Amir vs. Abyss: The Battle We Need

[danielmiessler]

Hey all, new user and new almost-audiophile here.

I'm a skeptically-distanced fan of Abyss. I love their videos. I like the family. They seem smart, knowledgable, and—most importantly—honest. I'm also somewhat biased since I have their AB 1266 TC headphones, and one of their super-expensive cables for it (paired with a Bartók, if anyone cares).

Anyway, like a few weeks ago I was thinking about trying to rig up some way of measuring high-res and low-res files on a graph, like to see objectively where there were frequency differences. I read a lot, and I MASSIVELY distrust my own ears and brain. Placebo effect is strong enough to be measured as a REAL effect. It's crazy.

So then I find Amir. Like literally last night. And I watch like hours of his stuff. Read tons on this forum, etc. And after a year of study in this field, I see some clear sides.

Abyss thinks every single thing matters to sound quality, and they talk for hours about this. Amir thinks (mostly) that only the measurements matter.

So who wants to see Amir sit down with those three in a discussion, with some equipment, and just talk it through. WITH DATA. And even if the data show that there's no difference, but we can get a large number of people (audiophiles or not) saying they can tell a difference in this vs. that, then maybe we start looking for what is producing that impression?

You know, like science!

For example, wouldn't it be crazy if we could isolate 1) the actual objective differences in stuff, and 2) non-machine-measurable differences in perception that come from X, Y, or Z variables?

In other words, if I get a placebo bump from X, which costs $4 dollars—and it sounds as good as spending $16,400 on speakers. Amazing, I'm buying that placebo.

I think a lot of people underestimate the effect of human psychology in this whole audio game. People might actually have better experiences due to a massive psychological filter of having put 300 hours of effort into their system. Like an ACTUAL better experience, which we'd be able to measure if we lived in the future and had tons of FMRI data.

Anyway, just throwing the idea out there. If we have two smart entities, who we assume are acting in good faith, let's get them connected!

I know this sport can have a lot of religious hate, but I'm confident that we can push past that in search of truth. Call me an optimist.

SO. HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS HAPPEN?

 

[mermayer]

Wasted time and energy.

 

[danielmiessler]

Wasted time and energy.

Care to say anything more about that? Like, why?

 

[tomelex]

Are you sure you have read this forum enough, the answer is pretty much double blind testing and full measurements, audio sparring is not any type of solution, just the facts count. Yes, things can sound different and do, so what! Everything matters in audio, components to systems, but once the "matter" is inaudible, it does not matter to most of us.

 

[danielmiessler]

One of us is missing something here. Probably me.

If measurement were all that mattered there would be no reason for double-blind testing, because that's subjective.

It would just be a matter of figuring out which measurements a particular person liked better.

 

[Jimbob54]

Welcome and please forgive my scepticism , but I am pretty sure a case of lightly used cash might get one party to the table. Amir would probably settle for some help with the garden.

But I agree with others, nothing good would come of it.

 

[ahofer]

One of us is missing something here. Probably me.

If measurement were all that mattered there would be no reason for double-blind testing, because that's subjective.

It would just be a matter of figuring out which measurements a particular person liked better.

Well, there's a theoretical possibility that measurements don't tell the whole story (If you look over in some of the speaker review threads you'll see quite a bit of discussion of what the Olive predictions may be missing). What double-blind testing tells you is whether the differences you perceive are *strictly audible*. If they are, then we can move to measurements to see if those audible differences are explained, and design an experiment to confirm our explanation. However, the opponents of double-blind testing object to the blind testing method itself. From our side it typically looks like they are trying to avoid any further investigation of the phenomena they are allegedly hearing.

Measurement-oriented folks tend to focus on what is *audible*, not what is perceived when sighted. If something is audible and unexplained by measurements, that's very interesting to us ASR folks, I think. But if our interlocutors won't even admit the importance of identifying strictly audible qualities, there isn't much basis for further investigation. Hence the pessimism.

I've offered people to wager a lot of money (for charity) at very attractive odds, to prove they can tell the difference between electronics in carefully controlled tests. In part because it would be really exciting (if very unlikely IMO) to find clearly audible phenomena that aren't captured within the audible measurements and thresholds we think we understand. But also, in part, because I think the snobbier segment of the subjectivists need to...stop being snobby, stop pushing snake oil, and realize they are in an epistemically-closed bubble. Many have offered these kinds of challenges, from David Clark, to James Randi and others. Sadly, these folks likely know that most of the time they won't be able to tell electronics apart in controlled tests (as has been shown hundreds of times), and just don't want to examine the bubble too closely.

