Revealing Member Stories

[LTig]

This thread shall collect stories of ASR members which reveal how our human hearing sense fooled us into believing to hear differences where they were provable none at all. Revelations which lead us to accept the limits of our own senses. Making such stories public may help others to think more about their senses and how much they should trust them.

The reason to collect those stories in one thread is to have a reference for linking from other postings. No more need to repeat the same story again and again, just link to the story here.

 

[LTig]

Let me start with the first story.

I fell myself victim to op-amp rolling in an Arcam Black Box 3 DAC and thought it sounded much better than before, until I did a blind test next day against an unmodified model where I failed miserably: I got 8 out of 10 correct but it was very very difficult to hear any difference at all - far from those night and day differences I had heard the day before.

Recent measurements of this DAC showed that the performance of the modded model was not better although I used an op-amp which was very much hyped by audiophiles and the press at that time. You can read about it here and here.

 

[LTig]

I took once part in a blind test for a group of audiophiles where we compared SPDIF Coax vs. SPDIF Toslink (optical). With each change I could clearly hear the advantages of Coax over Toslink (not the others though). Unfortunately I heard the same advantages of Coax when the operator did not switch to Coax but stayed with Toslink. A nice example of expectation bias at work.

 

[Fluffy]

How I found out I can't tell mp3 (at 320 kbps) from Flac:

I always thought high bitrate mp3 is good enough for me, and used that as my main codec in my music library, in the times where disk space was more expansive. Around the time I started getting into audiophile headphones, I became curious to see if there is any advantage to listening to lossless. I had the HE4XX back then and those felt like a huge upgrade from the m50x I was using at the time. I really felt like I was not taking full advantage of my headphones when listening to mp3, so I got a HiFi Tidal subscription. I compared the music I had on mp3 to the lossless version in Tidal, and I suddenly felt like I'm missing a whole bunch. It was like the Lossless version was clearer, more precise, with more depth and nuance. I started having real concerns that my mp3 library that I accumulated over many years was no longer relevant, even though it sounded fine to me up until that point.

So I decided to put this to the test. Bling testing in the ABX test site didn't show that I could really tell the difference, but I was still convinced that I could hear it in music that I liked and was familiar with. So I conjured up a different blind test, aimed at finding out if mp3 or lossless sounds more enjoyable. The test included taking 15 albums that I knew very well, and selecting two songs from each album. The files began as lossless files (ripped from Tidal), and one song of each album (chosen randomly) was converted to mp3, and after that both of them were converted to WAV so I wouldn't know which is which. I ended up with 15 folders, each containing two songs (from the same album, meaning the same mastering), one of them is lossless flac, the other is MP3 at 320kbps, and both presented as identical WAV files. The only way to discern which one originated from flac and which one from mp3, was to look at them in the spectral view in Audacity.

The test itself was listening to two songs at a time, and deciding which one had a better sound quality to my ears. During the listening, in almost all cases I immediately thought I knew which one was the lossless version and which one was the mp3, and with a high degree of confidence. But later when analyzing the results, I found out that I was right in just 8 out of 15 cases – basically no different than randomly guessing. Not only that I couldn't really tell them apart, I also had false confidence about my ability to do so. Later on I repeated the experiment listening to Focal Clear, and again got a 50% correct guesses.

So my conclusion is that any difference I think I hear between high bitrate mp3 and lossless is purely imagined – just as it should be, given the mp3 codec was designed to completely fool human hearing.

Nevertheless, I still have subscription to a lossless streaming service (Deezer now), because although the difference between it and lossy is imagined, imagination is still a powerful thing. In spite me knowing that in blind testing I can't tell the difference, I still sometimes feel like I'm enjoying the lossless music more. And enjoyment is the end goal, really, even if it's pure placebo.

 

[fuzzyqoute]

How I found out I can't tell mp3 (at 320 kbps) from Flac:

I always thought high bitrate mp3 is good enough for me, and used that as my main codec in my music library, in the times where disk space was more expansive. Around the time I started getting into audiophile headphones, I became curious to see if there is any advantage to listening to lossless. I had the HE4XX back then and those felt like a huge upgrade from the m50x I was using at the time. I really felt like I was not taking full advantage of my headphones when listening to mp3, so I got a HiFi Tidal subscription. I compared the music I had on mp3 to the lossless version in Tidal, and I suddenly felt like I'm missing a whole bunch. It was like the Lossless version was clearer, more precise, with more depth and nuance. I started having real concerns that my mp3 library that I accumulated over many years was no longer relevant, even though it sounded fine to me up until that point.

