Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Greenman]

Now ask them to taste 2 beers that according to a chemical identification ('measurements') are identical. Put them in a different bottle and you can be sure they're going to tell you how the taste differs.

This is the whole point here…who would actually do this to someone giving an opinion on how beer tastes….no one. Yet this seems to be the requirement before anyone is deemed worthy to give their impression on how anything sounds! Bizarre.

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

This is the whole point here…who would actually do this to someone giving an opinion on how beer tastes….no one. Yet this seems to be the requirement before anyone is deemed worthy to give their impression on how anything sounds! Bizarre.

After a SINAD of about 10, all beers taste the same
(Swallow Imbibe Neck Alcoholic Drink)

 

[Killingbeans]

This is the whole point here…who would actually do this to someone giving an opinion on how beer tastes….no one. Yet this seems to be the requirement before anyone is deemed worthy to give their impression on how anything sounds! Bizarre.

Nobody does it, because nobody cares what the beer truely tastes like. The opportunity to spew fancy sounding word salad is the whole point of the exercise.

The spewing also seems to be the main attraction for a lot of people in the audio hobby, and that would be fine by me if only they would acknowledge it.

What makes me sad is when they insist on linking it to actual functionality of the gear. If only they could go "This is just an impression. Take it or leave it." And we could respond with "Cool story bro.." or simply enjoy it as bit of poetry if we're into that sort of thing. Instead it's more often than not "I got this impression, and therefore this piece of gear must have a specific functionality that results in said impression!"

That's to me the main difference between beer and audio. The beer is all about taste. The only function it has, is to get you a bit drunk. Nobody tastes a beer and then proceeds to ramble about how it makes you drunk in a new amazing way that defies the laws of physics.... I mean they might do so when they've had enough beer, but then nobody in their right mind would take them seriously. Yet, that kind of logic is gladly accepted in the audio hobby without questioning.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

God not this again

What you say would make sense if Focal only made one speaker but they've made dozens. Some measure bright some don't so some will sound bright to most listeners and some won't. The model I have does not measure bright and so unsurprisingly does not sound bright.

You haven't quoted the context of that discussion which I can't recall now and maybe I could have made my post a bit longer and explained my point more fully but I didn't.

Consequently - taken in context that exchange does not actually illustrate the point you are making. (Which nevertheless I think is a good one).

I KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THAT THE EXCHANGE WAS TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT.
This is an example of two people, both knowledgeable objectivists, who disagree on a subject by using subjectivist vocabulary. That's why I think it's valuable. However ... if you wish, I can delete it and not use it again. I have no wish to cause you annoyance. I only used it because of its simple clarity.

Jim

 

[presence]

There is no evidence of this headphone compressing sound, at least not with high impedance headphones.

The frequency response is flat so there is no tonal change. The output resistance is low so there can be no tonal changes meaning it does not color the sound.

Since you are a mastering engineer it would be quite easy for you to record the output of both headphone outs (under load preferably) and post them here so we can all hear the differences and analyze the crap out of those recordings.
All 'we' have now are measurements and Amirs findings.

Sorry I'm late, but I didn't noticed that everything, which is considered a challenge for the 'science' will be forwarded here (junk yard). Note, I'm a scientist myself.

Anyway, your request won't work, because you can't hear my output by remote. When I record a file from my output it will change through your gear before you hear it. Even the recorder will add.

So, you could get the adi-DAC and RNHP yourself, level match both outputs and play your reference to have an idea if there is a difference from your point.

 

[Benesyed]

The only "more" that you need to know will be obvious in a blind test. Either you will hear a difference or you won't. If you want to be extra scrupulous, do an ABX blind test, against a unit well-known as a reference here. That may control your bias favoring the 2-to-3-thousand-euros unit.

To my mind, there are only two reason to purchase an expensive DAC:

1) It sounds better.
The only way you can find this out is a controlled blind test. Until then, everything is just sales crap, opinion, supposition and bias ... and bias ... and bias.

2) It is more reliable.
I myself am concerned about reliability, but it's an issue that defies all attempts at prediction, especially over a 20-year span of time. If you're really worried about it, buy two or three 100-euro DACs instead of the 2-or-3-thousand-euro DACS, and if something does go wrong, you'll have backups and still be huge amounts of money ahead.
Use the savings to buy music files, room treatment or streaming services.

