I cannot even fathom the stupidity..

[SSL]

Well, what I meant from 'can't prove a negative' is we can't prove that 'all cables (in the world) gives no perceivable differences, ever'. It's different from what you're saying, which is proving a positive claim (which in many cases, mandatory). 

 

So, what you're saying is something like, 'I claim that I can run 100m in under 10 seconds', well, then prove it.

What I'm saying is something like, 'I claim that no living man can run 100m in under 10 seconds, ever'. Now I can't prove this claim (because it's a negative). As soon as somebody proved that he/she can run 100m in under 10 seconds, then my claim is void or proved wrong that very moment. 

 

Another example, remember when the Harry Potter novel came out more than 10 years ago? Well, say someone at that time claims that 'there will never exist an invisibility cloak'. Well, in the recent years, they have developed exactly that, the invisibility cloak (although of course not as perfect as the book or the movie). At that very moment the invisibility cloak produced, that claim were void or proved wrong.....

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, that there are no snake oils in the cable industry. I believe there are plenty of them snake oils out there. I'm saying we can't claim that 'no cables produced or will be produced that can give a perceivable differences', because say there are none at the moment, but say they are developing one and release it 5 years from now, and it pass every tests thrown at it. At that very moment, the claim will be void/proved wrong.

 

There's a subtle difference here. My default assumption is that cables do not make a difference. That is not the same as "cables cannot and will never make a differences".

[juretrn]

Sure, buy a 20 or 30 $cable, so it doesn't fall apart after being plugged in 10 times. But how is a cable supposed to impact the quality of a digital signal is beyond me. Analog, sure to slightly reduce interference, especially over a distance....

[creatip123]

There's a subtle difference here. My default assumption is that cables do not make a difference. That is not the same as "cables cannot and will never make a differences".

 

Having a hard time understanding the difference between the 2 sentences, but okay, just leave it at that.

 

Now you're saying that 'cables do not make a difference', right? Of course everybody is free to state their own opinions/beliefs, but in order for their opinions/beliefs to hold their ground, like you've said yourself, they gotta show some proofs. 

 

Now let's set some boundaries on that sentence, 'cables do not make a difference'

 

- What cables are we talking about here? Assuming, based on this forum , it's analog audio cables (not counting power cords, digital cables, network cables, etc)

- What's the time circumference of that sentence? Past? Present? Future? Past and present (not counting future)? Assuming it's the last.

- What's the area circumference of that sentence? This might be the most important part. All cables in the world? All cables in your country? All cables in your town? Because in order for that sentence to really hold its ground, means you must test, or show credible testing journals, of every each one of the cables ever produced in that area, including those produced by top secret military labs, homebrews, cables produced by some mad genius scientists in his underground labs, you get the idea...

 

The bigger the area, the harder it is to be proven, naturally. 'cables in my house do not make a difference', now this is very easy to prove and hold its ground. 

 

That's what I meant, when I said 'kinda impossible to prove a negative', especially when it involves a large or universal contextual area. Of course the inability to prove a negative does not automatically renders it as a positive. 

 

That was what I meant in the first post you quoted that I'm keeping an open mind, for that small extra variable that I'm wrong, and cables do proven to make a perceivable difference, or there exist cables that do make a difference, that I just don't have the knowledge or never heard of. I am just a single human being after all....

 

*like I said in my post in previous page, I have experienced first hand that cables do make a difference. But because that was just 1 time (to be able to hold my ground, I'd have to replicate the tests to get a passable statistical score), and I had not the chance to replicate it with the same equipments, so I'll just chalk it up to my own beliefs, that it may be right, or may be just delusional, at least until I have the chance to replicate the tests to get a solid conclusion. 

[SSL]

Having a hard time understanding the difference between the 2 sentences, but okay, just leave it at that.

 

Now you're saying that 'cables do not make a difference', right? Of course everybody is free to state their own opinions/beliefs, but in order for their opinions/beliefs to hold their ground, like you've said yourself, they gotta show some proofs. 

