DBT Report

Just for Wolfy, I noticed that Revel employed his famous DBT criteria when designing speakers. What i did find interesting was the following report

So over 20% of listeners were deemed to be "aurally challenged", perfectly acceptable hearing, but unable to detect changes in the audible spectrum. Could this possibly explain why around 25% of forumites claim to hear no differences when comparing cables

 

No.

-- Ian

 

Along these lines - my theory is ear wax is responsible for 46.1% of cable scepticism. Dont ask me for the source of this statistic.

 

As usual, you've missed the point.

You should have had someone fiddle with your TACT when you were not looking - you try identifying a 3db bump in the frequency response - it's actually quite hard and is often mis-identified by even trained listeners. I can only assume you are applying the most cynical interpretation to Sean Olive/Floyd Toole's results.

As for you hearing an immeasurable difference frequency response different between cables: you're dreaming.

No serious researcher would bother trying to find differences between cables (or competently designed amps and digital sources) - it's why they only DBT speakers (and to some extent rooms).

The correct conclusion of Toole's work is that people with excellent hearing cannot correctly identify large deviations in response (eg 2-3dB) and that there is no hope that differences in cables can be reliably detected.

If you participated in a properly conducted double blind test of cables with the same RLC you would not be able to tell them apart. Your "experience" in open loop sighted testing is merely wishful thinking on your part.

If you are going to criticize the 25% of the forum who can't hear differences, then you might want too build your case around "they lack imagination".

 

Don't know which bit of thin air you picked 25% from...but anyway, as Ian said the answer to your question is no. There's actually a much more obvious and simpler explanation: there is no difference

Michael.

 

occam's not always correct
cheers


julian

 

Chaps I think the ear wax doctor needs to pay a few people a visit. I honestly cant believe anyone seriously states there are *no* audible differences between cabling.

 

Why?

Michael.

 

It seems that some folks claim that they can hear differences between cables and some folks claim they can't.

This is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. :inferno:

No one leaves the forum until we've all reached agreement. :gatling:

 

At a recent bake off .....with a room full of people and gear, not the most ideal situation, the majourity were able to distigush changes caused by cables. Now not everyone heard or experienced the same level of change, but where we all imagining the same thing I think not.
Some of these cables were comercial offerings at great expence and others were tupenny DIY lash ups. In my 30years with Hifi [now there's at lot of listening] DBT have never really been that sucsessful....well the ones I've been party to anyway. Its like other phenomena that if you look too closely at them, they disapears. This is another acknowledged scientific occurance. Just because one person can't see hear or feal somthing does not mean it does not exist.

I have yet to met anyone, who when things are demonstrated ie cables, in a coherent and sensible manner have admitted to being able to detect a change. But if you can't accept that cables, or supports or whatever make changes to the precieved audio presentation, yourin the wrong hobby. Thats not to say all cables make things sound better either. But if you change the inductance resistance and capacitance ie change the cable in a circuit, you will change the way the audio signal is percieved. Now some listener may not be able to hear this but , as stated previously it doesn't mean that there is no effect.

I accept that sincerly held believes are hard to change, and some of the naysayers perhaps have just not been in the right place at the right time the experience enlightenment......but thats life.

 

Bloomin' ell

Michael, would you just close the thread - some of those responses are worthy of governmental ministers.

Now forgive me, but I thought we had reached the stage that it was accepted that some people could hear the differences cables made and others could not. The accepted (or so I thought ) explanation was psycoacousitcs and the variations in the way the brain interprets signals from the ear.

So from my point of view, I post what would seem to be reasonable evidence to back this up, carried out in the conditions that some of you insist on, and all we get is vitriol. It's a fair enough interpretation to me, but hey, what's the point of arguing

Oh and Dattyboy, you'd be surprised how little a frequency abbheration I could detect with the Tact, and you'd also be amazed at the affect on the perceived frequency balance of +/- 1db shifts. But as you have no experience in this field, I find your reaction irrational to say the least.

 

I mentioned it before Mr M, it fell on cloth ears

 

There's no vitriol. If you post something suggesting people who don't believe in cable differences have faulty hearing, expect to be treated with complete scorn. My hearing is excellent.

From now on, perhaps I should start referring to the people zanash describes as "the enlightened" as "the gullible". Or would I get vitriol if I did?

ZG is a waste of time nowadays because a few cable believers who have been sulking for weeks just won't let the subject drop.

-- Ian

 

Awww, Ian, it's not a waste of time. Maybe a cooling period is longer than expected but dont give up.

 

I'm bored with the endless blue LED "jokes" and snide references to intellectuals, to be honest.

Some people need to grow up and take all this stuff far less seriously.

-- Ian

 

Ian,

no one's skulking - I guess all this shows is that those who don't hear any differences didn't really accept the "we all hear differently" point of view that I thought was a bridge between the two camps.

All this post shows is that under DBT conditions, a percentage of listeners were unable to detect a fairly obvious frequency abbheration, whilst others had no problem, despite their hearing being perfectly acceptable from a clinical point of view.

So what's the problem? I am merely suggesting that this testimony could explain why some of you cannot hear what is totally obvious to others. The other explanation is that it is all in our imagination. Fair enough, that's some's opinion. Others of us have heard differences too often and in effectively blind conditions, to accept that point of view.

So why is it that you cannot accept that it is just possible that your aural faculties are different to say WM's. I am quite shocked by the responses. I guess many were just hiding their mirth in the interests of restoring some decorum.

Like I said Michael, just close it before everyone adopts their original head in the sand stance and the forum disintegrates again.

Oh and I don't think I have made one joke about blue leds or intellectuals Ian, so what the f**k has that got to do with this

 

Suggesting those who don't believe have faulty hearing is rather more provocative than "we all hear differently". Not posting anything at all would have been better. Seems sulky to resurrect a DBT agrument that's been done to death in order to suggest you have better hearing than others.

I don't believe you've ever done a DBT of cables. If you can show you can consistently hear differences in a properly conducted DBT I'll let you crow all you like, until then, my position is: you honestly believe you hear a difference, but that's as much as you can, and should, claim.

WM thinks his system has deep bass, when it clearly doesn't, so no doubt my hearing faculties are different to his. (Before anyone gets upset, that's not necessarily a criticism of his system, btw.) I don't believe they're worse, however. I'm very capable of hearing cable differences if I put my mind to it, as well; except, I know when I'm fooling myself.

I wasn't referring to you.

-- Ian

 

ZG is indeed a waste of time nowadays, but because you have been sulking for weeks, instead of letting the majority of us discuss our cables or whatever we used to discuss over here... :bub:

 

Well im sorry if i caused offence, it wasnt meant to.

Maybe ill take a break.

 

Penance, I wasn't referring to you either!

-- Ian