Jim

3. How cool it looks sitting on my desk as part of my little listening den. Even though I know they are inferior, I probably will get a tube amp just for its cool mad science vibes to satiate the fool in me that has more money than sense ahaha. After i get a respectable totl like the RME....

 

[solderdude]

Anyway, your request won't work, because you can't hear my output by remote. When I record a file from my output it will change through your gear before you hear it. Even the recorder will add.

When you record the output of 2 different amplifiers under load then all differences that occur from that point on are exactly the same leaving differences between the 2 sources exactly the same. So it does not matter what the recorder will 'take away/add' as that is similar for both recordings.
The only differences will be in small variations in sample frequency. This is why one should record in 192/24.

So, you could get the adi-DAC and RNHP yourself, level match both outputs and play your reference to have an idea if there is a difference from your point.

You made the claim. The onus is on you. What you wrote is the typical cop-out from subjectivists.
By the way, to make your claim more successful you could add the exact same used interlink and power cables, headphones and who knows what else one would like to throw in the mix to get out of doing 'the work'.

 

[Geert]

This is the whole point here…who would actually do this to someone giving an opinion on how beer tastes….no one. Yet this seems to be the requirement before anyone is deemed worthy to give their impression on how anything sounds! Bizarre.

The point was that you can't trust impressions without the implementation of some basic controls that avoid bias. Without it an impression is what it is, it shouldn't be presented as a fact.

And when it comes to audio we don't need to ask people their opinion on stuff that measures nearly identical, they do it themselves. That's truly bizarre.

People not being worthy is no part of the equation.

 

[Mart68]

I KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THAT THE EXCHANGE WAS TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT.
This is an example of two people, both knowledgeable objectivists, who disagree on a subject by using subjectivist vocabulary. That's why I think it's valuable. However ... if you wish, I can delete it and not use it again. I have no wish to cause you annoyance. I only used it because of its simple clarity.

Jim

No that's okay.

I give a better example - I bought two DACs, a Topping and a Soncoz. Could not tell the difference between them.

Golden eared pal of mine says 'No that's impossible of course there will be a difference as no two DACs sound the same, there are always differences.'

So he comes over to my place like Christ coming to cleanse the temple, and we compared the two DACs. We swapped them in and out for hours while he tried to get a handle on the supposed difference, but he was struggling.

After about the tenth swap we had the Topping in - my brain was addled, and I was thinking 'Maybe the Topping is a bit brighter then the Soncoz.'

At the same time my pal triumphantly proclaims 'I think the Soncoz is a bit brighter than the Topping!'

 

[ads_cft222]

My short experience at the dealer store is that differences appear immediately only if there is a big performance gap. I have noticed this with amplifier swaps. I did not try dac swaps.

However I would not trust someone that says I don’t hear a difference . Because I noticed that there is a group of people that don’t care and discount automatically differences . Like people who do not care about the difference between Bluetooth/mp3 and lossless. Such as my wife .

 

[Mart68]

However I would not trust someone that says I don’t hear a difference .

An odd comment. What if there really isn't a difference? Which is true of most electronics when level comparison is made.

For the record I do perceive a difference between my two CD transports despite it being very unlikely that there really is one.

Fortunately there is no need to 'trust' anyone with regard to audio playback as it's entirely quantifiable.

 

[BDWoody]

However I would not trust someone that says I don’t hear a difference .

How about from someone who actually designs amps?

Here are a couple of snippets from an interview done with Quad's Peter Walker many years ago:

"Question:
Have you any opinions you'd share on the relative merits of distortion tests,
such as harmonic, two-tone IM, transient IM, or slew rate limiting, as clues to
amplifier quality?

"An amplifier should, within its limits of voltage and rate of change of voltage,
(which is slew rate limiting) if you keep within those two it should be very much
better than any program material. These are the things that are measured at .01
per cent or .05 per cent. But what is listened to is usually a program with 2 or 3
per cent distortion in the first place. That's the least you can get on records,
tapes, and such things. Listening tests are usually not done in this region of .01
percent distortion. I'm quite convinced within that range the amplifier is just as
perfect as you like to make it. It's quite possible to put 50 amplifiers in cascade,
each one into a load, potted down into the next one, and to listen to the 50th one
or to listen to the first one, and the sound will be virtually the same.

...

