Amir vs. Abyss: The Battle We Need

[HiFidFan]

1) Faults in aircraft design does not necessitate us to believe in magic carpets: This popped into my head after reading the "peer review is flawed" argument.

Peer review more than just flawed. It is a virus that has infected the sciences.

 

[Racheski]

It uses a ring DAC. Apparently it's a sort of a R2R idea but different. The link is translatable. A scrutinizing test of this bad boy would be interesting.

Looks fancy, but what is causing the price to skyrocket to over $20k? The R&D to develop the tech for the "ring DAC" ?

 

[Purité Audio]

It’s the same reason why dogs lick their balls, because they can.
Keith

 

[wwenze]

Peer review more than just flawed. It is a virus that has infected the sciences.

The arguments that say peer review is flawed are similar to why jury system is flawed

But then you notice the countries that abolished the jury system...

 

[HiFidFan]

The arguments that say peer review is flawed are similar to why jury system is flawed

But then you notice the countries that abolished the jury system...

Even only on its surface, your analogy is ridiculous.

 

[TimF]

Science is hard and scientific thinking is almost impossible. It takes dedication. As for subjective assessments of sound, we can call it self-reports. If I was to want information about you regarding behaviors, traits, dispositions, and habits I could use observation and/or self-reports. On some aspects of beliefs, dispositions, behavior, and habits it may be difficult to get to the meat in self-reports; and especially about eating, alcohol and drug use, dirty thoughts and animosities, and if you are a white Minnesotan the presence of racism. Once I pay a bushel of money for a pair of speakers I lose objectivity if I ever had it, which is doubtful. Tell me, can you give me an accurate description of your mother?

Or put another way, should we take your self-report on your hearing across the spectrum? I think I'd prefer a written assessment done by a professional in a test done to meet certain standards. No offense meant or implied. Maybe all members should post a hearing test; and if they did, what credibility would you give self reports done on the back of an envelope.

My cousin Louie studied science. He can get you a colonoscopy for for half the cost of what they charge in those fancy overpriced medical labs. What do you say? And....this week and only this week he will throw in a pair of very fine audiophile speakers with each colonoscopy.

 

[Coach_Kaarlo]

Yes yes yes, science is the best we method we have. Science is also deeply flawed, and like many institutions is increasingly under attack for its lack of scientific integrity ie following the funding not the facts.

It has taken us all the way from primitive animals to this golden era we are lucky enough to live in.........not bad.

And also told us smoking is good for us, among other slight glitches along the way. There will always be hubris, arrogance, and bias - even in the sciences. To be blind to its measurable and observable effects, and the shortcomings and failings inherent in the scientific process, is to perpetuate the same.

Better to be open and balanced about the pros and cons rather than succumb to absolutes and dogma in my opinion.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

With all of my respect, I will say this is just another unnecessary discussion. Just buy whatever makes you happy. If you enjoy the money you spent, then good for you. Blind testing or not, why must you care?

I have no knowledge in acoustics, but with a background in computer science, I usually work with data and graph, along with electronics in computing world. I value the measurement, however, in daily life there can be compromise in this regard. If I buy a badly measured device but It sounds "good" to me, then I hit a jackpot (although ideally a decoder should preserve information 100%). As you said, I'm happy to have a placebo which can pump up a $4 device to a $16k one, but I will never argue in public that a $4 one is a good or best device. It's good for me, but not the other, so they have to decide themselves.

As of now, my daily driver is Topping D10 + Atom + 58x simply because they work for me, and that's all. Now let say some time in a future Amir measures 58x and it goes into the worst category, will I disgust my own 58x? You got the answer.

Gee, if that is your standard, then why are you wasting your time?

 

[Helicopter]

Yes yes yes, science is the best we method we have. Science is also deeply flawed, and like many institutions is increasingly under attack for its lack of scientific integrity ie following the funding not the facts.

It has taken us all the way from primitive animals to this golden era we are lucky enough to live in.........not bad.

And also told us smoking is good for us, among other slight glitches along the way. There will always be hubris, arrogance, and bias - even in the sciences. To be blind to its measurable and observable effects, and the shortcomings and failings inherent in the scientific process, is to perpetuate the same.

Better to be open and balanced about the pros and cons rather than succumb to absolutes and dogma in my opinion.

It gets worse as the government continues to grow as a part of the economy. The influence of politics is growing as a biased source of funding. Thank God there isn't more money and political divisiveness in audio gear! I see heavy funding bias in some sciences, but psychoacoustics and similar disciplines seem relatively clean to me.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Most people possessed by ideological dogma miss lots of gray reality in between the black and white - in my opinion - we all have cognitive biases; some we are aware of, some we can become aware of, and many we will always be blind to.


I liked your point, and it has been made by others on the forum often - measurements do can not explain or measure everything that exists. If you believe that they do (that measurements describe everything that is needed) then you do not understand science, or history, or engineering, or physics, or etc etc etc....... Measurements, what is measured, how it is measured, follow and support the science, but they do not define it. As science moves forward new instruments and measurement methods are invented in pace with the science to support and prove the new findings. With what we now know, to the best of our understanding we think....etc.

I think the fields of medicine, science, engineering, etc mostly work forwards from an existing body of knowledge. Innovation often occurs when the fundamental principles developed from this body of knowledge, are then used to re-imagine these paradigms and solve ""the problem"" in new ways. Out of the box thinking, creativity, insight - all personality traits not commonly found in many of those who occupy the dogmatic position of ""if you cannot measure it - it doesn't exist"".

