Are DBTs the defacto standard for Audio Science research?

[Dynamix]

You don't have to go back to school, but in reality, if you want to make informed objective evaluations, you simply must know how things work. You can't just rely on 3rd party BS. Would you trust a reviewer with your wife on a desert island for a month? If not, why would you trust a reviewer to fill your head full of marketing BS? Back when I was 14, 24 years ago, I used to put lots of weight on reviews. But the more hand on experience I got, the less weight I put on them. All reviews are is simply a platform for advertising. They know their target market, and they say the words that will most likely appeal to the target market.

That's what I'm saying. I don't trust reviewers, and I don't trust marketing BS. I'm almost exactly the same age as you, and you're not the only one who's grown out of that stuff.

But there has to be a middle ground between that and knowing the ins and outs of every individual circuit. And there is, wether you like it or not. If only tech-heads could be objectivists, this place would be a desert.

 

[Mivera]

That's what I'm saying. I don't trust reviewers, and I don't trust marketing BS. But there has to be a middle ground between that and knowing the ins and outs of every individual circuit. And there is, wether you like it or not. If only tech-heads could be objectivists, this place would be a desert.

The bottom line is the more you know, the better choices you will be able to make. If you don't have the knowledge yourself, your only choice is to rely on advice from others. and if you don't have the knowledge, you will have no way of knowing if the advice from others is true or not. But keep in mind I'm talking about objective data. Subjective data everyone can analyze on their own. This is because everyone has 2 ears. And how it sounds to those 2 ears is all that matters. So if you're reading a review for subjective opinions, it can actually be more useful for the layman. Especially if your subjective opinion happens to be similar to the reviewers and you already know this from past experience. You can also simply demo the gear without having an arsenal of test equipment.

 

[Dynamix]

The bottom line is the more you know, the better choices you will be able to make. If you don't have the knowledge yourself, your only choice is to rely on advice from others. and if you don't have the knowledge, you will have no way of knowing if the advice from others is true or not. But keep in mind I'm talking about objective data. Subjective data everyone can analyze on their own. This is because everyone has 2 ears. And how it sounds to those 2 ears is all that matters. So if you're reading a review from subjective opinions, it can actually be more useful for the layman. Especially if you're subjective opinion happens to similar to the reviewers and you already know this from past experience. You can also simply demo the gear without having an arsenal of test equipment.

Oh, I agree with that. Like I say, I'm here to learn. I'm just saying that even though I don't have intimate knowledge of audio electronics, I'd like to believe that I'm able to seperate objective facts from subjective opinions. Using a bit of common sense, It's usually pretty obvious who's commenting based on actual knowledge, and who's talking out of their arse.

Not saying that will give me all the answers, but at least it will give me a starting point that's not just built on the usual "I heard it so it must be true". And from there I can build my knowledge with actual hands-on experience.

 

[Mivera]

Oh, I agree with that. Like I say, I'm here to learn. I'm just saying that even though I don't have intimate knowledge of audio electronics, I'd like to believe that I'm able to seperate objective facts from subjective opinions. It's usually pretty obvious.

Not saying that will give me all the answers, but at least it will give me a starting point that's not just built on the usual "I heard it so it must be true". And from there I can build my knowledge with actual hands-on experience.

As far as I'm concerned, if a piece of audio gear meets or exceeds acceptable standards for modern high gear, the rest of the evaluation must be done subjectively. If you don't like how something sounds, but you force yourself to listen to it because the numbers look better on paper, I'm not sure how you are winning in the end. Most of the specs that actually are meaningful, and never published anyways.

 

[Dynamix]

As far as I'm concerned, if a piece of audio gear meets or exceeds acceptable standards for modern high gear, the rest of the evaluation must be done subjectively. If you don't like how something sounds, but you force yourself to listen to it because the numbers look better on paper, I'm not sure how you are winning in the end. Most of the specs that actually are meaningful, and never published anyways.

I think were talking past eachother here, because I totally agree with that. But the numbers do mean something. For instance, I'd never even bother auditioning a pair of speakers with a frequency response that looks like the French Alps, and an impedance curve that looks like they'd need to be driven by an arc-welder. They're just not my cup of tea, and I know as much from experience, not just from theory. I've been in this hobby for twenty+ years, and I've picked up something along the way, even if I don't know the inner workings of every single component in my rack.

 

[Mivera]

I think were talking past eachother here, because I totally agree with that. But the numbers do mean something. For instance, I'd never even bother auditioning a pair of speakers with a frequency response that looks like the French Alps, and an impedance curve that looks like they'd need to be driven by an arc-welder. They're just not my cup of tea, and I know as much from experience, not just from theory.

I was talking more about electronics. Speakers are another story. Every single person has a different opinion of how a speaker should be built and sound.

 

[Dynamix]

I was talking more about electronics. Speakers are another story. Every single person has a different opinion of how a speaker should be built and sound.

Uhm, yes? But I'm still having problems understanding what exactly it is you're getting at here. Seems to me that you're just looking for an argument, but I'm not really the right guy for it. I think we agree on most things if we cut through all the BS...

 

[Mivera]

Uhm, yes? But I'm still having problems understanding what exactly it is you're getting at here. Seems to me that you're just looking for an argument, but I'm not really the right guy for it. I think we agree on most things if we cut through all the BS...

No not looking for an argument. I'm just saying if measured results of electronics are ever shared, they are meaningless anyways. The ones that matter are beyond the scope of what a layman would understand. There for they are never shared because all it would do is cause confusion. Not only that they could be giving away their competitive edge to the competition.

