View Single Post
  #48  
Old September 20th 18, 08:17 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,718
Default Epson XP 830 Ink Cartridge Problem

In article , NY
wrote:

it also applies to more than just audio.

there was a double-blind test with wine, where expert wine tasters
couldn't identify the cheap wines from the expensive ones, including
when one of the 'red wines' was white wine + food colouring.


LOL. It takes guts to perpetrate that sort of test on a wine buff. And they
got away with it :-)


found it:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rahimka...der-yourself-a
n-expert-think-again/
"This was nicely demonstrated in a mischievous 2001 experiment led by
Frédéric Brochet at the University of Bordeaux,² writes Jonah Lehrer.
³In the first test, Brochet invited fifty-seven wine experts and
asked them to give their impressions of what looked like two glasses
of red and white wine. The wines were actually the same white wine,
one of which had been tinted red with food coloring. But that didn¹t
stop the experts from describing the ³red² wine in language typically
used to describe red wines. One expert praised its ³jamminess,² while
another enjoyed its ³crushed red fruit.²

In fact, the look of a label or the price on the bottle profoundly
influence the tasting experience.

Said Lehrer: ³The second test Brochet conducted was even more
damning. He took a middling Bordeaux and served it in two different
bottles. One bottle bore the label of a fancy grand cru, the other of
an ordinary*vin de table. Although they were being served the exact
same wine, the experts gave the bottles nearly opposite descriptions.
The grand cru was summarized as being ³agreeable,² ³woody,²
³complex,² ³balanced,² and ³rounded,² while the most popular
adjectives for the*vin de table*included ³weak,² ³short,² ³light,²
³flat,² and ³faulty.²


If we accept your argument then double-blind tests are a waste of time
under any circumstances we are discussing with you.

In fact, and for example, practically nobody could fail to detect the
difference between my PC speakers and the Arcam DAC feeding the Quad
amplifier and Z4 speakers with their ribbon tweeters. The difference
between the two DACs is not as great but it is quite audible.


I read of an interesting study that was done comparing vinyl against CD.
Audiophiles could tell that difference, which doesn't surprise me. Many of
them preferred the "vinyl sound". Fair enough.


cds do sound different, not because they're cds, but because they're
mastered differently.

they're also capable of much higher quality and can reproduce sounds
vinyl cannot.

put another way, a cd can sound *exactly* like a vinyl record (if
that's what one prefers), or it can sound much better.

But then they introduced a third factor: live sound (eg a radio broadcast of
a concert) with no recording, whether on tape, vinyl or CD. And the
audiophiles thought it was a CD, and hated it. So what some audiophiles
prefer is the modifications that are made to "fit" the recording onto vinyl:
the reduced dynamic range and the modified frequency response when writing
to disc and converse process when playing back - that other forms of
recording are too faithful and less "warm".


vinyl records add distortion, which is the 'warmth' that they claim to
hear. that distortion can also be added to a cd, or left out for those
who want accurate sounds.
Ads