of the trials.Do the study doctors protest "What? Are you trying to tell me I can’t trust my own judgement to get around my bias? What insulting nonsense! I’ve used my judgement to get through life, and I’ll use my knowledge of who is on the medicine and who is not to get through this study just fine thank you"
Of course the doctors don’t throw such a fit. Because they are simply acquainted with the facts of the matter about human bias, and the need to control for that variable.
But when these variables are raised in threads like this you invariably raise hackles as if you’ve attacked someone’s religion, or at least some of their cherished beliefs. It’s understandable on one level because, hey, our subjectivity is essentially our main tool for getting through life and making inferences about how things work. Threaten someone’s strongly held belief based on a strong subjective experience and it seems on the surface a bit destabilizing. One can say "Oh yes, I agree we need that rigor for certain areas of science...but I don’t need it to come to firm conclusions in my audio hobby." And in that way compartmentalize things. But unfortunately, human bias doesn’t stay compartmentalized like that and it seems the honest thing to do is admit it, and take this in to account when deciding on how strong our claim is going to be about cables and other things, where objectively verifiable evidence is less forthcoming.
(That said, I think many in this particular thread, including those who believe cables often make a sonic difference, seem more open to the points being made by some of us more skeptical critters).
