Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Robin L]

i really think "golden-ears" exist, tho its a funny term, no human is the same....

I don't think self-hypnotism exists. I know self-hypnotism exists. I know people who claim to have "golden ears" are usually delusional. Probably due to self-hypnotism. That process of repeating an idea to oneself as a collection of words---like "expanded soundstage" or "more vivid midrange" or "better microdynamics"---makes that thought override whatever actual evidence is presented to that person. One of the central post-hypnotic suggestions, one that pervades the "high-end", is that more money = better quality. Looking at the measurements often points out that money does not necessarily correlate to quality.

There's a recent Stereophile review written by the two most objective writers there. It points to a pair of preamps with sound quality at the limits of what is measurable. One costs $600, is small and fits neatly on a desk. The other is $17,500, is huge and heavy with multiple chassis. Someone who already paid $17,500 for a massive preamp doesn't want to hear they could get the same results for 3.5% of the cost. The internal dialogs of the golden-eared audiophile, those mantras that are so hard to turn off, will convince that auditor that the additional $16,900 was worth it. They have no incentive to think otherwise, seeing as they already spent the money.

Measurements may not be everything---maybe someone with sufficient loose change simply prefers the 'look' of the bigger, more expensive gear. But they're certainly not 'nothing'.

 

[nonnyno]

To me the fundamental problems between the subjectivist and objectivists concerns definition, definition conflation, marketing and presentation.

The objectivists define what they mean by hi fi but aren’t always entirely blatant about it. When arguing with subjectivists they tend to get aggression and respond in kind.

What the subjectivists hear is that an arrogant jerk expert says “your system is crap and sounds bad”. WTAF I’ve just spent $15,000 dollars ( I told my partner half that). Do not tell me my system sounds bad. My system sounds awesome. I think so and all my friends think so. I bought the XYZ with twit twats and added the chromed elephant turd to one leg of the amp and I could hear the difference. You say you can’t measure the difference, well what does that say about you???? I heard it and so did my friends. Your expertise isn’t worth much – you might as well be a lawyer or an economist!!! ;-> You’re about as useful as t*ts on a bull.

I’d describe myself as a relaxed and realistic objectivist.

To me hi fidelity (hi fi) means adherence or fidelity to the original recording (I’m sure Amir has said this somewhere but it needs to be put up in 48 point font all by itself on a sticky called READ ME BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE AND SCREAM.

One always hopes that the sound engineers were sufficiently competent to get the recording reasonably faithful to the original live performance with minimal deviations given the equipment and interpretation they wished to convey at the time.

With this definition, Hifi is materially not the same as good sound or perhaps what should be more appropriately defined as enjoyable sound, or even more appropriately defined as the sound the specific listener enjoys more than other sounds they’ve heard.

That is coloured by perceptions, memory, expectation, ear state and capability, attention given to listening at the time and a host of variables so complex as to cause an engineer to have kittens.

The problem is that the marketing industry has (I suspect deliberately) conflated the two. The audio equipment manufacturers have been befitting from this ever since.

I was guilty of chasing hi fi marques before happening on this site. I have since changed my thinking as I have begun to understand :

• That a product by any marque is not necessarily well engineered sonically. It may produce a sound I enjoy, but it may actually constitute really bad engineering from a hifidelity perspective.
• That if something measures well it is probably well engineered. If it is well engineered there is probably a correlation between being well engineered and sounding reasonably enjoyable (this isn’t guaranteed but is probably more likely).
• You can’t rely on a posh box (solid/tanklike build), a high price, or a label to guarantee that something is well engineered from the hifi testable front.
• For some devices they are now capable of materially transparent output. Any distortion or other issues are well beyond what any human can even theoretically hear.
• I cannot escape the subjective nature of the fact that I am human. My eyes are flawed, my ears (more so – I’m now 53). I am as prone as the next man to prejudice and unrealistic expectations. I am capable (and probably rather good at expectations and confirmation bias even whilst knowing I’m doing it). My audio experience is most definitely not confined to my ears. I am experiencing with my eyes as well for example if contemplating some piece of hifi gear whilst looking at it. A Michell Gyrodec for example is a thing of loveliness (it might be a terrible turntable form a measurement perspective but I loved the way it looked – it wasn’t mine) and I could pretty much hypnotise myself watching the brass weights going round whilst listening to music. It was very relaxing.
• I have wants and needs that need to be satisfied beyond a strictly hifidelity approach (as an example you may have hit upon the perfect set of components that all measure divinely. If your wife or husband thinks they look horrible or are simply a step too far your choices are stark). Most would go with the partner but some may choose the components ;->

