• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

HarmonicTHD

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 18, 2022
Messages
3,326
Likes
4,829
Have you guys ever heard stories where a non-audiophile family members immediately picked up on a difference in sound, without having been told that cables had been changed (or even been aware that the system was being worked on)?

I've heard those stories several times, as if that were some kind of proof.
Yep after some time reading audio forums you have heard them all. All those miracle, life changing and veil lifting stories.

The most popular is the “wife in the kitchen”, which has become already a running joke here in the forum.
 

Doodski

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 9, 2019
Messages
20,753
Likes
20,771
Location
Canada
Me, too. The problem is that I have a lot more to LEARN than I have to IMPART. :D :D

Seriously ......... learning never ends. Jim
I've given up trying to learn everything. For example I usually stay away from speaker commentary. There's just so many peeps that have far more knowledge than I. Phono stuff is kind of a outlander and tubes I don't mind so read all of those.
 

Peluvius

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
513
Likes
543
Keep in mind the "truth" is also more difficult to discern these days and requires additional filters and judgements to navigate. When I was younger the only sources of "truth" were encyclopaedia Britannica, later World Book, National Geographic, my professors and parents to a lesser extent and my own meandering experience. Later as I entered a professional field, journals and colleagues with experiences and their own learnings to share. I am not saying that all of this was truth or even factual however I feel it was simpler for me to draw conclusions and navigate then than it is now. These days the "truth" is pumped at us via torrents of social media, internet, youtube....it is endlessly available via google search and this will generally yield "facts" convincingly supporting black and white positions so here we are at ASR. Another point source of data in an endless sea of facts lies and half-truths.... No one likes to feel like a fool or be made to feel that way and everyone wants to feel they have a relevant contribution to make even if it is by sharing something they have been fooled by. People take some time to come around but I see that mostly over time they do as long as they are not the subject of ridicule or personally attacked.
 

Dimitrov

Active Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
140
Likes
43
Yep after some time reading audio forums you have heard them all. All those miracle, life changing and veil lifting stories.

The most popular is the “wife in the kitchen”, which has become already a running joke here in the forum.
What would the objections be to those kinds of stories? Especially the "noticed a difference without being told a cable was changed"?

I'm spitballing but it might have something to do with "tells", inadvertently given?
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
Keep in mind the "truth" is also more difficult to discern these days and requires additional filters and judgements to navigate. When I was younger the only sources of "truth" were encyclopaedia Britannica, later World Book, National Geographic, my professors and parents to a lesser extent and my own meandering experience. Later as I entered a professional field, journals and colleagues with experiences and their own learnings to share. I am not saying that all of this was truth or even factual however I feel it was simpler for me to draw conclusions and navigate then than it is now. These days the "truth" is pumped at us via torrents of social media, internet, youtube....it is endlessly available via google search and this will generally yield "facts" convincingly supporting black and white positions so here we are at ASR. Another point source of data in an endless sea of facts lies and half-truths.... No one likes to feel like a fool or be made to feel that way and everyone wants to feel they have a relevant contribution to make even if it is by sharing something they have been fooled by. People take some time to come around but I see that mostly over time they do as long as they are not the subject of ridicule or personally attacked.
I agree with you. Some time management guy wrote a book in the mid-1990's about the coming OVER-INformation age and how it would make facts available to everyone and truth nearly impossible to discern by non-specialists. And as a result even well educated rational people would find truth hard to discern outside of their field. He was right. Throw in most people either have no training in disciplined logical thought or rational argument or forget what they know in personal matters, and you'll always get the truth drowned out by well meaning people who believe some plausible to them truth which is a nothing of the sort. Worse I'm not exempt from being manipulated that way myself. Dammit.
 

jtgofish

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2021
Messages
130
Likes
72
They told you this or you assume they do ?



They told you they hardly ever do or do you assume they hardly ever do.
They have told me.
One sold off everything he could.
Another one has talked about doing the same.
Another has switched to big horn loaded speakers which are coloured but which he finds involving -and they are.

