• 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!

Message to golden-eared audiophiles posting at ASR for the first time...

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
But unless I'm part of the tested cohort - and I don't have my own speaker double blind testing facilities - I can never really know for sure what I personally would prefer in the blind testing.
Sure, sure, anyone can say that. I can say that.

You are completely overlooking the biggest point from the scientific testing of preferences, which is that the effectively-universal-among-those-with-not-seriously-damaged-hearing preferred sound is the one that measures most accurately in terms of FR and hence tonality. So it is the one that most effectively preserves the tonality of live instruments and voices.

To say "hey, I'm the exception man (and oh my doesn't everyone secretly think that they are The Special One?)" is filled with the unfortunate corollary that it implies that you don't actually like the original sound of music and voice in the air. That you wish the person talking to you, the busker in the mall, all didn't sound like they do and you wish they sounded more like Speaker X.

And that is why the odds that the science doesn't apply to you are so small that you shouldn't base your position on it. Unless your job or bad luck has quite severely damaged your hearing.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
So yea as the OP's original post mentions, the ear is not the most reliable thing. As a professor at MIT mentions in his lectures, humans are a visual species (even tho we have a fairly low Flicker Fusion Threshold). We have 30,000 auditory nerve fibers as compared to over a million optic nerve fibers. About 3,500 inner hair cells and 12,000 outer hair cells per cochlea. And in every human they are wired and are physically slightly different.

So how can one human even begin to think that what he may think he hears is the "correct" interpretation of anything?
And when even the optical system is so easily fooled.... ;)

Since even the overwhelmingly most favoured of the five senses is nowhere near to 'perceiving truth', it's not about having enough nerve fibres to avoid error or misinterpretation, it is actually about how hard-wired we are to 'sense what we think we are about to sense', and attribute that to the raw senses. That is, prior knowledge will taint what we see and hear etc, but we will be unaware of the taint.

cheers
 

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,195
Likes
11,808
Sure, sure, anyone can say that. I can say that.

You are completely overlooking the biggest point from the scientific testing of preferences, which is that the effectively-universal-among-those-with-not-seriously-damaged-hearing preferred sound is the one that measures most accurately in terms of FR and hence tonality. So it is the one that most effectively preserves the tonality of live instruments and voices.

To say "hey, I'm the exception man (and oh my doesn't everyone secretly think that they are The Special One?)" is filled with the unfortunate corollary that it implies that you don't actually like the original sound of music and voice in the air. That you wish the person talking to you, the busker in the mall, all didn't sound like they do and you wish they sounded more like Speaker X.

And that is why the odds that the science doesn't apply to you are so small that you shouldn't base your position on it. Unless your job or bad luck has quite severely damaged your hearing.

I'm aware of the general preference for neutral speakers - even sighted that generally seems to be my preference vs wildly colored speakers - and I've said here numerous times that as a matter of probability I should expect I would pick more neutral over seriously colored speakers in blind speaker tests.

It still doesn't tell me exactly which speakers I would prefer.

Also, as I've said before, while we know of the type of discrepancies that occur in testing sighted and blinded for speakers, the specific blind listening tests don't seem to directly translate in to choices in sighted listening tests, nor in to predicting long term owner satisfaction (at least I'm unaware of any such studies showing this). It's certainly true that when you control all other variables, on sound alone you can get a high level of predictability as to what most people will like under the specific conditions of the tests in question. And that's powerful information. But since sighted conditions can actually influence our perception, I don't find it unreasonable for me to allow such factors in my decisions.

So, for instance, I auditioned a few Revel speakers at length (in set ups where they were well set up and didn't suffer any obvious deficiences from room interaction), and found they were quite competent sounding, but I just wasn't that thrilled by them. Whereas I found myself riveted from the get go playing my tracks through Joseph Audio speakers. Did I actually only like the sound of the JA speakers better or was some bias or other effects I wasn't aware of contributing? Certainly bias effects were quite possible. But in my case I chose to spend my hard earned cash on the speakers that I knew thrilled me under the conditions in which I'd actually use them, vs buying the ones that didn't thrill me but "I may likely have chosen under blind conditions." And I've been thrilled with my choice to say the least.

