Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Josh83]

Even when applying the same signal 2 different DACs may not output the signal at exactly the same time. This can turn out to be a tell.
There is always some delay between the applied digital signal and the actual conversion due to filter lengths, buffering etc.

The ABX box itself inserts a short “tick” when switching, so I’m not sure I’d notice any small hypothetical delay imposed by a DAC’s filter. Plus, since I have so many DACs on hand and plan to test numerous pairs, if one had some sort of noticeable filter delay, I could just exclude it from my testing.

 

[goryu]

But that doesn’t make the evidence any less objective. Controlled tests don’t dictate what you personally will prefer - they establish what is reliably detectable or preferred across listeners. Of course, individual preferences or perceptions can be outliers; that’s always true for both subjective impressions and objective evidence.

But it's what I personally prefer that matters to me and as you agree, there can always be outliers- maybe the guy asking me my opinion about a set of speaker is an outlier. Maybe I am... Thus, I can not rely on such evidence. This kind of data may be valid in gross, but I don't find that reliable for anyone in particular. I just don't see much confidence in its predictive power regardless of how it was obtained. I am at a loss to understand the logic behind taking subjective data in a controlled way, summing it, and then saying the sum of a sample of subjective data has now been transformed into an objective result....

For example, say we run a hypothetical double-blind test comparing Amp A and Amp B, and 70% of listeners consistently judge Amp A as sounding better. That is objective evidence that most people perceive Amp A as preferable, and you will probably like it more too.

I would rather call it evidence that 70% of listeners subjectively preferred A to B. Not sure how you can make the leap that I would "probably" like it too- I don't buy equipment on a "probably".

 

[goryu]

If testing subjects for statistically relevant preference, then yes the result preferred by the population may not be the same as your preference.

If (as is more often the case) testing subjects for detectable differences, then it is likely that the results do apply to you. Unless your personal hearing is much better than the hearing of the study's subjects, or much worse, which is a bit of a corner case study then.

Exactly- there is no way to predict with any certainty exactly the preferences of any particular individual. For individuals not looking to roll dice, it makes more sense to listen for one's self in one's room and system before committing rather than relying on the opinions of others.

Actually, a third possibility is tests like ABX tests aren't for everybody, need a ton of concentration to perform especially if the differences are small, and some people just can't complete the test with rigor from start to finish. I sometimes get flat out bored, loose interest... In which case a null result means nothing.

Well, yes, there is that, isn't there?

 

[goryu]

Some of us have found designers, manufacturers, or reviewers we trust explicitly.
The guy who designed my (previous) speakers I've loved for 40 years I would (and have) bought anything he produces. I absolutely know his talents, taste, and priorities and have spent many hours in his sound room.

I have always been a trust but verify sort of person, rather than a kool-aid drinker. Clearly, your mileage may vary.

 

[Newman]

I would rather call it evidence that 70% of listeners subjectively preferred A to B. I wouldn't make the leap that I would "probably" like it too- I don't buy equipment on a "probably".

...there is no way to predict with any certainty exactly the preferences of any particular individual. For individuals not looking to roll dice, it makes more sense to listen for one's self in one's room and system before committing rather than relying on the opinions of others.

Perhaps you could avail yourself of the actual science on preference in sound reproduction, instead of point scoring over silly hypotheticals involving amps that, if competently designed for a flat frequency response and applied in a situation where they won't 'run out of power', simply won't be able to be distinguished by any percent, never mind 70 percent.

The best available experimental evidence that I have seen indicates that people are universally consistent in their preference for sound reproduction that delivers an initial sound wave, the so-called direct or first arrival sound, that has a flat, smooth and extended frequency response in the audible band. The only exception being people with significant hearing damage.

That's why it's a very important finding: it is not "70 percent" and applies to you "probably". It is so reliable that the sensible course is to assume it does apply to oneself, and put the burden on oneself to prove otherwise before ignoring it.

cheers

 

[MAB]

Exactly- there is no way to predict with any certainty exactly the preferences of any particular individual. For individuals not looking to roll dice, it makes more sense to listen for one's self in one's room and system before committing rather than relying on the opinions of others.



Well, yes, there is that, isn't there?

Which is why the measurements, and ability to understand them and relate them to my preference.

After all, I can’t control my mood as well as a mic.

 

[goryu]

Perhaps you could avail yourself of the actual science on preference in sound reproduction, instead of point scoring over silly hypotheticals involving amps that, if competently designed for a flat frequency response and applied in a situation where they won't 'run out of power', simply won't be able to be distinguished by any percent, never mind 70 percent.

The best available experimental evidence that I have seen indicates that people are universally consistent in their preference for sound reproduction that delivers an initial sound wave, the so-called direct or first arrival sound, that has a flat, smooth and extended frequency response in the audible band. The only exception being people with significant hearing damage.

That's why it's a very important finding: it is not "70 percent" and applies to you "probably". It is so reliable that the sensible course is to assume it does apply to oneself, and put the burden on oneself to prove otherwise before ignoring it.

cheers

Well perhaps I am one of those with significant hearing loss, which means then that it doesn't apply to me. When it comes to matters of taste and personal preference, I prefer to judge for myself in my system and in my room. I am not arguing against studies that show that at a certain level of objective performance amps will be indistinguishable to most, I am simply saying that I prefer, and can understand why others might as well, to decide for myself in my room with my system, rather than take anyone else's opinion or study result, into my decision making process.

