Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[ahofer]

It's just your opinion. (that AB testing is "bogus") Dont talk for everyone (at least for each men on this forum).

It is not a matter of opinion that sighted AB testing is flawed. It is a fundamental premise of the modern scientific method and well supported by evidence comparing sighted to unsighted tests. This is Audio Science Review, where the majority will come down on the side of scientific method and I'm quite confortable asserting that the vast majority would say sighted AB testing is inferior to blind testing. If you would like to test that, start a thread with a poll.

Bogus is not specifically correct, but we all know what he means.

 

[AustreV]

You are missing several of the most likely explanations, as well as some letters.

Sure. Sorry for that, where having minimal time to type all stuff. But general idea understandable. If there is questions, people can ask.

 

[SIY]

You dont need "blind test" every time, but Iam sure I could pass it easily.

You're the first person who's ever said that. Oh wait, you're about the thousandth person who's said this. Here's a list of the people who came back with actual evidence to back their claims:
.
.
.
.
See?

Seriously, basic controls are vital in any kind of sensory evaluation. Otherwise, the claims have the same credibility as UFO alien abductions and anal probing.

 

[AustreV]

It is not a matter of opinion that sighted AB testing is flawed. It is a fundamental premise of the modern scientific method and well supported by evidence comparing sighted to unsighted tests. This is Audio Science Review, where the majority will come down on the side of scientific method and I'm quite confortable asserting that the vast majority would say sighted AB testing is inferior to blind testing. If you would like to test that, start a thread with a poll.

Bogus is not specifically correct, but we all know what he means.

I guess blind test can be replaced in some cases. If you have a stable and identical result that does not change when changing applications, tracks, genres, or other physical elements of the audio chain. Also day, time of day, state of the listener.
Yes, I can only agree that it would be more representative to other people if I would record the results from both devices and make "that" poll. If I will have that opportunity will try next time.
Cause I sincerely don't want people spend their time and money on products with less quality sound reproduction. At least I don't see those "on ear tests" focused on amplifier sound difference. Nowadays you can use almost any headphones (not super sensetive) with very high quality vintage amps which now cost fraction of their production time, the only thing is you need not super old headphone selector and passive preamp and good condition amp. It takes time for sure.

 

[antcollinet]

No its not. Any change in signal will lead to "losses". Its just mathematical accurate, if signal goes longer path or will be affected by any modules.
Its not placebo. Any engeneer knew it. Current is not stable anywhere in electric devices. For example, any volume knob will show you that signal isnt perfect in any device, It was presented here in all reviews. Why "bypass" function where ever created then. So software is additional element that affect signal.

And, please dont tell me what I should present, until forum rules are not violated. You can type this to your friends in that manner.

The question though is in the magnitude of the changes, and are they audible. What we know about modern halfway decent electronics is that any imperfections are inaudible. Especially when it comes to DSP carried out at 24 bits or more.

 

[AustreV]

You're the first person who's ever said that. Oh wait, you're about the thousandth person who's said this. Here's a list of the people who came back with actual evidence to back their claims:
.
.
.
.
See?

Seriously, basic controls are vital in any kind of sensory evaluation. Otherwise, the claims have the same credibility as UFO alien abductions and anal probing.

Bold statement, I already said where difference is huge you can have no doubt.
You can also declare that painters or 3d modellers can't say if line overall straight or not without ruler. Eyes is more accurate than ears and easier to use instrument, but it its instrument.
I've already passed several tests, when one engenier gave ne amp and asked for impressions, so after my review he said that my words where overall where approved by his measurments he did before my listening test. Cause he created his own amp. He was interested in "live" feedback.
Note there is a difference in what people are hearing (in test too), the results is not always minimal. Sometimes its simply obvious to the ear. Yes, it’s difficult for you, but it happens. I hope you can distinguish the sound of a horn from a siren, for example, probably yes. In this case, you probably don't need measurements. So I was talking about that kind of "quality" difference comparing two devices. So you dont need to type about flat Earth, UFO and etc.

 

[AustreV]

The question though is in the magnitude of the changes, and are they audible. What we know about modern halfway decent electronics is that any imperfections are inaudible. Especially when it comes to DSP carried out at 24 bits or more.

