I posted this in another thread, but I thought it might be useful to open source some more ideas in a separate thread.
“To be a genius is to be misunderstood. But to be misunderstood is not to be a genius”. - Neil DeGrasse Tyson
..nor is being hard to understand - me.
Ad Vinum
Audio is like wine, which inevitably involves incorrect assertions about the chemical make-up of wine (e.g. they allege that identical wines taste different) and blind testing (usually they are wrong about what sommeliers can and can’t do). For instance, the different tastes of different varietals, vintages, and terroir all have measurable chemical signatures (Giving rise to “frankenwines” blended to be similar to great vintages). They tend to ignore that the Sommelier and Master Sommelier exams involve an important label-blind test (but even that requires viscosity and color examination to get correct).
forum.audiogon.com
suggested edit: This fallacy also misses the point that in this analogy. the music is the wine, not the audio gear. The music (like the wine) is the thing we enjoy/consume.
Ad Automobilis
High end audio is like cars. Ok, now what? It seems more like installing a speedometer that goes way higher than the maximum speed of the vehicle.
Ad Horologium in Carpi
Audio is like wristwatches. True, but nobody is making claims about the quality of time-telling in a fancy chronomoter. Corollary: all audio debates devolve to wristwatch debates.
Ad Quantum
Your measurements are Newtonian and Audio involves significant quantum effects that are audible to us - we just can’t prove it
elusivedisc.com
Ad Difficile Nito
Blind testing involves too much pressure/rapid changes and therefore is invalid. Typically ignores many blind tests where the timing, length, and rapidity are under the subject’s control. Those asserting this also tend to discount the audiological evidence that a) rapid switching is by far the best way for humans to distinguish small differences and b) that audio memory is incredibly short-lived.
forum.audiogon.com
Ad Mysterium
A superset of Ad Quantum and Ad Materiae, in which previous examples of ‘settled science’ being unseated are trotted out as dispositive that this is going on in Audio, despite the lack of unexplained phenomena to explain in unsighted testing. Often supported with the Shakespeare quote from Hamlet “There is more on heav’n and earth..”, ignoring that the speaker is defending the existence of ghosts. He is also expounding on the limitless nature of human imagination, which is actually quite apt to high end Audio, as that’s where most high end differences appear to arise. Typically used to confuse the fact that measurements don’t explain everything we hear with the truth that measurements can describe everything in the sound wave (above and beyond what is audible).
www.psaudio.com
Ad Aures Aureas
The Golden Ear fallacy, usually trotted out by people with severe age-related hearing loss. Tales of extraordinary audio discernment with few witnesses accompanied by a violent allergy to any kind of blind-testing. Ad Difficile Nito is a common co-morbidity when cornered.
A variation of this is the “I don’t need blind tests because the differences were so obvious” (to my Golden Ears..(. This is a sure sign of mismatched levels, broken equipment, or rhetorical desperation.
www.stereophile.com
Argument to Bogus Experience
A close corollary to the Golden Ear Fallacy is the Fallacy that being around audio equipment, or auditioning, and perhaps subjective writing about, a lot of equipment constitutes some kind of invaluable experience that serves as an argument against, or even justifies dismissal of, measurements and scientific evidence. “Measures great, sounds like crap” is, at best, a statement of preference, and at worst, it’s nonsense.
This also gives rise to the nonsense criticism that “if you haven’t heard it, you can’t criticize it”. I’m sorry, if it looks and measures like a kazoo, we don’t have to listen to it to criticize it. In fact, we can criticize whatever we like.
Omnia Critica
Every little thing makes a difference, down to the cushion material used on the feet of your DAC. No threshold of difference is too small. Ignores the science of human hearing.
Contra Aequationem Volumen
Often committed en passant, without acknowledging as much, this is the practice of deprecating level-matching as the primary cause of actual perceived differences. Many audiophiles eschew any kind of level-matching in evaluating equipment, which has, perhaps, cost people more money than any other nonsense in the hobby. Also known as Contra-Fletcher-Munson.
