In Reply to: RE: Technical knowledge? posted by theaudiohobby on April 23, 2008 at 07:44:41:
I'd say most. If you observe it and tell me, that's anecdotal, if I observe it, it's empirical. Question is, then what do you do? Perhaps:
1. Enjoy the results and pass the information along to friends, possibly on AA, who may find the method or device useful in their systems.
2. Enjoy it in secret. Better sound with less criticism.
3. Try to learn more about it out of curiosity or desire for further optimization.
The real rub seems to be comingling observation, theory, testing and proof. An observation is empirical data. A theory is a guess at what produced the observed result. That gets tested to try and prove that it explains the phenomenon to an acceptable level. Acceptable to whom, for what purpose is another rarely asked question.
It seems like many folks make the leap from observation to proof (conclusion) without passing through the theory/test loop. That, IMHO, is what drives some of the odd debates on PHP. And I think folks are almost forced into it because if something is posted without an "explanation", it is met with ridicule while unsupported explanations are well accepted.
In the broadest terms then I agree with E-Stat: On PHP, theory (guessing) trumps experience (observation). But I think your point is that those guesses perhaps should not be called "theories" because they are not likely to suffer being tested and thus simply remain 'guesses'.
Rick
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - rick_m 04/23/0808:47:13 04/23/08 (39)
- "Enjoy it in secret. Better sound with less criticism." A good rule indeed. nt - clarkjohnsen 08:45:52 04/24/08 (0)
- Experience (observation) - AJinFLA 16:47:57 04/23/08 (12)
- shouldn't be too hard to hear a frozen photo - Analog Scott 20:01:22 04/24/08 (0)
- RE: Experience (observation) - rick_m 18:00:55 04/23/08 (10)
- Chupacabra - thetubeguy1954 18:32:04 04/23/08 (9)
- RE: Chupacabra - rick_m 19:06:44 04/23/08 (6)
- It's classed as a cryptid or Unidentified Mysterious Animal - Pat D 05:51:12 04/24/08 (5)
- As I said... - kerr 09:45:08 04/24/08 (0)
- Another Idiotic Assumption Pat D Made About Me! - thetubeguy1954 09:35:22 04/24/08 (3)
- "Being the uninformed idiot he is, Pat-D-Cake continually mistakenly speaks about my beliefs " - Richard BassNut Greene 13:46:00 04/25/08 (1)
- RE: "Being the uninformed idiot he is, Pat-D-Cake continually mistakenly speaks about my beliefs " - Pat D 16:15:28 04/27/08 (0)
- I'm just following your rules. (nt) - Pat D 08:07:43 04/25/08 (0)
- RE: Chupacabra - kerr 19:01:03 04/23/08 (1)
- Chupacapocus! (nt) - Pat D 07:11:12 05/16/08 (0)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - theaudiohobby 11:24:37 04/23/08 (24)
- A classic case of attacking anecdotal evidence with anecdotal evidence - Analog Scott 14:38:14 04/23/08 (2)
- Scott, where are Jon Risch's tests again? (nt) - AJinFLA 16:36:33 04/23/08 (1)
- odd question - Analog Scott 17:17:11 04/23/08 (0)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - rick_m 14:06:41 04/23/08 (10)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - morricab 04:24:42 04/24/08 (9)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - rick_m 08:14:53 04/24/08 (8)
- Is this the key to the blind testing problem? - Tony Lauck 14:12:01 04/24/08 (3)
- RE: Is this the key to the blind testing problem? - morricab 02:40:31 04/28/08 (0)
- As they used to say on TV, "Verrrrry interesting." nt - clarkjohnsen 09:56:37 04/25/08 (0)
- RE: Is this the key to the blind testing problem? - rick_m 15:28:04 04/24/08 (0)
- Totally agree re: "frequency response variations". Those, and white noise, fade into the background. nt - clarkjohnsen 09:10:46 04/24/08 (0)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - morricab 08:28:33 04/24/08 (2)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - rick_m 09:20:21 04/24/08 (1)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - morricab 02:41:38 04/28/08 (0)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - kerr 11:55:43 04/23/08 (9)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - theaudiohobby 14:52:14 04/23/08 (5)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - kerr 17:43:05 04/23/08 (0)
- "Now would you classify audiophile experiences as empirical observations or testimonials?" - Analog Scott 15:50:23 04/23/08 (3)
- I once got kicked in the testimonials -- boy did that hurt (nt) - Richard BassNut Greene 08:36:11 04/24/08 (0)
- "The poor fools no little about real science." - AJinFLA 16:52:01 04/23/08 (1)
- thank you for the correction - Analog Scott 17:19:43 04/23/08 (0)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - thetubeguy1954 14:01:16 04/23/08 (2)
- RE: How many audiophile experiences can be verified by empirical (not anecdotal) observation? - kerr 10:01:19 04/24/08 (0)
- "'Objectivists'... have their own version of what empirical means here @ PHP." Of course they do! They must nt - clarkjohnsen 08:49:16 04/24/08 (0)