Have we lost civility and respect on Audio forums?

Excellent post...

But i will correct you about this era... This is the age of Trump and Biden ... Trump is not the only  con man ...

This is the internet, the age of Trump, and outrage and disrespect for others seem to go hand in hand any any post you might write. Audio asylum has been this way for years which is why I never look at it or Facebook or any other.

I guess many were not taught in school, working well with others, being a good citizen, civics, and so on, all taught in elementary school and graded on your behavior. To be known as a liar was the worst thing you could be or called, all frowned upon you. Now you get elected to office. Sad you cannot have your experience posted without it turning into a blood bath at times. This hobby was one of sharing experiences and learning from each other from those who might have 30-40 years of experience. 

The anonymous nature of the Internet allows behavior that would not be acceptable fact-to-face.  Agree 100% with an earlier comment about 90% opinion and 10% fact.  There are very few actual subject matter experts for any topic.  The audio hobby seems to have an excessive number of self appointed experts.

It almost sounds like you're living with absolute certainty that we know norhing. That none of the 100+ years of research in psychoacoustics taught us anything at all about human aural perception. “Let us assume that you can't hear 20khz or above?” It’s not an assumption. Literally millions of human beings have been tested for their frequency range. It’s almost like saying “let’s assume gravity is a real thing.” Do you really think wave interference patterns that affect the sound in the audible range are a mystery that none of us ever knew about and are mysterious and unmeasurable? If ultra frequency sounds manifest a wave within the audible range we hear it, if it isn’t masked, and we can measure it. AND any basic cable will transmit it without any audible distortion.

going back to the early days of Bell Labs about 100 years ago to current times there has been a massive amount of research on what we hear and don’t hear. We know for example that the total distortion in a basic audio cable is so low that it’s hard to say for sure if what is being measured is actual distortion or just thermal noise. It’s around -140 db. We also know that no human being can come close to hearing any noise or distortion at -140 db. And there is no recording or source component either digital or analog that can produce a signal that doesn’t add at least 20-30 db of noise and distortion. Analog sources in particular aren’t anywhere near that. And we have numerous controlled tests that clearly demonstrate this inaudibility. 
 

We also know, based on a large body of research that humans can not accurately compare an aural memory to real time sound. Not even close. And we know through other studies that it is a cause for humans, all humans, to misidentify differences in sound where none exist. 

“There are indeed all kinds of PhDs working 16 hour days doing research. What is really dumb is to think that they continually miss real audible phenomena that is only detected by audiophiles under non controlled conditions.

Did you know that for GPS to even work they have to use algorithms to make real time adjustments for time dilation due to special relativity? The sati lights are literally experiencing time at a different rate of Han we do on the ground because of the speed of their orbit Do you have any idea the level of sophistication and degree of precision that requires? Do you think the same scientific research and engineering that allows for that is missing something in cable transfer function that only audiophiles are detecting?

@maghister. I agree. Look we have opinions and I respect every one’s right to have an opinion but we have all different systems and to tell someone it’s not possible when the are listening to their own system while some are typing their scientific theories is beyond me. 

We hear meanings with our consciousness not mere hertz frequencies with the ears ...

It is why the human ears is not a microphone ...

You are not even wrong scottwheel ...

But i will not write a very long post to contradict your "not even wrong" observations conflating technological knowledge about the ears/brain and science open vast questions about this ...

Listen to my video above about the guru rolling in a fire and analyse "the trick" for me if there is one ... 😊

A very simple article to read to get my point ...

https://acousticstoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Psychoacoustics-A-Brief-Historical-Overview.pdf

«Although research on complex sound processing was pur-
sued by many psychoacousticians, there was no overarch-
ing theory or organizing principle to integrate the knowl-
edge being accumulated and to make new predictions. This
changed when a series of articles, chapters, and books ap-
peared between 1988 and 1992 (Yost, 2014). The book by
Al Bregman (1990), Auditory Scene Analysis, captured the
essence of these other authors’ attempts at finding an orga-
nizing principle for complex sound processing, and Auditory
Scene Analysis captured the imagination of perceptual scientists
in hearing as well as in perceptual and cognitive psychology.
Sounds from the various sources that make up an audi-
tory scene interact physically and arrive at the ears as a
single sound field representing the physical combination
of the sounds from the various sources. The auditory pe-
riphery uses biomechanical and neural processes to send
a neural code to the brain representing the spectral/tem-
poral features of that sound field. There are no peripheral
mechanisms that process sounds as coming from individual
sources. There is no representation in the neural code flow-
ing to the brain that the scene may be one of a car driving
by as the wind blows the leaves and a child giggles. Yet that
is what we can perceive usually immediately and effortlessly.
The sound is complex and the listener may be hearing some
of the sounds for the first time, yet the auditory images are
often vivid. These auditory images allow the listener to identify the car, the blowing leaves, and the giggling child. The
brain performs auditory scene analysis. Psychoacoustics has
just begun to investigate how the brain does this. It appears
to be a daunting task; it is, like Helmholtz observed, trying
to look down a tube at waves on a beach and determining
what caused the waves. It is likely that the next chapter in
the history of psychoacoustics will be written by present and
future psychoacousticians who help unravel how the brain
analyzes an auditory scene..»