Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Newman]

You're right. For that particular claim, I didn't present the evidence (yet).

Did you ask the guy for evidence of his claim, or did you in fact simply state his claim is "exactly" true?

You could have made all the same snarky retorts to him about his claim as you so repeatedly are doing for the opposite claim, in this thread. But no. That's blatant hypocrisy or bias. And you think you are lecturing us about how science works?

It looks like you are the one dropping standards to, in your own words, "that's gotta be a new low".

 

[Guettel]

Yes, statistics are a big part of just about any science.

The claim is an absolutist claim, not a statistical one.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Because new understanding and technology comes along every day and we learn new things we didn't know yesterday.

Dude. We are not talking meta or quantum physics here. The principles applied here are known for decades. Just because you lack the knowledge or don’t (want?) understand don’t them make them less correct. Let alone that we have to teach, let alone prove to you, these fundamentals. Especially in light of your displayed unwillingness to learn even if we tried.

Your are wasting everyone’s time, which is rather spent on people who come here actually willing to learn something.

 

[voodooless]

The claim is an absolutist claim, not a statistical one.

So you claim is that tomorrow there will be new science found? Great! Because tomorrow is today for me. Can't wait! You really should have taken the bet then..

 

[DavidEdwinAston]

This couldn't be more right. But you won't convince the cult. That's the nature of a cult, after all. They'll go on claiming their indefensible absolutes and enjoy their dopamine hits and that's the extent of it.

It is probably a fact that the subjectivist cults on the many sites that aren't ASR, are far more aggressive to non believers than folks here!
Is that because they "have", to find a rationale for spending thousands of pounds/dollars/whatever, on our hobby, while we "know", very reasonable expenditure will get us audio perfection?

 

[IAtaman]

This couldn't be more right. But you won't convince the cult. That's the nature of a cult, after all. They'll go on claiming their indefensible absolutes and enjoy their dopamine hits and that's the extent of it.

Oh look at that, the good old RecEngineer who could hear things his mic can not record! Welcome back.
While I have you, I got a question if you don't mind. What kind of equipment one uses to process or playback the immeasurable parts of the music mics can not record?

 

[IAtaman]

That could be, I'm not too sure. Cults aren't nice to non-tribe members as a general rule, probably.

People who think ASR puts too much weight on measurements call ASR a cult.
People who think measurements are presented incorrectly call ASR a cult.
People who think there are not enough measurements on ASR call it a cult.

If the only way one can justify to themselves the existence of other people who fail to see "the obvious truth" is by convincing themselves that these others must be brainwashed by a cult, than that person really need to rethink whether they are approaching this whole civilized debate thing correctly in my opinion.

 

[restorer-john]

Back when the Compact Disc format was first introduced to the world, it was trumpeted as being essentially flawless in terms of the playback. What I mean here being the complete lack of aberrations, clicks, pops and dropouts. The CIRC and buffer memory meant it either played perfectly or didn't. There was no in between.

Imagine how it was when early adopters with absolutely flawless, unmarked in any way, brand new CDs were reporting one, two or five momentary dropouts 'blips' we called them, over the entire length of a CD. Not only were those 'blips' real, they were totally unpredictable, never occurred at the same point ever again and were not repeatable or demonstrable when the machine landed in the service centre for 'repair'. Countless machines were unfortunately returned to customers stating "no fault found".

I know, my father's first generation machine suffered from the issue. But I recorded the "blips" and provided the tape recordings to the technicians. Sony, Technics, Akai etc all had this fatal flaw which was so obvious and yet so short in duration, it was like a "WTF?" was that moment. Did I hear it? Go back, and it wasn't there...

Our first gen machine could not be fixed as the techs really had no idea what they were dealing with, and the replacement 2nd gen machine was absolutely perfect and never 'blipped'.

Why I am I bringing this up? Sony also absolutely denied there was a problem, but they admitted after a while it was not only audible, but also of such concern Sony Japan built a standalone device to monitor a player in for service, with a special disc, to look for and count the un-correctable (audible) errors and more importantly, locate those specific errors precisely in an attempt to work out WTF was going on.

There was no test gear on earth at the time that told them anything other than the player was 100% perfect. They had to build new test equipment to help them identify problems their customers had reported to them and carefully isolated and ruled out all other normal variables. The engineers were wrong.