I can understand someone else making a different choice for different reasons, of course. But this is part of what I mean by the science only taking me personally so far in my choices of audio gear.

BTW, while neutrality was generally preferred among speakers, where listener selection is limited to the speakers presented, I'd be more cautious about your leap from those tests to the claim it is effectively universal that people align on neutral sound "because it will produce the most natural vocal/instrumental production."

Once listeners were allowed to start with neutral sound and then adjust sound to their preference, Olive apparently found variations in preferences:


"There were significant variations in the preferred bass and treble levels due to differences in individual taste and listener training."

So, again: nuance, and caution are a good thing when talking science.
 
Last edited:

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
I'm aware of the general preference for neutral speakers - even sighted that generally seems to be my preference vs wildly colored speakers - and I've said here numerous times that as a matter of probability I should expect I would pick more neutral over seriously colored speakers in blind speaker tests.

It still doesn't tell me exactly which speakers I would prefer.

Also, as I've said before, while we know of the type of discrepancies that occur in testing sighted and blinded for speakers, the specific blind listening tests don't seem to directly translate in to choices in sighted listening tests, nor in to predicting long term owner satisfaction (at least I'm unaware of any such studies showing this). It's certainly true that when you control all other variables, on sound alone you can get a high level of predictability as to what most people will like under the specific conditions of the tests in question. And that's powerful information. But since sighted conditions can actually influence our perception, I don't find it unreasonable for me to allow such factors in my decisions.

So, for instance, I auditioned a few Revel speakers at length (in set ups where they were well set up and didn't suffer any obvious deficiences from room interaction), and found they were quite competent sounding, but I just wasn't that thrilled by them. Whereas I found myself riveted from the get go playing my tracks through Joseph Audio speakers. Did I actually only like the sound of the JA speakers better or was some bias or other effects I wasn't aware of contributing? Certainly bias effects were quite possible. But in my case I chose to spend my hard earned cash on the speakers that I knew thrilled me under the conditions in which I'd actually use them, vs buying the ones that didn't thrill me but "I may likely have chosen under blind conditions." And I've been thrilled with my choice to say the least.

I can understand someone else making a different choice for different reasons, of course. But this is part of what I mean by the science only taking me personally so far in my choices of audio gear.

BTW, while neutrality was generally preferred among speakers, where listener selection is limited to the speakers presented, I'd be more cautious about your leap from those tests to the claim it is effectively universal that people align on neutral sound "because it will produce the most natural vocal/instrumental production."

Once listeners were allowed to start with neutral sound and then adjust sound to their preference, Olive apparently found variations in preferences:


"There were significant variations in the preferred bass and treble levels due to differences in individual taste and listener training."

So, again: nuance, and caution are a good thing when talking science.
I like panel speakers. Most of what I've owned for 35 years now. Interestingly in some binaural recordings (which don't usually work well for me) where we get to pick from 4 speakers recorded offered in another thread here, my first choice was a Quad (I've owned Quads for 12 years). My first choice was the Quad and my 2nd choice (the choice favored by well over half those taking part) was one of the Harman based designs. The Quad was the 2nd favorite of the whole group. This was repeated with different music, and once again I chose the Quad 1st while the crowd picked a Harman speaker.

Does this mean I have a preference for panels or was just acclimated to their sound from long familiarity? Would I always prefer a good panel even blind?
 

Inner Space

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,285
Likes
2,938
Does this mean I have a preference for panels or was just acclimated to their sound from long familiarity? Would I always prefer a good panel even blind?
I think this is a really, really important question. When we blind-test four loudspeakers, and then are asked our preference, what metric do we instinctively use? Do we ask ourselves, "Which of these sounds like the real world?" Or do we ask, "Which of these sounds like a good loudspeaker should?" Given the brain's processing abilities, and pattern recognition abilities, I worry that it's the latter, more than the former.
 

