Audiofools turned objectivists or vice-versa?

[gsp1971]

So, do you want equipment tested by educated geeks or uneducated not jobs?

I just want the truth. Give me the truth and let me decide. Don't try and fool me with catchwords and fake awards.

 

[ahofer]

After reading 22 pages in this thread, all I have to say is "Phooey"! It can easily be summed up as subjectivists are basically uneducated nut jobs and subjectivists are educated geeks. So, do you want equipment tested by educated geeks or uneducated not jobs? It is a simple decision to make whichever way you pick.

I love the broad brush afforded to me by the internet!

Would rather maximize long-term satisfaction per $ spent, and am pursuing that goal in a factual and as scientific as possible manner.

 

[Wes]

Well, your beliefs certainly trump all the scientific evidence and practices to the contrary and that it is the "subconscious" that is specifically controlled for. Enjoy.

The boar's stmt. is correct. Whether it applies to audio equipment selection or not, or in what ways, is the question.

 

[Mystical Boar]

This is actually a common argument on audio forums: “I thought the more pricey amplifier X will outperform the amplifier Y, but after listening to both I ended up buying the amplifier Y, so how can you say I could’ve been biased!?”. It’s as common as “my wife confirmed the difference”.

It doesn’t work that way. You cannot simply take a deep breath and think “Okay, let’s be objective and focus on how it sounds” to make the bias you’re even aware of disappear. Your mind may still steer you wrong because of the very bias (or some other stuff you’re completely unaware of, like the amplifier Y resembling something your conscious mind doesn’t remember). Even after confirming there’s no difference in a double blind test you may still keep barely noticing “subtle differences”.

I imagine with proper exercises, discipline, education and experience one can better their judgement, but to say you can take complete control over the subconscious is a bold statement and I doubt many people get even close.

 

[DimitryZ]

This is actually a common argument on audio forums: “I thought the more pricey amplifier X will outperform the amplifier Y, but after listening to both I ended up buying the amplifier Y, so how can you say I could’ve been biased!?”. It’s as common as “my wife confirmed the difference”.

It doesn’t work that way. You cannot simply take a deep breath and think “Okay, let’s be objective and focus on how it sounds” to make the bias you’re even aware of disappear. Your mind may still steer you wrong because of the very bias (or some other stuff you’re completely unaware of, like the amplifier Y resembling something your conscious mind doesn’t remember). Even after confirming there’s no difference in a double blind test you may still keep barely noticing “subtle differences”.

I imagine with proper exercises, discipline, education and experience one can better their judgement, but to say you can take complete control over the subconscious is a bold statement and I doubt many people get even close.

"Silencing" of the conscious mind is one of the goals of transcendental meditation.

 

[Angsty]

So, do you want equipment tested by educated geeks or uneducated not jobs?

I think uneducated nut jobs’ reviews rule most parts of the internet. That’s why I came to ASR; I like the company of geeks!

 

[MarkS]

People who think they can "tune out" visual influences on sound should try it with a video of the McGurk effect, and see how they do.

 

[Tokyo_John]

So, has anyone switched sides and stayed there?

I think it is a false dichotomy to suppose that there are two “sides” in any arena. I’m not even sure what people mean when they throw around terms like “objectivist,” because it hasn’t been adequately defined. The same word has also been used in a wide variety of other contexts throughout history, whose meaning does not correlate with the way it is used here in the audio context.

It is a similar situation in US politics and society, people have an unfortunate tendency towards contrived polarized views and narratives that lack any kind of linguistic or philosophical coherency, and also present themselves as false dichotomies with terminology that is ill-defined, shifts it’s meaning over time, and contradicts other established usage.

It seems as if many people simply want to label and divide themselves against each other, embracing poorly conceived self-applied labels that do not stand up to logical scrutiny. Such a lack of specificity and coherency provides cover to shift the meaning of these labels as it is convenient, as circumstances change, and not to be held accountable for intellectual integrity of the ideas themselves that are shape-shifted in an ad hoc way…moving targets, terra non firma.