 

[Dynamix]

No not looking for an argument. I'm just saying if measured results of electronics are ever shared, they are meaningless anyways. The ones that matter are beyond the scope of what a layman would understand. There for they are never shared because all it would do is cause confusion. Not only that they could be giving away their competitive edge to the competition.

So what about third-parties who do the measurments that actually matter on their own time? Because there are quite a few of those, and some of them are pretty trustworthy. Some of them I know personally. Do they not matter, and are blind tests the only thing we should concern ourselves with? Is that what you're saying? Because honestly, you've completely lost me here...

 

[Mivera]

So what about third-parties who do the measurments that actually matter on their own time? Because there are quite a few of those, and some of them are pretty trustworthy. Some of them I know personally. Do they not matter, and are blind tests the only thing we should concern ourselves with? Is that what you're saying? Because honestly, you've completely lost me here...

third parties run industry standard testing. Pretty much everything decent, unless it has tubes in it, will pass the standard testing with flying colors. So where do we go from here? It seems that hardcore objectivists think as look as those numbers look great, everything must sound the same. To me blind testing by third parties is meaningless data. That's just like saying 2-3 brands of beer were blind tested by a panel of 10000 people and one of them won 1st prize. So that automatically means I will like it better too. and if I don't, it means I'm flawed, and I should drink it anyways because it's well known to be better.

 

[Dynamix]

third parties run industry standard testing. Pretty much everything decent, unless it has tubes in it, will pass the standard testing with flying colors. So where do we go from here? It seems that hardcore objectivists think as look as those numbers look great, everything must sound the same. To me blind testing by third parties is meaningless data. That's just like saying 2-3 brands of beer were blind tested by a panel of 10000 people and one of them won 1st prize. So that automatically means I will like it better too. and if I don't, it means I'm flawed, and I should drink it anyways because it's well known to be better.

Again, I pretty much agree. Nothing trumps personal experience. But there still needs to be some kind of baseline, as there is a lot of stuff out there that could be objectively described as being "broken" when measured against what "high fidelity" actually means.
And for some reason a lot of that stuff is somehow seen as "high-end" and/or "state of the art". This kind of thinking is what leads certain audiophiles towards thinking that vinyl and tubes are more "accurate". Because "I prefer them, and my golden-ears would never lie".
And I say that as someone who listens to a lot of vinyl, and has enjoyed more than a few tube amps.

 

[fas42]

The interesting thing is that the current Auditory Scene Analysis (ASA) research is demonstrating that DB is going to be just about worthless once the content of what you're listening to has meaning to you - the auditory system is far more clever in compensating for differences than most seem to realise, it's a game of chess as far as getting something meaningful from the exercise.

 

[Dynamix]

The interesting thing is that the current Auditory Scene Analysis (ASA) research is demonstrating that DB is going to be just about worthless once the content of what you're listening to has meaning to you - the auditory system is far more clever in compensating for differences than most seem to realise, it's a game of chess as far as getting something meaningful from the exercise.

How so?

 

[Dynamix]

Oh, and there's something wrong with playing chess now? Who knew...

 

[Mivera]

Again, I pretty much agree. Nothing trumps personal experience. But there still needs to be some kind of baseline, as there is a lot of stuff out there that could be objectively described as being "broken" when measured against what "high fidelity" actually means.
And for some reason a lot of that stuff is somehow seen as "high-end" and/or "state of the art". This kind of thinking is what leads certain audiophiles towards thinking that vinyl and tubes are more "accurate". Because "I prefer them, and my golden-ears would never lie".
And I say that as someone who listens to a lot of vinyl, and has enjoyed more than a few tube amps.

In the end it all boils down to personal taste. As long as the gear is reliable, it's not going to start your house on fire, or break down prematurely that's all that matters. It's not like it's a vehicle you're evaluating test crash reports to see how safe it will be for your family to drive. Nobody will die if it doesn't meet a certain spec.

Humans have 5 senses. Sight, taste, smell, hearing and touch. Everyone likes some smells different than others, everyone likes some foods different than others, everyone likes how some women look different than others, so what's wrong with liking how something sounds different than others? Are ears are just as unique as our other 4 senses.

 

[fas42]

How so?

Because DB is all about bottom up processing - not bottoms up ! - meaning it considers that the brain just soaks up what hits the ear, and interprets it in a simplistic fashion. The truth is being revealed that the brain is always being a smart arse - and is working away at guessing what's going to come next, predicting what it will hear - this is called top down activity. That is, it always works on making what it's hearing "fit" into what's expected - DBs are just throwing it curve balls all the time - which probably gets it pretty pissed after a while ... .

 

[amirm]

In the end it all boils down to personal taste.

If I surveyed chocolate or ice cream, how dissimilar would the votes be in the general public? Would 50% like it and 50% not?

 

[Mivera]

If I surveyed chocolate or ice cream, how dissimilar would the votes be in the general public? Would 50% like it and 50% not?

Who cares. I won't decide I like something until I try it myself anyways. And my opinion of it once I try it is the only thing that matters to me.

 

[Dynamix]

If I surveyed chocolate or ice cream, how dissimilar would the votes be in the general public? Would 50% like it and 50% not?

Good question.

 

[amirm]

Who cares. I won't decide I like something until I try it myself anyways. And my opinion of it once I try it is the only thing that matters to me.

And what matters to people building you products is to predict what you like. Turns out we are remarkably alike in our subjective preferences in audio. It is a completely myth that we all have different tastes.