• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

I'm tired of audiophile and high fidelity confusion.

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
3,563
Likes
3,017
Got zero points. I'm an extremist! :D

But I still don't like going on crusades or putting people in boxes. I'd prefer if we just focus on quantising the things that have real impact on the experience of music reproduction, instead of trying to redefine expressions that already have a million different meanings.
Well there is no fun in that! I like kicking holes in those boxes.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,340
Likes
11,749
Location
The Neverlands
What is signature in term of signals for you ?
Signature to me is a tonal balance (linear distortion) thing where the sound is deviating audibly from 'not colored'

To me is just distortion of the original signal.
O.K. -60dB for instance, IMO, has no influence on tonal balance but this is your party. My 'limit' is below -80dB in multitone for normal to loud music listening.

No need to explain FFT nor harmonics nor masking nor the difference between dual tone and music nor audible limits (audible to who and under what circumstances)

These are signature in audiophiles.
Explains your confusion about audiophiles. You mean poor measuring equipement that doesn't necesarilly sounds poor.
I suggest you use another name. Audiophiles are people that enjoy audio as a hobby and can be anything between 100% objectivist and 100% subjectivist. Your definition of audiophiles differs from what it means at ASR. Please use another word.

Difference from original signal otherwise too flat as they always say. Which is a non sense.
These folks (your 'they) consider themselves 'music lovers' or 'audiophiles' but are what I (we ?) call audiophools/audiofools.
There is a clear distinction between an audiophile and audiophool but a vague border. For me the border is claiming snake-oil works.

While nonsensical in many ways it makes sense to them. I don't mind, they should do whatever they want/like as long as they don't claim their 'sound' is closer to 'reality' or 'better'.
 
Last edited:
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #203
I am still no closer to understanding this : "But if the quality is measurable it resides in the objective side." so in my own simple way I am going to take it as meaning you look for things that objectively measure well for the budget you have.
I think the there are a lot of good DAC out there objectively speaking. For example Topping D90 if you don't want imd hump and you need balanced out. If you don't need balanced out and you are in short budget an SMSL Sanskrit 10th is more then enough. Or the Topping e30. Or the last release smsl su-9. More then enough objectively measured state of the art Dac. There are other depending on your busget of course. They are objectively best possible measurement equipments. Personally I like rme adi 2 pro because I like to have a good adc around. On budget motu m2 and m4 are amazing object objectively. For example i don't even think about headphones amp except the Gheselli. Why should I ? These are VFM and busget related considerations. Let's talk about TOTALDAC ?
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
3,563
Likes
3,017
I think the there are a lot of good DAC out there objectively speaking. For example Topping D90 if you don't want imd hump and you need balanced out. If you don't need balanced out and you are in short budget an SMSL Sanskrit 10th is more then enough. Or the Topping e30. Or the last release smsl su-9. More then enough objectively measured state of the art Dac. There are other depending on your busget of course. They are objectively best possible measurement equipments. Personally I like rme adi 2 pro because I like to have a good adc around. On budget motu m2 and m4 are amazing object objectively. For example i don't even think about headphones amp except the Gheselli. Why should I ? These are VFM and busget related considerations. Let's talk about TOTALDAC ?
Nothing to disagree with there.
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #205
Signature to me is a tonal balance (linear distortion) thing where the sound is deviating audibly from 'not colored'



O.K. -60dB for instance, IMO, has no influence on tonal balance but this is your party.

No need to explain FFT nor harmonics nor masking nor the difference between dual tone and music nor audible limits (audible to who and under what circumstances)



Explains your confusion about audiophiles. You mean poor measuring equipement that doesn't necesarilly sounds poor.
I suggest you use another name. Audiophiles are people that enjoy audio as a hobby and can be anything between 100% objectivist and 100% subjectivist. Your definition of audiophiles differs from what it means at ASR. Please use another word.


These folks (your 'they) consider themselves 'music lovers' or 'audiophiles' but are what I (we ?) call audiophools/audiofools.

