Latest Guttenberg Video talks about measurements

[Kal Rubinson]

In my defense, it was totally ad hoc. Steve and I had discussed doing an episode about "living with Maggies." However, Steve decided it would be more interesting to open the discussion to other topics. He showed me his list of questions just before he started recording; I did not prepare anything other than Magnepan stuff. I edited myself as I spoke to keep the discussion moving and have time to get through all the questions. Even so, Steve had to cut large chunks for time. (I'm a video editor, so I understand the need for editing.) Steve is great just standing there and talking; I'm not in his league. I shot some b-roll for him so I wouldn't be just a talking head. -- Mark

Please do not take my comments personally. I did not view the video since I generally do not view them. My comments were an explanation why.

 

[jae]

Nice to see ASR mentioned.

I believe the reason most of these videos these days are 20+ minutes is because when monetising a channel, it is the minimum amount of time required to get the maximum amount of video ads is that time. That is the thing stopping people from editing and splicing up longer videos and putting them up in smaller segments. I miss the days where videos were closer to the 5 minute mark on average with mostly organic quickly digestable content. The internet would be absolutely innavigable without browser add-ons like uBlock origin. In addition to speeding up youtube videos, a good addon is SponsorBlock, which allows you to manually or automatically bypass in-video ads/promotions and superfluous segments like intros and outtros, I've probably saved hundreds of hours of my life with just this alone.

 

[r042wal]

I offered Darko to be on his podcast and his reaction was very negative. But sure, I will go on Steve's channel anytime he is willing.

Tell him you're into 'techno, electronic' and maybe he'll change his mind

 

[posvibes]

But sure, I will go on Steve's channel anytime he is willing.

You both could in all good faith avoid the subjectivist/objectivist argument and explain the rudiments of Kippel/what the measurements mean/ how they are a tool for decision making etc etc.

 

[MRC01]

I think the video interview is great. To be fair, people can measure the wrong things or measure them in the wrong way.

 

[MattHooper]

In my defense, it was totally ad hoc. Steve and I had discussed doing an episode about "living with Maggies." However, Steve decided it would be more interesting to open the discussion to other topics. He showed me his list of questions just before he started recording; I did not prepare anything other than Magnepan stuff. I edited myself as I spoke to keep the discussion moving and have time to get through all the questions. Even so, Steve had to cut large chunks for time. (I'm a video editor, so I understand the need for editing.) Steve is great just standing there and talking; I'm not in his league. I shot some b-roll for him so I wouldn't be just a talking head. -- Mark

Nice to see you here Mark!

Again, nice job on the video interview and I really appreciated seeing your perspective, especially on such a popular audiophile channel.

To expand on the comment I made earlier:

Again, I liked very much how you brought up the need to be skeptical about what we seem to perceive when trying out new pieces of gear - and the reminder to the audience that there's a lot of processing going on and interpretation in our brains, where things can go askew.

If the skeptic wants to talk to the Believe Your Ears part of the audiophile audience, I think we have to be careful about fulfilling their caricatures. Their big rag on folks like those here is "They Don't Use Their Ears" or "They Don't Trust Their Ears!" That seems utterly mindboggling to them, and to hear just that repeated back I'm sure (and as I saw in some of the comments) gets an "aha, figured so, we were right all along" confirming their bafflement on why anyone would want to be an "objectivist." Distrusting yourself seems like such a drag!

So if we only concentrate on how our perception can be fooled we can leave the impression of a hyper-skepticism that just doesn't make sense to the person watching. "What do you mean I can't trust my ears? I use my ears all day long and they WORK! How can I take this guy seriously?"

Personally I like to start out acknowledging (what may seem too obvious, but might need saying anyway), that yes, of course, our ears work. Yes of course we can in a general sense put some confidence in our hearing. It's quite a remarkable system, and it helps us navigate the world in an amazing way!

