|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: RE: "Real science has no agenda" posted by Todd Krieger on September 26, 2021 at 09:47:34:
What finding? Have you personally looked at the findings of any studies in psychoacoustics and found a fatal flaws in the design of the testing or statistical analysis of the data?
Here is where audiophiles including yourself are denying science. The area of bias effects. It is well studied and well understood. It is a phenomenon that accurately predicts audiophiles and everyone else will hear differences in things under sighted conditions that are not actually physically present. Audiophiles believe that they possess listening skills that simply do not exist in human beings that allow them to reliably identify differences in sound under sighted conditions with large spans of time between samples.
That this is not true and why it is not true is well understood in the world of psychoacoustics and that is what is being denied.
Of course the other major body of science that is being denied is the degree to which we can objectively measure actual differences in sound and electrical audio signals. Degrees of measurement that far exceed human hearing.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- "People aren't denying science, they just don't agree with a particular finding" - Analog Scott 09/26/2110:12:35 09/26/21 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