Ultimately therefore.

• I want something that is well engineered from the basic functional point of view. If its purpose is hifi I want it to do hifi as well as possible. I have defined hifi - that is my criteria. I do not believe in rewarding companies for producing that which does not fulfil its stated purpose. A company that claims to produce hifi I will treat very differently to one that claims to produce musically enjoyable products (and draws the distinction).
• I want it to look and feel good (for me). That’s minimalist, probably heavy with nice smooth knobby things. Or clicky things with definite but rich feeling clicks rather than the sound of a handbrake being applied when the button isn’t depressed. I want it to look and feel like a quality product.
• I want it to sound enjoyable whilst ideally being as true to the original recording as possible.

What this site has done has stopped me chasing snake oil (not that I was ever that bad at it). No longer will I pay silly money for cables or go for the chrome plated elephant turd which sits on one side of an LP because the imbalances created somehow make the sound more enjoyable (note I didn’t say make the sound more hifi).

Having said all of this I sympathise with the subjectivists. I have listened to the Senn HD650 which is incredibly popular and apparently measures as well as any headphone currently do. I have hated it every time I have listened to it. It sounded muffled to me. Perhaps this was down to amplification (I don’t know). I had no expectations whatsoever. I’ve listened 3 times now through different amps and have never been able to like it. I don’t have one available now to try with the oratory PEQ settings again (mebbe that would change things).

I ought to point out that I have also listened to most of the Audeze, Hifiman headphones too and didn’t like any of them (they mostly sounded muffled in a way that most speakers I have heard don’t – perhaps the PEQ settings would have changed this). AKG 550’s, Beyer DT 770’s, Shure 1540’s and 1840’s, Sennheiser HD800’s and Beyer Tesla T1’s were far more enjoyable and clear to me with no Oratory PEQ settings. I have just applied the Oratory PEQ settings to the Beyer 770’s and they have improved for me even more. I have no idea what any of this says about my hearing – perhaps I have odd ears. Note I am NOT saying that these are the best headphones or that they are better engineered than the ones that have recs and measure well but to me they just sounded more enjoyable.

I have a decent mid priced DAC SMSL M500 MK 1 (so the source is basically reasonable from an engineering perspective). I bought this on the Amir Rec.

I am currently listening to it through jriver with my Beyer DT770’s which have the Oratory settings applied. I find the sound quite enjoyable. I have no doubt it can be bettered with suitable choice of headphone (any suggestions???). Whether or not a different DAC would improve things further I have no idea.

Now for a question. I’m very new at this. It may be an entirely stupid question for which I apologise in advance.

Is it possible to see how different dac/headphone combos measure. E.g. how do the Sennheiser HD650’s (or name your headphone poison) measure on say a Topping D90 vs and SMSL m500 vs something else. Is there any synergistic effect in the chain combination that causes better or worse outcomes when compared against other combos? Is it measurable?