When you talk about high level formats, difference between cables or idk passive preamp and some good active Preamp, it make sense. In that case difference maybe subtle and most ppl won't hear or might not hear clear the difference. It also depends on whole rig and your ears. But I said nowhere that it was in my case. So I just took 2 amps in same enviroment and connection and connected them to the same power supply and used the same chain, where these both amps could handle r70x headphones for sure through 6.3. The results wasn't subtile or even. It wasnt in one aspect. Difference was in accuracy, low, mid, high frequences, soundstage. Thats why I decided it was obvious for me. I also tried different gain modes, swapping between xlr and rca if some fault may took place. Idk what else for casual test should be done with huge subjective difference. Its like comparing 2 devices of different price range. Well it obviously was, but better numbers where on cheapest device.
I wasnt mind to replace bulky, heavy old preamp for little, cheaper box with better measurments. So I was only interested to.

 

[oleg87]

Bold statement, I already said where difference is huge you can have no doubt.
You can also declare that painters or 3d modellers can't say if line overall straight or not without ruler. Eyes is more accurate than ears and easier to use instrument, but it its instrument.
I've already passed several tests, when one engenier gave ne amp and asked for impressions, so after my review he said that my words where overall where approved by his measurments he did before my listening test. Cause he created his own amp. He was interested in "live" feedback.
Note there is a difference in what people are hearing (in test too), the results is not always minimal. Sometimes its simply obvious to the ear. Yes, it’s difficult for you, but it happens. I hope you can distinguish the sound of a horn from a siren, for example, probably yes. In this case, you probably don't need measurements. So I was talking about that kind of "quality" difference comparing two devices. So you dont need to type about flat Earth, UFO and etc.

It does not matter if you think the difference is obvious. Your misplaced confidence in your hearing suggests to me that you haven't done a meaningful amount of controlled listening and have zero awareness of how fallible your ears are. If your tests aren't controlling for cognitive bias and mere volume difference, you are almost certainly just wallowing in your auditory imagination, and that doesn't hold much interest to folks at ASR.

 

[AustreV]

The question though is in the magnitude of the changes, and are they audible. What we know about modern halfway decent electronics is that any imperfections are inaudible. Especially when it comes to DSP carried out at 24 bits or more.

When you talk about high level formats, difference between cables or idk passive preamp and some good active. In that case difference maybe subtle and most ppl won't hear or hardly hear the difference. It also depends on whole rig and your ears. But I said nowhere that it was in my case. So I just took 2 amps in same enviroment and connection and connected them to the same power supply and used the same chain, where these both amps could handle r70x headphones for sure through 6.3. The results wasn't subtile or even. It wasnt in one aspect. Difference was in accuracy, low, mid, high frequences, soundstage. Thats why I decided it was obvious for me. I also tried different gain modes, swapping between xlr and rca if some fault may took place. Idk what else for casual test should be done with huge subjective difference. Its like comparing 2 devices of different price range. Well it obviously was, but better numbers where on cheapest device.
I wasnt mind to replace bulky and heavy preamp for little and cheaper box with better measurments. So I was only interested in that test.

 

[AustreV]

If something inaudible it does not exist for me as a listener. But for some it may and in these cases you need to use statistics, involve more people in the same test. But you need some doubt at least in your subjective results to even start doing it.
In simple cases you don't need it. Our (common people) ears are not perfect, but good enough to differ majority of "basic" frequencies.

 

[MAB]

When you talk about high level formats, difference between cables or idk passive preamp and some good active.

I can't understand what you are writing, am not sure if it is a written-language barrier on your part, for sure you are not comprehending what members are telling you.

In that case difference maybe subtle and most ppl won't hear or hardly hear the difference. It also depends on whole rig and your ears. But I said nowhere that it was in my case. So I just took 2 amps in same enviroment and connection and connected them to the same power supply and used the same chain, where these both amps could handle r70x headphones for sure through 6.3. The results wasn't subtile or even. It wasnt in one aspect. Difference was in accuracy, low, mid, high frequences, soundstage. Thats why I decided it was obvious for me.

You 'deciding it was obvious' is a sign that you don't understand how hearing works.