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,195
Likes
11,808
I like panel speakers. Most of what I've owned for 35 years now. Interestingly in some binaural recordings (which don't usually work well for me) where we get to pick from 4 speakers recorded offered in another thread here, my first choice was a Quad (I've owned Quads for 12 years). My first choice was the Quad and my 2nd choice (the choice favored by well over half those taking part) was one of the Harman based designs. The Quad was the 2nd favorite of the whole group. This was repeated with different music, and once again I chose the Quad 1st while the crowd picked a Harman speaker.

Does this mean I have a preference for panels or was just acclimated to their sound from long familiarity? Would I always prefer a good panel even blind?

And what does it mean for anyone's personal choice of speaker?

It seems you didn't need blind testing to have gravitated to a speaker design that has given you very long term satisfaction.

A scientific approach to untangling exactly why would of course be the best for getting at some reliable understanding of what is influencing your choice. But in the end, whatever the entanglement of sound and bias effects may be involved, ultimately it's your subjective experience that is being satisfied or not, and all sorts of factors may be contributing.

For instance if someone substitutes a blingy-looking AC cable in to his system and has a strong reaction that the sound got better, we would want to know what is causing that perception, because knowledge is power. Blind testing would almost certainly indicate that it wasn't the sound actually changing. But what to do with that information is still in the hands of any user and it seems to me different rational choices can be made advisedly by different people. One person may decide that sighted bias effect may not be worth paying for (e.g. me when I blind tested AC cables), but another could I think rationally take advantage of the bias effect. Because after all it IS one's perception that is changing. So one could say "It may not change the sound, but the bias effect of the sound being better is so persistent and pleasurable, it's worth the money to me." Seems no problem so long as one isn't utterly deluded or making anti-scientific claims on behalf of one's perception.

I take a similar approach to my tube amps. I understand that when I compare them to solid state amps that the characteristic differences I perceive could be some bias/expectation effects. Nonetheless, it is such a reliable impression that combined with how I enjoy the concept and aesthetics, I've been happy with the subjective benefits for over 20 years.

Back to panel speakers: I find it intriguing that...IIRC...Dr. Toole has said before that there isn't really a "panel sound" distinct from box speakers. (And that panel speakers have their own resonances). I can't recall the specifics, but I'm sure you'll agree that the impression that there is a distinct panel/ESL characteristic sure is strong! I'll never forget the shock of first hearing my friend's Quad ESL 63s where it seemed any hint of "sound coming from a box" that I was used to seemed absent. It really seemed like a new paradigm. (Which is why I ended up with 63s myself). And like many when I hear electrostatics there is a strong perception of "man, stats sound so effortlessly 'free-of-the-box' in a hard to miss way."

BTW, do you have a preference for any particular Quads? My entry point were the 63s, but I came to actually slightly prefer the 57s.
 

audio2design

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2020
Messages
1,769
Likes
1,830
I think this is a really, really important question. When we blind-test four loudspeakers, and then are asked our preference, what metric do we instinctively use? Do we ask ourselves, "Which of these sounds like the real world?" Or do we ask, "Which of these sounds like a good loudspeaker should?" Given the brain's processing abilities, and pattern recognition abilities, I worry that it's the latter, more than the former.

I think most people's perception of what the real world and real instruments sound like is often flawed.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
I like panel speakers. Most of what I've owned for 35 years now. Interestingly in some binaural recordings (which don't usually work well for me) where we get to pick from 4 speakers recorded offered in another thread here, my first choice was a Quad (I've owned Quads for 12 years). My first choice was the Quad and my 2nd choice (the choice favored by well over half those taking part) was one of the Harman based designs. The Quad was the 2nd favorite of the whole group. This was repeated with different music, and once again I chose the Quad 1st while the crowd picked a Harman speaker.

Does this mean I have a preference for panels or was just acclimated to their sound from long familiarity? Would I always prefer a good panel even blind?
Given Toole's report on how the panel speakers get high ratings sighted and not so high ratings in controlled conditions, there is objective evidence that the answer to your last question is "very possibly not".

cheers
 
D

Deleted member 39414

Guest
As an ex-auto racer, a quotation: "The only substitute for cubic inches ia cubic money!"

