Objectivism vs subjectivism and misinformation spreading?

[BDWoody]

Luxury goods are historically thought of as indicators of social status - in buying them, consumers signal their membership of an elite and exclusive club ...
It's the jungle's law
We, rational animals, have achieved the social cohesion through tribal patterns that have created a social hierarchy.
The concept of luxury has always been closely associated with social class.
From a multi-million-dollar yacht to a $150,000 pair of Focal Grande Utopia speakers, luxury goods have been an instantly recognizable way to show social status or power - and zoologically speaking, these are key elements of leadership.

The evolution of mating rituals and sexual selection...

 

[watchnerd]

Why fixate on a single number? What is the use or the rationale? The world isn’t black or white, there will always be grey zones. This place is an oasis, with an ever growing number of devices tested extensively, in a consistent comparative way. A device has to measure good for me to even consider buying it. But having had to many negative experiences in the past trusting on numbers alone, listening for me is the final and essential part of the process. Even renowned designers work that way.

I don't understand your point.

The all-up SINAD graph of everything reviewed already exists.

Amir already makes listening notes.

I'm just asking for the addition of a audibility threshold so a chart the site already uses.

 

[watchnerd]

The enormous popularity of soundbars (with optional wireless subs) also speaks to this demand for good enough sound that is easy to set up and sounds impressive.

Full disclosure:

We listen to our TV through TV speakers.

 

[Drone/doom]

I bought my Etymotic ER4 SR IEMs for £220 as B stock, and a Shanling M3s DAP for £170 in a clearance offer. Combined price less than £400 and access to superb sound enjoyed on nice gear with a very nice quality tactile feel. And to be honest I find my Sony smartphone is just as good as the Shanling except for more limited volume. High quality sound has never been so accessible.

I'm using the Sony NW A45 which i got for £139 but my ER4SR was MSRP from amazon UK. Yup even VBR 256kbps AAC sounds transparent to me since 256GB not enough for lossless and i can't tell the difference.

 

[GrimSurfer]

I'm just asking for the addition of a audibility threshold so a chart the site already uses.

What would you propose this audibility chart show? Whether SINAD of a DAC is audible? (That would depend on the amp, frequency/quality of material)

Whether the THD of the DAC or amp would degrade the sound of the rest of the system to the point of audibility? That would depend on the THD of the other components?

Whether the THD degrades the resolution of a device below source thresholds? We're really talking about 16 and 24 bits of resolution, of which 16 is the only realistic threshold because SOTA has not yet reached 24 bits of resolution. So a chart isn't really necessary.

My point in all of this is that this is a case where dumbing down the results onto a chart isn't helpful. In some cases it can be downright misleading.

 

[watchnerd]

What would you propose this audibility chart show? Whether SINAD of a DAC is audible? (That would depend on the amp, frequency/quality of material)

Whether the THD of the DAC or amp would degrade the sound of the rest of the system to the point of audibility? That would depend on the THD of the other components?

Whether the THD degrades the resolution of a device below source thresholds? We're really talking about 16 and 24 bits of resolution, of which 16 is the only realistic threshold because SOTA has not yet reached 24 bits of resolution. So a chart isn't really necessary.

My point in all of this is that this is a case where dumbing down the results onto a chart isn't helpful. In some cases it can be downright misleading.

The cart is already dumbed down.

And people are already using it as a figure of merit.

And, in the latest discussion, there are already discussions about labeling the color bands according to bitness levels.

So if your objection is that the chart is too dumbed-down, that train has left the station.

If people are going to use the SINAD chart as some kind of single point of reference, we might as well make it more informative.

 

[ahofer]

Don’t different types of distortion have different audibility thresholds? I think I saw research on that. So the all-in SINAD, in a perfect world, might need to be adjusted for different sources of noise/distortion.

 

[sergeauckland]

Don’t different types of distortion have different audibility thresholds? I think I saw research on that. So the all-in SINAD, in a perfect world, might need to be adjusted for different sources of noise/distortion.

