Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[hwest]

I put it into simple terms I've found one system sounds great in a demo room take it home it sounds like pants. That's after I listened to what I perceived as great.

Any of my testing is done in the same room whether at home or in a demo studio that I have access to listen to any gear I want.

 

[krabapple]

Ok. So tell me why Marantz and Denon sound better or as good as let's say an AVM 90 or Lyndorf? I'd like to know how or if you've come to that conclusion somehow.

I needn't 'tell you' any such thing. I need you to explain how you immunize yourself from perceptual mistakes that are due to utterly normal psychological biases.

IOW, why you ignore audio science. This being the Audio Science Review forum, after all.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I'm not saying I have Amir's ears, I'm saying I know what sounds good and have intensely studied sound beyond what most have. I will say most don't so I'm not willing to put myself in the category of most nor am I willing to say I have the same knowledge as Amir. That's my compromise because too many people know nothing about sound quality.

Sounds good???? Who said anything about what sounds "good"? The purpose of audio electronics is to pass a signal unaltered ... IOW, accuracy. A garbage recording will sound like garbage, ruining even a great performance. A great recording of a great performance will sound great.
Not only that, but your use of the phrase, "sound quality" simply reinforces the ambiguity of your reply.

The way most people use the phrase, "sound quality" means preference, not a scientifically accurate reproduction. Preference is an uniquely individual reaction to stimuli, and has nothing to do with accuracy. It's emotional. OTOH, accuracy is discernible by instrumental tests, and has nothing to do with preference. Science is, after all, not concerned with emotions.

Two totally different worlds. Which one are you discussing?

Jim

 

[Lux_ury]

I think everyone who comes here has some sort of biases but the argument discussion doesn't have the same out come for one reason. Ones opinion doesn't mean bad sound it's a personal preference science guys will always win due to data on their side. I've accepted over the years some distortions make sounds perception great but science says it's distortion. Everyone has a point where you understand the otherside helps you understand more of a bigger picture?

 

[hwest]

I think everyone who comes here has some sort of biases but the argument discussion doesn't have the same out come for one reason. Ones opinion doesn't mean bad sound it's a personal preference science guys will always win due to data on their side. I've accepted over the years some distortions make sounds perception great but science says it's distortion. Everyone has a point where you understand the otherside helps you understand more of a bigger picture?

Numbers only get you so far which has turned out to be very true and people have woken up to the fact now. Too much emphasis on the curve and numbers then we talking out of both ides of our mouths to discuss the minute measurements that are likely not even noticeable vs the results of an overall system.

 

[krabapple]

I think everyone who comes here has some sort of biases but the argument discussion doesn't have the same out come for one reason. Ones opinion doesn't mean bad sound it's a personal preference science guys will always win due to data on their side. I've accepted over the years some distortions make sounds perception great but science says it's distortion. Everyone has a point where you understand the otherside helps you understand more of a bigger picture?

science doesn't say that all distortions sound bad

 

[krabapple]

Numbers only get you so far which has turned out to be very true and people realize it now.

"people" have been claiming that for decades in audio, and they've been pretty wrong about it for as long.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I think everyone who comes here has some sort of biases but the argument discussion doesn't have the same out come for one reason. Ones opinion doesn't mean bad sound it's a personal preference science guys will always win due to data on their side. I've accepted over the years some distortions make sounds perception great but science says it's distortion. Everyone has a point where you understand the otherside helps you understand more of a bigger picture?

Personal preference is perfectly legitimate. Any one can like whatever they want. However, personal preference is unique to the individual. It cannot be transferred to another person accurately. Some people make the mistake of thinking that if they just use enough words, they can transfer their personal opinion to someone else. Or they think that they can make their personal opinion universal. so that everyone can understand it the same way they can.

Wrong.

Science-based methodology has nothing to do with opinion, preference or taste ... and vice-versa. Like I said (above), TWO DIFFERENT WORLDS.

Jim

 

[MAB]

I think everyone who comes here has some sort of biases but the argument discussion doesn't have the same out come for one reason. Ones opinion doesn't mean bad sound it's a personal preference science guys will always win due to data on their side. I've accepted over the years some distortions make sounds perception great but science says it's distortion. Everyone has a point where you understand the otherside helps you understand more of a bigger picture?

It's not about bad or good. There is a science of how sensitive we are to distortion (for instance), it can be measured, and the answer is not very sensitive at all.
Here is a test:

Listening Test

www.klippel.de

It follows good scientific principles.

Maybe we need to start having golden-ear competitions at ASR; find who can score the highest (or lowest) on audibility tests. The winner gets to make any claim about audibility they want since they would clearly have the best hearing, and therefore the most relevant observation.

