Message to golden-eared audiophiles posting at ASR for the first time...

[rdenney]

Dude, dial it back.

Subjective data is perfectly acceptable here, as long as it properly controlled to give confidence that it isn’t biased or the result of chance. Good empirical data is used to connect repeatable subjective preferences to measurements, including understanding thresholds of audibility to put boundaries on the relevance of measurements.

If the measurements being used aren’t enough, then the human experience they don’t model should at least be shown to exist, don’t you think? If it’s as obvious as is often claimed, it should hold up to such testing.

Words like “asinine” accomplish little, though, no matter who is using them.

Rick “keep reading” Denney

 

[Buster Chestnut]

Subjective data is perfectly acceptable here,

For a very few “golden ears” posters perhaps. The vast majority of posts are “harman curve” this and “SINAD” that, purporting some derivative silver bullet that supplants personal preference as if it’s a zero-sum game.

Telling people “your ears deceive you- you shouldn’t actually like product X over product Y! Buy product Y instead!“

Absolutely zero difference between that and buying something bc a certain reviewer likes it. Just pure hypocrisy.

 

[Jimbob54]

For a very few “golden ears” posters perhaps. The vast majority of posts are “harman curve” this and “SINAD” that, purporting some derivative silver bullet that supplants personal preference as if it’s a zero-sum game.

Telling people “your ears deceive you- you shouldn’t actually like product X over product Y! Buy product Y instead!“

Absolutely zero difference between that and buying something bc a certain reviewer likes it. Just pure hypocrisy.

Why are you here?

 

[Maki]

For a very few “golden ears” posters perhaps. The vast majority of posts are “harman curve” this and “SINAD” that, purporting some derivative silver bullet that supplants personal preference as if it’s a zero-sum game.

Telling people “your ears deceive you- you shouldn’t actually like product X over product Y! Buy product Y instead!“

Absolutely zero difference between that and buying something bc a certain reviewer likes it. Just pure hypocrisy.

What are you talking about? I've posted a couple of times about personally disliking parts of the Harman target and I have never been challenged about it. Harman is an average which means lots of people do like it hence the support but it's obviously not perfect for everyone.

 

[oursmagenta]

No you. You test. How you evaluate the results of those tests is remarkably unscientific and farily inconsistent. If you don't believe me take a look at these reviews in a scientific way. I haven't done so but I've considered it.

I don't understand what you are talking about . Can you elaborate a bit? PM is also ok (I guess) if you think that may side track the thread though.

 

[danadam]

Telling people “your ears deceive you- you shouldn’t actually like product X over product Y! Buy product Y instead!“

I'm waiting for a day when someone posts example links alongside such accusations. So far, no luck. I'm particularly interested in this "you shouldn’t actually like product X over product Y", because if links eventually come, it usually turns out that it actually is "you shouldn't say that X is more accurate than Y".

 

[GGroch]

I'm waiting for a day when someone posts example links alongside such accusations. So far, no luck.

Don't the panthers in every measurement test imply that? Perhaps this is not Amir's intended purpose but I think most readers here think it is.

Nearly every bored or headless panther review is followed by several dejected or defensive owner comments expressing their surprise because in use, it sounded just fine to them. These owners question whether their judgments about a product they use every day has been faulty because of a test.

 

[Thomas savage]

Why are you here?

To bust our nuts .

Seems intent on projecting division using false claims ( no-one here i am familiar with has told anyone what they should and shouldn't like ) .

I can however sympathise with some feeling overly defensive when they read some of the content here , some of the time thats their own baggage they are carrying but sometimes some of us are ' asinine ' and seem to bask in supposed feelings of superiority.

People twist things when they need to feel recognised and help keep insecurity at bay , if it suits their own needs they will spin any narrative that enables this self affirming and comforting story to continue perpetually in many cases . When this happens there's no communication happening between us and the resulting content is all rather dull and depressing to read .

Humans and the Internet.

 

[Thomas savage]

Don't the panthers in every measurement test imply that? Perhaps this is not Amir's intended purpose but I think most readers here think it is.

Nearly every bored or headless panther review is followed by several dejected or defensive owner comments expressing their surprise because in use, it sounded just fine to them. These owners question whether their judgments about a product they use every day has been faulty because of a test.

No they are a expression of what Amirm feels , they aren't there to tell anyone else what to think .