The peripheral effects are what get people into trouble. You can
see why you find these differences in amplifiers. You can always find them. If
people test two amplifiers and say, "These sound different," there's no magic in
it. Spend two days, maybe a whole week in the lab, and you find out exactly why
they're different and you can write the whole thing down in purely practical,
physical terms. This is why these two sound different, and the cause is usually
peripheral effects. It is not really a case of good or bad amplifiers, it's that the
termination impedances are wrong, or something of that sort. "

"TAA: How do you rate the merits of listening tests to instrument tests?

PW: We designed our valve (tube) amplifier, manufactured it, and put it on the market. and never actually listened to it. In fact, the same applies to the 303 and tile 405. People say, "Well that's disgusting, you ought to leave listened to it." However, we do a certain amount of listening tests, but they arc for specific things. We listen to the differential distortion - does a certain thing matte' You've got to have a listening test to sort out whether it matters. You've got to do tests to sort out whether rumble is likely to overload pickup inputs, or whether the high frequency stuff coming out of the pickup due to record scratch is going to disturb the control unit But we aren't sitting down listening to Beethoven's Fifth and saying "l hat amplifier sounds better. let's change a resistor or two. Oh yes, that's now better still." We never sit down and listen to a music record through an amplifier in the design stage. We listen to funny noises, funny distortions, and see whether these things are going to matter. to get a subjective assessment. But we don't actually listen to program material at all."

https://geocities.restorativland.org/ResearchTriangle/Lab/6722/pwint1.txt

 

[Killingbeans]

Like people who do not care about the difference between Bluetooth/mp3 and lossless. Such as my wife .

Your wife sounds like smart cookie

 

[SIY]

Note, I'm a scientist myself.

You said earlier that you were a mastering engineer.

 

[Galliardist]

Oh wow. That is an astonishing visual / tool. I feel like I have more biases than I have brain cells

But to be useful, you need to be able to apply it! What bias applies to which person with which choice?

The bias idea does put the difference in the right place, in your head. However, it's not yet been conclusively shown that any particular bias or biases is responsible for a single case of difference between what was heard in a blinded and sighted listening session, comparison, preference or ABX test: at least, I'm aware of none.

The best I have from textual comparison is the idea of the "Naim sound" which does not appear to correlate to all measurements of Naim equipment.

Anyone here got any papers or proof of a particular bias, in action?

 

[wyup]

Sorry Jim, I know this may not the place, but all amplifiers sound different.Try them and you'll know. Measurements are useful for electronic performance but listening to music and synergy is another.

Even perfect measured DACs and amps may sound lifeless, dry, monochromatic or clinical. Music reproduction of the real performance is not mirrored in measurements of a full scale 1KHz, frequency sweeps or a 32-tone test.

I bought a Hypex NC122MP based amp, brother of the NC250MP that got a high review here, and violins and guitars sound metallic with the Elacs. A cheaper Onkyo A-9010 integrated sounds better, more realistic tonality. I can't fool myself with what I hear and I play the violin and go to classical concerts.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

Sorry Jim, I know this may not the place, but all amplifiers sound different.Try them and you'll know. Measurements are useful for electronic performance but listening to music and synergy is another.

Even perfect measured DACs and amps may sound lifeless, dry, monochromatic or clinical. Music reproduction of the real performance is not mirrored in measurements.

I bought a Hypex NC122MP based amp, brother of the NC250MP that got a high review here, and violins and guitars sound metallic with the Elacs. A cheaper Onkyo A-9010 integrated sounded better, more realistic tonality. I can't fool myself with what I hear and I play the violin and go to classical concerts.

OMG ... here we go again!

Jim

 

[solderdude]

Clearly measurements tell the whole story, if we have the same music file, it sounds the same for everyone.

Measurements in the electrical plane do/can IF appropriate measurements are done and are done good enough.

Acoustic measurements (unless done in situ with proper gear and setup of that gear) usually only tell a part of the story.

 

[solderdude]

You said earlier that you were a mastering engineer.

He could be a scientist that became a mastering engineer or a mastering engineer who studied and became a scientist.

In any case he did not seem to get that recording an electrical signal isn't anything problematic and nothing like recording of sound waves.

 

[SIY]

n any case he did not seem to get that recording an electrical signal isn't anything problematic and nothing like recording of sound waves.

...which is why I'm dubious.