 

[voodooless]

@Spkrdctr and @Sgt. Ear Ache: sarcasm is hard, stop it

 

[Deleted member 23982]

I know self-hypnotism exists. I know people who claim to have "golden ears" are usually delusional. Probably due to self-hypnotism. That process of repeating an idea to oneself as a collection of words---like "expanded soundstage" or "more vivid midrange" or "better microdynamics"---makes that thought override whatever actual evidence is presented to that person. One of the central post-hypnotic suggestions, one that pervades the "high-end", is that more money = better quality. Looking at the measurements often points out that money does not necessarily correlate to quality.

if you quote me, please quote everything and not just half a sentence you can use to twist it

There's a recent Stereophile review written by the two most objective writers there. It points to a pair of preamps with sound quality at the limits of what is measurable. One costs $600, is small and fits neatly on a desk. The other is $17,500, is huge and heavy with multiple chassis. Someone who already paid $17,500 for a massive preamp doesn't want to hear they could get the same results for 3.5% of the cost. The internal dialogs of the golden-eared audiophile, those mantras that are so hard to turn off, will convince that auditor that the additional $16,900 was worth it. They have no incentive to think otherwise, seeing as they already spent the money.

diminishing returns, you still have to have a "solid" setup tho, i never said a 17k dac is needed nor 1k+ cables, i didnt even tried those so i cant judge them but i certainly heared differences between 10$ cables and diy ones which would probably cost premade around 30-50$, i just said cables matter because they do, i didnt say more expensive = better
some of these "ultra audiophile" companys are probably just made as a money sink for rich people but that doesnt mean all of them are
those cables/dacs you guys are talking about IS probably "snake oil" (well not really, i think they do make a difference but you probably pay like 500%-5000% more for a 0.5% change compared to good "budget" ones) but that doesnt mean cables/dacs dont matter at all

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

What would account for those cable differences you heard? What was it that the 10$ cables were failing to accomplish given there must have been a signal getting through?

 

[Robin L]

To me the fundamental problems between the subjectivist and objectivists concerns definition, definition conflation, marketing and presentation.

The objectivists define what they mean by hi fi but aren’t always entirely blatant about it. When arguing with subjectivists they tend to get aggression and respond in kind.

What the subjectivists hear is that an arrogant jerk expert says “your system is crap and sounds bad”. WTAF I’ve just spent $15,000 dollars ( I told my partner half that). Do not tell me my system sounds bad. My system sounds awesome. I think so and all my friends think so. I bought the XYZ with twit twats and added the chromed elephant turd to one leg of the amp and I could hear the difference. You say you can’t measure the difference, well what does that say about you???? I heard it and so did my friends. Your expertise isn’t worth much – you might as well be a lawyer or an economist!!! ;-> You’re about as useful as t*ts on a bull.

I’d describe myself as a relaxed and realistic objectivist.

To me hi fidelity (hi fi) means adherence or fidelity to the original recording (I’m sure Amir has said this somewhere but it needs to be put up in 48 point font all by itself on a sticky called READ ME BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE AND SCREAM.

One always hopes that the sound engineers were sufficiently competent to get the recording reasonably faithful to the original live performance with minimal deviations given the equipment and interpretation they wished to convey at the time.

With this definition, Hifi is materially not the same as good sound or perhaps what should be more appropriately defined as enjoyable sound, or even more appropriately defined as the sound the specific listener enjoys more than other sounds they’ve heard.

That is coloured by perceptions, memory, expectation, ear state and capability, attention given to listening at the time and a host of variables so complex as to cause an engineer to have kittens.

The problem is that the marketing industry has (I suspect deliberately) conflated the two. The audio equipment manufacturers have been befitting from this ever since.

I was guilty of chasing hi fi marques before happening on this site. I have since changed my thinking as I have begun to understand :

• That a product by any marque is not necessarily well engineered sonically. It may produce a sound I enjoy, but it may actually constitute really bad engineering from a hifidelity perspective.
• That if something measures well it is probably well engineered. If it is well engineered there is probably a correlation between being well engineered and sounding reasonably enjoyable (this isn’t guaranteed but is probably more likely).
• You can’t rely on a posh box (solid/tanklike build), a high price, or a label to guarantee that something is well engineered from the hifi testable front.
• For some devices they are now capable of materially transparent output. Any distortion or other issues are well beyond what any human can even theoretically hear.
• I cannot escape the subjective nature of the fact that I am human. My eyes are flawed, my ears (more so – I’m now 53). I am as prone as the next man to prejudice and unrealistic expectations. I am capable (and probably rather good at expectations and confirmation bias even whilst knowing I’m doing it). My audio experience is most definitely not confined to my ears. I am experiencing with my eyes as well for example if contemplating some piece of hifi gear whilst looking at it. A Michell Gyrodec for example is a thing of loveliness (it might be a terrible turntable form a measurement perspective but I loved the way it looked – it wasn’t mine) and I could pretty much hypnotise myself watching the brass weights going round whilst listening to music. It was very relaxing.
• I have wants and needs that need to be satisfied beyond a strictly hifidelity approach (as an example you may have hit upon the perfect set of components that all measure divinely. If your wife or husband thinks they look horrible or are simply a step too far your choices are stark). Most would go with the partner but some may choose the components ;->