I also tried different gain modes, swapping between xlr and rca if some fault may took place. Idk what else for casual test should be done with huge subjective difference. Its like comparing 2 devices of different price range. Well it obviously was, but better numbers where on cheapest device.
I wasnt mind to replace bulky and heavy preamp for little and cheaper box with better measurments. So I was only interested to

Again, perhaps read more, write fewer incomplete thoughts and sentences.

 

[AustreV]

I can't understand what you are writing, am not sure if it is a written-language barrier on your part, for sure you are not comprehending what members are telling you.

You 'deciding it was obvious' is a sign that you don't understand how hearing works.

Already said everything several times. If you can't get it, sorry. Seems to hard to for you to understand. Hearing works simple enough. You clearly destinqush what your hear or not. That's the basic idea. Should be enough.
Btw you need to learn grammar too, - "sentences". Watch yourself.

 

[Blumlein 88]

If something inaudible it does not exist for me as a listener. But for some it may and in these cases you need to use statistics, involve more people in the same test. But you need some doubt at least in your subjective results to even start doing it.
In simple cases you don't need it. Our (common people) ears are not perfect, but good enough to differ majority of "basic" frequencies.

Except nothing you wrote in this is true. Lots of statistics with lots of people have been used. So many have said the same thing about in simple cases you don't need it. Guess what, when they try the same comparison blind with level matching they no longer hear these simple obvious differences. Everything other than speakers/headphones and microphones are good enough any influence is inaudible to anyone.

Try this one for a simple obvious difference in sound. No way you get fooled right?

 

[MAB]

Already said everything several times. If you can't get it, sorry. Seems to hard to for you to understand. Hearing works simple enough. You clearly destinqush what your hear or not. That's the basic idea. Should be enough.

See above, McGurk effect. A great example of sighted bias.

Btw you need to learn grammar too, - "sentences". Watch yourself.

'Sentences' is plural. As in; you have written more than one 'sentence' that is gibberish. You are really grasping. Thank goodness for the forum ignore, which I just applied to your account.

 

[AustreV]

Except nothing you wrote in this is true. Lots of statistics with lots of people have been used. So many have said the same thing about in simple cases you don't need it. Guess what, when they try the same comparison blind with level matching they no longer here these simple obvious differences. Everything other than speakers/headphones and microphones are good enough any influence is inaudible to anyone.

Try this one for a simple obvious difference in sound. No way you get fooled right?

Maybe you are write, but can I ask you firstly. Are you won't be able to differ mp3 player something like cowon j3 from any modern DAP for example?

 

[Blumlein 88]

Maybe you are write, but can I ask you firstly. Are you won't be able to differ mp3 player something like cowon j3 from any modern DAP for example?

Never used a Cowon J3, and not familiar with it. If it has good low distortion, low noise and flat response it will be fine.

 

[AustreV]

See above, McGurk effect. A great example of sighted bias.

'Sentences' is plural. As in you have written more than one 'sentence' that is gibberish. You are really grasping. Thank goodness for the forum ignore, which I just applied to your account.

Ive typed right form for you. Firstly you have typed "sentence", after Ive pointed on that, you have fixed it. Omg. If your can't understand that, bad story for you. Seems you didn't. Well, hope same misunderstanding would not follow your audio-life decisions.

 

[AustreV]

Never used a Cowon J3, and not familiar with it.

Okay but, I dont know but I think you should clearly be able to distinquish some yamaha basic modern amplifier from their top line amplifier. If not, well. Okay measurments its the only thing that would help in that case.

 

[SIY]

I guess blind test can be replaced in some cases.

Not in this context, no. Basic controls are basic.

If you have no interest in testing your perceptions to see if they are real or brain tricks (which we are ALL susceptible to) you really shouldn't be posting in a science and reality based forum. There's plenty of other places for storytelling. If you DO trust your ears and want to check things with basic ears-only protocols, lots of people here will be helpful.

 

[MAB]

Ive typed right form for you. Firstly you have typed "sentence", after Ive pointed on that, you have fixed it. Omg. If your can't understand that, bad story for you. Seems you didn't. Well, hope same misunderstanding would not follow your audio-life decisions.

Nope! Nothing fixed, otherwise it shows up as edited!!! Like many of your posts:

I I do make typos all the time, this isn't one of those examples.
You keep writing some serious gibberish. But don't let my typos, real or imagined, distract you from thinking about the McGurk video.