AP tests do not tell you how a piece of equipment will work for you. Not even close. A small subset of electrical parameters- that's all. How those devices interact and function in the real world is completely missing. Are there noises, clicks, pops, DC offset, thumps, delays in locking into a signal, bursts of noise in various situations, shutdowns and deterioration from heat or extended operation, poor controls, volume ranges, etc. Who cares how it performs if the device is a b#stard to operate?

That's what HiFi is about- not just a narrow subset of the performance of a piece of gear. And this is coming from someone with a bench full of test gear himself...

 

[IAtaman]

Not at all. The only reason people call ASR a cult is because of its absolutism and its rejection of people who question its unfounded absolutism.

Someone comes up with this bright idea that if they demand proof whether all that exists is measurable, the lack of the proof will clearly demonstrate to everyone how correct his opinion is and how wrong the others have been so far; posts this idea on the 333rd page of this tired thread, and when not taken seriously calls that absolutism? Well, I would call that lack of originality, lack of humility and a serious case of lack of self-awareness.

 

[BDWoody]

If you're making logically ridiculous claims (which you yourself admit to), I'd recommend you stop.

You're done in this thread.

 

[BDWoody]

This couldn't be more right. But you won't convince the cult. That's the nature of a cult, after all. They'll go on claiming their indefensible absolutes and enjoy their dopamine hits and that's the extent of it.

Yes, that's a common accusation from those who don't bother to understand.

Funny how the cult thing applies more to those who believe a story with no evidence, doesn't it? Isn't a cult where it's about belief, and not proof?

They are supposed to follow their leaders without question... Like when Danny or Steve or Johnny or Mikey hear differences, the idea of asking for proof will get you kicked right out.

 

[Axo1989]

This couldn't be more right. But you won't convince the cult. That's the nature of a cult, after all. They'll go on claiming their indefensible absolutes and enjoy their dopamine hits and that's the extent of it.

A pattern of primary and secondary microagressions toward outsiders and associated peer recognition/reinforcement and dopamine reward etc doesn't require a cult context. It's straightforward tribal (in-group vs out-group) behaviour. Invoking cults is somewhat lazy rhetoric.

It is probably a fact that the subjectivist cults on the many sites that aren't ASR, are far more aggressive to non believers than folks here!

I agree, core ASR norms (based in falsifiable theory) are less likely to be defended by irrational argument, which is a significant factor. ASR forum behaviour is also moderated more than say Audiogon, where a much higher level of insults and ad homs appears to be tolerated. Non-core norms aren't always ideal, I've seen more misogyny, heterosexism and reactionary social declarations on ASR compared to a straight-up tech forum like Arstechnica (which may have a younger demographic) but also less of these negative (imho) attributes than many audio and general social media fora. So on balance ASR does reasonably well.

 

[IAtaman]

There was no test gear on earth at the time that told them anything other than the player was 100% perfect. They had to build new test equipment to help them identify problems their customers had reported to them and carefully isolated and ruled out all other normal variables. The engineers were wrong.

Any idea what was the cause?

 

[MattHooper]

Not at all. The only reason people call ASR a cult is because of its absolutism and its rejection of people who question its unfounded absolutism.

What “absolutism” occurs here and what percentage of the members, roughly, would you claim hold these “absolutist” views?

I’d think someone making that charge should be able to show a majority of members take some indefensible position in order to be likened to a “cult.”


Is seeking objective evidence over anecdote for controversial claims “absolutist?”

 

[Galliardist]

How those devices interact and function in the real world is completely missing. Are there noises, clicks, pops, DC offset, thumps, delays in locking into a signal, bursts of noise in various situations, shutdowns and deterioration from heat or extended operation, poor controls, volume ranges, etc. Who cares how it performs if the device is a b#stard to operate?

That's what HiFi is about- not just a narrow subset of the performance of a piece of gear. And this is coming from someone with a bench full of test gear himself...

Of course.

But when we come to choose the components of our systems, we have to start somewhere, and we can easily reject equipment that doesn't measure well in the most basic way as the first step, and we can avoid those expensive accessories that don't do anything. That narrow subset, if you will, is also the core.

And, if only subjective reviews involved putting equipment in different situations to see how it performs, properly covered ergonomics, and such, they would be far more useful than telling us what the reviewer perceived (rather than heard) in one situation. For example, when did a review of a streamer really dig into the app's features and setup? The best I've seen is when the app fails during setup of the equipment (five star review anyway, of course!), or a throwaway comment like Naim's app apparently being "minimalist", whatever that means.

