Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[danadam]

To put it succinctly: we are slaves to our unconscious minds to a (varying) degree that we cannot apprehend nor appreciate ... and definitely not consciously control.

Don't call me stupid/crazy! [1]


[1] The response you can often get when you try to explain it to people of subjective persuasion.

 

[antcollinet]

OK, but is it really likely to overcome overwhelming conscious bias?

It does it all the time in everything you perceive. The subconsious brain filters and processes all your senses before the info reaches your concious brain - you couldn't function without it.

Here is a demo of it in action. What you hear is *changed* by what you see. Even when you know what is happening, you cannot stop it happening. This is obviously related to speech processing - but similar "pre-processing" applies everywhere.

Your conscious "bias" (that you know the sound is not changing) doesn't alter the fact that you hear it change.

 

[welwynnick]

It does it all the time in everything you perceive. The subconsious brain filters and processes all your senses before the info reaches your concious brain - you couldn't function without it.
Here is a demo of it in action. What you hear is *changed* by what you see. Even when you know what is happening, you cannot stop it happening. This is obviously related to speech processing - but similar "pre-processing" applies everywhere.
Your conscious "bias" (that you know the sound is not changing) doesn't alter the fact that you hear it change.

That's a convincing video. With my eyes open, I heard "far", and with my eyes closed I heard "bar".

However, I have a reason to think that I'm hearing "far" when I see the teeth on the lip, because that's what I've become used to seeing and hearing over a long time, and I can see that's subconscious because I can't stop thinking that.

I think the speaker demo is different because there was no reason for me to think that the speakers sounded poor. I had every hope and every expectation of liking the speakers. Their reputation preceded them, and coincidentally Amir published a glowing review just two days before.

If you have an opinion and you want to find some evidence to support it, you can always find someone who says what you're thinking. However it's hard find a bad word about those speakers anywhere, and all the resources that I trust were unanimous.

Like I said, if there's a bias, it has to come from somewhere; there has to be a reason.

To be clear, I'm not saying there's a subjective / objective contradiction here. On the contrary, I have no doubt measurements can confirm what I heard.

 

[pkane]

That's a convincing video. With my eyes open, I heard "far", and with my eyes closed I heard "bar".

However, I have a reason to think that I'm hearing "far" when I see the teeth on the lip, because that's what I've become used to seeing and hearing over a long time, and I can see that's subconscious because I can't stop thinking that.

I think the speaker demo is different because there was no reason for me to think that the speakers sounded poor. I had every hope and every expectation of liking the speakers. Their reputation preceded them, and coincidentally Amir published a glowing review just two days before.

If you have an opinion and you want to find some evidence to support it, you can always find someone who says what you're thinking. However it's hard find a bad word about those speakers anywhere, and all the resources that I trust were unanimous.

Like I said, if there's a bias, it has to come from somewhere; there has to be a reason.

To be clear, I'm not saying there's a subjective / objective contradiction here. On the contrary, I have no doubt measurements can confirm what I heard.

The conscious mind can’t explain even a tiny fraction of what your subconscious is doing. Just the fact that you’re auditioning audio equipment already biases you to hear differences, even if there are none. There’s nothing you can do to turn this off, and certainly nobody human can make the claim that they are immune to biases, no matter what rationalizations you come up with to explain why you should be.

 

[welwynnick]

There’s nothing you can do to turn this off, and certainly nobody human can make the claim that they are immune to biases, no matter what rationalizations you come up with to explain why you should be.

Well since you mention it, I do claim to be immune from bias. I touched on it at 18:15, and it's the reason for my signature.
....................

 

[pkane]

Well since you mention it, I do claim to be immune from bias. I touched on it at 18:15, and it's the reason for my signature.
....................

Good thing we know better.

 

[welwynnick]

You might be surprised. Even pretend scientists are supposed to have enquiring minds.

 

[pkane]

You might be surprised. Even pretend scientists are supposed to have enquiring minds.

I do and I inquired, and so did many, many others. Science is clear, without controlled testing, you can’t trust perceptions. If you want to inquire further, please do and publish the results of your controlled test.

 

[antcollinet]

Well since you mention it, I do claim to be immune from bias. I touched on it at 18:15, and it's the reason for my signature.
....................

Just like claims of superhuman hearing, claims of superhuman immunity to biases carry no weight here.

Everyone human is subject to subconcious biases. It is impossible to avoid. It is part of being human, it is how we are built. It is why blind testing of all sorts exist.

It would be ludicrous to believe you, alone, on the entire planet are immune.

And that is the last I'll say on the subject EDIT : in this conversation.

 

[BDWoody]

Well since you mention it, I do claim to be immune from bias. I touched on it at 18:15, and it's the reason for my signature.
....................

Here is an excerpt from an interview with the founder of Stereophile, J. Gordon Holt:

"Do you see any signs of future vitality in high-end audio?

Vitality? Don't make me laugh. Audio as a hobby is dying, largely by its own hand. As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me, because I am associated by so many people with the mess my disciples made of spreading my gospel."

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/index.html#:~:text=Do you see,spreading my gospel.

 

[danadam]

think the speaker demo is different because there was no reason ...

That you know of.

Like I said, if there's a bias, it has to come from somewhere; there has to be a reason.

Sure, but if we can't think of any reason, it doesn't mean there's no bias. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't.