So I decided to put this to the test. Bling testing in the ABX test site didn't show that I could really tell the difference, but I was still convinced that I could hear it in music that I liked and was familiar with. So I conjured up a different blind test, aimed at finding out if mp3 or lossless sounds more enjoyable. The test included taking 15 albums that I knew very well, and selecting two songs from each album. The files began as lossless files (ripped from Tidal), and one song of each album (chosen randomly) was converted to mp3, and after that both of them were converted to WAV so I wouldn't know which is which. I ended up with 15 folders, each containing two songs (from the same album, meaning the same mastering), one of them is lossless flac, the other is MP3 at 320kbps, and both presented as identical WAV files. The only way to discern which one originated from flac and which one from mp3, was to look at them in the spectral view in Audacity.

The test itself was listening to two songs at a time, and deciding which one had a better sound quality to my ears. During the listening, in almost all cases I immediately thought I knew which one was the lossless version and which one was the mp3, and with a high degree of confidence. But later when analyzing the results, I found out that I was right in just 8 out of 15 cases – basically no different than randomly guessing. Not only that I couldn't really tell them apart, I also had false confidence about my ability to do so. Later on I repeated the experiment listening to Focal Clear, and again got a 50% correct guesses.

So my conclusion is that any difference I think I hear between high bitrate mp3 and lossless is purely imagined – just as it should be, given the mp3 codec was designed to completely fool human hearing.

Nevertheless, I still have subscription to a lossless streaming service (Deezer now), because although the difference between it and lossy is imagined, imagination is still a powerful thing. In spite me knowing that in blind testing I can't tell the difference, I still sometimes feel like I'm enjoying the lossless music more. And enjoyment is the end goal, really, even if it's pure placebo.

This why I doubt the audiophiles that say they can tell lossy. I had that period but when i did my own tests i can't tell Lame at V0 or AAC at 192kbps for 99.9% of my collection.

 

[Ceburaska]

I went to have a listen to the Kii and Dutch&Dutch @Purité Audio and before leaving Keith let me have a listen to the physically ridiculous Cessaro Liszt speakers. We played a bit of Kate Bush, an artist I know well, and had in fact just seen perform live (so that dates this to 2014). I thought the speakers interesting, but didn’t notice anything special or unusual about them.
A day later Keith apologised that the bass drivers had not been connected so I hadn’t heard them properly.
OK, Kate Bush isn’t very bass heavy, but I hadn’t noticed anything unusual, listening to some songs I know very well.
Moral of the story, I have cloth ears. Or, we hear what we expect to hear (and vice versa).
@Purité Audio I hope you don’t mind me telling this story.

 

[PaulD]

I have fooled myself many times, yes op-amp rolling is one that I have fallen victim to, but the best is a story like this: I was mixing a song in a studio (when that was my job) late one night, and I thought the main vocal needed a little tweaking with eq in the 6-7HKz range, which I did, listening intently on the main monitors, until it was juuust right. I was happy! I looked across the console about 30 minutes later (SSL G-series) and I noticed the EQ was bypassed on that channel. All of the changes were all in my head... As it was about 3am I decided I was too tired and went home to sleep.

I know it is unpopular with some members even here, but I do not trust subjective reviews at all, not even my own. We are so easily fooled it is just silly to trust a subjective response. So contrary to what some others want, I do not want any subjective reviews, I do not read them, I do not believe them, and I will not do them.

I have another story, from a friend who was in charge of piano sales for a significant chunk of the world for a major Japanese instrument manufacturer. He told me that they would have a Steinway in the showroom, one of their pianos (manufacturer A) and one from Japanese manufacturer B. He would show customers into the showroom and play a bit on the Steinway and say, "Hear how it is very smooth and romantic sounding?" Then play on Japanese manufacturer B's concert grand and say, "Hear how it is harsh and brittle?" Then play on his own concert grand and say, "Hear how this is clean and clear, but not muffled or harsh?" ... He freely admitted to me that the pianos sounded the same for all intents and purposes, they were all top of the range instruments, but people would hear what he told them to...

 

[LTig]

Years ago the local dealer had "phono days" and a rep from Ortofon offered free checks of turntables. I watched as he checked the speed of a Thorens TD-105 with an Ortofon test record. The speed was absolutely correct and he told the owner that his TT was perfect and no other drive could ever best it in SQ.

Having owned an TD-115 for many years and knowing its inferior SQ (even the entry level Linn LP 12 is much better) I was so stupid to mention that a correct speed is not the most important spec of a good TT. He got quite angry and told me that if a TT has no perfect speed it can never be good.

Well, point made, point taken. Now comes the funny part: Next day a group of people including me and the Ortofon rep listened to a record unknown to me. It sounded weird and after a minute I said that it must be a 45 rpm record played at 33 rpm. I was right.

