Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Xulonn]

I hope you keep the Pepto handy.

Pepto Biasmol?

(Me gusta la paronomasia.)

 

[pkane]

Should Albert Einstein be disrespected for requiring 130 pages to explain Relativity: The Special and the General Theory?

Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler​

 

[Geert]

There are some things that are beyond the ability of a machine to measure. Humans are flawed. And humans made machines!

Flawed logic, that's for sure. I leave it as an exercise to contemple what process and measures humans apply to do a lot of things perfectly. Warning; the argument that they also make mistakes does not invalidate this idea.

 

[isaudio]

I hope you keep the Pepto handy.

"Gut feeling" was just a replacement for a proper explanation of my thought processes. I'm just too lazy to dig inside my own brain.

 

[BDWoody]

"Gut feeling" was just a replacement for a proper explanation of my thought processes. I'm just too lazy to dig inside my own brain.

I assumed, but I couldn't help picture a SNL style skit with various...um...reactions as the rating scale...from mild 'throw up in my mouth a little,' to explosive...oh, never mind.

 

[Sal1950]

Anything that can be heard and identified by ear, can be measured. Do you have any examples otherwise?

A most excellent post Woody.
Short, factually based, and to the point.

The attempts at car analogies are really lame - I can never truly relate them to my audio adventures. Not one of them in this thread has enhanced my understanding of subjective vs objective audio issues.

It really is pretty simple though many try to twist the truth to their needs.
If pure performance is the issue of investigation the numbers will tell it all.
Just like in audio.

Now how the seat feels to the drivers butt or if he prefers a slightly loose or tight condition,
that falls back to the land of subjective preferences.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

Ach mein Gott! Certainly pithy brevity is great for underscoring the simplicity of political slogans, advertising, internet forums, etc., but sometimes facts actually require words to explain. Should Albert Einstein be disrespected for requiring 130 pages to explain Relativity: The Special and the General Theory? Or Nicola Tesla requiring 120 pages to write Experiments with Alternate Currents of High Potential and High Frequency? Or Stephen Hawking requiring 213 pages to write A Brief History of Time? Gotta love internet wisdom...

I'm sure you won't find prose or fiction in those. So the words are needed. Unlike..

In general it is what it is.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

A most excellent post Woody.
Short, factually based, and to the point.

It really is pretty simple though many try to twist the truth to their needs.
If pure performance is the issue of investigation the numbers will tell it all.
Just like in audio.

Now how the seat feels to the drivers butt or if he prefers a slightly loose or tight condition,
that falls back to the land of subjective preferences.

Now, if a racetrack is the musical experience, and the car the means to achieve maximum performance, alas the sound reproduction system, the racecar is the neutral, best measuring system. It has the best feedback from the drivers input on the steering, handling and acceleration and will objectively be the best at driving the circuit.

But the driver (listener) may have a soft spot for an old Citroën from the eighties. It does not drive the circuit very well, has poor feedback but the seats are soft and cushy.

But the goal is to perform on the track, so objectively the racecar is the best. You can tell by the way it measures/handles.

That's the best flawed car analogy I could come up with on the fly.. Now someone shoot me, I hate car analogies because it's used to (poorly) explain about everything when people won't educate themselves on the subject they so seemingly are interested in.

 

[Axo1989]

Now, if a racetrack is the musical experience, and the car the means to achieve maximum performance, alas the sound reproduction system, the racecar is the neutral, best measuring system. It has the best feedback from the drivers input on the steering, handling and acceleration and will objectively be the best at driving the circuit.

But the driver (listener) may have a soft spot for an old Citroën from the eighties. It does not drive the circuit very well, has poor feedback but the seats are soft and cushy.

But the goal is to perform on the track, so objectively the racecar is the best. You can tell by the way it measures/handles.

That's the best flawed car analogy I could come up with on the fly.. Now someone shoot me, I hate car analogies because it's used to (poorly) explain about everything when people won't educate themselves on the subject they so seemingly are interested in.

It's a rare thing when this story is the answer to an audio forum post: The Citroen Xantia Is The Undisputed King Of The Moose Test.

Spoiler: not this moose test

It's a rambling article (subjectivists, pfft) selected for the headline, perhaps I can find the original Swedish. There's always Wikipedia. Also, for measurement and linguistic purists (cf "undisputed") a Spanish magazine couldn't match the numbers using a different swerve test standard 20 years later. Since last time I checked the results modern cars with electronic control systems are getting pretty close (feel free to enter an active vs passive speaker analogy). Subjectively, I do like an old Citroen.

 

[amirm]

The power of measurements is in how conclusively and easily can show if an audio device is well engineered or not. Someone familiar with my measurements can easily determine this in one or two minutes post review. Yes, there are stuff in the middle that require some judgement. But the extremes are dead easy. You simply don't have this with any kind of random subjective listening/reviewing. You are shooting in the dark without this powerful evidence.

Once we know a device is not well engineered, then all bets are off that it performs great. To the extent the company charges huge sums of money, logic determines what you should do.

Conversely when a superbly engineered audio gear costs $150, then that decision is easy as well.

These are the benefits of measuring.