 

[pablolie]

The conscious mind can’t explain even a tiny fraction of what your subconscious is doing. Just the fact that you’re auditioning audio equipment already biases you to hear differences, even if there are none. There’s nothing you can do to turn this off, and certainly nobody human can make the claim that they are immune to biases, no matter what rationalizations you come up with to explain why you should be.

The conscious mind can understand the difference between the conscious, the subconscious and the reptilian. We need all those layers for survival, but some of them may not be as actualized as others. We are still instinctively scared of things with big sharp teeth, but haven't had the time to instinctively react to far more immediate threats in the 21st century.

Many of us in here totally understand the concept of hearing bias, and what's even more refreshing in this forum is how many have admitted to having experienced it.

In the end, there'll always be a bit more than just measurements that drives our enjoyment devices. It could be the user interface, the features, or just the visual and tactile. Which don't make things sound any better (well some features provide better adjustability to your own environment), bit if you feel better, things may also be more enjoyable all around, including the listening experience.

 

[Doodski]

The conscious mind can understand the difference between the conscious, the subconscious and the reptilian. We need all those layers for survival, but some of them may not be as actualized as others. We are still instinctively scared of things with big sharp teeth, but haven't had the time to instinctively react to far more immediate threats in the 21st century.

Many of us in here totally understand the concept of hearing bias, and what's even more refreshing in this forum is how many have admitted to having experienced it.

In the end, there'll always be a bit more than just measurements that drives our enjoyment devices. It could be the user interface, the features, or just the visual and tactile. Which don't make things sound any better (well some features provide better adjustability to your own environment), bit if you feel better, things may also be more enjoyable all around, including the listening experience.

I have always found and especially when I was in my teens and 20s found that I would have a sort of buyers remorse in that I thought if I did not get the exact name brand and model that I was missing out on something. I would then hear or not hear things in the music and would think the equipment must be at fault. A form of bias.

 

[pablolie]

I have always found and especially when I was in my teens and 20s found that I would have a sort of buyers remorse in that I thought if I did not get the exact name brand and model that I was missing out on something. I would then hear or not hear things in the music and would think the equipment must be at fault. A form of bias.

I walked into audio stores and would lust after something just because of the brand and what it looked like. Made me assume it was always a step up. I think I bought at least 4 different premium CD players in the 90s. And integrated amplifiers. And speakers. And honestly I am not sure how much of a progression it really was.

 

[Groove01]

It does it all the time in everything you perceive. The subconsious brain filters and processes all your senses before the info reaches your concious brain - you couldn't function without it.

I participated in a leadership development program with my company run by MIT not long ago that focused on how the brain perceives and processes information. It was really fascinating.

In summary, the brain/senses can only process but so much at one time. It compensates by filling in the gaps with past experience. We don’t even realize it’s happening and it’s imperceptible to us when it does happen.

The easy examples are playing cards or road signs. See a red octagon sign and your brain just fills in “stop” regardless of what the sign actually says. You THINK you read the sign, but you really didn’t - your brain filled in the gap and moved on to something more important in the background.

I was really amazed at how often I (and the majority of pretty smart and perceptive folks) were fooled, even when we knew what was coming.

 

[Doodski]

I walked into audio stores and would lust after something just because of the brand and what it looked like. Made me assume it was always a step up. I think I bought at least 4 different premium CD players in the 90s. And integrated amplifiers. And speakers. And honestly I am not sure how much of a progression it really was.

I was also doing it with motorcycle dirt bikes. Lusting after specific models. After going to 400cc 2 strokes I realized it was getting a bit much. I'm better at it now but I see some of you guys watches and also specific knives and I want them. Heheh... I'm sure you know this one.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I participated in a leadership development program with my company run by MIT not long ago that focused on how the brain perceives and processes information. It was really fascinating.

In summary, the brain/senses can only process but so much at one time. It compensates by filling in the gaps with past experience. We don’t even realize it’s happening and it’s imperceptible to us when it does happen.

The easy examples are playing cards or road signs. See a red octagon sign and your brain just fills in “stop” regardless of what the sign actually says. You THINK you read the sign, but you really didn’t - your brain filled in the gap and moved on to something more important in the background.

I was really amazed at how often I (and the majority of pretty smart and perceptive folks) were fooled, even when we knew what was coming.

It is maybe easier to understand for vision. You don't see a fixed image like a video running. Your eye jumps around at a few points and creates the images you see. There are hundreds of illusion animations on the internet which show ways your eyes are quite faulty. It is harder to conceptualize in a way with hearing, but it suffers just as much. Echoic memory, the time your brain can access something like the real sound as heard is in the few seconds range. After that you are hearing a filtered, coded version of the sound. Something like the brain's MP3.

 

[Jim Taylor]

It is maybe easier to understand for vision. You don't see a fixed image like a video running. Your eye jumps around at a few points and creates the images you see. There are hundreds of illusion animations on the internet which show ways your eyes are quite faulty. It is harder to conceptualize in a way with hearing, but it suffers just as much. Echoic memory, the time your brain can access something like the real sound as heard is in the few seconds range. After that you are hearing a filtered, coded version of the sound. Something like the brain's MP3.

And then there are illusions such as this ...

This illusion has caused more arguments than I can count ... especially after a few beers!

(Blocks "A" and "B:" are actually the same shade.)

In case you don't believe it:

Jim

 

[antcollinet]

In case you don't believe it:

Or if the video is not convincing, copy the image into an image editor and look at the RGB values.

 

[melomane13]

illusion within illusion.
This is a good example of an erroneous conclusion due to incorrect measurement.
A and B reflectance are different in reality and perception actually does a great job.