Any one from motor racing knows that the last five percent of added horsepower cost 50 to 100 times more than the first additional five percent.

Happily, I do not think that ratio of goodness (flat response, no distortion, great ability to play softly or loud etc.) in speakers is that costly.

True, one can pay approaching seven figures for speakers but not get any measured improvements over some very cost effective ones.

Comments and enlightening arguments welcome!

Disclaimer: I currently own KEF R3s, Harbeth 40.2, Stacked modified Quad 57s and Quad 63s with various subwoofers
Funny, I’m also an ex-(occasional current but open-wheelers are a little tighter on me these days)-racer and had a similar thought. It’s pretty easy to hit a sweet spot in hifi using a little gaffer tape to plug the gaps so to speak. I was just yelled at in another forum for suggesting a member check out this site for reviews. Took a look at their other posts and found a lot of the directional cable nonsense. reminds me of track day guys who show up in carbon fiber helmets when they could just lose two pounds of weight and save themselves a thousand bucks.
 

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,409
Likes
12,294
Location
UK/Cheshire
Funny, I’m also an ex-(occasional current but open-wheelers are a little tighter on me these days)-racer and had a similar thought. It’s pretty easy to hit a sweet spot in hifi using a little gaffer tape to plug the gaps so to speak. I was just yelled at in another forum for suggesting a member check out this site for reviews. Took a look at their other posts and found a lot of the directional cable nonsense. reminds me of track day guys who show up in carbon fiber helmets when they could just lose two pounds of weight and save themselves a thousand bucks.
See also 250lb MAMILs cycling round on 5K pedal bikes made of soot and spider web.
 

g-force

Member
Joined
May 20, 2021
Messages
11
Likes
7
Sigh. I am Not an Audiophile Expert/Engineer nor Rich. I have real decent sound and a new Topping e30; thanks to Amir.
I like Frank and Dweezil. I like watching Paul of PS... and I made a mistake of posting Amir's DAC chart there; in the Ask Paul realm.
Well... I don't think there is a drug or therapist-team capable of bridging our separate worlds.
https://www.psaudio.com/askpaulvideo/does-dac-size-matter/#comment-238232
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
LOL thanks for the link. Entertainment is always welcome. :cool:
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,335
Likes
6,700
Given Toole's report on how the panel speakers get high ratings sighted and not so high ratings in controlled conditions, there is objective evidence that the answer to your last question is "very possibly not".

cheers
But in this case at least, he was part of the minority that did prefer the panel under blind conditions.
 

Alexium

Active Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2019
Messages
223
Likes
144
Location
Ukraine
I like watching Paul of PS... and I made a mistake of posting Amir's DAC chart there; in the Ask Paul realm.
I've watched a dozen of Paul's videos and I think he's full of bullshit. I wonder if he really believes he hears the things that he says he does (some of which is definitely objectively impossible), or if he just does it to stir up demand for his overpriced crap that does nothing to the sound in the best case. I don't mean to say every PS Audio product is bad, but many of them are questionable, IMO.
 
Last edited:

billyjoebob

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2021
Messages
307
Likes
118
I've watched a dozen of Paul's videos and I think he's full of bullshit. I wonder if he really believes he hears the things that he says he does (some of which is definitely objectively impossible), or if he just does it to stir up demand for his overpriced crap that does nothing to the sound in the best case. I don't mean to say every PS Audio product is bad, but many of them are questionable, IMO.
Fact or opinion?
 

Robin L

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
5,211
Likes
7,589
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
Fact or opinion?
Fact:



 

keith_h

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
40
Lots of good stuff here. Let me present my humble contribution.

I officially have a Tin Ear according to a local hifi establishment. I was awarded this on the strength of auditioning the very first gen CD player and the handful of available CD's and declaring it to sound underwhelming, which it undeniably did.