 

[Axo1989]

I'll take it that the SINAD tabulation is officially promoted as a proxy for good engineering (by ASR). If so it has the usual advantages of a simple proxy index, and the usual disadvantages. I don't think it's hard to get your head around.

 

[Axo1989]

Ach mein Gott! Certainly pithy brevity is great for underscoring the simplicity of political slogans, advertising, internet forums, etc., but sometimes facts actually require words to explain. Should Albert Einstein be disrespected for requiring 130 pages to explain Relativity: The Special and the General Theory? Or Nicola Tesla requiring 120 pages to write Experiments with Alternate Currents of High Potential and High Frequency? Or Stephen Hawking requiring 213 pages to write A Brief History of Time? Gotta love internet wisdom...

Generally, I find the semi-literate tend to distrust text, while the semi-numerate distrust numbers. You can see that in the objectivist/subjectivist divide and in posts here, there and everywhere.

A while back there was a thread here where people discussed "warm" as an audio descriptor. Some objected to the usage as indefinite and imprecise, others cited real-world utility and long-standing conventions of language. It didn't matter how many words were used to argue the case, some of those pre-disposed against words remained unconvinced, even when the word in question was more concise than a numerical formulation. Most people fall between the extremes, fortunately.

Making sport of people who struggle with simple language is one-sided of course. I also recall preparing draft reports where the lawyers on the working group would simply ignore the graphs and data. It was as if they couldn't see them at all. That was weird.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

It's a rare thing when this story is the answer to an audio forum post: The Citroen Xantia Is The Undisputed King Of The Moose Test.

Spoiler: not this moose test

View attachment 225460

It's a rambling article (subjectivists, pfft) selected for the headline, perhaps I can find the original Swedish. There's always Wikipedia. Also, for measurement and linguistic purists (cf "undisputed") a Spanish magazine couldn't match the numbers using a different swerve test standard 20 years later. Since last time I checked the results modern cars with electronic control systems are getting pretty close (feel free to enter an active vs passive speaker analogy). Subjectively, I do like an old Citroen.

Haha!

I just find analogies always lacking.

I like an old Citroën too, but wouldn't dare taking one to a racetrack, nor would I buy one. But an XM with hydractive suspension is just like gliding on a magic carpet. -It's so comfortable on the trips between home and the automechanic.

 

[IPunchCholla]

Haha!

I just find analogies always lacking.

I like an old Citroën too, but wouldn't dare taking one to a racetrack, nor would I buy one. But an XM with hydractive suspension is just like gliding on a magic carpet. -It's so comfortable on the trips between home and the automechanic.

I have my partner on board with a Rolls Royce Ghost (mostly because of the umbrella) if they make it an EV. Not sure what the audiophile metaphor would be.

 

[Robbo99999]

The attempts at car analogies are really lame - I can never truly relate them to my audio adventures. Not one of them in this thread has enhanced my understanding of subjective vs objective audio issues.

Analogies are useless pretty much anytime, and the people that use them constantly have the weakest arguments, whilst also taking up the most space! I'm sure I literally roll my eyes as soon as someone embarks on an analogy! (And I think "embark" is quite an apt term, they're so slow & longwinded......the ship is leaving veeeerrrry veeeeerrrry slowly!)

EDIT: Ha, it dawned on me that I used what I think is a Visual Metaphor to describe an element of human behaviour....well I suppose it's not quite the same as an analogy, and is probably more useful in describing human behaviour than it is for trying to convey complicated scientific audio concepts, so maybe I can be let off the hook!?

 

[Geert]

Analogies are useless pretty much anytime, and the people that use them constantly have the weakest arguments

In my opinion analogies could be very useful and have nothing to do with weak arguments. They could as well be needing because of weak understanding of the listener. This topic is the living proof of that.

The problem with analogies is that it requires some level of abstract thinking, something a lot of people are not good at. The result is that when you make a car analogy the listener can not relate it to the topic at hand and instead switches to discussing cars. So in that regard I agree they often fail.

 

[IPunchCholla]

In my opinion analogies could be very useful and have nothing to do with weak arguments. They could as well be needing because of weak understanding of the listener. This topic is the living proof of that.

The problem with analogies is that it requires some level of abstract thinking, something a lot of people are not good at. The result is that when you make a car analogy the listener can not relate it to the topic at hand and instead switches to discussing cars. So in that regard I agree they often fail.

It’s also that, while useful, analogies all fail, by definition. Otherwise the items being compared are identical. That failure itself can be illuminating,as long as it is kept in mind.

Back in my archaeology days, analogy was frowned upon in papers, but utilized quite a bit in formulating arguments. In that sense it is like anecdotal evidence.

 

[Geert]

It’s also that, while useful, analogies all fail, by definition. Otherwise the items being compared are identical. That failure itself can be illuminating,as long as it is kept in mind.

This is exactly what I meant by failing to make abstraction of what doesn't apply to the discussion and focus on the point where the analogy makes sense.

 

[IPunchCholla]

This is exactly what I meant by failing to make abstraction of what doesn't apply to the discussion and focus on the point where the analogy makes sense.

Sorry. Not enough coffee yet to power up my abstract thinking.

 

[Sal1950]

WTF is a Citroën?