P.S.(edited in a few minutes later) - This doesn't even get into the difference between what's *audible* and what's *better*. But we aren't that interested in arguing the latter if the former hasn't even been demonstrated.

 

[Deleted member 4708]

There are plenty of measurements (and standards) backed by science. What you are asking is let's get Amir and others together and see if we can improve the existing science... I don't mean to sound disrespectful but that is called research and people spend many years doing PHDs...
Nothing good other than sheer entertainment would come out of it. Most of the claims "audiophiles" make are already debunked. There may be gray areas that require in depth research but that is hard stuff and in general is not done in shows / public / etc.

 

[Racheski]

Here is how I imagine that sit-down playing out

Amir: Here is all of the scientific evidence that expensive cables do not improve sound quality.
Abyss: But I can hear a difference.

Repeat for 45 minutes.

 

[Jimbob54]

Here is how I imagine that sit-down playing out

Amir: Here is all of the scientific evidence that expensive cables do not improve sound quality.
Abyss: But I can hear a difference.

Repeat for 45 minutes.

Not quite. What they would do is pull out 30 pages of positive testimonials from *insert audio forum of choice* . "See!"

 

[ahofer]

Here is how I imagine that sit-down playing out

Amir: Here is all of the scientific evidence that expensive cables do not improve sound quality.
Abyss: But I can hear a difference.

Repeat for 45 minutes.

Or even, "here is all the evidence that you guys can't hear any difference in wire with adequate specs" followed by "blind tests put too much pressure on us and are unrealistic/the difference is night&day/it must be so because so many people hear it and buy them/you guys are so closed-minded"[quotes Shakespeare - more on heaven & earth etc.]....

btw, I wish I had a dime for every time I have heard that Shakespeare quote. The people who quote it don't understand it in context (it is likely a call for returning to theological orthodoxy, not an argument for superstition).

Another one people quote without realizing how it undermines them is "yelling fire in a crowded theatre". People don't know what the quoted individual was arguing for (limiting anti-war literature/protest) when he said it.

 

[Jimbob54]

K - in that case I take back what I said above. Let's make it happen; bring the popcorn!

Nooooo- dont forget there is no such thing as bad PR.

 

[ahofer]

Part of the problem is that almost everyone at ASR has at least tried to have a good faith discussion of these things on other forums and suffered nothing but derision and lopsided moderating. At Audiogon, it gets my posts deleted reliably.

I have this rule that I don't engage to contradict highly subjective audiophoolery (i.e. "my amp that cost as much as two cars sounds so much better than the one-car amp") unless one of two conditions have been met :

1) someone is seeking advice on electronics, not having made a purchase yet
2)A subjectivist breaks out the condescension - "you just don't have the ears"

In those cases, I'm happy to say "don't waste your money until you've tried a blind test" to (1) and "you have no basis for that statement and nearly the entire body of scientific evidence says you are full of it" to (2).

 

[danielmiessler]

Interesting replies here.

Ok, well then let me ask you this.

Are you in this forum (and Amir, I suppose) basically saying that spending more on stuff like cables and amps doesn't matter at all?

Like if we're trying to get transparency and quality, is it just about transmitting a signal? So it all comes down to NOT BEING ******, and then having good speakers?

Is there really no such thing as high-quality tube sound in an amp, for example? Like warmness? In a way that's desirable—at least to some?

Sorry for the n00b questions.

I'm just trying to figure out what the primary thesis is for the forum. I get that a) much of what's said in this industry is snake oil. Amir already has me there, 100%. I knew that by just intuition and seeing like 2 of Amir's vidoes.

But that leaves the question of what's left? If someone has X amount to spend on, what should they get?

I was going to get:

- dCS Vivaldi DAC
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Pre-Amp
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Stereo Amp
- Focal Sopra No. 2 Speakers

Is spending that much on a DAC a waste? And on pre-amps and amps? Is Amir and this forum basically saying I can get the same experience spending 10K total instead of like 70K (minus speakers?)

Not trolling. Genuinely curious where the line is according to this model of undertanding.

