Empirical evidence can also be anecdotal evidence and persons postulating on how much difference a cable makes in the sound coming from their speakers is empirical and anecdotal evidence. From this evidence we build hypotheses is the difference because of the cable or some other factor? Now we can begin to form experiments to understand why this person hears differences between cables or we can just take their word for it only one of these will further our knowledge of cables and human perception and it isn't the latter.
If you stream music from the internet, I can't recommend this more highly
I had been using a Roon Nucleus to stream Qobuz, with my Chord Qutest directly connected to the Nucleus. I thought I was getting pretty decent sound quality. And then I got a marketing email from Small Green Computer touting some of their optical gear. The basic idea is that normal cables and connections used to stream from the internet pick up noise of one kind or another (radio frequencies and electromagnetic something or other). But fiber optic cables and their connections/interfaces do not. I don’t know anything about anything, but it made theoretical sense to me, it wasn’t a huge amount of money ($1,400), and with a 30 day return policy I figured I could always return it if I didn’t hear any improvement. Well, I didn’t just hear a slight improvement; it was like turning on the lights in a dark room. Much greater clarity and detail, much better micro and macro dynamics, better timbre to acoustic instruments -- overall just more lifelike. Two quick examples: I’ve listened to some of Steely Dan’s top songs 100s of times over the course of my life, and this is the first time I’d ever noticed a particular and very subtle sound characteristic of Fagen’s keyboard in Babylon Sister. It’s hard to describe, but it’s like there’s a slight sound of air being exhaled by it. The other example: the specific timbre of whatever percussive instrument is used at the beginning of Copeland’s "Fanfare for the Common Man" (a recording by the Minnesota Orchestra). There’s more of a metallic sound than a drum skin sound to it that I didn’t know was there before. The metallic sound starts in the center and then projects out and to the sides, like a wave washing over you. Anyway, I’m just thrilled about having stumbled upon the whole "optical" thing and felt obligated to let others know about it. If you stream music over the internet, I highly recommend giving it a try. (The product I got was the opticalRendu, with the linear power supply option, and the Fiber Ethernet Converter Bundle option.)
- ...
- 156 posts total
Copied this from a website, but ... Breaking Down the Evidence The main concern with empirical research is the collection of unbiased evidence. Researchers must carefully design the research while minimizing exposure to potential errors. In the scientific world, it is common that several scientists or researchers gather evidence simultaneously through the replication of the same study. In addition, a peer review is a primary tool in science that is used to validate the evidence provided in a study or research. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/empirical-evidence/ Stolen from Wikipedia. These methods yield only probabilities. Among scientific researchers, empirical evidence (as distinct from empirical research) refers to objective evidence that appears the same regardless of the observer. For example, a thermometer will not display different temperatures for each individual who observes it. Temperature, as measured by an accurate, well calibrated thermometer, is empirical evidence. By contrast, non-empirical evidence is subjective, depending on the observer. Following the previous example, observer A might truthfully report that a room is warm, while observer B might truthfully report that the same room is cool, though both observe the same reading on the thermometer. The use of empirical evidence negates this effect of personal (i.e., subjective) experience or time. What this means is the answer to "do you like A better than B" could be considered non-empirical evidence. Being able to tell A and B apart would be empirical evidence. However, if B was a modified version of A, then it could be empirical depending on how the question was worded. I do feel this paragraph is a bit strict in its definition. From bennpar.com Anecdotal evidence is using your personal experiences and stories to illustrate your point. Empirical evidence is measured, unbiased, and replicable.
From study.com Today's topic, anecdotal evidence, can be defined as testimony that something is true, false, related, or unrelated based on isolated examples of someone's personal experience. Anecdotal evidence is very popular in the advertising world. Every time you see a claim about a product's effectiveness based on a person's personal experience, the company is using anecdotal evidence to encourage sales. Again, like almost every single uncontrolled listening test reported on Audiogon. From yourdictionary.com Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis. Again, like almost every reported listening test here. Oxford English Dictionary:
So yes, I am quite confident in classifying almost all the reported listening experiences on this site as anecdotal. |
@djones, Empirical evidence can also be anecdotal evidence and persons postulating on how much difference a cable makes in the sound coming from their speakers is empirical and anecdotal evidence.@audio2design gave an excellent overview, according to which these are non-empirical evidences, as an empirical evidence reflects objective reality. @audio2design has in fact justified that the most of the arguments here are based on non-empirical, i.e., anecdotic evidences. And empirical evidences are somehow related with a theory. For instance, by observing the temperature (an empirical evidence) we rely on the theory based on which thermomiters were designed. Even anecdotic evidences here rely on theory. E.g., when one judges about sonic properties of a DAC, he relies on the theory on which this dac was built (e.g. Fourier transformation used in sampling/unsampling process or whatever theoretical assumption supporting the architecture of that unit). From this evidence we build hypotheses is the difference because of the cable or some other factor? Now we can begin to form experiments to understand why this person hears differences between cables or we can just take their word for it only one of these will further our knowledge of cables and human perception and it isn't the latter. Indeed, these are subjective realities. Perhaps, thus guy smoke marijuana and every cable, including the tested one, sounds wonderful for him or he was encouraged by the seller or whatever. An empirical evidence based on theory is reliable but unlikely that may occur in these threads. |
Let me start saying I haven't read this entire thread but I have read others and I do believe people have heard an improvement with optical interfaces vs ethernet. I'm also aware SGC and Sonore make exceptional well regarded audio products. That said it is a misconception to think optical as a technology is "completely" clean for RFI purposes, now if this RFI dirtyness (residual of optical) affects audio or not that's another story. The entire RFI/EMI issue arises on ethernet and dacs, servers and such on poorly designed and improperly shielded systems. When you are modulating a wavelength (either multimode light or single mode laser) over fiber there are residual RFI which by the way are many times higher than with actual ethernet, 30 to 40 dB in magnitude, radiating in all directions and inducing into cables creating antenna effects everywhere, shielding with aluminum, copper and even cable shielding blocks at most 10 to 15 percent of this signal but it is ineffective at blocking effectively specific residual due to their magnitude. This problem is even more accentuated with BiDi devices which transmits and receives over the same fiber on different wavelengths. Finally this will get induced into ac adapters, other cables and such. Does it affects music? Apparently not since no one has complained and people I trust have tested the Sonore and SGC products and report an improvement with optical, but it does exist and it is not "completely clean" On my testing some optical equipment is better than others blocking and shielding this effect, SGC and Sonore products haven't been part of my testing as my test was on a different application than audio related directly to my work. |
just in front of my Antipodes server to eliminate EMI/RFI that may potentially be contaminating the approximately 30 feet run of Ethernet from my router to my server @mitch2 question is what this contamination might do, your tplinks will certainly contaminate based on my results, is it audible or different in SQ? TP-Link Gigabit SFP to RJ45 Fiber Media Converters cost about $20 bucks But they are terrible at shielding, think of it like most FMCs will radiate omnidirectional and through the cable in every direction. Using SFPs "usually" will radiate on controlled directions (mostly in front of the SFPs) use MM better than SMF unless you need more than 1 gb which is highly unlikely, and avoid BiDi |
- 156 posts total