 

Now let's set some boundaries on that sentence, 'cables do not make a difference'

 

- What cables are we talking about here? Assuming, based on this forum , it's analog audio cables (not counting power cords, digital cables, network cables, etc)

- What's the time circumference of that sentence? Past? Present? Future? Past and present (not counting future)? Assuming it's the last.

- What's the area circumference of that sentence? This might be the most important part. All cables in the world? All cables in your country? All cables in your town? Because in order for that sentence to really hold its ground, means you must test, or show credible testing journals, of every each one of the cables ever produced in that area, including those produced by top secret military labs, homebrews, cables produced by some mad genius scientists in his underground labs, you get the idea...

 

The bigger the area, the harder it is to be proven, naturally. 'cables in my house do not make a difference', now this is very easy to prove and hold its ground. 

 

That's what I meant, when I said 'kinda impossible to prove a negative', especially when it involves a large or universal contextual area. Of course the inability to prove a negative does not automatically renders it as a positive. 

 

That was what I meant in the first post you quoted that I'm keeping an open mind, for that small extra variable that I'm wrong, and cables do proven to make a perceivable difference, or there exist cables that do make a difference, that I just don't have the knowledge or never heard of. I am just a single human being after all....

 

*like I said in my post in previous page, I have experienced first hand that cables do make a difference. But because that was just 1 time (to be able to hold my ground, I'd have to replicate the tests to get a passable statistical score), and I had not the chance to replicate it with the same equipments, so I'll just chalk it up to my own beliefs, that it may be right, or may be just delusional, at least until I have the chance to replicate the tests to get a solid conclusion.

 

Note the keywords in what I said, "default" and "assumption". I'm not making a statement that needs to be proven or not. It's a provisional belief, if you like, that cables to not have an appreciable effect on audio quality until such evidence appears to demonstrate otherwise.

[creatip123]

Note the keywords in what I said, "default" and "assumption". I'm not making a statement that needs to be proven or not. It's a provisional belief, if you like, that cables to not have an appreciable effect on audio quality until such evidence appears to demonstrate otherwise.

 

I know, like I said, I'm not disagreeing. We're actually on the same page. This few posts conversation is just me trying to elaborate what I meant by 'can't prove a negative'....

 

It's like this: I don't believe unicorns exist, but I can't prove it otherwise (proving a negative)

[SSL]

I know, like I said, I'm not disagreeing. We're actually on the same page. This few posts conversation is just me trying to elaborate what I meant by 'can't prove a negative'....

 

It's like this: I don't believe unicorns exist, but I can't prove it otherwise (proving a negative)

 

Fo' sho'. That is why I made the point about burden of proof because you could say the same about all sorts of things from leprechauns to more ... controversial subjects, lol.

[h264]

Do you have any proof that it doesnt work, and that the cables are actually a rip off? Or are you just trying to mock him for spending money on stuff he enjoys?

I have no idea what these battery things do

Made my week.

[creatip123]

Fo' sho'. That is why I made the point about burden of proof because you could say the same about all sorts of things from leprechauns to more ... controversial subjects, lol.

 

Yeah. Because we can't prove a negative, the best we can do is to count the amount of 'how likely' or 'how unlikely'. I can't prove unicorns don't exist, but based on there are no bones, fossils findings, credible sightings, credible pas journals about unicorns, then I can say that it's very unlikely that unicorns exist. But still don't count as proving a negative though

[BoredErica]

Yeah. Because we can't prove a negative, the best we can do is to count the amount of 'how likely' or 'how unlikely'. I can't prove unicorns don't exist, but based on there are no bones, fossils findings, credible sightings, credible pas journals about unicorns, then I can say that it's very unlikely that unicorns exist. But still don't count as proving a negative though

In theory one can prove a negative. If I said there is no change in my pocket, you can take out all of the things in my pocket and examine if there are any coins in there. But proving a negative is a pointless discussion.

 

The shifting of the burden of proof is like the oldest fallacy I know and the first I've ever known. Ever remember as a kid having a disagreement and having the other kid saying 'Well, you can't prove I'm wrong!'? Intuitively I felt something was wrong with that kind of thinking but as a kid I couldn't quite point out what.