BUT....if you REALLY want to be careful about drawing a conclusion, it's worth remembering we really do have this variable regarding our perceptual biases, and ...by the very nature of bias...how easily it slips in to our perception without us knowing it. And it really can play a role in any thing we are perceiving.
As I like to say, at any one moment countless people are making erroneous inferences from their perception. Right now there are folks who believe they were anally probed by aliens in the middle of the night. You don't think we audiophiles can sometimes imagine some added "midrange glare?"

There's a reason the scientific method arose. We get our most reliable knowledge from the method that takes the problem of bias seriously.

As I've argued on this forum numerous times, I like to recognize pragmatism along with skepticism. That is, scale my confidence with the nature of an audio claim, or what I think I'm hearing. If I audition two speakers at the same audio shop and they seem to have characteristics that distinguish them from each other, yes even in that case bias (e.g. how they look) could be playing a role. And if we really wanted to be SURE about what was going on, measurements (and in the best scenario, combined with blind comparison) would help pin that down. But, in a practical sense, speakers do sound different and it's entirely plausible I'm hearing real differences, so...pragmatically I'm fine with "what I seem to hear."

The more something leads in to technically dubious or controversial areas, e.g. differences between AC cables or whatever, the more "extraordinary" the claim, the stronger and more careful evidence I'd want. So in that case I wouldn't just trust what I, or some other audiophile, "hears." It's a higher bar to cross.
(And it's why I have indeed put AC cables...even ones that I seemed to hear a difference between...to blind tests. And under those conditions I could no longer detect any difference).

Cheers, and once again welcome!

Oh, and sometimes my floor looks like yours, with all the tape marks for speaker positions, and I don't even own maggies! I just like to experiment.

 

[EJ3]

Right now there are folks who believe they were anally probed by aliens in the middle of the night.

That is not happening??? Really???
Damn, that's a great relief!
I was wondering what which Aliens had this strange problem, so I could identify them and avoid them.
Now I don't have to worry about that.
Disclaimer: (For those that don't know me, I can be facetious)

 

[MattHooper]

That is not happening??? Really???

Indeed. They misinterpreted the bodily invasion as being aliens when in fact we know it was Big Foot slipping under their covers to spoon. People are weird.

 

[EJ3]

Indeed. They misinterpreted the bodily invasion as being aliens when in fact we know it was Big Foot slipping under their covers to spoon. People are weird.

Good to know that all we need to do is avoid Big Foot.
That's a lot easier than avoiding Aliens with super fast air (& perhaps under water) transportation.

 

[thewas]

Tell him you're into 'techno, electronic' and maybe he'll change his mind

I don't think that this is the reason or problem, but rather that Darko knows that the objective side of audio here is endangering his existence.

 

[Jmudrick]

I don't think that this is the reason or problem, but rather that Darko knows that the objective side of audio here is endangering his existence.

Hardly. Darko can pull 100k views just chatting about his eye surgery or new apartment. In any event aesthetics and features will always matter in electronics reviews, as will subjective considerations in speaker reviews. I think Darko will be just fine.

 

[thewas]

Hardly. Darko can pull 100k views just chatting about his eye surgery or new apartment. In any event aesthetics and features will always matter in electronics reviews, as will subjective considerations in speaker reviews. I think Darko will be just fine.

In the short term I agree with you but in the long run things are changing which can be seen when for example when comparing the continuously rising viewing numbers of ASR vs the falling ones of subjective audio websites.

 

[Zensō]

I offered Darko to be on his podcast and his reaction was very negative. But sure, I will go on Steve's channel anytime he is willing.

Too bad about Darko. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, he has to protect his bread and butter. He must know that the entire premise of his channel is put into question by the work you’re doing here.

 

[Jmudrick]

In the short term I agree with you but in the long run things are changing which can be seen when for example when comparing the continuously rising viewing numbers of ASR vs the falling ones of subjective audio websites.

Don't think so. Blogs and websites are so 2005. He's a YouTube personality and very good at what he does.