Historically, for centuries real innovation and growth in understanding have been repressed by people unable to imagine or believe or perhaps understand something new was possible, many of these believed that science and measurements were sufficient to explain the ""objective"" reality they thought they were observing (the bias they were unable to be aware of). To a person from the dark ages we would all look like gods or wizards or aliens (belief) when we are merely in possession of advanced technology (understanding).

Sun orbiting the earth versus earth orbiting the sun for example. Those unable to understand the science which proved that the earth orbits the sun, persecuted the ones who understood this, because it conflicted with their ignorant and fixed beliefs (mindset, dogma, ideology).

My point is if you think everything that matters in the audio world is defined or known - you are equivalent to a flat-earther. Enjoy your beliefs but do not presume to call them understanding or knowledge.

Some fantastic conversations to start might be;

• what exists that current steady state measurements do not describe but our hearing can reliably perceive
• what areas lack a good deep body of research to support the current understanding
• where are the overlaps between what one can perceive and what can be measured
• and on and on - basically what do we not know and how could we better understand these things?

Toole, Olive, Geddes, et al did not start from a place of everything is known therefore nothing is left to discover.


Example:

Everyone (almost everyone) on here told me if an amplifier is not clipping, ie operating linearly then it is impossible to perceive an audible difference. Yet I have been able to pass the blind test and disprove this common generalisation (myth?). In free field conditions 2 x amps in mono (AHB2) is so audibly superior to 2 amps in stereo (in blind testing), that one wonders how those who think otherwise can hear anything at all? Waiting for some more fine weather to record some audio of each setup to share on here and see what the poll says - who can hear and who cannot.

My point is if I believed everything I was told, read, saw, thought, felt - I would have not learned or experienced or grown as much as was possible with an ongoing practice of critical thought, trying to maintain an open mind, increasing my awareness of my bias, etc etc etc.

Where ASR misses the mark IMO is when the standard response starts to resemble dogma. Watch and wait, guaranteed someone will illustrate my point before too long.......

I didn't know clipping was the standard for amplifiers. Sounds like too much time spent on critical thoughts in a safe space.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

It gets worse as the government continues to grow as a part of the economy. The influence of politics is growing as a biased source of funding. Thank God there isn't more money and political divisiveness in audio gear! I see heavy funding bias in some sciences, but psychoacoustics and similar disciplines seem relatively clean to me.

Audio gear has always been divisive.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Just get the brown / walnut Sopras, a couple subs, some DSP, an RME, a couple AHB2s and call it good. If you have a big enough room, get the no. 3.View attachment 118285

That is one ugly speaker.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

This is super-high-quality feedback. Like 24-bit at least.

Seriously, thank you.

This new information resonates strongly with me, but there is a counterforce that is almost as strong.

Namely, I find it hard to believe that so many people spend tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars, after listening to multiple systems, and still haven't been able to collectively figure out a basic truth that diminishing return happens around $200.

Like you said, this hobby has been going for decades. And we still haven't figured this out? A super obvious truth that Amir is showing us right in our faces? Like nobody has simply recorded and compared $200 dollar equipment next to $200,000 equipment and noticed that the measurements were identical?

That is an extraordinary claim on its own.

Now, I am 1014% convinced in Amir, and everyone here's point, that there is TONS of snake oil in this business. And I massively appreciate this data-based approach to things. I actually do business intelligence for a big tech company. I love using data to solve disputes.

I just worry that we're dealing with human minds here, and that there might be more to the equation than I measured this vs. that and therefore this sounds as good as that.

It seems like the other extreme of the spectrum, which I'm prone to doubt as well. And I think I remember Amir saying he's not a pure, 100% objectivist either. More so that he's shedding light on the blatant bullshit, which I love.

Anyway, thank you for the education. I have much to think about. See you in the threads.

I haven't found a $200 AVR that does not suck. Educate me.

 

[Easternlethal]

We have been trolled before from people doing the exact same thing.

I would have thought that a forum which prides itself on being objective would have no issues despatching trolls instead of resorting to name calling

 

[Racheski]

I would have thought that a forum which prides itself on being objective would have no issues despatching trolls instead of resorting to name calling

I moved on several posts ago, I suggest you do the same. To the OP @danielmiessler, apologies for any offense and welcome to ASR.

 

[Helicopter]

That is one ugly speaker.

Which speakers do you find aesthetically excellent?

Honest question... genuine curiosity.

The Sopra is a bit heavy-handed for me, but I love the veneer and I think I could work with it... it keeps seeming more reasonably priced as I become more interested in the hobby, but I will at least hold out for a future model with advanced baffle that betters the Kanta.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Which speakers do you find aesthetically excellent?

Honest question... genuine curiosity.

The Sopra is a bit heavy-handed for me, but I love the veneer and I think I could work with it... it keeps seeming more reasonably priced as I become more interested in the hobby, but I will at least hold out for a future model with advanced baffle that betters the Kanta.

I prefer straight ugly boxes. That one makes me dizzy.

 

[617]

The discussion here on philosophy of science is idiotic and I modestly ask we stick to more tangible subjects.

 

[Helicopter]

I prefer straight ugly boxes. That one makes me dizzy.

Raw birch?

Piano black?

Walnut?

Rosewood?

White?

 

[das]

I was considering a system somewhat like the asker mentioned (about 1/2 as much however) but backed way off after reading this site for probably 60-80 hours - lots of threads and lots of forums. So now I am down in the $8-12K range for for all new electronics (before speakers). The people on here are very serious, very honest and most of all very sensible - and so willing to be helpful!
One question to ahofer -- are dipole speakers ala Spatial Audio consider among the "good" ones?
Thanks