Why is science just a starting point and not an end point?

                     btw: Someone mentioned lifting cables off carpeting.

        Whether that's audible or not: I can't say, as none of mine have ever been on the carpet, in the past 40 years..

         I can say: whatever your cables are contacting, along their lengths, will become a part of their dielectrics, which can (potentially) affect signal propagation.

         Some carpeting/flooring is manufactured of really bad materials (re: permittivity).

                                                       Just sayin'.

      Make that, "Of course: anything the Naysayer Church's popes can't fathom, they'll VACUOUSLY dismiss."

                                It's their modus operandi.

Look class! This is the sound someone makes when they can’t produce a reasoned rebuttal to an argument.

Sorry but all your "arguments" are sophism around a mantra...the mantra is Blind-test....Your idea of science is akin to a comic book fiction... and in this comic book superman is a scientific superpower debunking astrology and ground bare walking.... Is it not pitiful enough?


Ears are not replaceable by equations or arguments...

Psycho-acoustic use measures, very precise one, of all kinds, but none of them replace hearing experience or even explain it...Psycho-acoustic is precisely an exploration of hearing mysteries...One of the problem for example covered in a 800 hundred page book i own is : what is musical timbre...


Save for religious scientism mind, measure of electronic design is very far to explain what we hear through and audiob system or what we could hear with an improved  an audio system modified by many embeddings controls......

Dont test your ears ,educate it....

No human ears is perfect for sure, no need to prove it at all, but all ears can be educated by our own strike of EXPERIMENTS...For our own pleasure....

This audiophile claims of mine is not a zealot mantra like your obsession with blind test but an invitation to be creative....

Well, I asked for a clear example from rodman99999 about some tweak he "hears" making a difference at home, and we get yet more scattershot rambling and links...as if someone else needs to do the job to piece it all together.


Again, this is a thread about science and audio.


rodman99999, if you are such a fan of science, you must acknowledge the relevance of blind testing, right?   Have you successfully passed any blind tests for your tweaks?


That's the problem:  for most if not all the controversial claims in high end audio, nobody has produced reliable results showing people can tell differences when they are not peeking.


*(there are some intriguing reports here and there, e.g. occasionally for cables, but there doesn't seem to be any sturdy replication of these results to put the debate to rest).

Prof are you really a scientist?

Or a crusader disciple of James Randi...Obsessed by cables like Randi was obsessed by spoon benders...
No audiophile and music lover need blind test....

Marketers of drugs or audio products perhaps need it, debunkers in a circus also or on a theater or in a show on tv....

Serious use of blind test methodology is very complex and implicate statistic in drug market for example...And anyway all the problem in audio life is the way by which we must educate our "biases" way more than the way to eliminate them... It is called a continuous series of listening experiments...Like a practicing musician on a new instrument coordinating hands and ears.. In my room i coordinated mechanical modifications about vibrations controls for example, electrical modifications pertaining to the noise floor level with devices of my own, and many many acoustical modifications ...


All that has no value for you if not blind tested? And if you work someday like me around your system will you wait for a blind test for each of the many hundred introduced modifications... Do you see the ridicule of your obsession? Do you see the misplaced imposition of blind test by you in an audiophile creative forum? and all this revendications to be a scientist from you, asking forcefully for blind tests are they not ridiculous ?



I fine tuned each one of my 40 Helmholtz tubes and pipes resonators and diffusers to actively control my link speakers/room...
And the only blind tests useful was for me accidental blind test, when some device is uninstalled or removed by accident, and my feeling said so, and simple private conscious blind test in the course of a work when a change in sound is borderline between real and placebo....

Do i need public blind test to satisfy you and mute your mantra ?



I installed a grid of Schuman generators, do i need to blind test each one addition or all of them in one test strike?

I created many devices of my own like special diffusers in set of suspended strings with passive connectors and herkimer diamond and tourmaline....

Do i need blind test to verify if they work or if it is a placebo?

Creativity cost nothing sometimes, stupidity generally cost way more....





« An elephant blind tested is no more an elephant»-Groucho Marx

Guess why?