So even the Ortofon rep did not note that the record was played some 25 % too slow.

 

[PaulD]

I have 2 more...

On a couple of occasions I changed the LED on the front of an amp (multiple versions) from blue, to yellow or red. Sighted testing by others (multiple copies of the amp available) had listeners saying the amplifier with the yellow/red LED sounded smoother and warmer... There was no circuitry difference. This was for a bet with an acoustics friend (he won).

With a friend who was a die-hard vinyl fan who would tell me that digital audio sounded bad/"cold"/sterile blah blah, I once digitised one if his favourite albums and played it back swapping between the digital and analogue versions. He confidently picked the analogue version as sounding better etc. I then said, "Oh, sorry I had the leads swapped, that was the digital version." to which he cried out, "But now I don't know what I'm supposed to believe!" The 'supposed to believe' bit stuck with me... Now he ignores the hifi press, and freely admits that digital audio sounds better, he even likes streaming! But he still often plays vinyl, loves the covers and his several thousand records for what they are - and who wouldn't?

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

I was on the straight and narrow and then I wandered and then I saw the light again. Through careful buying (secondhand) it didn't cost me too much.

I was put on the straight and narrow years ago by Roger Sanders. I had asked his opinion about a DAC that was being offered to me (a Weiss DAC from memory). In his typical no nonsense way, he lambasted me for wanting to spend so much money and suggested I buy an EMU-0404 DAC for a fraction of the price. This was about eight years ago and he was strongly of the opinion that DACs were a solved problem.
I bought the EMU, and it served me well until a Mac OS upgrade made it no longer functional.

Then, I admit to my shame, I was tempted by the dance of the lifted veils.
A Resonessence Invicta was bought and then followed by a Holo Spring r2r DAC. Friends brought round their DACs to compare (Meitner, Chord) and we obsessed over differences that sometimes I was sure were imaginary but who wants to admit cloth-ears.

Then these same friends brought over a Topping d10. And level matched by ear, suddenly the emperor's clothes fell away. If I tried really hard sighted, I think I could tell a difference. Was it worth the thousands of dollars of price difference? Would I be able to tell in day to day, long term listening? Not a chance.

I still have the D10...

The only DAC that tempts me now is the RME, but that is only because I think its loudness feature is brilliant. I wish there were a cheaper DAC that offered this

 

[Mnyb]

I did my own blindtest on some 16/44.1 vs 24/96 .

To make it work properly I used some AIX and chesky records all new stuff recorded digitally.

And did my own downconverting to be sure that it is the same master . This was the important step .
Hint : using your CD version and then some HD version is not good enough it is very likely that they are not the same master .

The result so far , of-course I could not tell .
At the time I did the test with speakers , active Meridian DSP5200

Here I am with a lot of DVDA disc’s.
They still have one advantage , the multichannel mix they sound fantastic that’s the way they supposed to be enjoyed.
Discrete properly produced multichannel is something else. And yet most audiophiles used thier SACD or DVDA for stereo only?

I have not solved how to test multichannel 16/44.1 then I must rip the DVDA and downsample all channels and then burn a disc and use my DVDA player

 

[Thomas savage]

Well one time while on a 3 day bender... Oh you only want revealing audio stories .

Iv fooled myself out of thousands of pounds , spent on stuff I was certain made my audio system more ' complete ' .

Not even always hearing a difference mind you, it was more just wanting it to be perfect in some way..

Total nightmare, I was lost chasing things down a rabbit hole.

I think having the capacity to admit these things firstly to ourselves and then to others is what makes folks on ASR different to folks on other audio forums.

Many of us here are recovering audiophools. We should mint some ' recovery' coins ha ha

 

[MediumRare]

For a little change of pace:

A famous winemaker traveled with wine samples in plain bottles with a simple number-coded label. He always carried multiples of each. I think you know where this is going. When a customer remarked he didn't like a particular wine, he would bring out the 2nd bottle filled with an identical wine. Often the response was, "well why didn't you give me the better one first!?"

 

[Thomas savage]

For a little change of pace:

A famous winemaker traveled with wine samples in plain bottles with a simple number-coded label. He always carried multiples of each. I think you know where this is going. When a customer remarked he didn't like a particular wine, he would bring out the 2nd bottle filled with an identical wine. Often the response was, "well why didn't you give me the better one first!?"

Social behavioural hierarchical structures ,strategies and conflict avoidance.