Ultimately therefore.

• I want something that is well engineered from the basic functional point of view. If its purpose is hifi I want it to do hifi as well as possible. I have defined hifi - that is my criteria. I do not believe in rewarding companies for producing that which does not fulfil its stated purpose. A company that claims to produce hifi I will treat very differently to one that claims to produce musically enjoyable products (and draws the distinction).
• I want it to look and feel good (for me). That’s minimalist, probably heavy with nice smooth knobby things. Or clicky things with definite but rich feeling clicks rather than the sound of a handbrake being applied when the button isn’t depressed. I want it to look and feel like a quality product.
• I want it to sound enjoyable whilst ideally being as true to the original recording as possible.

What this site has done has stopped me chasing snake oil (not that I was ever that bad at it). No longer will I pay silly money for cables or go for the chrome plated elephant turd which sits on one side of an LP because the imbalances created somehow make the sound more enjoyable (note I didn’t say make the sound more hifi).

Having said all of this I sympathise with the subjectivists. I have listened to the Senn HD650 which is incredibly popular and apparently measures as well as any headphone currently do. I have hated it every time I have listened to it. It sounded muffled to me. Perhaps this was down to amplification (I don’t know). I had no expectations whatsoever. I’ve listened 3 times now through different amps and have never been able to like it. I don’t have one available now to try with the oratory PEQ settings again (mebbe that would change things).

I ought to point out that I have also listened to most of the Audeze, Hifiman headphones too and didn’t like any of them (they mostly sounded muffled in a way that most speakers I have heard don’t – perhaps the PEQ settings would have changed this). AKG 550’s, Beyer DT 770’s, Shure 1540’s and 1840’s, Sennheiser HD800’s and Beyer Tesla T1’s were far more enjoyable and clear to me with no Oratory PEQ settings. I have just applied the Oratory PEQ settings to the Beyer 770’s and they have improved for me even more. I have no idea what any of this says about my hearing – perhaps I have odd ears. Note I am NOT saying that these are the best headphones or that they are better engineered than the ones that have recs and measure well but to me they just sounded more enjoyable.

I have a decent mid priced DAC SMSL M500 MK 1 (so the source is basically reasonable from an engineering perspective). I bought this on the Amir Rec.

I am currently listening to it through jriver with my Beyer DT770’s which have the Oratory settings applied. I find the sound quite enjoyable. I have no doubt it can be bettered with suitable choice of headphone (any suggestions???). Whether or not a different DAC would improve things further I have no idea.

Now for a question. I’m very new at this. It may be an entirely stupid question for which I apologise in advance.

Is it possible to see how different dac/headphone combos measure. E.g. how do the Sennheiser HD650’s (or name your headphone poison) measure on say a Topping D90 vs and SMSL m500 vs something else. Is there any synergistic effect in the chain combination that causes better or worse outcomes when compared against other combos? Is it measurable?

I agree with the gist here, but:

"One always hopes that the sound engineers were sufficiently competent to get the recording reasonably faithful to the original live performance with minimal deviations given the equipment and interpretation they wished to convey at the time."

. . . almost never applies to the intentionally surreal sound of popular music right now.