While nonsensical in many ways it makes sense to them. I don't mind, they should do whatever they want/like as long as they don't claim their 'sound' is closer to 'reality' or 'better'.
I repeat that from the beginning. Do whatever suits you but don't pretend to stay in the objective side while you follow emotional and subjective consideration. This scale you keep on talking about of 100% objective and 100% subjective with grey in the middle is simply inexistent. Science must be objective. If it's objetive plus some subjective is not science anymore. DOT. If you don't understand this you should study what science really is and what mean "scientific method". That way it's not science anymore but I think I give up. You don't want to understand a basic fact. The meaning of scientific method and reproducibility used to avoid bias like the one you are talking about. You can't be in the middle. Science must be only objective. No grey scale there. Just the basic of scientific method.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,340
Likes
11,749
Location
The Neverlands
I do NOT follow emotional and subjective consideration. I just don't care if others do.

You are denying the existence of audible limits but clearly you use them too.
What is the difference ?
Audible limits = Science

When something does not differ audible then what does it matter if it measures better than audible limits ?
How can you talk about something getting a signature when audible there is none ?
Inaudible = cannot be distinguished in this case.
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #207
I do NOT follow emotional and subjective consideration. I just don't care if others do.

You are denying the existence of audible limits but clearly you use them too. What is the difference ?
You do not follow emotional and subjective consideration but you say you look for a signature. Well please tell what is this signature you are talking about. To me is subjective and emotional consequentially. Correct me i'f i'm wrong or tell what is signature in scientific terms. Because it really sound like a different or specific sound indipendently from the source.
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
3,563
Likes
3,017
I repeat that from the beginning. Do whatever suits you but don't pretend to stay in the objective side while you follow emotional and subjective consideration. This scale you keep on talking about of 100% objective and 100% subjective with grey in the middle is simply inexistent. Science must be objective. If it's objetive plus some subjective is not science anymore. DOT. If you don't understand this you should study what science really is and what mean "scientific method". That way it's not science anymore but I think I give up. You don't want to understand a basic fact. The meaning of scientific method and reproducibility used to avoid bias like the one you are talking about. You can't be in the middle. Science must be only objective. No grey scale there. Just the basic of scientific method.
But we are talking about selecting audio equipment and listening to music- not undertaking scientific explorations. This site is all about using objective measurements to gain better subjective enjoyment of that equipment and more importantly the music it (re)produces. There is no need for labelling of anybody, or building artificial divides between folk.

Im one hundred percent sure I can enjoy music played on some equipment that measures terribly. I dont really need to stop and think about the measurements unless i am considering purchasing I am also sure I can detest some music that plays on absolutely the best measuring equipment.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,340
Likes
11,749
Location
The Neverlands
You do not follow emotional and subjective consideration but you say you look for a signature.
No I don't look for a signature at all. I have no idea why you keep hanging on this. I have NEVER said I look for a signature.

There is NO audible difference (signature) between perfect gear and gear that is good enough to NOT sound any different from ideal while having 'poorer' measurements.
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
3,563
Likes
3,017
Well this is quite strange. If your signature stay below audible range it just didn't exist for you and you can't hear it. Exactly as the extra Db over audible range in measured equipments that you don't care too much. If you can't measure it and you can't hear it because is below audible range what are you talking about ? Where emerge audible signature then ? What you think it is materially ?
Youve done it again! You've dredged up the concept of "signature" now and added it into the discussion, in a way that is less than useful. The quoted post of yours literally makes no sense. In response to solderdude's post which makes total sense. So I will say again, what we have here is a breakdown in communications
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #211
No I don't look for a signature at all. I have no idea why you keep hanging on this. I have NEVER said I look for a signature.

There is NO audible difference (signature) between perfect gear and gear that is good enough to NOT sound any different from ideal while having 'poorer' measurements.
Well then then. I was sure you talk about signature. What are you looking then in an equipment outside measurement ? If you looking for something outside it. But in the case you only follow measurement you are just loosing my time for no reason.
 
Last edited:

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,340
Likes
11,749
Location
The Neverlands

As long as one cannot detect ANY audible difference between perfect measuring gear and lesser gear I don't care if it measures stellar or just above audible limits. That whole range from 'perfect' to good enough to be indistinguishable from perfect is good enough for me and should be good enough for anyone. Note this is about electronic gear only.
 