 

[r042wal]

I don't think that this is the reason or problem, but rather that Darko knows that the objective side of audio here is endangering his existence.

It was a joke !

 

[fpitas]

Darko I'm sure realizes he has nothing to gain by entertaining Amir. His listeners wouldn't appreciate it, I'm sure.

 

[bodhi]

In the short term I agree with you but in the long run things are changing which can be seen when for example when comparing the continuously rising viewing numbers of ASR vs the falling ones of subjective audio websites.

The thing is that huge percentage of the subjectivists want to believe. No amount of evidence will change the fact. And it's not just old farts, you can see the same phenomenon with younger audiophiles even though they are playing with much less expensive stuff.

I have a friend who readily admits that he cannot prove his audio beliefs, doesn't even want to and doesn't really care. He has great time and it's not like he's using his grocery funds on tube amps.

I think that objective approach from places like ASR increases the total value of the market as people who are not interested in hardcore hobbyism understand that although there is no point in spending money on power cables there is a great deal of value in spending a bit more to get premium sound instead of the cheapest offerings.

 

[eatapc]

Nice to see you here Mark!

Again, nice job on the video interview and I really appreciated seeing your perspective, especially on such a popular audiophile channel.

To expand on the comment I made earlier:

Again, I liked very much how you brought up the need to be skeptical about what we seem to perceive when trying out new pieces of gear - and the reminder to the audience that there's a lot of processing going on and interpretation in our brains, where things can go askew.

If the skeptic wants to talk to the Believe Your Ears part of the audiophile audience, I think we have to be careful about fulfilling their caricatures. Their big rag on folks like those here is "They Don't Use Their Ears" or "They Don't Trust Their Ears!" That seems utterly mindboggling to them, and to hear just that repeated back I'm sure (and as I saw in some of the comments) gets an "aha, figured so, we were right all along" confirming their bafflement on why anyone would want to be an "objectivist." Distrusting yourself seems like such a drag!

So if we only concentrate on how our perception can be fooled we can leave the impression of a hyper-skepticism that just doesn't make sense to the person watching. "What do you mean I can't trust my ears? I use my ears all day long and they WORK! How can I take this guy seriously?"

Personally I like to start out acknowledging (what may seem too obvious, but might need saying anyway), that yes, of course, our ears work. Yes of course we can in a general sense put some confidence in our hearing. It's quite a remarkable system, and it helps us navigate the world in an amazing way!

BUT....if you REALLY want to be careful about drawing a conclusion, it's worth remembering we really do have this variable regarding our perceptual biases, and ...by the very nature of bias...how easily it slips in to our perception without us knowing it. And it really can play a role in any thing we are perceiving.
As I like to say, at any one moment countless people are making erroneous inferences from their perception. Right now there are folks who believe they were anally probed by aliens in the middle of the night. You don't think we audiophiles can sometimes imagine some added "midrange glare?"

There's a reason the scientific method arose. We get our most reliable knowledge from the method that takes the problem of bias seriously.

As I've argued on this forum numerous times, I like to recognize pragmatism along with skepticism. That is, scale my confidence with the nature of an audio claim, or what I think I'm hearing. If I audition two speakers at the same audio shop and they seem to have characteristics that distinguish them from each other, yes even in that case bias (e.g. how they look) could be playing a role. And if we really wanted to be SURE about what was going on, measurements (and in the best scenario, combined with blind comparison) would help pin that down. But, in a practical sense, speakers do sound different and it's entirely plausible I'm hearing real differences, so...pragmatically I'm fine with "what I seem to hear."

The more something leads in to technically dubious or controversial areas, e.g. differences between AC cables or whatever, the more "extraordinary" the claim, the stronger and more careful evidence I'd want. So in that case I wouldn't just trust what I, or some other audiophile, "hears." It's a higher bar to cross.
(And it's why I have indeed put AC cables...even ones that I seemed to hear a difference between...to blind tests. And under those conditions I could no longer detect any difference).

