Objective vs. Placebo relating to system changes

Understanding the 'science' behind something doesn't constitute a bar of sorts on which to judge others perceptions since the beauty of that 'science' is that it is disprovable. This has been discussed here at great length before.

If you have any doubts that others can hear a difference and can't experience it firsthand with others, what is the strength of those doubts and just how far are you willing to go to refute them? By setting up a straw man argument?

Not too long ago there was an article on another audio site that went back to one of the first audio double blind challenges that was revealed to be nothing more than an attempt to embarrass audiophiles by a person with an agenda against audiophiles. That person was quickly forgotten but his methods weren't.

All the best,
Nonoise

I'd love an opportunity to be convinced, but my location is not near either of you that offered. My issues relating to sciece are primarily when the science used to market audio equipment is obviously flawed or just unrelated. I don't expect every product to have a scientificly (I can't spell this word today I guess) sound proof, all that I ask is don't lie to me.

An example is the people that sell gold cables stating that they are the best when silver is proven to be superior. The use of gold is mostly like due to the fact that many people associate gold with being the best and assume that it'll cost a lot. If they simply said that the use of gold as a conductor provided a color to the sound that they preferred to silver or copper, then I wouldn't necessarily call BS on them.

My original question was intended to set a stage "where all other things are equal" as the foundation of the discussion and then find out what changes in the system people are 100% confident people could identify. This goes to the heart of the discussion about the value (i.e. cost vs. improvement vs. I swap things for fun) of upgrading and/or changing equipment.

In my case, I'm perfectly happy with the sound of my system, but purchased a tube integrated (I was given most of the money as a gift) because I just wanted to experience something different than what I have. I won't even be surprised if I prefer the sound of my solid state gear, but only time will tell.

I'm not against changing for the sake of changing, but that should be the reason and not I'm spending an additional $10,000 on an interconnect when I couldn't tell if you swapped it out or not if you didn't tell me.

When I had Nordost Sort Kones demonstrated under a CD player on a system with speakers in the middle of the Focal Utopia line and a Pathos amplifier, I was convinced that I could hear a difference, but was equally convinced that I would never be able to tell if they were in or out if I just walked in and wasn't doing an A/B comparison. And, I still ended up with a pair because curiosity got the better of me.

My first question to the salesman was if they made more of a difference on cheap CD player compared to the $10,000 ones and was suprised that they seemed to work equally. My next question was why a company selling a $10,000 CD player wouldn't either incorporate a similar design or just work out a deal with Nordost to include them with the purchase.

"It seems that many who so desperately profess to hear the "mind blowing" differences are also the ones that desperately try to debunk double blind testing as they know they'll get outed to the nonsense.
Snofun3 (System | Threads | Answers | This Thread)"

For years I've been asking the same question every time I read a quote like this: Where can I read the tests that you are referring to? I can't debunk your tests if you keep guys keep them a secret. Not one person has ever produced a test. I wonder why?

I think that John ( Jmcgrogan2 ) and others called you out correctly, plus your last sentence validates that fact.

You're an engineer, so you should be making a decent salary. If you are indeed looking to upgrade, you need to quit looking for excuses and decide to dedicate a fair amount of money towards it. If you're not, just stay where you are and enjoy it.

If you think that some cones and wires are going to make your system sound like it cost $30,000.00, you need a reality check. If you think that some cones and wires will make a $30,000.00 sound better, you're in the ballpark.

It's pretty apparent that you're not even in the mindset to look into upgrading, have any useful plan or commitment even if you wanted to, and you're just looking to stir the pot.

Mceljo,

This really has nothing to do with science. (I'm just responding to your post's, not everyones.)

"I have Nordost Sort Kones under my SACD player and after several attempts to prove to myself that they did or did not make a difference I left them in and chock up the "improvement" that I convinced myself I heard to being primarily placebo. Even after coming to that conclusion I never took them back for a refund, which I could have done, and have never removed them from my system. What I am convinced about is that if my wife took them out and I couldn't visually tell the difference I'd never know."

Thats a psychological issue, and nothing more. It doesen't have a thing to do with audio. If you spent money on those cones that didn't make a difference but didn't return them, that's just silly. You're supporting the same thing your condemning. If the vendor was willing to take them back, they're standing behind what they sell.

"I'm also convinced myself that I heard a difference between a $7 pair of hardware store speaker wires and a $2,000 pair something fancy, but it certainly wasn't a $1,997 improvement."

Same thing here. It has nothing to do with audio. If you didn't see the value in the cable, you shouldn't have bought it. It doesn't take an engineer to figure that one out.