Last edited:

Killingbeans

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
799
Likes
1,289
Location
Bjerringbro, Denmark.
@diegooo1972 I think what people are trying to make clear here is this:

In the mind of an objectivist there should be two extreme viewpoints that makes no sense:

1. Measurements tells you nothing.
2. Any gear that measures better than another piece of gear will automatically sound better.

An objectivist should look at the data and see it in context with what is known about the limitations of human hearing.

If the measurements of nonlinearities in one piece of gear shows them to be below the thresholds of audiblity, and the measurements of another piece shows some that are even further down, both of those should be considered to be equally 'perfect', assuming that inaudibility of nonlinearities is your goal.

On the other hand, if the nonlinearities are shown to be above the limits of audiblity, you can evaluate whether they correlate to your personal preference and whether buying the product will be a suitable way to get those colorations of you system.

Objectivism is all about trying to find out what's actually going on. It has nothing to do with preference.
 

raistlin65

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
968
Likes
1,257
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
You try to trick me :) Objectivity and subjectivity are 2 contradictory concepts. 0 or 1. You can't use a scale or you imply that your grey area is consistent. It's not when you talk about objectivity. But of course is perfectly fine if you want to go for some objective measure and then use your bias to make a choice. But you can't escape from the logic at the base. If you want an honest answer my choice are probably biased too and subjective in some degree. I just try to be as objective as I can cause this is a solid base to make a choice. But I don't pretend that I can be on both sides when im in your grey area. I try to avoid that grey are.
Putting objective and subjective on a scale is like to put scientific fact with non scientific fact in a scale. You can do whatever you want but it's not logically constent. When you do that you remove objectivity from science and in that case science will not be consistent anymore. This is a logic fault.
That is incorrect.

Objectivism and subjectivism in audio are epistemologies. They are belief systems about how knowledge is made. One relying on scientific understanding and the scientific process. The other rejects science and relies on human perception when it suits them.

So the fact that they are contradictory, opposites of the same coin, does allow them to be put on a scale. On a scale from 0-10, with pure objectivism being 0 and pure subjectivism being 10, one can fall in the middle if one is unsure which belief system they embrace.

Although I would argue that some people who feel they are in the middle are actually not.

If someone relies on science regarding DACs measurements of audible noise and distortion to determine what is inaudible or not, but believes that amps all have a sound signature, then that would still make them a subjectivist (9-10 maybe?), as they are choosing to reject science when it suits their world view. Or for another example, the person who embraces the science regarding exotic cables, but still believes well-measuring DACs and amps have a sound.

In other words, one can't really be a part-time objectivist. Only someone unsure about their overall beliefs would be a 5.
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #217
#Raistlin65 We are not talking about audio in general. We are talking about electronic equipments. Objectivism regarding elettronic equipment is not epistemiology. You can have fun with equipments only because science don't behave like you say. The science that build equipments is completely objective or it's not science. You create your own belief in complete disregard to scientific method.
The scientific method allow you to listen to music and you should have more respect of the concept behind all of this. I'm very happy that scientist don't think like you. Science need to remove bias at all cost and you talk about epistemiology ? Elettronic engineers have no doubts about audiophoolery. And without them you don't have your toys. Only few of them decide to joke people and sell illusions. Hypocrites. Everything for money as always. Give them your money. Is the right way to balance things. I'm very happy they are a small minority cause otherwise you ain't get your new toys tomorrow. That grey scale in the middle is delusional and completely out of the science you rely in every day.
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #219
Now I'm getting the popcorn in.
No more pop corn. I'm out. You are just not confident enough to admit how you choose equipments to pretend to stay also in the objective side.
You make that discussion useless. Bye
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
3,563
Likes
3,017
No more pop corn. I'm out. You are just not confident enough to admit how you choose equipments to pretend to stay also in the objective side.
You make that discussion useless. Bye
You finished as you started. 10/10 for consistency.
 
Top Bottom