Yes, I am sure most can hear it, how much outside the speakers the steps are is another matter. It also depends a lot of the room and its acoustical properties.
And the positioning of the speakers, their toe-in, etc., etc.,etc. I can get sounds seemingly emanating 40 feet behind me, but that is unique to my system, my room, my hearing, etc. It will never be accurately be replicated. Approximated?? Maybe.
No, but ONLY because the samples to get that 75-80% accuracy were a minimum of 20 minutes each (Unlike 99+% of ABX tests done) and only with trained ears. Tests done with short samples are meaningless, whether they seem to support my position, or not. Now, this only applies to music tests. Thousands of ABX tests in other areas are totally valid. Itās just that the human auditory system is so complicated, that the standard ABX test that most people try to use fail, in this one case.
It depends A LOT on room acoustics and speaker placement.
1 Like
Sorry for for being too advanced.
If a difference is stated as an absolute, all differences are the same.
But this all has a sound scientific basis. No one in their right mind will argue that sound reproduction will not be influenced by speaker placement and room acoustics. This can even be mathematically predicted.
Now cables on the other handā¦ Nope.
Have you ever carried out such tests or participated in them? Have you ever read any serious studies supporting your claims? This is my field of research and I donāt know of a single publication that arrives at such conclusions.
2 Likes
Now, now donāt let the facts get in the way of a good story.
I understood that the first experimental confirmation of General Relativity was made during the solar eclipse of 1919, some 100 years ago and only a couple of years [correction: four years (just looked it up)] after the theory was proposed. But Iām not sure what youāre trying to say anyway, as the rest of the paragraph seems to be garbled.
How are you quantifying that? What do you mean by a āreal thingā?
1 Like
3 Likes
Not blind?? How So?? whether a test is blind or not has nothing to do with the length of a sample. You are obviously making up things to support your position. And you are 1000% wrong about my lying. Just because donāt donāt read nearly as much about these things a s I do doesnāt not mean that the things I raed, and you miss, are not true. Theses were tests done using professional audio critics, a couple of dozen or so, including the likes of Larry Archibald and, I think, John Atkinson.
Utterly false. But do go on we are all 
Perhaps you should re-read my post.
Then this discussion with you is futile; you have absolutely no interest in science whatsoever and reject current scientific knowledge because it doesnāt fit your model of the world! You make claims, quoting examples, and then fail to substantiate what you say.
I donāt think you have a very good grasp of scientific study; scientists are probably to first to admit they donāt know it all. Your argument is closer to Aristotleās claim that the heart was the home of intelligence than [it is to] particle physics.
You are trolling.
5 Likes
If the tests existed youād have linked to them by now. Or at least named them.
It seems quite clear to me that you are just making up stories to dress your position with a false appearance of scientific validity.
By ānot blindā I meant that my evaluation of your claims is not blind. I benefit from being able to read all your posts on the subject. I was not referring to the tests you keep vaguely claiming exist.
4 Likes
Might get one of these, or at least borrow one for evaluation:
Iām surprised you donāt have a few already.
@Magnus and @Neil_Russell contradict each other.
@Neil_Russell claims that you need to be able to listen to 20-30 min of a track, in order to be able to successfully ABX test ethernet cables or switches.
@Magnus claims that he could successfully complete such an ABX test with only a few seconds of a track by Sophie Zelmani.
Neither one has offered anything to back up their claims. @Neil_Russell has not offered a citation to any such study and @Magnus has not actually carried out the ABX test that he is sure he could ace.
Hereās hoping one or the other of them comes through with some evidence to support their position. They canāt both be right! Letās find out which one is.
5 Likes
You can detect difference in a specific detail fast, but generally speaking you need to let your ear work for a while before they perform at 100%. I know that, and so does he. So stop that kid-drama.
1 Like
Iāll stop the minute you post the result of an ABX test of that Sophie Zelmani track.
That would be a very easy blindtest to pass, but why bother, you would not believe me unless it confirmed your own beliefs.