Lets fast forward a bit to the time I decided to buy new speakers and where after scanning reviews, had determined the B&W model something or other was the answer. Lots of people effused over them, they couldn't all be wrong. Right?

My wife and I trotted down to the retailer to audition them, and found them not to our taste by a long shot. Upon enquiring about what else might be available we were introduced to a pair of small anonymous white boxes with an unfamiliar name plate which we immediately took a shine to and took them home with their wall mount brackets for the win.

I later learned these speakers were highly regarded, awarded, well reviewed. But at the time it was a brand I had never heard of. Obviously I've connected them with audiophile grade speaker cables cables and jumpers I've made myself with wire and plugs of a suitable grade I've bought at the local electronics store.

In its environment and for the specific use case (small room system) they sound sensational, even now many years later.

And herein the message; buy what sounds great to you and makes you happy. That is all.
 

PenguinMusic

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
622
Likes
368
Lots of good stuff here. Let me present my humble contribution.

I officially have a Tin Ear according to a local hifi establishment. I was awarded this on the strength of auditioning the very first gen CD player and the handful of available CD's and declaring it to sound underwhelming, which it undeniably did.

Lets fast forward a bit to the time I decided to buy new speakers and where after scanning reviews, had determined the B&W model something or other was the answer. Lots of people effused over them, they couldn't all be wrong. Right?

My wife and I trotted down to the retailer to audition them, and found them not to our taste by a long shot. Upon enquiring about what else might be available we were introduced to a pair of small anonymous white boxes with an unfamiliar name plate which we immediately took a shine to and took them home with their wall mount brackets for the win.

I later learned these speakers were highly regarded, awarded, well reviewed. But at the time it was a brand I had never heard of. Obviously I've connected them with audiophile grade speaker cables cables and jumpers I've made myself with wire and plugs of a suitable grade I've bought at the local electronics store.

In its environment and for the specific use case (small room system) they sound sensational, even now many years later.

And herein the message; buy what sounds great to you and makes you happy. That is all.
Hi,

Can't agree more with your conclusion.
At the end of the day, you'll be listening to music, not measures and numbers.

Me, when, I am asked by friends what I do advise, my answer is following :
" Did you listen to it ?
- Yes.
- Did you like it ?
- Yes.
- Then it is good for you".

If answer is "No", then I of course say "It's not good for you".

But if the device has not been heard, my advice is following.
Get your appointment in "Audio shop".
The night before, do not sleep and get there super tired.
Ask them to play the music reasonably loud.
Can you fell asleep with that music ? Then the device is good for you.
Does it irritate you and you want to turn if off ? Then the device is not good for you.

This does not mean that the device is "better" or "worse".
It has nothing to do with how "pure" or "transparent" the sound is objectively.
It is only a matter of taste, which is totally subjective.

So we all have to be humble and say "I like it", not "It is the best you can get"...

Regards.
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Lots of good stuff here. Let me present my humble contribution.

I officially have a Tin Ear according to a local hifi establishment. I was awarded this on the strength of auditioning the very first gen CD player and the handful of available CD's and declaring it to sound underwhelming, which it undeniably did.

Lets fast forward a bit to the time I decided to buy new speakers and where after scanning reviews, had determined the B&W model something or other was the answer. Lots of people effused over them, they couldn't all be wrong. Right?

My wife and I trotted down to the retailer to audition them, and found them not to our taste by a long shot. Upon enquiring about what else might be available we were introduced to a pair of small anonymous white boxes with an unfamiliar name plate which we immediately took a shine to and took them home with their wall mount brackets for the win.

I later learned these speakers were highly regarded, awarded, well reviewed. But at the time it was a brand I had never heard of. Obviously I've connected them with audiophile grade speaker cables cables and jumpers I've made myself with wire and plugs of a suitable grade I've bought at the local electronics store.

In its environment and for the specific use case (small room system) they sound sensational, even now many years later.

And herein the message; buy what sounds great to you and makes you happy. That is all.

So what were the white bracket mount speakers?
 
Top Bottom