A much deeper set of measurements than we get in most cases these days would also go a long way to winning the objectivist argument as well. I don't mean to imply that Amir should do lots more than he does here, at least in most cases: though maybe half a dozen key items a year could be examined in much more detail to illustrate key points about how hifi works.

What I do know is that my partner doesn't curse my disc player or amp. Everything else here gets called "stupid" on a regular basis. I will find a streaming device that meets that standard, in time. That's actually worth as much as the sound quality to me, maybe more. And by doing my research I've largely avoided the problems you list (my last turntable was a turkey that ate motors though).

 

[thecheapseats]

Back when the Compact Disc format was first introduced to the world, it was trumpeted as being essentially flawless in terms of the playback. What I mean here being the complete lack of aberrations, clicks, pops and dropouts. The CIRC and buffer memory meant it either played perfectly or didn't. There was no in between.

Imagine how it was when early adopters with absolutely flawless, unmarked in any way, brand new CDs were reporting one, two or five momentary dropouts 'blips' we called them, over the entire length of a CD. Not only were those 'blips' real, they were totally unpredictable, never occurred at the same point ever again and were not repeatable or demonstrable when the machine landed in the service centre for 'repair'. Countless machines were unfortunately returned to customers stating "no fault found".

I know, my father's first generation machine suffered from the issue. But I recorded the "blips" and provided the tape recordings to the technicians. Sony, Technics, Akai etc all had this fatal flaw which was so obvious and yet so short in duration, it was like a "WTF?" was that moment. Did I hear it? Go back, and it wasn't there...

Our first gen machine could not be fixed as the techs really had no idea what they were dealing with, and the replacement 2nd gen machine was absolutely perfect and never 'blipped'.

Why I am I bringing this up? Sony also absolutely denied there was a problem, but they admitted after a while it was not only audible, but also of such concern Sony Japan built a standalone device to monitor a player in for service, with a special disc, to look for and count the un-correctable (audible) errors and more importantly, locate those specific errors precisely in an attempt to work out WTF was going on.

There was no test gear on earth at the time that told them anything other than the player was 100% perfect. They had to build new test equipment to help them identify problems their customers had reported to them and carefully isolated and ruled out all other normal variables. The engineers were wrong.

AP tests do not tell you how a piece of equipment will work for you. Not even close. A small subset of electrical parameters- that's all. How those devices interact and function in the real world is completely missing. Are there noises, clicks, pops, DC offset, thumps, delays in locking into a signal, bursts of noise in various situations, shutdowns and deterioration from heat or extended operation, poor controls, volume ranges, etc. Who cares how it performs if the device is a b#stard to operate?

That's what HiFi is about- not just a narrow subset of the performance of a piece of gear. And this is coming from someone with a bench full of test gear himself...

great post @restorer-john... I remember some of those first CD players with anomalous rice krispy sounds and other goofy artifacts - a laughable problem unless you owned one... the general consensus solution was to aquire a particular Phillips cd player model (at that time) which didn't puke on your shoes... Studer mfg'd one as well but they were nutty money... a lot of us grabbed that Phillips consumer device... still have mine for sentimental reasons....

any day of the week, I'll take well executed AP measurements (when available) as a blessed gift - as well as look at a mfg's spec sheet - ask others what their experience has been - and then listen/use the device in my environment... that's just a reasonable method, imo... and if I do buy the device, the first thing I do is take it apart and look inside for 'odd stuff'...

 

[thecheapseats]

But when we come to choose the components of our systems, we have to start somewhere, and we can easily reject equipment that doesn't measure well in the most basic way as the first step...

exactly ^^^ on point... measurements are a 'first sieve' - I'd rather have them than not...

 

[Axo1989]

Back when the Compact Disc format was first introduced to the world, it was trumpeted as being essentially flawless in terms of the playback. What I mean here being the complete lack of aberrations, clicks, pops and dropouts. The CIRC and buffer memory meant it either played perfectly or didn't. There was no in between.

Imagine how it was when early adopters with absolutely flawless, unmarked in any way, brand new CDs were reporting one, two or five momentary dropouts 'blips' we called them, over the entire length of a CD. Not only were those 'blips' real, they were totally unpredictable, never occurred at the same point ever again and were not repeatable or demonstrable when the machine landed in the service centre for 'repair'. Countless machines were unfortunately returned to customers stating "no fault found".