Cheers, and once again welcome!

Oh, and sometimes my floor looks like yours, with all the tape marks for speaker positions, and I don't even own maggies! I just like to experiment.

Great, thoughtful comments, Matt. Thanks. I was trying to be brief but provocative, controversial but not trollish. That we can’t always trust our ears is something I firmly believe. I’ve debated it many times with audiophile friends, but this is the first time I’ve “come out” about it on a heavily-viewed forum. Maybe I could have elaborated. By the way, I also argue with audiophile friends when they repeat another high-end cliché: “Everything matters.” No, everything does not matter; some things don’t make a difference, and some things are beyond the capability of human hearing. Audiophiles can disagree about where to draw the line, and that’s part of the fun, but there has to be a line somewhere.

I agree with you that the way I presented the concept was not the best way to change minds. However, people who don’t understand the concept are not going to be won over by an Audiophiliac video. I was happy to see that most of the comments were on my side. However, one thing that surprised me was the anger and hostility in some reactions because I dropped the name “Amir.” It’s weird that some of Steve’s viewers assumed I was an “Amir disciple” or someone who puts all his faith in measurements and none in listening. That’s not me. Why do people jump to black & white conclusions like that? It’s like a religious war that I don’t want to be a part of, or cheering for a team when I’m not a rabid fan. I engaged one of those people — a guy whose comment seemed sincere rather than hostile — and learned he lived in my town. I got in touch and we had an enjoyable lunch yesterday. Audiophiles are generally nice people in person.

If I had elaborated about trusting our ears (which would have required a few drinks), I might have said this: We feel like our ears have a direct connection to audible reality even though that's not how we perceive and interpret sensory data in consciousness. Fine. As with free will (another controversial point I brought up), the conscious part of the brain is not in control, and yet pretending we can trust our consciousness helps get us through the day. Something I did mention in the video is that our physical hearing mechanisms aren't perfect. Audiophiles seem to understand that intellectually but not emotionally. Too many will credit themselves with superhuman perception when it serves to justify their latest equipment purchases.

Normal people as opposed to audiophiles can "trust their ears" -- that is, trust their conscious perceptions -- because they are not trying to hear minuscule nuances in equipment and mixes. A recording engineer friend sent me two mixes last week, the only difference was a 1.2 dB boost at 4k. Deciding which was the best EQ was important to him. That's his job, but it's not vital for the rest of us. We're no longer apes living on the savannah having to hunt prey while avoiding lions, so we rarely depend on our ears in matters of life and death. But audiophiles sometimes act as though their lives depend on hearing things that may or may not be audible. Usually, this is good-natured fun, but it's misguided unless we recognize our limitations.

If I had said the above, Steve's subscribers would have hit the stop button and moved on. I was trying to keep things brief and breezy. I'm not an expert at striking the right balance.

 

[Vacceo]

Hmm people actually do. Darko can pull 100k viewers, Steve 50k for their 20 minute efforts. Given the size of this community that's a lot of people with sufficient patience.

Homeopathy also has clients.

Darko I'm sure realizes he has nothing to gain by entertaining Amir. His listeners wouldn't appreciate it, I'm sure.

Darko has blocked links to Amir's content.

It is no secret that Gutenberg is someone's whose opinions give me no value at all. But he's a decent person, quite kind in his approach and quite willing to listen to rebuttals. Darko, not so much.

 

[thewas]

The thing is that huge percentage of the subjectivists want to believe. No amount of evidence will change the fact. And it's not just old farts, you can see the same phenomenon with younger audiophiles even though they are playing with much less expensive stuff.

True, although how many are those younger audiophiles? Hifi used to be a mainstream hobby but at the newer generations it is just a small niche (none of the under 30 year old people I know are interested in it) while there is still a quite big offer of offline and online magazines/reviewers which has to "fight" over it.