[creatip123]

In theory one can prove a negative. If I said there is no change in my pocket, you can take out all of the things in my pocket and examine if there are any coins in there. But proving a negative is a pointless discussion.

 

The shifting of the burden of proof is like the oldest fallacy I know and the first I've ever known. Ever remember as a kid having a disagreement and having the other kid saying 'Well, you can't prove I'm wrong!'? Intuitively I felt something was wrong with that kind of thinking but as a kid I couldn't quite point out what.

 

Depends on the area circumference of the statements/claims. 

 

'cables in my house don't make any differences', this statement is easy to defend, because the area is very small (in my house only). I'll just have to pile up all the cables found in my house, and test them.

 

'Cables I've tested so far don't make any differences', this too is easy to defend, because the area is small, about my experience only.

 

As the area gets bigger and bigger, it's harder and harder to defend. 'There's no change in pockets', what pockets? All pockets in the world? To prove that, I gotta search all pockets in the world and prove there is no change in every each pockets exist. 

 

Again, it's not that I'm disagreeing the statement, just saying its harder and harder, up to impossible (when the area is universal) to prove. Even James Randi, the skeptic icon said the same thing. He said that he can't prove that paranormal phenomena doesn't exist. He can only say that it's highly unlikely that it exists. So instead, he went the opposite way, giving the burden of proof to anybody claiming that the phenomena exist. It's something like, 'I can't prove the ESP doesn't exist, so instead you gotta prove to me that they exist, and I'll believe you' There is an old video on youtube about him saying this in a lecture.

[BoredErica]

Depends on the area circumference of the statements/claims. 

 

'cables in my house don't make any differences', this statement is easy to defend, because the area is very small (in my house only). I'll just have to pile up all the cables found in my house, and test them.

 

'Cables I've tested so far don't make any differences', this too is easy to defend, because the area is small, about my experience only.

 

As the area gets bigger and bigger, it's harder and harder to defend. 'There's no change in pockets', what pockets? All pockets in the world? To prove that, I gotta search all pockets in the world and prove there is no change in every each pockets exist. 

 

Again, it's not that I'm disagreeing the statement, just saying its harder and harder, up to impossible (when the area is universal) to prove. Even James Randi, the skeptic icon said the same thing. He said that he can't prove that paranormal phenomena doesn't exist. He can only say that it's highly unlikely that it exists. So instead, he went the opposite way, giving the burden of proof to anybody claiming that the phenomena exist. It's something like, 'I can't prove the ESP doesn't exist, so instead you gotta prove to me that they exist, and I'll believe you' There is an old video on youtube about him saying this in a lecture.

Dude.

 

 

That's what I said.

[Lyons]

I feel really sorry for that bloke. He is so blatantly clueless and has no problem throwing away thousands on products he can't even understand.

 

 

#Im #using #hashtags #unnecessarily #like #a #mong

 

pls be troll

[BoredErica]

Dude, we've already been through this. It's not a troll, there is a section on Headfi dedicated to cables, and forum rules ban double blind testing in the forum section. Every single audiophile channel I've seen on Youtube believes in cables. It's not news. It's not a troll. They believe they are right. kk.

That's not to say we don't believe things that are wrong, it's just no matter how wrong we are, there's no way we're throwing away money at the same level they are.

[creatip123]

Dude.

 

 

That's what I said.

 

Yeah, it's like words play. It's good to keep the brain's gears spinning though, I don't get many brain exercises in my work, lol...

 

 

Dude, we've already been through this. It's not a troll, there is a section on Headfi dedicated to cables, and forum rules ban double blind testing in the forum section. Every single audiophile channel I've seen on Youtube believes in cables. It's not news. It's not a troll. They believe they are right. kk.

That's not to say we don't believe things that are wrong, it's just no matter how wrong we are, there's no way we're throwing away money at the same level they are.

 

Different levels maybe. Like, even if I believe that the Focal Grande Utopia speakers gives heavenly/godly sounds, I'm not remotely near the levels of shelling out 180 grand for a pair of them (http://www.stereophile.com/rmaf2008/101408focalbest/index.html). But....there are still people at that levels (who practically sweats and craps money) who don't mind getting a pair, and other equipment in that level....

