I hope
@FrantzM doesn't mind me quoting his post on another thread. I think it is a good jumping off point for a discussion.
Hi
While I have become a card-carrying "objectivist", I believe we need to take into account what we perceive, rightly or wrongly. Measurements came to be, to ascertain some of our perceptions , not the other way around. In my book there are differences between gear that under a given set of measurements sound the same. THD in particular as usually measured remains in my book as an insufficient metric, with most any units exhibiting vanishingly small level of such while sounding to my ear quite different. In the here and now, I would like members to continue posting their subjective impression even if it is to be challenged or even later reversed with proper observations, tests protocols , etc .. Such can only advance our knowmledge rather than declaring (hydrogen-audio-like) that we have reached perfection and that every gear sounds the same. Itt remains true that the differences may not be as great as the hyperbole would lead to believe, but we are again in the psychology of human emotions and perceptions: What is "small" and/or insignificant ( loudness wars among others) for most humans in term of audio differences may not be for the audiophiles.
On this, I have struggled also with the MiniDSP accessories in the signal chain. I am not yet persuaded that all DACs sound the same and am not pleased both emotionally and intellectually with the notion of cascading AD to DA conversions.. Something has to give and it usually does with a large degree of insatisfaction... subliminal often ... many find themselves not listening to their stereo as often.
The goal of these measurements should be IMO to further the enjoyment of reproduced music in one's home.
Measurements came to be to ascertain some of our perceptions, not the other way around he says. Maybe, maybe not I say. The measurements that stuck around I would agree.
The bigger question is declaring we have reached perfection and all gear sounds the same. I would ask, what would convince you such a thing is true? (not just FrantzM, but a question to the larger audience here).
Now it is my opinion everything other than transducers are fully transparent to us and exceed our ability to hear it. Caveats include things designed to have a "sound", and poorly designed gear. Poorly designed gear still happens even at elevated pricing. Though it seems unnecessary. Items like the Topping DACs show that inexpensive gear can be very good.
We also have gear people seem to love for the sound. Certain tube gear for instance. Maybe fully transparent gear isn't really the solution for maximum satisfaction for music/gear lovers. Quite often extremely high fidelity gear is declared sterile sounding. Colorful gear like colorful decorating can be satisfying for the taste shown in the endeavor.
How much is psychological? Firstly that despite intellectually knowing gear should sound the same you come to the conclusion over time or casual use that somehow it is still doesn't? We get influenced by so many things even the shape, size and cost of something. Even after you have "shot it out" in blind testing and could not hear any gear vs another you still find yourself (or I should say myself) equating certain sound qualities to one device vs another. Level match it and try blind and it all disappears yet it can reappear all the same. Measure it till the cows come home finding no reason for a difference and yet experience hearing it differ all the same. Of course I was infected with audiophilia decades ago. Those starting out without the infection might not have such a hard time.
Also mentioned is a subliminal sense of dissatisfaction which sometimes leaves one listening to their music less often. That too has a psychological element to it that goes beyond the performance of the gear. We get some satisfaction of a goal obtained by hearing differences, selecting gear, thinking what we have has been assembled with care, taste, and discernment. Even if the sound quality is not diminished or even altered one bit the psychological attachment, satisfaction, and the entire listening experience is different when one has put together their gear vs saying "its all perfect just pick what you need for least cost". Audio becomes an appliance and you get about the same satisfaction from your rig as you do your refrigerator. You only notice it when it doesn't work.
So if it has become true, that short of speakers, I can provide a list so that you can pick any item on it knowing they all sound exactly the same, does this diminish the hobby, or the experience or your tendency to listen to music? Should one intentionally proceed with untrue assumptions if they result in being a happier audiophile? And if you have become a card carrying objectivist how do you reconcile your knowledge with the experience?
I am an agnostic, myself. I value measurements and controlled listening tests extremely highly. I would never knowingly purchase something that "measures bad". But, two things are apparent to me. One, we don't have all the measurements thoroughly, competently and consistently done for all the gear of potential interest.
And, two, can we just accept as belief that all electronic gear (except speakers, vinyl, etc.) if well designed with similarities in the quality of measurement results we actually do have will "sound the same"? If we criticize the beliefs of total subjectivists, how can we ourselves fall back on an alternative simplistic belief, which, though it has very decent anecdotal evidence in support of it, is not proven beyond all possible doubt?
On that, I am afraid that I must still listen for myself, if only to verify to my own satisfaction that the "sounds the same" belief holds true with specific gear in question. Often, for me, it does, or is too close to call, even in sighted comparisons. It is extremely comforting when that happens. But, frankly, in some cases, it does not. I may delude myself in this, but I do take pains to reassess that outcome carefully if that is what I think I hear.
My view is that, like most things, we have imperfect information. Measurements are a subset sample of data that can tell us a lot of what is going on, but they may not tell the whole story. Example: do amp measurements reveal all about the interaction of that amp with a particular speaker, which might have difficult or unusual loading characteristics (like mine)?
In my opinion, no. So, I would not and did not buy my current amps without my own extensive listening comparisons. They revealed in some cases only at best subtle, inconsequential differences - just go with the cheapest - or surprisingly somewhat larger differences, requiring a choice in terms of my own subjective preference. Older, but wiser now, the ClassA stereo amps I eliminated had a much higher MSRP than the seven channels of mixed ClassD and AB amplification in my 7.1 system. Ten years later, I am still quite happy with those choices.
Listener preference is also highly flawed, subjective, potentially biased, etc. But, it may add more useful data to the decision process in spite of that. My preference, imperfect though it might be, is important to me once heard. As long as I don't try to insist it is a universal truth for all to worship, no harm is done. And, I am not going to argue with myself that I could not possibly be hearing any difference. Hey, we are all somewhat different, and we hear differently, systems differ, rooms differ, recordings differ.
I like to think I have in listening factored out as much as possible marketing hype or uncontrolled, subjective anecdotes of others, even magazine reviewers. But, you never know. However, in the end, I am accountable only to myself for my own audio system decisions. I would not purchase anything without a return privilege and after comparative listening to it in my own system in my own way.