"Is it possible to see how different dac/headphone combos measure. E.g. how do the Sennheiser HD650’s (or name your headphone poison) measure on say a Topping D90 vs and SMSL m500 vs something else. Is there any synergistic effect in the chain combination that causes better or worse outcomes when compared against other combos? Is it measurable?"

Someone with more of a technical background [I've got lots of practical experience in recording but I'm no EE] could give a more definitive answer. But if everything works within spec, the results, sonically, should be the same. The sorts of things that would alter the sound of the HD 650 would include having enough power at 300 ohms. That can vary between different headphone amps. At a certain point, enough power is enough power. But a lot of claimed differences in sound quality are projected by the listener knowing what component they are hearing. Take that 'knowing' out of the equation and they stop hearing the difference.

 

[Spkrdctr]

yep im psychotic and it was all a hoax, got ya!

some people found eachother i guess and im certainly not one of them

You can still hang out and read a lot and just doing that you will end up learning stuff. The main issue is to avoid these threads tailor made for long winded mega pages of arguments that will never be solved. Even I, the Mother Theresa of ASR have to take a break now and then. I reach my limit of people arguing, attacking each other etc. and decide to not "engage" for a bit. Usually two days will be enough for me to calm down and read other threads. So, stay and just use ASR for the fun parts. Whatever you like, you can probably find somone on here to agree with your views. Sometimes it might only be one or two people, but at least it is not zero! The main thing is to keep it fun, after all it is just a hobby. No one dying here!

 

[BoredErica]

I am actually surprised at how many subjectivists come onto ASR when ASR ideas clash strongly with their core beliefs.

 

[voodooless]

Is it possible to see how different dac/headphone combos measure. E.g. how do the Sennheiser HD650’s (or name your headphone poison) measure on say a Topping D90 vs and SMSL m500 vs something else. Is there any synergistic effect in the chain combination that causes better or worse outcomes when compared against other combos? Is it measurable?

Not really. Synergy is mostly a myth. Technically you'll need to make sure the gain structures are set up correctly, and in the case of a headphone amp, that it has enough power and voltage to drive the headphone. Gain structure means that the DAC does not overload the input of the headphone amp. In most cases, this will be fine by default.

 

[Deleted member 23982]

I am actually surprised at how many subjectivists come onto ASR when ASR ideas clash strongly with their core beliefs.

well "our core beliefs" are not that measurement dont tell anything but yea you are right, there doesnt seem to be a "middleground" forum, soo... (i kinda like diyaudio and audiophilestyle too tho)

 

[nonnyno]

I agree with the gist here, but:

"One always hopes that the sound engineers were sufficiently competent to get the recording reasonably faithful to the original live performance with minimal deviations given the equipment and interpretation they wished to convey at the time."

. . . almost never applies to the intentionally surreal sound of popular music right now.

"Is it possible to see how different dac/headphone combos measure. E.g. how do the Sennheiser HD650’s (or name your headphone poison) measure on say a Topping D90 vs and SMSL m500 vs something else. Is there any synergistic effect in the chain combination that causes better or worse outcomes when compared against other combos? Is it measurable?"

Someone with more of a technical background [I've got lots of practical experience in recording but I'm no EE] could give a more definitive answer. But if everything works within spec, the results, sonically, should be the same. The sorts of things that would alter the sound of the HD 650 would include having enough power at 300 ohms. That can vary between different headphone amps. At a certain point, enough power is enough power. But a lot of claimed differences in sound quality are projected by the listener knowing what component they are hearing. Take that 'knowing' out of the equation and they stop hearing the difference.

Many thanks for the answer and to voodooless too for much the same answer.

 

[Deleted member 23982]

What would account for those cable differences you heard? What was it that the 10$ cables were failing to accomplish given there must have been a signal getting through?

capacitance, inductance, impedance, resistance, shielding, skin effect .... you name it

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

capacitance, inductance, impedance, resistance, shielding, skin effect .... you name it

Cable myths: reviving the coathanger test

Today, in our speaker cable blind test we're going to try to prove one way or another whether or not high-end speaker cables make a difference for your equipment.

www.soundguys.com

 

[nonnyno]

I agree with the gist here, but:

"One always hopes that the sound engineers were sufficiently competent to get the recording reasonably faithful to the original live performance with minimal deviations given the equipment and interpretation they wished to convey at the time."