Of course people tire of all sorts of systems and desire change for its own sake.But over many years I have witnessed higher levels of longer term dissatisfaction [and expenditure] amongst people who become attracted to the concept that what they need is an ultra neutral ,ultra accurate,ultra high resolution system because that is "best" in a generic sense. Rather than having an awareness of what sort of sound might conform to their personal sonic preference.I know one who had a really excellent sounding room and then decided it was too dull sounding,which it wasn't,but then spent a lot of money ripping out the expensive plush carpet in there and replacing it with solid hardwood flooring in an attempt to inject more vibrancy into the sound.

Thankfully nowadays there are very good and more affordable options like good active studio monitors for people wanting to explore that sort of system and sound.I know a bloke who has a pair of active Neumann studio monitors and a pair of Harbeth speakers so has one very neutral and warmer /less perfect speaker option so can listen to either depending on his listening mood.Which seems to me to be a sensible approach.He reckons most of his listening is done on the Harbeths however.But it is nice to have the choice between the two different presentations.
 
Last edited:

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,673
Location
UK
Keep in mind the "truth" is also more difficult to discern these days and requires additional filters and judgements to navigate. When I was younger the only sources of "truth" were encyclopaedia Britannica, later World Book, National Geographic, my professors and parents to a lesser extent and my own meandering experience. Later as I entered a professional field, journals and colleagues with experiences and their own learnings to share. I am not saying that all of this was truth or even factual however I feel it was simpler for me to draw conclusions and navigate then than it is now. These days the "truth" is pumped at us via torrents of social media, internet, youtube....it is endlessly available via google search and this will generally yield "facts" convincingly supporting black and white positions so here we are at ASR. Another point source of data in an endless sea of facts lies and half-truths.... No one likes to feel like a fool or be made to feel that way and everyone wants to feel they have a relevant contribution to make even if it is by sharing something they have been fooled by. People take some time to come around but I see that mostly over time they do as long as they are not the subject of ridicule or personally attacked.
I've not been following this conversation, but I'd recommend not getting your news from social media. I think Google search is a good way of researching anything you're interested in (not really talking news related).....and I think you develop a sixth sense for whether what you're reading is balanced/factual, etc.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
I've not been following this conversation, but I'd recommend not getting your news from social media. I think Google search is a good way of researching anything you're interested in (not really talking news related).....and I think you develop a sixth sense for whether what you're reading is balanced/factual, etc.
I don't use social media at all. Google searching is what I have in mind. Yes, you can get a sense of what is good info or not, but you have to work at it more and more. If it isn't an area you are somewhat knowledgeable about you really have to work at it.
 

Peluvius

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
513
Likes
543
I've not been following this conversation, but I'd recommend not getting your news from social media. I think Google search is a good way of researching anything you're interested in (not really talking news related).....and I think you develop a sixth sense for whether what you're reading is balanced/factual, etc.

So would I however an increasingly significant percentage of the population is receiving their information this way. I do not think there is any sixth sense for BS on the internet unfortunately (face to face yes). This is one of the challenges of our times and one of the points I was attempting to make in my earlier post.

Take the recent example of a “peer reviewed” paper released by an individual with credentials which proposed there was an audible distinction between cheap, mid and expensive cables. Post that on TicToc or whatever platform penetrates your target demographic and you will convert 90% of those who watch it. The fact that the paper was full of baseless claims, false statements and his credentials were not relevant to the field under discussion is not detail available to the recipient (without further work).

A political party without a firm understanding of how the “truth” is now delivered to their electorate is a party that will lose these days. Look at how recent elections in the US have been impacted (trying not to name names).
 
Last edited:

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
How many people will listen to Kunchur because he is a credentialed scientist and even claims to be using blind testing to find out cables really do matter and so do high sample rates. Yet it is all bad information. If you don't know electronics, or signal transmission theory, how do you know he isn't credible outside his field?

I know a few people who should have or in the past did have more sense, but they are on facebook. It is nearly unbelievable some complete garbage things those people believe. Not just believe, but firmly believe all from listening to some BS artist on facebook. Trying to show them real facts is worse than changing someone's religion. It is mind blowing. Now my policy is if they learn something on facebook just don't discuss it with them.
 