People are ment to take in the information and make their own minds up, we are just a data resource.

Is personal responsibility at such a low these days People claim a cartoon is telling them what to think ... its perfectly possible for a secure individual to see a headless panther and negative review of something they ' liked ' and possibly own and walk on by ..

The butt hurt is just cognitive dissidence, raging within and filling a void left by the absence of assurance. Rampent insecurity , a modern human issue the causes for which are too complex and comprehensive for description here . I'm likely too dumb to do so also ha ha

If some folks feel so negative about ASR , they should simply not come here. Seems hypocritical to insist on finding this small corner only to harass and condemn the membership, like my grandma used to say " ruddy kids always moaning, if you don't like it here don't come dear " .. we were kids and had no executive control over this ' choice ' , adults however....

 

[oursmagenta]

No they are a expression of what Amirm feels , they aren't there to tell anyone else what to think .

People are ment to take in the information and make their own minds up, we are just a data resource.

Is personal responsibility at such a low these days People claim a cartoon is telling them what to think ...

This is entirely true, but I think that science and/or (I have a hard time to draw a line here) controlled observation/data + hypothesis checking tend to give the one exercising this methodological framework a bit of superiority feeling (or contempt in the extreme case).

I'm not talking about preferences (every taste is per se valid, no objection on that), but about fidelity.

And if we assume that fidelity is something that you can have a grasp on with a set of measurable quantities (with a mix of controlled human perception assessment + measurements like spinorama, thd, decay etc...). Then science as a methodology kind of gives us an upper hand on this compared to individual, not controlled, subjective assessment.

What you do with this factual upper hand (from my perspective of course) is up to you. Dismissal towards those who don't adhere to this framework, could be one attitude. Trying to convince to adhere is another one.

I think I see both on this forum. Admittedly, the first one seems to arise in very particular cases. But we can't deny the "upper-hand" effect that science gives.

 

[QuadDiffusor]

Gentlemen, let's have a balanced, objective discussion to explore the possibility that cables INDEED do sound different. Who can think of a quick, simple, and effective way to compare one cable from another? Let me put propose several experiments:

1) Replace just one (of the two L/R channel interconnects) with another RCA/XLR cable; sit back, and listen, using both stereo and mono sources
2) Replace just one set (of the L/R channel speakers) with another speaker cable; sit back, and listen, using both stereo and mono sources
The null hypothesis (to put to the test that all cables sound exactly the same) is that both stereo and mono sources will sound EXACTLY the same, with the stereo soundstage fully-formed, symmetrical, and exactly balanced between two speakers.

The test above will enable you to hear the additive or subtractive differences between the control (existing cables), and the a variable (new cables) in real-time, side-by-side. Please share your observations and results!

 

[GGroch]

The butt hurt is just cognitive dissidence, raging within and filling a void left by the absence of assurance...

So, those who are disappointed in seeing bad panthers towering over a beloved product should question not only their hearing acuity, but their mental stability as well.

 

[Jimbob54]

So, those who are disappointed in seeing bad panthers towering over a beloved product should question not only their hearing acuity, but their mental stability as well.

That is where I think a lot of the troubles come in. Happened to me with some of the headphone reviews. I own at least 2 expensive clunkers by the reviews here. It smarts. But the measurements dont lie (they may be disputed, and frequently are but thats a different story) -trick is to continue enjoying the beloved item as before and not let the review put you off. I am 100% sure mutlibit DAC owners love their products, they "hear" the (to their mind ) positive benefits only to find its actually a preference for distortion at the edge of audibility not special sauce. And dammit, they paid for special sauce!

 

[Robh3606]

Grounding is a straightforward thing that is either engineered or "designed." The former actually affects performance.

In principle yes. In practice no. Did you read the Rane Technote? It's no wonder we can have issues with ground loops when there is no standard.

Rob

 

[SIY]

In principle yes. In practice no. Did you read the Rane Technote? It's no wonder we can have issues with ground loops when there is no standard.

Again, you're confusing grounding with "ground boxes."

 

[Harmonie]

Some should be grounded in the BOX

 

[ahofer]

For a very few “golden ears” posters perhaps. The vast majority of posts are “harman curve” this and “SINAD” that, purporting some derivative silver bullet that supplants personal preference as if it’s a zero-sum game.