 

[chad2]

In my experience, sceptic and ironic communities attract more interesting people as mature people don't treat themselves too seriously and you can't push their buttons as easily. "Special" people are quick to make demands about what shouldn't be allowed anymore because someone may get sore. Be well.

i have never met a "MATURE" person whom needs to sling insults just to get there point across. a mature person uses wisdom, knowledge, and facts to state there position and if the opposing party can't agree, a "MATURE" person allows you to have your opinion because, it's okay to have a difference in opinions. that's what has made this country so great yet we are quickly falling away from accepting other peoples opinions just because we don't understand why or how they could think that way. the world i grew up in "accepted your position and was polite" the world we have today is now "if you don't accept my position your an idiot and i don't have to be polite to you because of that". seems a little counter productive if you ask me, people stop listening as soon as you insult them, SO MAYBE IF WE WERE AN ACCEPTING AND POLITE COMMUNITY, PEOPLE WOULD BE MORE WILLING TO ACCEPT CRITICISM. this is the point correct? to get the correct information out, NO? my argument has nothing to do with how weak people are becoming but more so how to get people to listen. any/every good leader never broke his people down they have always benefited from building their people up. i have been in a leadership position in the navy for 6 years now and even in the Navy, it has never worked in my favor to be rude to anyone that i expect or hope to listen to me or obey my instruction. MAYBE WE AS A COMMUNITY SHOULD RETHINK HOW WE SPEAK TO OTHERS IF WE ARE TRULY HOPING TO MAKE A CHANGE IN THE AMOUNT OF SNAKE OIL THAT SELLS SO WELL IN THE AUDIO WORLD???

if you don't agree that's okay, you can continue to insult an earless community. its kind of ironic that a community revolving around our ears has created such an earless idea of "if you don't listen to me your an idiot" it's also ironic that this idea is exactly what that person is doing so, your just a bunch of contradictions.

i love you all, and hope to have more classy conversations about many different audio ideas in the future.

 

[Mystical Boar]

i have never met a "MATURE" person whom needs to sling insults just to get there point across

Being sometimes ironic or facetious is not the same as "insulting" someone. I don't know what made "this country" so great because I'm not from "this" country, but I can tell you I like American comedy from the 80s and 90s more than anything recent. Also, I see no reason for using CAPS so often.

 

[chad2]

Being sometimes ironic or facetious is not the same as "insulting" someone. I don't know what made "this country" so great because I'm not from "this" country, but I can tell you I like American comedy from the 80s and 90s more than anything recent. Also, I see no reason for using CAPS so often.

SEE, WE AGREE!!!

 

[ctrl]

I do remember the Denon sounding a bit harsh in comparison. Do you all discard that the Marantz has some attenuation in the high frequencies? I think their claim is not transparency but enjoyment.

I've been looking for two amps reviewed here and I found the following.

This a Denon reviewed here:...
And this is a Marantz:...

I'm a little late to the party, but those are two interesting examples of "do all amplifiers sound the same and is it measurable".

If we set the Denon as reference, normalize to the frequency response (FR) of the Denon, and look at the deviation in the FR of the Marantz, the differences in the FR are very obvious.

Is this difference perceptible in a hearing test?

You have to distinguish between the perceptibility of a loudness difference, for example the difference of a sine tone at 80dB and 82dB, which is very difficult to perceive...:

Change of sound amplitude,How it is perceived in human hearing
1 dB,”smallest perceptible difference in loudness, only perceptible in acoustically-insulated noiseless environments”
3 dB,smallest perceptible change in loudness for most people in real-world environments
+10 dB,an approximate doubling of loudness

Source: digitalsoundandmusic.com

...and the perceptibility of a spectral tilt (deviation from flat FR, as in our case above), which can be "easily" perceived.