. . . almost never applies to the intentionally surreal sound of popular music right now.

"Is it possible to see how different dac/headphone combos measure. E.g. how do the Sennheiser HD650’s (or name your headphone poison) measure on say a Topping D90 vs and SMSL m500 vs something else. Is there any synergistic effect in the chain combination that causes better or worse outcomes when compared against other combos? Is it measurable?"

Someone with more of a technical background [I've got lots of practical experience in recording but I'm no EE] could give a more definitive answer. But if everything works within spec, the results, sonically, should be the same. The sorts of things that would alter the sound of the HD 650 would include having enough power at 300 ohms. That can vary between different headphone amps. At a certain point, enough power is enough power. But a lot of claimed differences in sound quality are projected by the listener knowing what component they are hearing. Take that 'knowing' out of the equation and they stop hearing the difference.

You said ". . . almost never applies to the intentionally surreal sound of popular music right now."

That was why I specifically said given the equipment AND interpretation they wished to convey at the time. Interpretation, I would think probably trumps everything else unless availability of competence or equipment limitations are a genuine issue. Interestingly my stepsons first listen to a decently recorded flac file of some of his mp3 stuff at 128kbps was revelatory for him (he initially didn't like it - he stuck to listening though and then said "Oh I can hear loads more detail - yeah this is better"). There is no doubt that we get used to things and our brains tend to like us to get more of what we're used to and like, thus I suspect that when hearing genuinely transparent gear for the first time someone who is a subjectivist may struggle to appreciate the higher hifidelity nature of the gear as it isn't hitting his/her brain reward centers in the same way as they 're used to and thus not giving the satisfaction.

 

[rdenney]

They were rhetorical questions, wasn't expecting a truthful answer, but thanks

I knew that. My thumbs got the better of me.

Rick “not assuming anything is obvious in this thread” Denney

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

You can still hang out and read a lot and just doing that you will end up learning stuff. The main issue is to avoid these threads tailor made for long winded mega pages of arguments that will never be solved. Even I, the Mother Theresa of ASR have to take a break now and then. I reach my limit of people arguing, attacking each other etc. and decide to not "engage" for a bit. Usually two days will be enough for me to calm down and read other threads. So, stay and just use ASR for the fun parts. Whatever you like, you can probably find somone on here to agree with your views. Sometimes it might only be one or two people, but at least it is not zero! The main thing is to keep it fun, after all it is just a hobby. No one dying here!

Yep...I take regular breaks from the strife.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I am actually surprised at how many subjectivists come onto ASR when ASR ideas clash strongly with their core beliefs.

It's quite beguiling! lol...like going to a Ferrari forum and posting about how much better Porsches are and then being shocked that you get piled on.

 

[nonnyno]

It's quite beguiling! lol...like going to a Ferrari forum and posting about how much better Porsches are and then being shocked that you get piled on.

snigger

 

[Geert]

I am actually surprised at how many subjectivists come onto ASR when ASR ideas clash strongly with their core beliefs.

Usually French people who misread the name as AudioSeanceReview.com.

 

[Spkrdctr]

Cable myths: reviving the coathanger test

Today, in our speaker cable blind test we're going to try to prove one way or another whether or not high-end speaker cables make a difference for your equipment.

www.soundguys.com

We need to start a new business on selling very high end audio coat hangars. We can really amp up the sonic effects over just a plain coat hangar. I think coating the hangar in a thin film of silver would be a start. Then we can move on to other versions that come with plastic ferrite beads attached. We can ship them in a cheap RF enhanced wood box. Once again, I think I'm starting to smell money with these ideas. Audio2design and Moderator Adam get first dibs on being on the board of the company since my last company went bust before I could get it going. I will call Putin yet again and see if he wants in by giving us some hefty financial help. If we don't get one up and running Putin will stop taking my calls!