Ad Materiae
Another subset of Ad Mysterium The materials used in electronics have their own audible quality, which transcends measurement. Amusingly, these qualities correspond directly to the tactile or visual characteristics of the material in question. Plastic waveguides sound synthetic, silver cables sound liquid, beryllium sounds hard, wood sounds warm, etc.
forum.audiogon.com
Russell’s Teapot
”You can’t prove it doesn’t exist”. A favorite of everyone with unsupported theories and claims, despite the well-known practical difficulties of proving a negative. Failure to disprove something is not evidence that it exists.
ad Immunitatem Specialem (a form of Special Pleading)
“I don’t care about the outcome/wanted the outcome to go the other way, so I didn’t have all those sighted biases”. Nope, this is not at all how sighted bias works. Everyone has it, nobody is immune, and you are not in full understanding of its direction or behavior.
Others?
*****added from thread below*****
Ad Turba or Ad Populem- The argument that many people, maybe thousands or millions all agree that they hear something when measurements say they shouldn't, so the measurements must be wrong. Ignores the omni-prevalence of cognitive effects on hearing.
Ad pecuniam - The argument that those who discount the possibility of certain audible differences simply haven't heard expensive-enough systems. Ignores the fairly blatant dislocation of price and quality across the entire industry.
“To be a genius is to be misunderstood. But to be misunderstood is not to be a genius”. - Neil DeGrasse Tyson
..nor is being hard to understand - me.
Ad Vinum
Audio is like wine, which inevitably involves incorrect assertions about the chemical make-up of wine (e.g. they allege that identical wines taste different) and blind testing (usually they are wrong about what sommeliers can and can’t do). For instance, the different tastes of different varietals, vintages, and terroir all have measurable chemical signatures (Giving rise to “frankenwines” blended to be similar to great vintages). They tend to ignore that the Sommelier and Master Sommelier exams involve an important label-blind test (but even that requires viscosity and color examination to get correct).
Audiogon Discussion Forum
1. There is no best wine for everyone.It depends on personal taste to choose favorite wine.2. Law of diminishing return apply to both audio and wine.100...
suggested edit: This fallacy also misses the point that in this analogy. the music is the wine, not the audio gear. The music (like the wine) is the thing we enjoy/consume.
Ad Automobilis
High end audio is like cars. Ok, now what? It seems more like installing a speedometer that goes way higher than the maximum speed of the vehicle.
Ad Horologium in Carpi
Audio is like wristwatches. True, but nobody is making claims about the quality of time-telling in a fancy chronomoter. Corollary: all audio debates devolve to wristwatch debates.
Ad Quantum
Your measurements are Newtonian and Audio involves significant quantum effects that are audible to us - we just can’t prove it
Walker Audio Quantum Silver Contact Treatment with Nanocrystal Technology
Elusive Disc, Inc., Features Only The Best In Audiophile Hardware, Accessories and Music. We Offer a Wide Variety Of Audiophile Turntables, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Record Cleaners, SACD Players, Speakers, Headphones, Pre-Amps, LP Cleaning Fluids, Cables, Vibration Control, Record Brushes &...
elusivedisc.com
Ad Difficile Nito
Blind testing involves too much pressure/rapid changes and therefore is invalid. Typically ignores many blind tests where the timing, length, and rapidity are under the subject’s control. Those asserting this also tend to discount the audiological evidence that a) rapid switching is by far the best way for humans to distinguish small differences and b) that audio memory is incredibly short-lived.
Audiogon Discussion Forum
Because it was scientifically proven to be useless more than 60 years ago.A speech scientist by the name of Irwin Pollack have conducted an experiment...
Ad Mysterium
A superset of Ad Quantum and Ad Materiae, in which previous examples of ‘settled science’ being unseated are trotted out as dispositive that this is going on in Audio, despite the lack of unexplained phenomena to explain in unsighted testing. Often supported with the Shakespeare quote from Hamlet “There is more on heav’n and earth..”, ignoring that the speaker is defending the existence of ghosts. He is also expounding on the limitless nature of human imagination, which is actually quite apt to high end Audio, as that’s where most high end differences appear to arise. Typically used to confuse the fact that measurements don’t explain everything we hear with the truth that measurements can describe everything in the sound wave (above and beyond what is audible).