I know, my father's first generation machine suffered from the issue. But I recorded the "blips" and provided the tape recordings to the technicians. Sony, Technics, Akai etc all had this fatal flaw which was so obvious and yet so short in duration, it was like a "WTF?" was that moment. Did I hear it? Go back, and it wasn't there...

Our first gen machine could not be fixed as the techs really had no idea what they were dealing with, and the replacement 2nd gen machine was absolutely perfect and never 'blipped'.

Why I am I bringing this up? Sony also absolutely denied there was a problem, but they admitted after a while it was not only audible, but also of such concern Sony Japan built a standalone device to monitor a player in for service, with a special disc, to look for and count the un-correctable (audible) errors and more importantly, locate those specific errors precisely in an attempt to work out WTF was going on.

There was no test gear on earth at the time that told them anything other than the player was 100% perfect. They had to build new test equipment to help them identify problems their customers had reported to them and carefully isolated and ruled out all other normal variables. The engineers were wrong.

AP tests do not tell you how a piece of equipment will work for you. Not even close. A small subset of electrical parameters- that's all. How those devices interact and function in the real world is completely missing. Are there noises, clicks, pops, DC offset, thumps, delays in locking into a signal, bursts of noise in various situations, shutdowns and deterioration from heat or extended operation, poor controls, volume ranges, etc. Who cares how it performs if the device is a b#stard to operate?

That's what HiFi is about- not just a narrow subset of the performance of a piece of gear. And this is coming from someone with a bench full of test gear himself...

Really interesting. Looking at it in therms of this thread's headline question, in relation to the sonic issues in that case, measurements were nothing. And if we (or Sony in this case) dismissed the subjective listening experience (gaslighting, basically) of their users then there would have been no progress.

Of course the issues were audible and therefore (eventually) measurable, but not trivially and not with the then-existing suite of measurements and measurement gear.

Incidentally, now we have streaming sources, computers, wireless networks and the like delivering their own noises, clicks, pops, stutters, dropouts and delays. Those things certainly—and oddly—interrupt/reset my listening pleasure. Progress is measured in steps forward and steps back.

Reviewing the contribution of a given component in terms of these interruptions to pleasure takes more time and concentration to experience and analyse (and clear-headed writing skill to describe) than running a measurement routine. So we don't see much of that—unless setup or software totally vexes our host—via the rapid throughput small box testing ASR business/procedural model.

Which is not an argument for not measuring, but an argument that (these) measurements aren't everything.

 

[Galliardist]

Really interesting. Looking at it in therms of this thread's headline question, in relation to the sonic issues in that case, measurements were nothing. And if we (or Sony in this case) dismissed the subjective listening experience (gaslighting, basically) of their users then there would have been no progress.

Of course the issues were audible and therefore (eventually) measurable, but not trivially and not with the then-existing suite of measurements and measurement gear.

Incidentally, now we have streaming sources, computers, wireless networks and the like delivering their own noises, clicks, pops, stutters, dropouts and delays. Those things certainly—and oddly—interrupt/reset my listening pleasure. Progress is measured in steps forward and steps back.

Reviewing the contribution of a given component in terms of these interruptions to pleasure takes more time and concentration to experience and analyse, and clear-headed writing skill to describe, than running a measurement routine so we don't see much of that—unless setup or software totally vexes our host—via the rapid throughput small box testing ASR business/procedural model.

Which is not an argument for not measuring, but an argument that (these) measurements aren't everything.

In a different sense, though, the pops - and indeed the dropouts an delays in streaming - are trivially measurable, you just record the output and wait for them to occur.

Tbe point about the question asked here is that it comes with a LOT of implicit assumptions, and there is space for argument within those. Nail it all down, and the standard measurements at least become closer to "everything".

 

[Axo1989]

In a different sense, though, the pops - and indeed the dropouts an delays in streaming - are trivially measurable, you just record the output and wait for them to occur.

For sure, hence 'incidentally' ... not the technical mystery of @restorer-john's story, rather another source of sonic misbehaviour.

Tbe point about the question asked here is that it comes with a LOT of implicit assumptions, and there is space for argument within those. Nail it all down, and the standard measurements at least become closer to "everything".

As they should, of course. And space for > 300 forum pages.