Most people aren’t interested and don’t care. I can see how it could be triggering for some people if people make unsubstantiated claims but if they are happy it really doesn’t matter in the greater scheme of things.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Newman
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2017
- Messages
- 5,051
- Likes
- 7,115
For an overview of numerous scientific studies on that issue, I commend Sound Reproduction by Dr F E Toole. Since you say you are really interested.
cheers
Jaxx1138
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2018
- Messages
- 224
- Likes
- 318
Studies show that listeners prefer accurate sound reproduction. Their preference can be tied back to the measurements in a statistical analysis where a high level of confidence is found.
Most people don’t know and don’t care. They are happy with their Sonos and Apple products. They have very popular and have very high preference. Doesn’t mean best sound for buck at all but those products have the highest preference. Harman should some correlation but it only became strong with training which the average consumer will never do.
If he posts here, why not bother?
He'd best not claim it here without evidence.
How dare such a thing happen here on Audio Science Review!
A claim of audibility is not an opinion.
In response to...what? You left that part out.
You should not conflate ignorance with preference.
Jaxx1138
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2018
- Messages
- 224
- Likes
- 318
The training increased the ability to discern frequency aberrations faster and more accurately. It did not change the results. When using untrained listeners, it took higher numbers of people to attain the same results. The results overall, in a statistical manner stayed the same.
That isn’t the way that most people prefer to purchase music reproduction equipment in practice though. Sound quality is just one factor and people have different preferences which is why different manufacturers tune differently. They tune for what people like when the test is the shop not what is the most accurate. People will still have personal preference when it comes to speakers and headphones. Sonos and Apple test their products and they don’t slavishly follow harman curves. They go with whatever sells best in the shop. Doesn’t mean that people are wrong to take a more objective approach at all just that such a approach is very niche and the preference of most people is to take a more subjective approach.
Indeed it doesn’t mean the majority is correct just the majority preference is for product like apple and Sonos and they are not interested in HiFi. Apple and Sonos do test their products as Toole acknowledges and they tune them to what they think will sell best not is not what is most accurate. Sonos admits they are not hifi. They tune to what most people prefer based on their testing. Doesn’t mean these people are wrong if they happy or that people are wrong or superior to take a more objective approach.
You’re pretty wrong about Sonos at least. They generally measure very flat:
A collection of loudspeakers measurements
www.spinorama.org
The Apple speaker pretty much as well:
A collection of loudspeakers measurements
www.spinorama.org
I bet people do not buy these products for their sound quality primarily. They are convenient lifestyle products.
Exactly!
Lol, you think there aren't?
Whole industries exist to study what makes customer preference tick.
What's that got to do with claims of audibility made here, on a forum devoted to audio science?
Audio science is well aware that people make decisions based on all sorts of 'emotional' reasons -- including reasons that they may not even be aware of.
They'll even pick A over B, when A and B are, by every objective measure, audibly the same.
And then, alas, they'll come here and say something to the effect of : 'Golly, A just sounds so much better than B'!
And ASR will say, 'Are you quite sure it's the sound that leads you to say that?'
Because here we are all shepherds who want to protect lambs that have wandered into our field.
The other way around, I've heard SO many stories about people finally hearing and/or getting a proper stereo for the first time, even if it's just older bookshelves from the usual budget lines and a 100€ Fosi. Seen it irl quite a few times as well.
People are STOKED and absolutely thrilled, finally hearing their favourite music properly for the first time. The usual "I hear details I didn't know were there" but on these occasions it's a real phenomenon. It's so awesome to hear about and see their enthusiasm and the "NOW I get it". As a music lover, I'm always wishing good sound to my fellow enthusiasts, and it's pure joy to see them in "holy shit, hell yeah" mode with stars in their eyes.
Is your needle stuck? You keep writing this over and over as if it was dispositive to how ASR should be.
This lesson you're teaching at us, that most people don't give a shart about objective performance: it's a banality. And that preference is multifactorial. We know, we're well aware of it.
We're also aware that people think sound was the factor driving their choice. But we know they could be wrong about that. That's where we differ from the masses.
The thing is, we care about objective performance. So, if you post something here, it's fair game for critique. Why shouldn't it be?
Btw, you're not quite on point about speaker preference studies. What they show most strikingly is that the correlation breaks down when the subject knows which speaker they are listening to. Preference then is all over the place. Preference, whether the listener is trained or not, already begins to converge simply by blinding the comparison.
Last edited:
I agree HiFi and I prefer a flatter curve but many manufacturers will go for a more base heavy V shape approach because that is more popular with a lot of people and may make more sense in the move. Just the reality is that HiFi is niche and ASR is even more niche. Most people are simple not interested. I saw very few women at high end trade show for instance and non unaccompanied for instance.
The point is as is clearly illustrated is that an interest in HiFi or objective measurement certainly doesn’t make someone a nicer or better or superior person. The evidence seems to be to the contrary. Most people have different preferences, be it speakers or headphones or whatever. There isn’t one speaker or headphones that people all tend to prefer even if they prefer objective measurements. People have different preferences so being judgmental isn’t justified.
You are surrounded by straw men.
No one says anything about being 'nicer'
But would you not say that ASR has a 'better', even 'superior', awareness of how people arrive at a stated 'audio' preference? Because we here tend to be more aware of things like cognitive biases?
Quite. I’m not disagreeing. They tune for instance preference and preference on the move. That is commercial reality. A commercial preference and a HiFi preference. But that is still preference. It might not be a very educated preference otherwise everyone would simply follow the harman curve. And even then if you asked what are the best Harman curve speakers and headphones on here you would still get lots of different views. Preference.
Jaxx1138
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2018
- Messages
- 224
- Likes
- 318
The psychology of many people is to conflate many disparate things as the same. In modern commerce the "good enough" philosophy is often applied. This is an economic model used by the bean counters. It works because most people don't have the time nor the inclination to study all the variables and their implications for most products that they purchase. This is why McDonalds and Crocs are so successful. When a product is designed to be "good enough," the manufacturer is essentially conflating "functioning" with "quality." From the perspective of an engineer , "good enough" often feels like a systematic betrayal of quality and truth.
It's not that people do not want the best. It's that they trust others opinions (and sometimes facts) to inform their decision. In modern commerce the signal to noise on how good a particular product is, is typically low. So it usually only takes one impressive demonstration (which is often highly contrived) to get a typical consumer to be sold by that subjective experience. It has nothing to do with if that product is actually preforming at some exceptionally high level.
Many of us working within the industry of consumer electronics have seen first hand, the compromises made because of factors that have absolutely nothing to do with engineering concerns. Often it may be a marketing issue, or a cost cutting concern or maybe the owners own ego.
The reasons why one product sells more than another has a myriad of variables. Popularity or effective marketing strategies often do not correlate with great quality products. If they do, you got lucky. But the psychology of preference is guided by many more things than science. In ASR the bias is tilted toward science. People will argue that they "like this better" but rarely have an understanding of why that is happening.
I suppose it is our goal as researchers, scientist, engineers and psychologist to assist in educating people regarding the subjective factors from the objective facts, so they can make a more educated decision.
Similar threads