Last edited:

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,201
Likes
11,817
As I stated in a previous post, some people who are infatuated with euphonic sound find accuracy distasteful. That might describe what happened here.

Jim

I think it also depends on one's familiarity with sonic accuracy - that is having heard pretty flat on axis/controlled off axis. Because I think some audiophiles may have heard speakers they thought were "accurate" but weren't - or that were quite flat on axis, but the off axis caused them to sound bright/sterile or whatever.

I remember listening to some speakers with another audiophile and he found them "too accurate, clinical, not euphonic enough." Except they weren't accurate.
They had an obvious dip in the warmth region making them sound lean and highly detailed, which he chalked up to "accuracy...I guess I don't care for it."

(BTW, in the 90's some of our dialogue editors bought some B&W monitors and they really liked them. They weren't accurate, had an obvious rising top end and some dips here and there. But they emphasized all the flaws in the tracks, making it really easy to hear all the tiny background flaws they were trying to cut out).
 

Ja1man

Member
Joined
May 15, 2022
Messages
32
Likes
12
Hello,

I've spent a few days meditating and discussing, and I think I understand the core of the issue. Furthermore, I am hoping, this post can help resolve our disagreements.

Disagreements between the so-called "subjective" and "objective" audiophiles arise from a dichotomy in the definition of the word audiophile itself.

Cambridge dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/audiophile

"a person who is very interested in and enthusiastic about equipment for playing recorded sound, and its quality"

Merriam webster
: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/audiophile

"a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction"

As you can see, the first definition above is purposefully and intractably subjective. The enthusiasm is focused on the equipment and its quality. Quality here is clearly referring to the equipment and not the recorded sound itself as it comes after a comma. This definition clearly aims to be inclusive of placebo and the sum total of indicators that make up the audio experience. Including what you touch, how it feels, what you know about it, and what others think.

However, the second definition forays into the concept of fidelity. Fidelity refers to the devotion to the source, not to some magical original moment when the audio was recorded. It is clear, that we can never replicate a moment of the past in its entirety. However, we can replicate a recorded sound and make efforts to have that replication done with as less flaws as possible.

The best metaphor for this is a dirty vs clean wineglass that taints the wine your pour into it. If you are trying to learn what wine really tastes like, you would like to drink from a clean glass.

I would further like to concede that after watching this video (and Amir's review of the Niagra power conditioner) -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WfWHC05lbg&t=18s. It is clear that we cannot trust our ears. And anyone who says that their ears are the measure of all objective truth simply does not understand how interconnected our biology is. It is equivalent to seeing a mirage on the road and showing up with swimming trunks over and over again.

It is time to either create a new word for the subjective audiophile or for the objective audiophile. It is clear to me that both communities can no longer claim dominion over this word without perverting its meaning.

Disclaimer - My change in opinion does not force me to chastise lovers of vinyl or tube amplifiers or any implementation that is objectively inferior.

Furthermore, why do the fringe members of ASR have to bandy together to excommunicate these people who are simply chasing a particular kind of sound that resides in their hearts? Is it not possible that people who grew up with vinyl prefer its flaws? Why must you make them feel bad just so that you can feel better about yourself? (mainly the radical fringe community)

However, lovers of flaws, you must also in turn concede that your wineglass has salt on its rim because you are drinking margaritas not wine. And you must also concede the following (excerpt from L7 wolf)

If the playback of a device with more harmonics is used as a benchmark, the device with less harmonics will sound like something is missing.

I hope we can create a more inclusive world together instead of falling into silos filled only with people who agree with us.

Thank you for making it this far.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
Hello,

I've spent a few days meditating and discussing, and I think I understand the core of the issue. Furthermore, I am hoping, this post can help resolve our disagreements.

Disagreements between the so-called "subjective" and "objective" audiophiles arise from a dichotomy in the definition of the word audiophile itself.

Cambridge dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/audiophile

"a person who is very interested in and enthusiastic about equipment for playing recorded sound, and its quality"

Merriam webster
: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/audiophile

"a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction"

As you can see, the first definition above is purposefully and intractably subjective. The enthusiasm is focused on the equipment and its quality. Quality here is clearly referring to the equipment and not the recorded sound itself as it comes after a comma. This definition clearly aims to be inclusive of placebo and the sum total of indicators that make up the audio experience. Including what you touch, how it feels, what you know about it, and what others think.

