Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Eeyore
wrote:


I'd also be interested in any evidence that it was real, due solely to
the sound, and wasn't something trivial/obvious like an alteration in
the frequency response. IIRC Andy made similar claims a while ago, but
although someone else commented on a possible reason for a different
in device (electronic) characteristics, no-one was able to provide
anything more than assertions of an audible difference that wasn't
for a trivial reason.


This is interesting - it appears that some here wouldn't necessarily
like what they were eating until they had read the ingredients list on
the packet...???

Perhaps you should name a few of the "some" you have in mind.

I can name them if you like by type. Those that insist claims of
audible differences between amps, cables, CD players and the like must
be supported by scienitifically valid evidence. I think you missed his
point by the comment about reading ingredients though. I think the
point is that those same "some people" probably don't do that at all.
Which means they have decided for some reason to pick on something very
specific for scientific validation out of the vast relm of experiences
that are widely evaluated without such evidence.



I note that you quote something I wrote and start with "this". But I
neither said, not meant, what you go on say above. If you think so, then
I am afraid you are mistaken. You would also be wrong to think it
must follow from what I said. If you think I am the mysterious "some"
then it looks like our friend the 'straw man' is making another
appearance. :-)


Or pehaps you simply missed a subtle inference to the irony of the
situation.




My comments had nothing to do with what anyone might or might not "like"
(i.e. prefer). So I am wondering who you are referring to, and what it
has to do with what I said...


Really? There is no infered coment about people liking things they
imagine to be there?


Scott



P.S. I am still waiting for your report on the other listening tests
you are aware of on the transparency of CD-Rs so we can evaluate those
along with the one I did.

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

On 17 Sep 2006 08:29:34 -0700, wrote:

Perhaps you should name a few of the "some" you have in mind.

I can name them if you like by type. Those that insist claims of
audible differences between amps, cables, CD players and the like must
be supported by scienitifically valid evidence. I think you missed his
point by the comment about reading ingredients though. I think the
point is that those same "some people" probably don't do that at all.
Which means they have decided for some reason to pick on something very
specific for scientific validation out of the vast relm of experiences
that are widely evaluated without such evidence.

How do you feel about the pseudo-scientific justifications often given
by snake-oil merchants? If they claimed magic, fair enough. But if
they claim science, shouldn't it be measurable?

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

How do you feel about the pseudo-scientific justifications often given
by snake-oil merchants?

How about multinationals?

"In tests 9 out of 10 cats preferred it"
"Reduces the appearance of wrinkles"
"Fights the seven signs of ageing" quote "For more beauty science,
please visit
www.pg.com"

And for those old enough "Aspro - does not affect the heart"

Be my guest and list the most outrageous claims you've heard!

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
oups.com...
How do you feel about the pseudo-scientific justifications often given
by snake-oil merchants?

How about multinationals?

"In tests 9 out of 10 cats preferred it"
"Reduces the appearance of wrinkles"
"Fights the seven signs of ageing" quote "For more beauty science,
please visit
www.pg.com"

And for those old enough "Aspro - does not affect the heart"

Be my guest and list the most outrageous claims you've heard!



The best one ever was 'Nothing works faster than Anadin'....!! :-)

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

The best one ever was 'Nothing works faster than Anadin'....!! :-)

I like "In tests 9 out of 10 cat owners preferred it".

That in itself was so utterly brainless. Preferred it to what? A poke
in the eye with a sharp stick? A steaming Dalmation turd? A railway
line sleeper?

And THEN they got round to changing it. But to what? This time it was

""In tests 9 out of 10 cat owners who expressed a preference, preferred
it".......

(Supply "to a steaming Dalmation turd" etc etc)

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

Laurence Payne wrote:

On 17 Sep 2006 08:29:34 -0700, wrote:

Perhaps you should name a few of the "some" you have in mind.

I can name them if you like by type. Those that insist claims of
audible differences between amps, cables, CD players and the like must
be supported by scienitifically valid evidence. I think you missed his
point by the comment about reading ingredients though. I think the
point is that those same "some people" probably don't do that at all.
Which means they have decided for some reason to pick on something very
specific for scientific validation out of the vast relm of experiences
that are widely evaluated without such evidence.

How do you feel about the pseudo-scientific justifications often given
by snake-oil merchants? If they claimed magic, fair enough. But if
they claim science, shouldn't it be measurable?

Don't they just simply avoid the issue by using plausibly sounding
pseudo-scientific terms which have in fact no actual meaning but sound
'important' ?

Graham

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

wrote:

Jim Lesurf wrote:

Perhaps you should name a few of the "some" you have in mind.

I can name them if you like by type. Those that insist claims of
audible differences between amps, cables, CD players and the like must
be supported by scienitifically valid evidence. I think you missed his
point by the comment about reading ingredients though. I think the
point is that those same "some people" probably don't do that at all.
Which means they have decided for some reason to pick on something very
specific for scientific validation out of the vast relm of experiences
that are widely evaluated without such evidence.

I'm not clear from that whether it's the case that you think any audible
difference should be scientifically measurable too or not.

Graham

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

Laurence Payne wrote:
On 17 Sep 2006 08:29:34 -0700, wrote:

Perhaps you should name a few of the "some" you have in mind.

I can name them if you like by type. Those that insist claims of
audible differences between amps, cables, CD players and the like must
be supported by scienitifically valid evidence. I think you missed his
point by the comment about reading ingredients though. I think the
point is that those same "some people" probably don't do that at all.
Which means they have decided for some reason to pick on something very
specific for scientific validation out of the vast relm of experiences
that are widely evaluated without such evidence.

How do you feel about the pseudo-scientific justifications often given
by snake-oil merchants?

A fair question. I think it best to take them individually rather than
as a group. I think such claims come in differen flavors ranging from
slaes pitch to ignorance to fraud. I have no sympathy for fraud.


If they claimed magic, fair enough.


If they claim magic I dismiss them out of hand. I don't believe in
magic.


But if
they claim science, shouldn't it be measurable?


Yes.



Scott

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

Laurence Payne wrote:
On 17 Sep 2006 08:29:34 -0700, wrote:

Perhaps you should name a few of the "some" you have in mind.

I can name them if you like by type. Those that insist claims of
audible differences between amps, cables, CD players and the like must
be supported by scienitifically valid evidence. I think you missed his
point by the comment about reading ingredients though. I think the
point is that those same "some people" probably don't do that at all.
Which means they have decided for some reason to pick on something very
specific for scientific validation out of the vast relm of experiences
that are widely evaluated without such evidence.

How do you feel about the pseudo-scientific justifications often given
by snake-oil merchants?

A fair question. I think it best to take them individually rather than
as a group. I think such claims come in differen flavors ranging from
slaes pitch to ignorance to fraud. I have no sympathy for fraud.


If they claimed magic, fair enough.


If they claim magic I dismiss them out of hand. I don't believe in
magic.


But if
they claim science, shouldn't it be measurable?


Yes.



Scott

Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
 

Eeyore wrote:
wrote:

Jim Lesurf wrote:

Perhaps you should name a few of the "some" you have in mind.

I can name them if you like by type. Those that insist claims of
audible differences between amps, cables, CD players and the like must
be supported by scienitifically valid evidence. I think you missed his
point by the comment about reading ingredients though. I think the
point is that those same "some people" probably don't do that at all.
Which means they have decided for some reason to pick on something very
specific for scientific validation out of the vast relm of experiences
that are widely evaluated without such evidence.

I'm not clear from that whether it's the case that you think any audible
difference should be scientifically measurable too or not.


Absolutely I believe any real audible difference is scientifically
measuable.

Scott