The simplest deviation from flat is probably a spectral tilt.
There is some evidence that we can detect slopes of about 0.1 dB/octave...

Source: Sound Reproduction, Floyd Toole

The Marantz amplifier has a frequency response drop of 0.3-0.4 dB/oct in the 5-10kHz range compared to the Denon, which should result in an "easily" perceivable change in sound/timbre (not amplitude/loudness change).

 

[Blaspheme]

I'm a little late to the party, but those are two interesting examples of "do all amplifiers sound the same and is it measurable".

If we set the Denon as reference, normalize to the frequency response (FR) of the Denon, and look at the deviation in the FR of the Marantz, the differences in the FR are very obvious.
View attachment 138011

Is this difference perceptible in a hearing test?

You have to distinguish between the perceptibility of a loudness difference, for example the difference of a sine tone at 80dB and 82dB, which is very difficult to perceive...:
Source: digitalsoundandmusic.com

...and the perceptibility of a spectral tilt (deviation from flat FR, as in our case above), which can be "easily" perceived.
Source: Sound Reproduction, Floyd Toole

The Marantz amplifier has a frequency response drop of 0.3-0.4 dB/oct in the 5-10kHz range compared to the Denon, which should result in an "easily" perceivable change in sound/timbre (not amplitude/loudness change).

Nice work. So the Marantz should sound warmer and depending on your musical reference and upper frequency hearing, the Denon should sound brighter and/or have more air. Or, since the Denon actually rises in the treble, sound harsh as xaviescacs perceived. Especially if the speaker pairing exacerbated this.

I expect there would be many cases where a closer look at measurements and a more nuanced understanding of audio perception will explain audible differences that may otherwise be hand-waved away as imaginary (which doesn't mean that all perceived differences are non-imaginary, of course).

 

[MarkS]

The simplest deviation from flat is probably a spectral tilt.
There is some evidence that we can detect slopes of about 0.1 dB/octave...

Note: "some evidence" does not make it "easily" perceivable.

I've added a 0.1dB/octave spectral tilt to your graph.

My prediction: no one can hear the difference between these two receivers in a blind test (either level matched, or with volume set to zero after each switch, and then adjusted blind by the listener).

 

[Pdxwayne]

Note: "some evidence" does not make it "easily" perceivable.

I've added a 0.1dB/octave spectral tilt to your graph.

View attachment 138026

My prediction: no one can hear the difference between these two receivers in a blind test (either level matched, or with volume set to zero after each switch, and then adjusted blind by the listener).

Please, don't continue make a fool of yourself.

You claimed you can sense 0.5db yesterday, but have to retract that statement soon after.

This is a ~0.55db tilt to 10khz.

On my first ABX try for 0.3db tilt to 10khz, which is much more difficult than 0.55db tilt, I already got 12 out of 16, with P value of 4%. See https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...no-v-stereo-what-is-audible.21864/post-821300

You prediction already proven wrong.

 

[MarkS]

Please, don't continue make a fool of yourself.

You claimed you can sense 0.5db yesterday, but have to retract that statement soon after.

No, I didn't. You misunderstood me. My own hearing is not good, which I freely admit.

The tilt in the graph is 0.1 db per octave, which was the tilt that Toole said might be audible.

You prediction already proven wrong.

You have compared the Marantz to the Denon? I don't think so.

And my standard for success is 18/20 or 65/100, or p<0.002. I don't care what your standard is.

 

[Pdxwayne]

No, I didn't. You misunderstood me. My own hearing is not good, which I freely admit.

The tilt in the graph is 0.1 db per octave, which was the tilt that Toole said might be audible.



You have compared the Marantz to the Denon? I don't think so.

And my standard for success is 18/20 or 65/100, or p<0.0002. I don't care what your standard is.

Can you at least get your math right? 65/100?

Do continue to embarrass yourself, why do I care?

