Hi-Res music is pointless. Objective measurements show that!!

Simple logic sometimes is not simple...

Before we argue if Hi-Res music is pointless, let's see their reasoning behind why some people claim that "Objective measurements show Hi-Res music is pointless as you cannot hear any differenece between Hi-Res and CD"


What if I tell you the following...

Based on objective scientific (and whatever unbiased descriptive terms you can add here like "double-blind",  "ABX", "level-matched", etc...) research/measurements, I can prove objectively that:

GHOST DOES EXIST based on scientific research! 

What do you think???

I believe you would say, "show me the scientifc prove!"

And if I show you a lot of peer-reviewed object scientific research paper showing that they cannot prove ghost does not exist, so based on my "common sense" or "reasoning", I conclude the following claim "Ghost does exist" based on sientific research.

"What?"

"Are you crazy?", you would say.

Well..... 

I agree with you 100% there is something wrong.... it is based on wrong reasoning but something similar is happening in Upsampling 16/44.1 collection a good idea? | Page 17 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

You would see something simiar to:

"There are a lot of objective measurements to show that there is no audible difference between Hi-Res and CD"...

Hang on... the research paper they quoted said "Now, it is very difficult to use negative results to prove the inaudibility of any given phenomenon or process. There is always the remote possibility that a different system or more finely attuned pair of ears would reveal a difference."

Basically, the conclusion of the paper is that "there is no evidence to show there is audiable difference" (statement 1)

Does it imply "there is evicence to show there is no auidble difference" (statement 2)

Simple locial reasoning tell us "No". Statement 1 does not imply statement 2.

Are these people crazy? Well....  I just think they need to go back to learn the Logical Reasoning 101. After that, I think they can be as smart as you do to point out pseudo science claims.

Cheers.

(souce of the picture https://drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf) 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"The expert in 'the Monty's video' shows clearly Hi-Res is useless; you won't get stair step audio signal output from CD"....Well, let's check together to find out!

Image
 " The 'Monty's video' shows Hi-Res is useless. The expert said you won't get stair step audio signal ..." I bet the above video , also known as "the Monty's video", is quite famous amongst the supporters who turly believe that " Hi-Res is useless". Whenever these supporters were questioned why "Hi-Res is useless", some of them would just show you that "scientific proof". Some supporter even made another YouTube video to support the very same "scientific" claim based on the same "Monty's video" (as they considered all the things the Monty's video said is factual). The supporter named his video as " Debunking the Digital Audio Myth: The Truth About the 'Stair-Step' Effect " A lot of these supporters may asked, "With so many experts on YouTube demonstrating so clearly with the help of a bunch of   lab equipments and doing various experiments in front of our eyes ,
Read more

768kHz for digital music sampling? Can you hear 384kHz? You're crazy...

Image
Do I want to hear up to 384kHz? LOL... of course not 😂 768kHz sampling is for something else... ( TL;DR ) The number one mis-understanding of why using Hi-Res music is:       " why we need to to hear frequencies that fall in the ultrasonic range (i.e. higher than 22kHz for most people)???" If you asked similar question or answered someone's question like below, then you are pretty much belong to a group of people who don't know what's Hi-Res music is. Hi-Res music is, in fact, to help your DAC to reconstruct better audio output for the audible range (yes, it is for the frequencies BELOW 22kHz with 768kHz sampling)... (It is a  real dialogue  as I just saw it today in an Audio Science forum) Someone asked: Ma ny DACs descriptions enhance in capital letters 32/768 kHz resolution. Is there any domain when such a resolution may be justified ?   Other (more experienced member) replied: Can you think of a circumstance where you'd even want a dynamic range of over
Read more

You should not hear it! It is your brain fooling you!

Image
You should not hear it! It is your brain fooling you! Well... but... but... I really do hear it. This is the following up of the previous blog:  Confirmation bias. Do you have it? My previous blog was based on the following picture (you don't have to read my previous blog before reading this one): If you see 4 boxes with graident of different greyscales in the middle column. Great, you don't have any confirmation bias .  What if I told you that there are something wrong with your vision, as you SHOULD see 4 different static grey color boxes instead of gradients.  The following picture show you the second box is actually a static grey color box (this is the actual capture of the second box in the above picture, you can try to capture it and see for yourself): You may say, " Cool, now, I know I got tricked by my visual perception ".  AFTER  knowing the fact that all the 4 boxes in the middle column of the first picture are indeed just static grey boxes (instead of
Read more