[mr moose]

Dude, we've already been through this. It's not a troll, there is a section on Headfi dedicated to cables, and forum rules ban double blind testing in the forum section. Every single audiophile channel I've seen on Youtube believes in cables. It's not news. It's not a troll. They believe they are right. kk.

That's not to say we don't believe things that are wrong, it's just no matter how wrong we are, there's no way we're throwing away money at the same level they are.

 

But that can't be the case, we have it on good authority that isn't true

 

They really don't. You get banned for acting like an arse about things. I have criticised pretty much every headfi sponsor dozens of times over the years and have never had so much as a deleted post.

 

Those individuals who can't set foot on the internet without conversing in an aggressive, rude and insulting fashion get shown the door pretty quickly. So long as you conduct yourself like an adult, there are no off-limits views, opinions or topics. 

[BoredErica]

But that can't be the case, we have it on good authority that isn't true

EXCEPT from the cable section.

Yes, that's an argument against Headfi. The real place left to talk against cables with blind testing is in the sound science section of the forum which doesn't have as many posters.

[mr moose]

EXCEPT from the cable section.

Yes, that's an argument against Headfi. The real place left to talk against cables with blind testing is in the sound science section of the forum which doesn't have as many posters.

I bet it doesn't,  They would all understand the logic/science behind it. A bit like fish discussing the flavor of water.

 

I just don't have time for any forum that feels the need to ban specific discussion and can't talk openly about all aspects of audio.  It reeks of ignorance.

[BoredErica]

I bet it doesn't,  They would all understand the logic/science behind it. A bit like fish discussing the flavor of water.

 

I just don't have time for any forum that feels the need to ban specific discussion and can't talk openly about all aspects of audio.  It reeks of ignorance.

But there's a difference between what the admin wants and how the community is like. Stay clear of the cable section and just stick to the headphone section or the sound science section.

[Stefky]

But that can't be the case, we have it on good authority that isn't true

 

Provided you use the right forum, there isn't. Going to the cable forum and hanging around there arguing with people for believing in cable differences is trolling. There is no point to it. That forum is there for people who do believe that there is a difference to discuss cables. Live and let live. If you're the type of person who just kind help riling people up, you're best not posting on forums, and the mods are best removing you.

 

This is the sort of thing people get banned for in all sorts of forums - basically looking for a fight and looking to start arguments. 

[mr moose]

But we are not talking about science fiction, we are talking about real products that cost real money that real people want real advice on.  I'm sorry but either the science is good or it isn't, you can't pick and choose when you want to be rational about audio gear, either you apply the same conditions to everything or stop giving advice on forums.  That's my bug bear, that's my grievance. people come to forums like this one and like headfi looking for advice so they don't buy the wrong product, how is someone who knows very little about cables supposed to get good advice when the forum bans one whole side of the discussion? 

[BoredErica]

I'm sorry but either the science is good or it isn't, you can't pick and choose when you want to be rational about audio gear, either you apply the same conditions to everything or stop giving advice on forums.  people come to forums like this one and like headfi looking for advice so they don't buy the wrong product, how is someone who knows very little about cables supposed to get good advice when the forum bans one whole side of the discussion? 

???

Are you saying that the people on Headfi sometimes believe in scientific testing but don't when it comes to cables? My observation is the people who buy into cables typically don't care for blind listening tests to begin with.

Or are you saying it from the advice giver's point of view? That deciding not to challenge the cable section because it's a DBT free zone is picking and choosing? Deciding which forum to visit and help is also picking and choosing. What about the people who go to Headfi for advice, are they screwed?   One can always shoot the person a PM.

 

Maybe you can reply that you only have so much time though and it's better spent outside of Headfi, I suppose.

[EmoRarity]

???

Are you saying that the people on Headfi sometimes believe in scientific testing but don't when it comes to cables? My observation is the people who buy into cables typically don't care for blind listening tests to begin with.

Or are you saying it from the advice giver's point of view? That deciding not to challenge the cable section because it's a DBT free zone is picking and choosing? Deciding which forum to visit and help is also picking and choosing. What about the people who go to Headfi for advice, are they screwed?   One can always shoot the person a PM.

