What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?


Douglas Self wrote a devastating article about audio anomalies back in 1988. With all the necessary knowledge and measuring tools, he did not detect any supposedly audible changes in the electrical signal. Self and his colleagues were sure that they had proved the absence of anomalies in audio, but over the past 30 years, audio anomalies have not disappeared anywhere, at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned. It's hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).

For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.

As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.

If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?

Regards.
anton_stepichev
The whole thing is a mess. I am with Mapman, I am sorry I wasted any time reading it.

All your post is an opinion like mapman WITHOUT any reading or analysis of the book...

Then...

For mapman it was " innate knowledge ", i guess and i know that for you your opinion comes from "perfect" scientific formation coming with your education and works in audio...It is easy to spot reading your posts you are not like me an amateur...

Then i will respect your opinion....not the opinion of mapman....

But i will read the book.....

A very weak conclusion, not at all supported by evidence in the paper
By the way the book is 512 pages.... The author has obtained his doctorate at the Sorbonne in acoustic for a work and experiments that takes him decades because he was innovative so much in an Unorthodox direction to explain hearing process and sound and perhaps he is wrong but i will be surprized if he was a complete idiot....

Then refrain your judgement and wait for arguments...Or perhaps like mapman you enjoy innate knowledge and not only experience in the audio working field ?

That will be interesting book because it is in the center spot of acoustic experience...

By the way it is not USUAL to produce a doctorate at the Sorbonne or in any known institution contesting in an original way centuries of reasearch in acoustic, is it not?

Then for this study , no innate knowledge or experience in audio will replace reading it....

 I am guessing they were desperate for papers for the 2nd International Conference on Acoustics in Nigeria. Beautiful country, nice people, not well known for academic regour (note author is listed as independent researcher and no indication of peer review, which, is not uncommon at these conferences.)
This is only prejudices and his doctorate is in acoustic from Sorbonne... even if it is not the center of the world of acoustic research they dont give a doctorate to a complete idiot....

I will pass your prejudices and read the book...

 I am interested by  the links between phonology/phonetics, music, and acoustic, the book adress all that...  
I respect arguments not opinions throwing against someone intention like the OP or about a book no one has ever read...

See how it works?

your threating remark against my arguments are the logical continuation of your bashing intervention....

 I try and tried to be positive.... Trashing a thread without arguments and worst lendin to the OP intention are not positive  participation...


M Yup. Have at it! I am fine with that. Aren’t you glad?

BTW I never attacked the OP personally, just what he/she wrote. Would reach the same conclusion if Mother Teresa actually wrote it. Whereas that makes me a bad person in your eye. Which is fine. It is what it is.
Ok i have nothing against you mapman...

But contrary to you i am interested by the OP thread...

Then perhaps i overreacted defending him.... But you cannot say that your intervention consisting in one word "gaslighting people" is an argument...

Then i dont want to cause you discomfort but help me .... Gives us arguments...

Anyway i apologize if i hurted you...

I am too direct like you are yourself by the way.....

 Then put yourself in the OP shoes reading your posts....