Equal measurements is not the same as equal sound quality

[Frank Dernie]

I know this is a shocking suggestion, but try listening with your ears a little more

I think you are making the mistake of thinking the people here are inexperienced.
I and many others on this forum felt a bit like you when we were younger, more ignorant and easily led. After decades of experience of listening we know that what you seem to believe is complete poppycock.
ALL the things you imagine you hear will disappear if you do a proper level matched comparison. They did for me and lots of other people. If you can't be bothered to do this you can continue to believe things which lots of people here abandoned years or decades ago.
You have a lot to learn and here is the best place to help you. You will be surprised how many things you are sure of turn out to be imagined. I was.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Well, where is your proof? Show me the proof that prove measurements can measure everything that ears can hear?

First you need to prove that you can actually hear the differences you claim to hear. You haven't done it, and like many others like you are refusing to do so.
I am confident that you won't be able to.
So far nobody making the claims you are has been able to.

 

[oldsysop]

Guys, this is deliberate (and to be honest, not terribly creative) trolling. I strongly suggest ignoring.

We all know them, but it's still fun

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

I know this is a shocking suggestion, but try listening with your ears a little more

It may be shocking for you to realise that what you are doing is not listening with your ears.
So if you are actually serious about your own advice, you need to make sure you are listening with your ears and not your sighted bias… you should try it a little more

 

[Thomas savage]

You are all claiming that I don't have any proof (which I don't), and because of that my claims are worthless. I mean, I use my ears to determine sound quality, how utterly stupid!

Well, where is your proof? Show me the proof that prove measurements can measure everything that ears can hear? If you can't, then that would (by your own logic) make measurements worthless as any kind of tool for determining how our ears perceive music.

Show me proof there's no god, he talks to me so I know he exists .

I'm off to a science forum to argue against evolution, see you later .

 

[March Audio]

Guys, this is deliberate (and to be honest, not terribly creative) trolling. I strongly suggest ignoring.

Yeah, the responses are only really for the wider audience, those that don't have ingrained dogma and are capable of critical thought.

Ignore pressed.

 

[thefsb]

Besides, I don't need to prove anything, I am just voicing my opinion and you are free to agree or disagree.

This is not the case. If it were, why all the effort to persuade and defend?

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

So thats your answer? I have a listening impression that contradict your view, and your only argument is you don't believe me?

Funny, if I had said the opposite, that the DAC that measured well also sounded more transparent, I am sure you would believe me

until you prove that your sighted listening impressions are real (via challenging yourself with a volume matched blind comparison) they mean absolutely nothing. It's been proven time and time again that we humans allow ourselves to be fooled by all sorts of things that bias us to imagine differences that don't actually exist. Chances are very good that if you did a proper blind test comparing your DACs you'd not be able to tell them apart and your entire belief system would come crashing down around you. That's what happened to many of us.

 

[MagnusH]

Haha, so when I ask about your proof I am trolling

I know there is no proof that measurement can fully cover what the ear can perceive, but its fun to see how people behave when they get a "ohh shit" moment.

Besides, I didn't start this talk about needing proof, I use my ears to listen how it sounds. And in some cases, my ears tells me different than what measurement does, which is why I started this thread. I think people need to realize that measurements are a tool or aid, and not a proof (or even a strong indication) of sound quality. And this applies not only to new people (who tends to think measurements are the pinnacle of determining sound) but you guys as well.

 

[March Audio]

Haha, so when I ask about your proof I am trolling

I know there is no proof that measurement can fully cover what the ear can perceive, but its fun to see how people behave when they get a "ohh shit" moment.

ll.

OMG what an idiot. Hahahaha


I'm not trolling

I'm trolling

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

lol. Enjoy your delusions man

 

[MagnusH]

Fact is, there is no proof that measurements equals sound quality, or even that all we hear can be measured. In that regard, the whole notion about measurement as sound quality is based on assumptions and has no validity. Hence its worthless. So much for your "science".

Notice how I basically just said what you said to me earlier, but apparently when I say it it's trolling and I am an "idiot" with "delusions"

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

sigh. The proof is in the blind testing. If the difference you are hearing is imaginary (hint - it is) then your entire position is meaningless. Your argument is founded upon the notion that you are hearing a difference in sound between 2 things, whatever you want to call it. Soundstage. Imaging. Clarity. Unobtanium. Whatever. If it's in your imagination, then nothing you are saying has meaning. So, until you prove (to yourself really because most of us already have done this) that you actually are hearing what you think you are, you just have nothing meaningful to contribute. Nobody here cares about your subjective listening impressions.