 

[MAB]

Well perhaps I am one of those with significant hearing loss, which means then that it doesn't apply to me. When it comes to matters of taste and personal preference, I prefer to judge for myself in my system and in my room. I am not arguing against studies that show that at a certain level of objective performance amps will be indistinguishable to most, I am simply saying that I prefer, and can understand why others might as well, to decide for myself in my room with my system, rather than take anyone else's opinion into my decision making process.

Are you suggesting that your hearing loss drives your preference?

Where was it written that you should take other people’s opinion into account for deciding on which gear? You are actually being told you shouldn’t let someone’s opinion on one piece vs. the other sway you.

 

[Newman]

Well perhaps I am one of those with significant hearing loss, which means then that it doesn't apply to me.

And the science does show that these people are completely useless at identifying even their own preference. They can't pick the same preferred component this morning vs afternoon, today vs tomorrow. People without such damage are really quite reliable and consistent. You definitely want to be in that group.

You are rushing far too hastily to claim that the findings may not apply to you.

When it comes to matters of taste and personal preference, I prefer to judge for myself in my system and in my room. I am not arguing against studies that show that at a certain level of objective performance amps will be indistinguishable to most, I am simply saying that I prefer, and can understand why others might as well, to decide for myself in my room with my system, rather than take anyone else's opinion into my decision making process.

Again, avail yourself of the actual science. It shows that the method you describe above will create opinions, including preferences, that are dominated by non-sonic factors. You aren't even identifying your own preference for sound waves, using that method.

 

[goryu]

Are you suggesting that your hearing loss drives your preference?

Where was it written that you should take other people’s opinion into account for deciding on which gear? You are actually being told you shouldn’t let someone’s opinion on one piece vs. the other sway you.

Whether or not I have hearing loss is beside my point, which is I prefer to screen equipment based on objective performance parameters, then audition the candidates in my room and system to decide which I want and which I don't. I don't believe in taking the opinions of others as part of my decision making process. That's all.

 

[MAB]

Again, avail yourself of the actual science. It shows that the method you describe above will create opinions, including preferences, that are dominated by non-sonic factors. You aren't even identifying your own preference for sound waves, using that method.

Maybe he meant he wants to get the speakers home to measure in his room to verify an already established preferred response.

OK, prolly not.

 

[MarkS]

My point was Neumann and Genelec both measure excellently
But sound completely different

Have you ever done a blind comparison?

 

[goryu]

And the science does show that these people are completely useless at identifying even their own preference. They can't pick the same preferred component this morning vs afternoon, today vs tomorrow. People without such damage are really quite reliable and consistent. You definitely want to be in that group.

I assure you I have no issues with my preferences.

You are rushing far too hastily to claim that the findings may not apply to you.

Well, whether they do or they don't is of little interest to me. What I am concerned about is my own findings.

Again, avail yourself of the actual science. It shows that the method you describe above will create opinions, including preferences, that are dominated by non-sonic factors. You aren't even identifying your own preference for sound waves, using that method.

I don't recall recounting my methods other than saying I screen by objective performance and then listen to those that meet my requirements in my system in my room.

 

[MAB]

I don't believe in taking the opinions of others as part of my decision making process. That's all.

Once again, nobody is giving you an opinion on what to buy. You are getting information on what has been demonstrated to actually create biased opinions, in others and in yourself.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Problem is that not everyone can re

Have you ever done a blind comparison?

No
But but I owned Neumanns and auditioned Genelec more than one time so I'm familiar with their sound

 

[MarkS]

The best available experimental evidence that I have seen indicates that people are universally consistent in their preference for sound reproduction that delivers an initial sound wave, the so-called direct or first arrival sound, that has a flat, smooth and extended frequency response in the audible band. The only exception being people with significant hearing damage.

Please give a citation to the published paper(s) that you believe make this claim.

 

[goryu]

Once again, nobody is giving you an opinion on what to buy. You are getting information on what has been demonstrated to actually create biased opinions, in others and in yourself.

Ok, thanks.

 

[ahofer]

A lot of the core beliefs you'll see on this site derive from this group of publications:

https://floydtoole.academia.edu/research

 

[sdrichard]

But it's what I personally prefer that matters to me and as you agree, there can always be outliers- maybe the guy asking me my opinion about a set of speaker is an outlier. Maybe I am... Thus, I can not rely on such evidence. This kind of data may be valid in gross, but I don't find that reliable for anyone in particular. I just don't see much confidence in its predictive power regardless of how it was obtained. I am at a loss to understand the logic behind taking subjective data in a controlled way, summing it, and then saying the sum of a sample of subjective data has now been transformed into an objective result....





I would rather call it evidence that 70% of listeners subjectively preferred A to B. Not sure how you can make the leap that I would "probably" like it too- I don't buy equipment on a "probably".

Goryu, measurements don't tell you what you like, but it can accurately describes something so you can make your own judgement. If you prefer speakers that exaggerate low frequencies, looking at speaker measurements will tell you that. It's been shown over and over again humans are not reliable in describing sound. A consumer is best served by 1) understanding his own preference, and 2) understanding how gear is measured and what those measurements mean

 

[Newman]

Please give a citation to the published paper(s) that you believe make this claim.

Please state the specific claim.