Bye bye and good night!

 

[oldsweatyman]

Personally, I admit that I mostly bought the ASR-dominant "objectivist" narrative at first with chasing measurements. Then, I bought a bottlehead crack and compared it to my magnius. The BHC sounded "better" at all volume levels because the tonality was obviously different, at which point I realized that the measurements didn't particularly matter. With this knowledge, I went further and thought that, given my understanding of the immense complexity of sound perception from a biological standpoint, it is less likely that current measurements universally and certainly determine a particular component's full characteristics.

With that said, I became what many youtube reviewers are, which is just someone who appreciates both. Measurements are cool and useful sometimes. Other times they aren't and I don't see the point in trying to dunk on other people.

It's fine to believe... it can bring great pleasure.
It's better to know... it can bring piece of mind.

I think this type of thing sums up quite a bit the type of person I'm talking about. Not any jab at solderdude here, I don't know how much he was serious about. But, on a more abstract level, if one pursues absolute objectivity, you should realize over time that the pursuit is only useful if it is practical, and that there is no "truth." Belief does indeed bring great pleasure. Thinking that you "know" and consequently have "peace of mind" is itself a belief that brings pleasure because knowledge itself is elusive. The law of cause and effect and therefore the veracity of logic can be brought into question given the existence of paradoxes. If there is a truth, it is that the belief that the human mind and our so-called "logic" is capable of being truly "absolute" amounts to run-of-the-mill human arrogance and ignorance.

 

[ctrl]

My prediction: no one can hear the difference between these two receivers in a blind test (either level matched, or with volume set to zero after each switch, and then adjusted blind by the listener).

You might want to start doing ABX testing yourself, after all, you don't have 10k in prize money on offer

It is not easy to find a filter that exactly duplicates the behavior of the Marantz versus the Denon amplifier - an approximation will have to do.

Therefore I applied a first order Butterworth filter @22kHz, using Audacity, to pink noise - I can't say for sure if this is the correct procedure, maybe someone with studio engineering experience can help us out.
The filter curve reduces the sound pressure level a bit less in the range 2-6kHz, a bit more in the range above 7kHz - as said I can't produce a perfect match on the fly.

So the spectrum (it is not a frequency response) of the pink noise, the "total energy", has changed after applying the filter:


Here is my result after one ABX test run (believe it or not) in foobar. The differences are immediately audible. Attached are the files I used.

 

[xaviescacs]

Nice work. So the Marantz should sound warmer and depending on your musical reference and upper frequency hearing, the Denon should sound brighter and/or have more air. Or, since the Denon actually rises in the treble, sound harsh as xaviescacs perceived. Especially if the speaker pairing exacerbated this.

I expect there would be many cases where a closer look at measurements and a more nuanced understanding of audio perception will explain audible differences that may otherwise be hand-waved away as imaginary (which doesn't mean that all perceived differences are non-imaginary, of course).

Thanks guys for all your replies! I didn't expect this amount of discussion on that particular event.

From a philosophical point of view, science is about being able or not to reject a null hypothesis, but not about proving the null hypothesis, which is not possible. Therefore, it can't be proved that there wasn't any audible difference, and therefore is quite pointless to argue about that. The most scientific approach, is, in my opinion, try to explain that observed difference and eventually recognizing the inability of science to find an explanation, which usually means, loosely speaking, that it's very unlikely that there was some audible difference. However, as @Blaspheme points out, this can't be done without a closer, accurate and unbiased inspection of the problem.

and the perceptibility of a spectral tilt (deviation from flat FR, as in our case above), which can be "easily" perceived.

That was the case indeed. The difference was obvious, so perhaps the two actual amps I auditioned had even more difference. I just picked up this two from ASR to find an example, simply because I can't believe that statement that all amplifiers sound equal. Thanks @ctrl. The work I've done is what I intuitively was thinking about and it helps me to improve my understanding of these concepts.