The Unmeasurable Aspects of High-End Audio
In our world of high-end audio, we often find ourselves tangled in the web of specifications, measurements, and tangible data. As a self-admitted crazy audiophile and a 50-year veteran in designing audio equipment, I've always believed that while numbers and graphs are crucial, they don't tell...
www.psaudio.com
Ad Aures Aureas
The Golden Ear fallacy, usually trotted out by people with severe age-related hearing loss. Tales of extraordinary audio discernment with few witnesses accompanied by a violent allergy to any kind of blind-testing. Ad Difficile Nito is a common co-morbidity when cornered.
A variation of this is the “I don’t need blind tests because the differences were so obvious” (to my Golden Ears..(. This is a sure sign of mismatched levels, broken equipment, or rhetorical desperation.
The Swift Boating of Audiophiles
The "Want to make an easy $1,000,000?" e-mail wasn't a scam from Nigeria but an alert from Paul DiComo, late of Polk Audio and now of Definitive Technology, about a double-blind cable-identification challenge made by The Annoying Randi, a magician and debunker of paranormal events who goes by...
www.stereophile.com
Argument to Bogus Experience
A close corollary to the Golden Ear Fallacy is the Fallacy that being around audio equipment, or auditioning, and perhaps subjective writing about, a lot of equipment constitutes some kind of invaluable experience that serves as an argument against, or even justifies dismissal of, measurements and scientific evidence. “Measures great, sounds like crap” is, at best, a statement of preference, and at worst, it’s nonsense.
This also gives rise to the nonsense criticism that “if you haven’t heard it, you can’t criticize it”. I’m sorry, if it looks and measures like a kazoo, we don’t have to listen to it to criticize it. In fact, we can criticize whatever we like.
Omnia Critica
Every little thing makes a difference, down to the cushion material used on the feet of your DAC. No threshold of difference is too small. Ignores the science of human hearing.
Contra Aequationem Volumen
Often committed en passant, without acknowledging as much, this is the practice of deprecating level-matching as the primary cause of actual perceived differences. Many audiophiles eschew any kind of level-matching in evaluating equipment, which has, perhaps, cost people more money than any other nonsense in the hobby. Also known as Contra-Fletcher-Munson.
Ad Materiae
Another subset of Ad Mysterium The materials used in electronics have their own audible quality, which transcends measurement. Amusingly, these qualities correspond directly to the tactile or visual characteristics of the material in question. Plastic waveguides sound synthetic, silver cables sound liquid, beryllium sounds hard, wood sounds warm, etc.
Audiogon Discussion Forum
I notice the Beryllium tweeters cost about $500 each! Focusing mostly on SB Acoustics (Satori) but you are welcome to comment if you have heard any bra...
Russell’s Teapot
”You can’t prove it doesn’t exist”. A favorite of everyone with unsupported theories and claims, despite the well-known practical difficulties of proving a negative. Failure to disprove something is not evidence that it exists.
ad Immunitatem Specialem (a form of Special Pleading)
“I don’t care about the outcome/wanted the outcome to go the other way, so I didn’t have all those sighted biases”. Nope, this is not at all how sighted bias works. Everyone has it, nobody is immune, and you are not in full understanding of its direction or behavior.
Others?
*****added from thread below*****
Ad Turba or Ad Populem- The argument that many people, maybe thousands or millions all agree that they hear something when measurements say they shouldn't, so the measurements must be wrong. Ignores the omni-prevalence of cognitive effects on hearing.
Ad pecuniam - The argument that those who discount the possibility of certain audible differences simply haven't heard expensive-enough systems. Ignores the fairly blatant dislocation of price and quality across the entire industry.
Last edited:
