The root of audiophile myths (and how we fell for them)?

[Pogre]

Sadly, the home audio industry takes caveat emptor to a whole new level.

Absolutely. I got lucky and avoided a lot of pitfalls, but there's so much misinformation about audio out there it boggles my mind. It really does. I've been at this hobby level, including participating on various forums for several years now and I still see new stuff. Both educational and sometimes just batshit crazy nonsense.

I can totally understand how easy it is to buy into some of that stuff if you're influenced by the right crowd early on tho. It's a quagmire of clever sounding pseudoscience with just enough of the right sounding terminology backed by loads of bias to sell a lot of people on it.

 

[Pogre]

I work in a different field of engineering, but your statement about being able to explain things simply rings true. Currently managing a team of design engineers, an cutting through any BS is a must. Do it early, and do it often. Thankfully not a problem I have to deal with too often.

It rings true to me too. I think one of the hallmarks of someone who really understands something is that they are able to explain it in simpler easier to understand terms for the rest of us.

Thats probably why Feynman said that anyone who says they understand quantum mechanics doesn't understand quantum mechanics. Nobody can explain it in simple terms for the rest of us, lol.

 

[Pogre]

The worst part is that the magical explanation will be more compelling to you than any facts later being presented.

Of course it is. Magical explanations are sufficient to explain anything we don't understand. We've been doing it for eons. "I don't know", and "I was wrong" might be 2 of the most difficult sentences to for a person to utter. The problem with assuming we know the answer means we stop looking for one. I've been learning a lot, but one of the best lessons I learned early on is getting comfortable with those sentences.

I think I'm barely talking about audio now... lol. You struck a chord with me. I agree with you tho.

 

[egellings]

Is that because you can understand and not understand quantum mechanics at the same time?

 

[Unground]

Is that because you can understand and not understand quantum mechanics at the same time?

Yes, but only until you understand it. And then the understanding collapses.

 

[egellings]

Got it!

 

[Killingbeans]

We've been doing it for eons. "I don't know", and "I was wrong" might be 2 of the most difficult sentences to for a person to utter. The problem with assuming we know the answer means we stop looking for one. I've been learning a lot, but one of the best lessons I learned early on is getting comfortable with those sentences.

I've gotten a lot better at "I don't know" with age, but I still suck at "I was wrong"

 

[Deleted member 46664]

Of course it is. Magical explanations are sufficient to explain anything we don't understand. We've been doing it for eons. "I don't know", and "I was wrong" might be 2 of the most difficult sentences to for a person to utter. The problem with assuming we know the answer means we stop looking for one. I've been learning a lot, but one of the best lessons I learned early on is getting comfortable with those sentences.

I think I'm barely talking about audio now... lol. You struck a chord with me. I agree with you tho.

Back in my training days (mid-1970s) my professor used to tell us to "Be ready to flip hats from teacher to student on a moment's notice. The correct answer is not 'you're wrong' the correct answer is 'Teach me'. Electronics will take the pride right out of you."

So far nobody's proved him wrong.

 

[JRS]

Timeline may vary with different magazines but by the time I started buying them (circa 1988) all the UK mags had moved over to subjective reviews in the main. A few still produced measurements as an adjunct or had some blind-testing, at least for loudspeakers, but the review format had changed from 90% of the review being measured performance and a discussion of that, to 90% listening without any controls and writing poetry based solely on it.

Currently reading through old issues of the American magazines and the sea-change broadly occurs between 1985 to 1990.

There's another change starting in the early 1990s when things like power cables, speaker cables, interconnects and fantasy devices like Shun Mook begin to get reviewed on a regular basis.

Given this was pre-internet ubiquity the magazines were the only source of information to the enthusiast or potential purchaser. You could alternatively ask your dealer but with few exceptions the dealers took to the new paradigm with glee. Customers who were previously satisfied with what they had now wanted to upgrade due to FOMO, plus they could now be sold accessories with high mark-ups and so far more profitable than just selling the boxes.

That was the end for me--tube gear did sound different, and I really liked the Audio Research pre-amps. My buddies and I had some tech at our disposal and could do blind A-B testing where even on rare occasion good SS amps sounded different--don't ask me why (level matched on scope). But yes when they started down that rabbit hole of green CD markers, magic discs, nine nines OF copper, and all that rubbish, I stopped taking them seriously and read mostly for the speaker reviews. Now I mainly read for the amusement value when some obvious BS gets put into circulation, although speaker reviews can be of interest (I just like to see what philosophies are emerging as I'm dyed in the wood DIY'er).

 

[SIY]

My buddies and I had some tech at our disposal and could do blind A-B testing where even on rare occasion good SS amps sounded different--don't ask me why (level matched on scope).

Source impedance and resulting changes in frequency response is the most likely reason.

 

[DSJR]

Timeline may vary with different magazines but by the time I started buying them (circa 1988) all the UK mags had moved over to subjective reviews in the main. A few still produced measurements as an adjunct or had some blind-testing, at least for loudspeakers, but the review format had changed from 90% of the review being measured performance and a discussion of that, to 90% listening without any controls and writing poetry based solely on it.

Currently reading through old issues of the American magazines and the sea-change broadly occurs between 1985 to 1990.

There's another change starting in the early 1990s when things like power cables, speaker cables, interconnects and fantasy devices like Shun Mook begin to get reviewed on a regular basis.

Given this was pre-internet ubiquity the magazines were the only source of information to the enthusiast or potential purchaser. You could alternatively ask your dealer but with few exceptions the dealers took to the new paradigm with glee. Customers who were previously satisfied with what they had now wanted to upgrade due to FOMO, plus they could now be sold accessories with high mark-ups and so far more profitable than just selling the boxes.

I'd say the UK subjective sea change began with a certain turntable (you know the one) in the mid to late 70's. The hippies (there still were some with beards, sandals and with only moderate token haircuts back then) lapped it up as it made their CSN&Y records sound real cool man.... The amps and speakers that latched onto said turntable also served the post punk and new Romantic scene in the UK early to mid 80's too (I was a huge Siouxsie & The Banshees fan then, the recordings not being served well by my current speakers at all!).

Trouble for me looking back, is that I was part of it all, but we had a similar age customer base and 'we' all liked similar music, my album collection expanding hugely by records our customers bought in and not just dear old John Peel (R.I.P) and in London early 80's, David 'Kid' Jensen and 'Little' Nicky Horne on the radio playing cool new tunes...

Coming up to date in me mid sixties - just had a hearing test and been referred to the hospital clinic - "To discuss various options..." - EFFFFF!!!!!!! - No wonder my current speakers sound muffled I wonder what wide lateral dispersion JBL-like tweeter horn-waveguides will do for me?

 

[fpitas]

Audio myth or good design? Why is this open back speaker open when the audio myth(?) is that the front and back of the speaker's energy will cancel each other out and cannot function this way?
View attachment 166118

If that's an instrument speaker, they are supposed to have a certain sound. And that certainly will.

 

[egellings]

Low pitched long wavelength sounds will be attenuated by the cancellation effect in an open back speaker enclosure, but higher shorter wavelength notes will not be because the shorter wavelength ones will not reach the rear of the speaker in time to cause a cancellation. The larger the open backed enclosure the lower the frequency (longer wavelength) of sound it will allow.

 

[mhardy6647]

If that's an instrument speaker, they are supposed to have a certain sound. And that certainly will.

There were also "pro"/domestic crossover designs, such as the slightly infamous Yamaha "earspeakers" of the mid-1970s.

(borrowed image: Yamaha NS-15)

I had one of these (dump find) for a while. It actually sounded OK and was commendably sensitive, but, weird factor notwithstanding, even a Yamaha audio fanboi such as I couldn't rationalize hanging on to one.



Here's the (open, albeit screened) back, note also the side slots.


P1030009 by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

 

[Doodski]

There were also "pro"/domestic crossover designs, such as the slightly infamous Yamaha "earspeakers" of the mid-1970s.

(borrowed image: Yamaha NS-15)

I had one of these (dump find) for a while. It actually sounded OK and was commendably sensitive, but, weird factor notwithstanding, even a Yamaha audio fanboi such as I couldn't rationalize hanging on to one.



Here's the (open, albeit screened) back, note also the side slots.

Collectors items. The weirder and more radical the better.

 

[mhardy6647]

Why are all tweeters 1 inch in diameter ?

I lusted after these massively when they came out, but couldn't afford them. My mother had Ditton 15s at home which I always enjoyed when I visited. I had both the 44 and 66 at various times. Both excellent speakers for their day IMO. Never heard the Ditton 15, but there was good continuity...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Doodski]

Why are all tweeters 1 inch in diameter ?

I lusted after these massively when they came out, but couldn't afford them. My mother had Ditton 15s at home which I always enjoyed when I visited. I had both the 44 and 66 at various times. Both excellent speakers for their day IMO. Never heard the Ditton 15, but there was good continuity...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Veryyyy unusual... weirdO even. Collectible, yes.

 

[mhardy6647]

Veryyyy unusual... weirdO even. Collectible, yes.

Wait! Now, don't try to make me feel like I erred in getting rid of the one that I had!

(oops, it's too late...)

 

[Spkrdctr]

Wait! Now, don't try to make me feel like I erred in getting rid of the one that I had!

(oops, it's too late...)

I think that speaker is worth about $1000 to a collector.......

 

[mhardy6647]

I think that speaker is worth about $1000 to a collector.......

Get thee behind me, Satan!