 

[Lux_ury]

"I was being kind, but hey I can only lead horses to water and cannot make it drink"
My life is too short (Big smile emoji)

 

[Blumlein 88]

It's not about bad or good. There is a science of how sensitive we are to distortion (for instance), it can be measured, and the answer is not very sensitive at all.
Here is a test:

Listening Test

www.klippel.de

It follows good scientific principles.

Maybe we need to start having golden-ear competitions at ASR; find who can score the highest (or lowest) on audibility tests. The winner gets to make any claim about audibility they want since they would clearly have the best hearing, and therefore the most relevant observation.

Kind of wasted effort. HWEST has listened more than the rest of us plus he thinks about limitations of hearing. We know he will win.

Hwest must be an acronym for hearing while earnestly sitting thinking.

 

[hwest]

Kind of wasted effort. HWEST has listened more than the rest of us plus he thinks about limitations of hearing. We know he will win.

Hwest must be an acronym for hearing while earnestly sitting thinking.

Measurements aren't everything folks, get over it.

 

[hwest]

It's not about bad or good. There is a science of how sensitive we are to distortion (for instance), it can be measured, and the answer is not very sensitive at all.
Here is a test:

Listening Test

www.klippel.de

It follows good scientific principles.

Maybe we need to start having golden-ear competitions at ASR; find who can score the highest (or lowest) on audibility tests. The winner gets to make any claim about audibility they want since they would clearly have the best hearing, and therefore the most relevant observation.

How many people agree with me on the Anthem AVM 90 over the Marantz AV 10 or Denon. I would say 100% think the AVM 90 sounds better but here it's ranked lower by numbers. Have I made my point yet? I jumped on the AVM 90 wagon very early because I heard several versions of them and when they went to the ESS DAC I jumped on it for good reason which proved to be a great decision. I can bring a flat curve to any system and typically it won't sound better it will sound worse.

 

[oleg87]

How many people agree with me on the Anthem AVM 90 over the Marantz AV 10 or Denon. I would say 100% think the AVM 90 sounds better but here it's ranked lower by numbers. Have I made my point yet?

No, literally not at all

This is what we're telling you: unless you have determined this with the appropriate controls or have some evidence besides "I hear it!" or "a bunch of people on subjectivist audio forums hear it!", this is 100% meaningless to anyone with a modicum of awareness of the limitations of sighted listening.

 

[SIY]

Don't assume. As I said baseline settings and levels match. Then tweaked settings with levels matched.

Your description was a classic uncontrolled evaluation. There's lots of great information here on how to do this correctly.

 

[Jim Taylor]

How many people agree with me on the Anthem AVM 90 over the Marantz AV 10 or Denon. I would say 100% think the AVM 90 sounds better but here it's ranked lower by numbers. Have I made my point yet? I jumped on the AVM 90 wagon very early because I heard several versions of them and when they went to the ESS DAC I jumped on it for good reason which proved to be a great decision. I can bring a flat curve to any system and typically it won't sound better it will sound worse.

No, you have not made your point yet. You have not made any point yet. All you have done is made ambiguous, unfounded and unproven assertions.

You keep saying " a flat curve ... sounds worse". It has been explained to you, time and again, that preference is personal and has nothing to do with accuracy. And because personal (subjective) assessments are unique to you, and non-transferable, you have no idea what other people will or will not think.

What you're arguing here is that your personal opinion has the force of scientific proof. In actuality, there's no way in hell that they have any correlation ........ none at all.

Jim

 

[SIY]

I would say 100% think the AVM 90 sounds better but here it's ranked lower by numbers.

Do you have any references to actual comparisons with actual controls?

Numbers aside, it would be remarkable if they could be distinguished once all stimuli other than sound are removed.

 

[SIY]

For those of you who are entertained by Twitter, what we seem to have here is Three Year Letterman (the best account on that platform).

 

[MAB]

Your description was a classic uncontrolled evaluation. There's lots of great information here on how to do this correctly.

hwest only mentioned level-matched after we told him it was critical, clearly was never on his radar. He is trying to do revisionist posting with "As I said", in fact he never said. he is gish galloping his way to incoherence.

At least he learned one thing here; level matching is critically important. Not sure if he will take it to heart since he didn't understand any of the other concepts.

 

[Jim Taylor]

Do you have any references to actual comparisons with actual controls?

This thread is slogging along like a mud road. I can't remember whether anyone (including me) has referred @hwest to Amir's video on blind listening. If not, here it is:

Jim