The brains a curious beast.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Oh there were many small instances you ignore or gloss over. I recall someone in my group of audiophile friends getting an expensive new digital cable. We gathered to listen, swapped the digital cables, and heard the new one, described virtues, all came to a common opinion of it in general. We had a couple bits of gear with multiple digi ins and outs. Then when the host went to switch to the old cable, it was discovered we were listening to the old cable. Nothing had changed. That caused a bit of sheepish discussion etc. It died down in a few minutes. Ok so we made a silly mistake.

There were others instances like that now and again.

The final one that put me over was the series amplifier test I have described. I'd taken some nice tube amps, converted them to triode, made some other modifications, installed the best MIT caps, my own version of teflon insulated pure silver wire from military surplus used in satellites, used all Vishay resistors in the signal path. It was a really beautiful sounding amp known for its wide spacious 3D sound, and dynamics and a certain genuine aliveness no solid state could manage. I'll leave out the excessive details, but at one point I loaded the output of the amp with power resistors and tapped the output with a voltage divider so it was unity gain. A big triode power amp as preamplifier. I wanted to feed it into a Spectral SS amp to see how much the Spectral filtered out of all this 3D realism. Instead the Spectral played everything with all the 3D alive quality in the triode. Qualities I thought it incapable of it was quite able to do. Reversing positions you couldn't tell if a plain wire or the Spectral were in circuit. So that beautiful sound quality.....it was all additive coloration. I knew the triode has more noise, less power, more distortion so it really made sense it would color the sound and not the reverse. So the idea some unknown quality of triodes was superior in fidelity to good solid state just died with me at that point. It still took time to re-orient to reality.

 

[Wombat]

Thread title is a double entendre for flasher. So far the stories have been respectable.

 

[digicidal]

I'm not sure I want to see a bunch of guys telling stories about revealing their members... oh wait that's not what it said... in that case:

I've had several where I believed I could hear something until I tested (in some cases sighted even) and realized I could not - or even if I could... I would have to focus on a single frequency or artifact so strenuously to tell the difference - that it completely stopped being "listening to music" any longer.

I obsess over gear somewhat constantly, but I now know that the range of variables that I can listen to and still have no problem enjoying the music is incredibly broad and requires nothing even remotely close to perfect transparency. I still find the megabuck esoteric gear to be aesthetically appealing from an industrial design standpoint, but I know that I could likely never truly tell an audible difference. Certainly not a significant one unless it was a truly broken design.

The upside to that realization is that I can now just swap around gear I already own and get much of that same "wow that new gear sounds fantastic" illusion without spending a dime on anything. Sure when I actually need to replace something, I'll look for the best performing product I can afford... but I won't expect to actually hear a significant difference any longer - and that means I can just go back to enjoying the music sooner.

So I can still get most of the "snake-oil-tweako-audiophile" fix, but I don't have to pay scammers to get it... and that's a nice feeling. Who knows, I might even crack out my saw and some nice hardwoods one of these days to make myself some cable-elevators... if I try not to think about it rationally, I might even be able to convince myself it made a difference.

 

[Tks]

Today my desktop speakers were on, and my HD58X as well. I didn't realize my speakers were on at their normal volume

 

[RayDunzl]

Audio Buddy brought over his new DAC for casual (blind - other guy clicks to switch) AB compare.

After level matching, and no DSP on either it put mine to shame.

So much so that it didn't even make sense.

We thought "Well, they're definitely different, but you kinda get used to either one after listening for a while".

Some tunes (on mine) would still sound almost right (those closer to mono) while others would be entirely missing some instruments (wide stereo).

Finally the "Wait a minute, WTF?" thought interrupted the festivities.


Discovered DSP was still applied to mine, but not "normal/corrective" DSP, it was one channel being split to both channels with a crossover function between them.

I'd been previously messing with the normally "flat" configuration choice (of four), and forgotten about it.

Recordings with less separation sort of sounded OK because most all the data was in either channel, and the crossover betwen channels was just making a kind of fake stereo.

Fixed that and they sounded the same, which is "good enough", though he may have been a little disappointed, having read the ad-copy for his shiny beast.

---

That being embarrassing enough, yet with no harm done, permits me to have contributed to the thread and keep any other embarrassments safely in the Vault O' Shame.

 

[DKT88]

About 15 years ago, I bought an AMB M3 headphone amplifier board and built one. Bought a pant-load of different opamps and spent hours swapping them and listening to CDs and SACDs through a Sony player and HD600s. Not SB or DB, although I was aware of this method, having studied Human Factors Engineering in college. Despite having read all the subjective descriptions of the "sound" of opamps, I could not hear a difference. They just sounded the same. I then moved on to swapping tubes in properly engineered tube amps with similar results. I guess it took "fool me twice" to get over the urge.