 

[Racheski]

Interesting replies here.
I was going to get:

- dCS Vivaldi DAC
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Pre-Amp
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Stereo Amp
- Focal Sopra No. 2 Speakers

Other members will have some interesting discussion points in response, but before this train leaves the station it will be helpful to understand why you selected these devices in the first place.

 

[617]

Interesting replies here.

Ok, well then let me ask you this.

Are you in this forum (and Amir, I suppose) basically saying that spending more on stuff like cables and amps doesn't matter at all?

Like if we're trying to get transparency and quality, is it just about transmitting a signal? So it all comes down to NOT BEING ******, and then having good speakers?

Is there really no such thing as high-quality tube sound in an amp, for example? Like warmness? In a way that's desirable—at least to some?

Sorry for the n00b questions.

I'm just trying to figure out what the primary thesis is for the forum. I get that a) much of what's said in this industry is snake oil. Amir already has me there, 100%. I knew that by just intuition and seeing like 2 of Amir's vidoes.

But that leaves the question of what's left? If someone has X amount to spend on, what should they get?

I was going to get:

- dCS Vivaldi DAC
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Pre-Amp
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Stereo Amp
- Focal Sopra No. 2 Speakers

Is spending that much on a DAC a waste? And on pre-amps and amps? Is Amir and this forum basically saying I can get the same experience spending 10K total instead of like 70K (minus speakers?)

Not trolling. Genuinely curious where the line is according to this model of undertanding.

Most people on this forum would advocate not buying an amplifier at all; the most advanced speakers being made today are active, and indeed could not be made in passive versions. Regarding a DAC, the job of a DAC is extremely simple and you can get a DAC which produces perceptually perfect reproduction for under 200 dollars, but obviously you can spend more for features and design.

 

[Bamyasi]

Who's Abyss? I've googled and nothing came up except for some K-Pop movie...

 

[Deleted member 4708]

Interesting replies here.

Ok, well then let me ask you this.

Are you in this forum (and Amir, I suppose) basically saying that spending more on stuff like cables and amps doesn't matter at all?

Like if we're trying to get transparency and quality, is it just about transmitting a signal? So it all comes down to NOT BEING ******, and then having good speakers?

Is there really no such thing as high-quality tube sound in an amp, for example? Like warmness? In a way that's desirable—at least to some?

Sorry for the n00b questions.

I'm just trying to figure out what the primary thesis is for the forum. I get that a) much of what's said in this industry is snake oil. Amir already has me there, 100%. I knew that by just intuition and seeing like 2 of Amir's vidoes.

But that leaves the question of what's left? If someone has X amount to spend on, what should they get?

I was going to get:

- dCS Vivaldi DAC
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Pre-Amp
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Stereo Amp
- Focal Sopra No. 2 Speakers

Is spending that much on a DAC a waste? And on pre-amps and amps? Is Amir and this forum basically saying I can get the same experience spending 10K total instead of like 70K (minus speakers?)

Not trolling. Genuinely curious where the line is according to this model of undertanding.

You say you read this site... Here we strongly believe in Genelec / Neumann / ME Geithain / etc. Active speakers with DSP.
They will measure better than what you listed above, while cheaper.
Measurements, measurements, measurements.

 

[Racheski]

Who's Abyss? I've googled and nothing came up except for some K-Pop movie...

James Cameron is not Korean AFAIK

 

[ahofer]

I was going to get:

- dCS Vivaldi DAC
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Pre-Amp
- Dan D'Agostino Progression Stereo Amp
- Focal Sopra No. 2 Speakers

Is spending that much on a DAC a waste? And on pre-amps and amps? Is Amir and this forum basically saying I can get the same experience spending 10K total instead of like 70K (minus speakers?)

Not trolling. Genuinely curious where the line is according to this model of undertanding.

We have to stipulate one prior - that money spent on differences that are *not strictly audible* is a "waste" in your terminology. If we agree to that, the answer to all those questions is YES.

If you like the way they look when you listen, or they work as status symbols for you, YMMV.

But odds are you can't tell your incredibly expensive dcs from a $9 dongle when the lights are out. Or tell the D'Agostino amps from a $1000 Yamaha integrated. My view is you could spend about $3k on electronics and have a *more* accurate, but audibly indistinguishable, system. In which case, you can decide whether the Focals are still your endgame speaker (I hope you've listened to some high end KEF and Revel designs).