However, the second definition forays into the concept of fidelity. Fidelity refers to the devotion to the source, not to some magical original moment when the audio was recorded. It is clear, that we can never replicate a moment of the past in its entirety. However, we can replicate a recorded sound and make efforts to have that replication done with as less flaws as possible.

The best metaphor for this is a dirty vs clean wineglass that taints the wine your pour into it. If you are trying to learn what wine really tastes like, you would like to drink from a clean glass.

I would further like to concede that after watching this video (and Amir's review of the Niagra power conditioner) -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WfWHC05lbg&t=18s. It is clear that we cannot trust our ears. And anyone who says that their ears are the measure of all objective truth simply does not understand how interconnected our biology is. It is equivalent to seeing a mirage on the road and showing up with swimming trunks over and over again.

It is time to either create a new word for the subjective audiophile or for the objective audiophile. It is clear to me that both communities can no longer claim dominion over this word without perverting its meaning.

Disclaimer - My change in opinion does not force me to chastise lovers of vinyl or tube amplifiers or any implementation that is objectively inferior.

Furthermore, why do the fringe members of ASR have to bandy together to excommunicate these people who are simply chasing a particular kind of sound that resides in their hearts? Is it not possible that people who grew up with vinyl prefer its flaws? Why must you make them feel bad just so that you can feel better about yourself? (mainly the radical fringe community)

However, lovers of flaws, you must also in turn concede that your wineglass has salt on its rim because you are drinking margaritas not wine. And you must also concede the following (excerpt from L7 wolf)

If the playback of a device with more harmonics is used as a benchmark, the device with less harmonics will sound like something is missing.

I hope we can create a more inclusive world together instead of falling into silos filled only with people who agree with us.

Thank you for making it this far.
Straw man. I don't see excommunicating going on for those with a preference. Plenty here have and acknowledge those preferences. Plenty of tube or vinyl threads. What gets people off on the wrong foot is telling us their preference is of higher fidelity, and that we are wrong about what fidelity is.
 

voodooless

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
10,228
Likes
17,809
Location
Netherlands
The problem is not that people like the flawed gear. People should like whatever they damn well please.

The problem starts when the arguments go into the territory of provable false claims of superior equipment.

Because the argument is never: “oh, I know it’s flawed, but I just like it”. It’s always some pseudoscience technobabble parroted from a reviewer or company website.

And that is where the real problem lies: this industry is build around selling bullshit to anyone gullible enough to buy it. People opinions are based on this. The industry is poised to brainwash people into that mindset they have.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Disclaimer - My change in opinion does not force me to chastise lovers of vinyl or tube amplifiers or any implementation that is objectively inferior.

The word 'audiophile' is just a word invented by someone and is used to describe a group of people. Some audiophiles hate the word as it includes people they don't identify with.
It is basically the same reason as the whole gender thing. You are something but do not identify with the usual descriptions. They don't want to be put in the classic 'boxes' but want their own box. And a lot more boxes will be needed as not all people are the same and relate to newly invented boxes.
Chastising is of all ages and all 'groups'. Its why wars are there. Not all people go to war and want war.
The same is going on here. Not all ASR people chastise, some don't give a hoot what other like and if it differs from their preference. Some hang on to 'lets formulate correctly', some love science so much they forget humans are involved. Some are open ... no.. lets not go there.
Black and white are not the only colors there are many, many shades of grey.

Furthermore, why do the fringe members of ASR have to bandy together to excommunicate these people who are simply chasing a particular kind of sound that resides in their hearts?

Audio SCIENCE Review. Notice the word science. Also notice the emphasis on measurements. It attracts and deters people. So ASR consists mainly of a group of people drawn to this subject. They usually prefer signal fidelity over personal taste. Get satisfaction/a sense of security that the used gear is not going to stand in the way. They believe (yes believe) that the original music file should be reproduced as closely as possible to the, handed to them, recording.

Usually they take for granted that recordings can be poor and the result will thus be poor. Good recordings will sound good. Most of them also realize that the room and transducers are an important part of that equation and use EQ and or room treatment to achieve that goal, usually in a restricted small optimal listening spot (alas).
This is where they stray from the path of others.
Others may want as much recordings as they can find to sound pleasant. This requires a different approach, different gear, different wallet and the look for something they like.
There is nothing wrong with that in my opinion. Color things every way you want. However, followers of the signal fidelity church will disagree. That should be clear to them.

There's the rub. "Signal fidelity aficionados" and "music enjoyment aficionados" mean something entirely different with the word 'good' and 'poor' based on their religion practiced in their community.
No matter which aficionados enter a different community to preach their belief run the risk of being chastised by convinced people. Regardless of what other folks in that community even think or deem necessary.
A dialog with convincing arguments may well be preferred by most but not supported by all.

Is it not possible that people who grew up with vinyl prefer its flaws?

Possible yes, maybe even likely for whatever reasons they can think of
I can only speak for myself (and some others I know) but I have always hated its flaws and am glad I have a choice to listen to it or not and do not have to force others in agreeing with me.
Technically speaking (I am an electronics engineer) it is extremely clear that signal fidelity is the weakest point of vinyl. The guys claiming 'vinyl' or even 'tape' is 'better' than 'digital' are simply wrong. They are wrong in the eyes of 'signal fidelitists' but not in the eyes of 'enjoymentists'.
The dispute is about the words 'good/better/best' here and what those words define.

Why must you make them feel bad just so that you can feel better about yourself? (mainly the radical fringe community)

The real question is whether it is the intention to make 'other minded folks' to feel bad or whether it is to 'educate' or 'correct' others.
Person A may see this as an opening to a discussion, person B may find it insulting of their 'acquired knowledge', person C may disagree and move on or leave shaking their heads.
You can't please everyone. If one feels offended then realize those are their feelings. Not everyone is out to make others feel bad but indeed some are out there with that sole purpose. This is true for all people on all sides of life.
 
Last edited:

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,413
Likes
12,294
Location
UK/Cheshire
I agree with you. Some time management guy wrote a book in the mid-1990's about the coming OVER-INformation age and how it would make facts available to everyone and truth nearly impossible to discern by non-specialists. And as a result even well educated rational people would find truth hard to discern outside of their field. He was right. Throw in most people either have no training in disciplined logical thought or rational argument or forget what they know in personal matters, and you'll always get the truth drowned out by well meaning people who believe some plausible to them truth which is a nothing of the sort. Worse I'm not exempt from being manipulated that way myself. Dammit.
At least in the UK, the education system is arming kids on how to deal with this. They are now being taught critical thinking skills to help them identify good sources of info amongst the piles of dross available to them.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Hmmm I don't know.
I rather believe they are being taught to think in a certain way and are told that is the correct way.
Come to think of it, that has always been the case but goal posts are changed over time.
When one wants to change the world one has to change the way people think.
Children are the most malleable. Older people usually aren't. Audiophiles are usually 'older' people.
So to change the way things go you need to change people = educate = school = young people = 'indoctrinate' with what is deemed to be 'the correct way'.
 

HarmonicTHD

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 18, 2022
Messages
3,326
Likes
4,829
What would the objections be to those kinds of stories? Especially the "noticed a difference without being told a cable was changed"?

I'm spitballing but it might have something to do with "tells", inadvertently given?
The objections are that these stories are not replicable nor verifiable in a scientific manner unless the claims / stories are derived from some properly controlled ABX tests. And if so, the person claiming such differences should have no problem publishing these facts. Unfortunately in many many of these claims, such facts don’t exists. However many engineering derivations and scientific tests show that these differences don’t exist. So the story remains a story and everyone can tell a story.
 
Last edited:

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
At least in the UK, the education system is arming kids on how to deal with this. They are now being taught critical thinking skills to help them identify good sources of info amongst the piles of dross available to them.
How is this being taught? Interesting if you some concise information about how that is being done.
 
Top Bottom