 

[solderdude]

Fact is, there is no proof that measurements equals sound quality

That is correct when it comes to sighted non level matched 'findings'.
That is also not the goal of measurements so what is your point ?
How can any measurement EVER correlate to ones personal taste ?
That is not the goal of any measurement either.

You must be someone that is still convinced the 'unknown signal' must still exist.
Instead of looking for it yourself, and making yourself immortal and worshiped in the audio field, what's the point in coming onto a forum and teach all those 'measurebator' people a lesson and ask the questions that are not answerable because you refuse to test properly.

You can make a fortune by passing blind tests. Please contact Amirm when you want to make some money and show the biggest 'non believer' you can easily tell the difference. I dare you to take the test.

 

[MagnusH]

That is correct when it comes to sighted non level matched 'findings'.
That is also not the goal of measurements so what is your point ?
How can any measurement EVER correlate to ones personal taste ?
That is not the goal of any measurement either.

That's not my point! I claimed that measurement was not equal to sound quality earlier, and got lots of replies about how I lacked proof. And yes, I don't have any proof and never said I have, but where is the proof that I am wrong? If you use proof as an argument, you should be able to back it up.

For example, if I claimed that 1 is equal to 2, and people said "thats wrong, you don't have any proof" then I am sure lots of mathematicians would provide a proof how I was wrong (it's not that hard btw, I had it on a math test once).

Some people here treats measurement as a proof about sound quality, but its not. Its based on assumptions, and measurements can at most be seen as an indication of sound quality (if even that). Which was pretty much what I said when I started this thread, except you guys forced me to be formal about it.

 

[Veri]

For example, if I claimed that 1 is equal to 2, and people said "thats wrong, you don't have any proof" then I am sure lots of mathematicians would provide a proof how I was wrong (it's not that hard btw, I had it on a math test once).

Some people here treats measurement as a proof about sound quality, but its not. Its based on assumptions, and measurements can at most be seen as an indication of sound quality (if even that).

So what you're saying is: measurements are only an "assumption" of sound quality, while "My Ygdrassil sounds better than my Pro-Ject DAC, as it should based on the price difference" (no context about any listening set-up or transducer, no volume matching, no nothing) is in fact a better instrument for sound quality? Please.. this is some /r/iamverysmart material.

Note the gigantic bias highlighted in bold by the way. As has been explained to you two or three times already. By which point yeah, you're seen as a troll.

 

[threni]

I like this page and the reviews, and I think Amir is doing an excellent work.

Surely he's wasting his time. He could just listen to the amp, think for a little while about whether the cohesion (insert any other word here) was better and then type in "it's better...well, it sounds better to me - you're entitled to your own opinion". I mean, he would get the wrong answer most of the time but it would be a lot quicker and you can't argue with opinions, can you?

 

[solderdude]

I claimed that measurement was not equal to sound quality

We all know that.. and the word 'quality' is ill chosen. That's the whole point.
When you would have claimed that measurement was not equal to perceived sound quality then we all would have applauded and ranted on about your way of determination of it.

Preference ≠ sound quality.... Preference = perceived sound quality of an individual.
An interpretation of ones brain depending on more input than just sound waves.

Measurements (when looking at a bunch of measurements combined) actually says something about signal integrity (fidelity) and is more reliable than ones personal opinion based on flawed ways of testing. Regardless if that individual beliefs his testing methods are valid and if he can trust his senses.

We all know that below certain thresholds there is no audible improvements. Just don't look at SINAD only, FR only, certain type of distortion only.

 

[M00ndancer]

Can I please poke the troll some more? Pretty please?
@MagnusH you have to up your game a lot to get us to listen. First thing on the agenda is actual listening not just jamming to a cool tune coming from a good looking DAC. You know that I really don't like my DAC/AMP in the mornings before my first cup of hot tea. It also sounds amazing at night after a glass of Glenlivet Nadurra First Fill. How do you explain that?

 

[Veri]

Can I please poke the troll some more? Pretty please?
@MagnusH you have to up your game a lot to get us to listen. First thing on the agenda is actual listening not just jamming to a cool tune coming from a good looking DAC. You know that I really don't like my DAC/AMP in the mornings before my first cup of hot tea. It also sounds amazing at night after a glass of Glenlivet Nadurra First Fill. How do you explain that?

One day my set-up sounds Meh but the very next day I'm thinking nothing ever sounded this good before!
Almost as if your mood, mind-set and well-being have an effect on your enjoyment. Imagine that .....

Now add some pricy new toy syndrome and you basically have OP drooling over his pretty heavy-weight Ygdrassil machine.