He ois saying people are srtupid and do stupid things. And makes him angry that they pretend to be anything more then stupid when they do nothing to improve their intellectual standing.

[Stefky]

But we are not talking about science fiction, we are talking about real products that cost real money that real people want real advice on.  I'm sorry but either the science is good or it isn't, you can't pick and choose when you want to be rational about audio gear, either you apply the same conditions to everything or stop giving advice on forums.  That's my bug bear, that's my grievance. people come to forums like this one and like headfi looking for advice so they don't buy the wrong product, how is someone who knows very little about cables supposed to get good advice when the forum bans one whole side of the discussion? 

 

Or you stop being a zealot and let people believe what they want to?

 

People get bad advice on this forum all the time when it comes to headphone recommendations. I bite my tongue as there is no point getting into a war on every tiny point.

 

If someone goes to the cable forum and asks opinion on which cable to buy - they are a cable believer - they are there to ask other cable believers which cable they should buy. They can also go into sound science and talk about whether or not there is any difference between cables or not if they chose to and discuss it to their hearts content there. 

 

Going into a cable forum with a mandate to force everyone to agree with you is like a democrat going to a republican forum to stir up arguments, or an atheist going into a christian forum. What's the point? It's just trolling, it's just going to start a huge argument. 

 

Besides, we don't know everything so there's no point pretending we do. I don't believe there is any difference between cables based on my own listening tests, but I can never know for sure there isn't a difference that someone with better trained hearing can't. Saying "science is science" ignores what science is - constantly evolving with new things discovered every time. 

 

I find arrogant zealotry every bit as annoying as ignorance.  

[h264]

But we are not talking about science fiction, we are talking about real products that cost real money that real people want real advice on. I'm sorry but either the science is good or it isn't, you can't pick and choose when you want to be rational about audio gear, either you apply the same conditions to everything or stop giving advice on forums. That's my bug bear, that's my grievance. people come to forums like this one and like headfi looking for advice so they don't buy the wrong product, how is someone who knows very little about cables supposed to get good advice when the forum bans one whole side of the discussion?

You're assuming way to much about the nature of a forum board. Head-fi is not about scientific discussion, it's a "happy place" where people come to discuss the latest gear they purchased and what they'd like to purchase next then post pictures of on the site. Nobody in that environment wants to hear about science or measurements. Head-fi is about consumerism, and everything else flows from that.

[SSL]

Or you stop being a zealot and let people believe what they want to?

 

People get bad advice on this forum all the time when it comes to headphone recommendations. I bite my tongue as there is no point getting into a war on every tiny point.

 

If someone goes to the cable forum and asks opinion on which cable to buy - they are a cable believer - they are there to ask other cable believers which cable they should buy. They can also go into sound science and talk about whether or not there is any difference between cables or not if they chose to and discuss it to their hearts content there. 

 

Going into a cable forum with a mandate to force everyone to agree with you is like a democrat going to a republican forum to stir up arguments, or an atheist going into a christian forum. What's the point? It's just trolling, it's just going to start a huge argument. 

 

Besides, we don't know everything so there's no point pretending we do. I don't believe there is any difference between cables based on my own listening tests, but I can never know for sure there isn't a difference that someone with better trained hearing can't. Saying "science is science" ignores what science is - constantly evolving with new things discovered every time. 

 

I find arrogant zealotry every bit as annoying as ignorance.  

 

Those little "beliefs" that you're letting people have are costing other people in real ways, beginning with time and money.

 

This goes deeper than just people who believe in snake oil like cables; there is a lot of money at stake in the audio(phile) industry.

 

 

You're assuming way to much about the nature of a forum board. Head-fi is not about scientific discussion, it's a "happy place" where people come to discuss the latest gear they purchased and what they'd like to purchase next then post pictures of on the site. Nobody in that environment wants to hear about science or measurements. Head-fi is about consumerism, and everything else flows from that.

 

"A" forum board? I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that a forum can be a place for disseminating good information FIRST and facilitating people's consumerism second.