Telling people “your ears deceive you- you shouldn’t actually like product X over product Y! Buy product Y instead!“

Absolutely zero difference between that and buying something bc a certain reviewer likes it. Just pure hypocrisy.

I’ve been posting and reading here for a few years, and I don’t see this at all. I know it’s frustrating when someone doesn’t accept your testimony as reliably auditory phenomena without further evidence, but that is what we think audio science means. I’m willing to concede there *may* be audible phenomena we can’t measure now, but it is an extraordinary claim, completely unsupported by available evidence. Until that changes, insisting that this forum accept it is ridiculous. You might as well be insisting a medical science publication accept an anti-vaccine jeremiad based on a few anecdotes.

 

[Harmonie]

Just know that at least every other week someone new here says that. Physics disagrees with you. We know how sound works. It can be measured.
.

+1 +1 +1 +1 + ......

Over and over again
I really wish for the many of us to find a "shortcut" answer like a YES / NO chart to be present on the Master thread.

 

[GGroch]

...... I'm not talking about preferences (every taste is per se valid, no objection on that), but about fidelity. And if we assume that fidelity is something that you can have a grasp on with a set of measurable quantities (with a mix of controlled human perception assessment + measurements like spinorama, thd, decay etc...). Then science as a methodology kind of gives us an upper hand.....

Right. And before using measurement to critique products or preferences it should be made clear that fidelity to the source is the yardstick we are using. DMS talks to this in a new video contrasting "Hi-Fi" and "Audiophile" headphone design goals. This video surprises me a bit because DMS has in the past been a measurement guy.

"Audiophile" is not the same as "every taste is valid", at least in consumer electronics. Some headphone and speaker brands deviate from the Harman curve or Spinorama due to incompetent design; but others make conscious choices to target specific users and markets. It is very possible that bad panther B&W and Klipsch speaker models sound exactly the way their manufacturers' intended. They may see this deviation as validated by sales numbers or satisfaction of their target customers rather than measured fidelity alone.

My take is that the audio market is more like Gladwell's description of the mustard market than the ketchup market. There is no consensus best mustard, but that does not mean all mustards are equally valid. You can choose fidelity as the measuring stick, or market success, or J.D. Powers satisfaction ratings. Just be clear what you are concluding from your measurements.

 

[ahofer]

Right. And before using measurement to critique products or preferences it should be made clear that fidelity to the source is the yardstick we are using. DMS talks to this in a new video contrasting "Hi-Fi" and "Audiophile" headphone design goals. This video surprises me a bit because DMS has in the past been a measurement guy.

"Audiophile" is not the same as "every taste is valid", at least in consumer electronics. Some headphone and speaker brands deviate from the Harman curve or Spinorama due to incompetent design; but others make conscious choices to target specific users and markets. It is very possible that bad panther B&W and Klipsch speaker models sound exactly the way their manufacturers' intended. They may see this deviation as validated by sales numbers or satisfaction of their target customers rather than measured fidelity alone.

My take is that the audio market is more like Gladwell's description of the mustard market than the ketchup market. There is no consensus best mustard, but that does not mean all mustards are equally valid. You can choose fidelity as the measuring stick, or market success, or J.D. Powers satisfaction ratings. Just be clear what you are concluding from your measurements.

One thing I’d add, which supports your position, is that the Harman Curve is a preference, not necessarily fidelity to source. It has mostly to do with how people seem to integrate direct and reflected sound.

In fact, Fidelity to source is an interesting goal when you seek to reproduce a big band or orchestra in your living room. Does it mean when it arrives at your ears? Or at the speakers? I’ve never heard a system that really *reproduced* the sound of an orchestra in my room, but I’ve heard more or less credible simulations of the audience experience, primarily due to accurate timbre, somewhat realistic dynamic range, and even the extraneous bow noises and auditorium reflections. All measurable, I might add. (Btw, Timbre is an area where audiophiles suggest there is extra-measurable information. I don’t think there’s anything in timbre immeasurable by frequency response and distortion).

Those ”credible simulations” vary by person. My wife, like many others, can be transported to her own live experiences with some cheap headphones. It’s like she draws on her memory (and she’s a violist) to fill in the blanks. I find I need a sort of minimum ’fidelity’ to really immerse myself. It’s possible we in the hobby are doing ourselves a disservice by acclimatizing to higher and higher quality in search of something that is never quite..live.