Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Mr. Widget]

Not one single person has said they are everything. You are tilting at windmills again.

Then we must be arguing about semantics.

If a person following my proposed scenario refuses to accept what they have experienced in a real world situation and still relies on reviewing collaborating measurements as the ultimate determining factor, what would you call that?

 

[Mr. Widget]

If you hear a sound that does not make you happy, the reasons may be:

1. A problem with your recording
2. A problem with your speakers
3. A problem with your room
4. Some problem with your hearing / mood / tiredness / level of intoxication which makes you less receptive to music that day, or causes you to have a preference for non-neutral sound. For example, many people with high frequency hearing loss have a preference for very bright sound.

The trouble is that most people listen to uncontrolled random recordings, with unfamiliar speakers, in unfamiliar rooms. All you hear is a tonal problem. How do you know which contributed what? If you misidentify the problem, it could get very expensive and you will end up with a downgrade. You NEED to measure. In fact, I think everyone on ASR should own a microphone and know how to use it.

I agree with everything in this post. Understanding all of this, like many here, I too rely on measurements as a tool to help achieve a satisfactory outcome, but I believe there is still more to sound perception than the standard suite of measurements we typically have access to and as variable as our ability to hear is, it is ultimately the determining factor.

I am not advocating a single listening session which will likely be affected by all that you suggest, but if multiple auditions with a variety of sources is successful, then we have a success.

 

[rjp]

Then we must be arguing about semantics.

If a person following my proposed scenario refuses to accept what they have experienced in a real world situation and still relies on reviewing collaborating measurements as the ultimate determining factor, what would call that?

That is the definition of "necessary but not sufficient". Whereas, "everything" would probably equate to necessary *and* sufficient.

 

[Mort]

Then we must be arguing about semantics.

If a person following my proposed scenario refuses to accept what they have experienced in a real world situation and still relies on reviewing collaborating measurements as the ultimate determining factor, what would you call that?

That's the difference between "measurements are everything" and "measurements are predominant".

The former is a straw man. That's not semantics.

 

[Mr. Widget]

That's the difference between "measurements are everything" and "measurements are predominant".

The former is a straw man. That's not semantics.

Then I guess your beef is with the title of the thread.

I agree with you, that the world can seldom be viewed with a simple binary lens. It is unfortunate that we so often see people wanting to view the world in binary terms.

 

[Mort]

Then I guess your beef is with the title of the thread.

1) that's a simplistically literal interpretation of the thread title
2) the title is irrelevant. This is the penalty thread where people are put who are being needlessly argumentative.

 

[Mr. Widget]

@Newman reminded me that the thread title is actually simply to draw interest to the topic and Amir's initial post is far more encompassing.

In any event, I am not yet retired and need to get to work... but reflecting on Amir's initial post is far more interesting than debating the thread's title.

 

[rjp]

Yes, it was much better in the beginning pages. Now it's just for people who want to argue, and is patrolled by sharks looking for new blood to devourer.

 

[Timcognito]

If one starts with a neutral well measuring speaker they can over come much of the room effects with DSP and even tune it to their tastes. With a flawed ill measuring speaker that is probably not the case but they still can enjoy their music. In my personal experience my speakers that I bought with my ears tested well, without me caring but when I tried DSP and cleared up some room induced idiosyncrasies it was revelation how much better treasured music sounded. I went back and forth, again and a again for about six months and the improvement was there. So DSP should help a poor measuring speaker but it will be more work.

 

[tmtomh]

Then we must be arguing about semantics.

If a person following my proposed scenario refuses to accept what they have experienced in a real world situation and still relies on reviewing collaborating measurements as the ultimate determining factor, what would you call that?

Your proposed scenario is not a test of whether someone thinks measurement are everything.

 

[Mr. Widget]

Your proposed scenario is not a test of whether someone thinks measurement are everything.

 

[krabapple]

Well, at least you guys are consistent... if not closed minded.

I am a believer in measurements and have been making MLS and other high resolution measurents since 2006. That said, If I love the sound... say with a pair of JBL DD67000 which do not measure well, then the hell with the measurements. Ultimately in a home environment, a loudspeaker is supposed to be for playing back music and to be listened to by the human ear.

Nothing wrong with enjoying beautiful measurements, but they should not be the destination.

But have you compared them, at home, with ones that *do* measure well? You might like them better.

 

[krabapple]

Absolutely, human auditory perception is certainly inconsistent... but it is what we have.

Well, doesn't that suggest it's not the speakers...it's you? (as in, the listener)

 

[krabapple]

Then we must be arguing about semantics.

No, claiming measurements are *everything* is quite a different claim than, say, *they are crucial* or *they are the most important*, are various milder assertions about their place in the buying decision.

Which are the things people here really say.

If a person following my proposed scenario refuses to accept what they have experienced in a real world situation and still relies on reviewing collaborating measurements as the ultimate determining factor, what would you call that?

So let's recap: why do DBTs for audio preference exist?

 

[antcollinet]

Then we must be arguing about semantics.

If a person following my proposed scenario refuses to accept what they have experienced in a real world situation and still relies on reviewing collaborating measurements as the ultimate determining factor, what would you call that?

Insisting on good measurements != they are everything.

Consider.

I won't buy speakers without good measurements.
I also won't buy speakers that I don't find aesthetically pleasing.

Which of these is "everything"? Because it can't be both.

Measurements are a very important part of the purchase decision - but there are other factors - for pretty much everyone. Including - for most - also wanting to hear them - though many will accept this is not essential.

 

[krabapple]

All who agree that the title "Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?" presents a false choice, should stop using the word 'everything' in their posts.

Can we get that far at least?

 

[Timcognito]

The shades gray are there, buying the great measuring and sounding newly reviewed Ascend bookshelves for $500 has fewer boxes to check for most at ASR than something that cost multiple thousand$. Having measurements are required for both ranges for those who frequent and post here.

 

[Newman]

If a person following my proposed scenario refuses to accept what they have experienced in a real world situation and still relies on reviewing collaborating measurements as the ultimate determining factor, what would you call that?

I would call it a good understanding of my explanation of the issues with your scenario, which relies on sighted listening.

cheers

 

[sonitus mirus]

Insisting on good measurements != they are everything.

Consider.

I won't buy speakers without good measurements.
I also won't buy speakers that I don't find aesthetically pleasing.

Which of these is "everything"? Because it can't be both.

Measurements are a very important part of the purchase decision - but there are other factors - for pretty much everyone. Including - for most - also wanting to hear them - though many will accept this is not essential.

Also, one of those you can argue with data, the other you can't argue at all.

 

[CurtR]

Well, at least you guys are consistent... if not closed minded.

I am a believer in measurements and have been making MLS and other high resolution measurents since 2006. That said, If I love the sound... say with a pair of JBL DD67000 which do not measure well, then the hell with the measurements. Ultimately in a home environment, a loudspeaker is supposed to be for playing back music and to be listened to by the human ear.

Nothing wrong with enjoying beautiful measurements, but they should not be the destination.

agreed.
I have not argued against measurements, as I agree that measurements are informative ... just against measurements as the destination. The destination is your ears in your room and your own personal preferences.