Yes, different types of distortion do have different audibility thresholds, but I think the issue is that all modern amplifiers and DACs, unless deliberately engineered not to, are of sufficiently low noise and distortions, of all sorts, that they are all transparent. Therefore, comparing SINAD measurements of most products is akin to arguing over how many angels can dance on a pin.

The only value I place on SINAD measurements is that one with relatively poor numbers on SINAD may also be poor elsewhere, or deliberately (or sloppily) engineered, so I should be wary of it. It's not a reason for excluding it as a valid choice. Other parameters, like facilities, being possibly more important.

S.

 

[KozmoNaut]

Full disclosure:

We listen to our TV through TV speakers.

I did for a long time, and it didn't seem to hurt my enjoyment of movies and TV shows.

I enjoy a bit of spectacle, but in the end a good movie is a good movie.

 

[watchnerd]

The only value I place on SINAD measurements is that one with relatively poor numbers on SINAD may also be poor elsewhere, or deliberately (or sloppily) engineered, so I should be wary of it. It's not a reason for excluding it as a valid choice. Other parameters, like facilities, being possibly more important.

S.

You're not of the Instagram generation.

Perhaps you have noticed the influence of new members to our site who post things like "what's the best DAC to go with my headphones".

The mass market doesn't want to become experts; it's like me going to the wine store and buying wine based on the posted points scale of the reviewers. I'm not an oenophile, I just want something decent to guzzle after dinner while listening to music.

 

[sergeauckland]

You're not of the Instagram generation.

Perhaps you have noticed the influence of new members to our site who post things like "what's the best DAC to go with my headphones".

The mass market doesn't want to become experts; it's like me going to the wine store and buying wine based on the posted points scale of the reviewers. I'm not an oenophile, I just want something decent to guzzle after dinner while listening to music.

Nor Twitface nor any other (anti)social media. I just go by the numbers.

As to wines, I buy one bottle if I like the label. If it's nice I go back the next day and buy a dozen.
S.

 

[FrantzM]

You're not of the Instagram generation.

Perhaps you have noticed the influence of new members to our site who post things like "what's the best DAC to go with my headphones".

The mass market doesn't want to become experts; it's like me going to the wine store and buying wine based on the posted points scale of the reviewers. I'm not an oenophile, I just want something decent to guzzle after dinner while listening to music.

I have no doubts that Science could come up with objective metrics for wine. Such endeavor. I am sure would be met with he same ire, bile and resistance High End Audio displays with ASR and its like.
. Applying some Science to Wine tasting also shows that the most expensive wines are not necessarily judged the best by the normal people See this illuminating article ... J. (What? The Chateau Total Daques bottle you bought for $15000 didn't taste as good as the $10 Chateau Don G. Le Apple??? WTF??? ) . The reality is that there are metrics that show how well a piece of electronics acquit itself of carrying/reproducing/amplifying a signal. It is pushing agains an ecosystem that has transformed Hgh Fidelity into a guru-dominated field, to the extent that the term Hi-Fi is derogatory. Srangely enough, the Internet has amplified this movement, allowing many to pose themselves as gurus or to use often self-anointed gurus to help sell their wares. The notion of "Influencer" is strong on the Internet and has been used quite extensively by High End Audio. Some people choices become the new mantra and from there perception changes and their system begin to sound like that of the influencer's, which is by the way, NEVER inexpensive, .. The highs become more extended, the noise floor lower, the reproduction more organic, the PRaT right on, the background blacker than black and the Soundstage galaxy spanning ...

Rightly again the Internet is pushing back against this (ASR is one exemple). People now are realizing that they can enjoy superb audio and HT reproduction in their own homes at a decent price...

P.S. I am willing to surmise that with Headphones $400, gives you something close to endgame ( ASR Special + HifiMan 400i) .. Adding PEACE + EAP (both free) or other EQ on your PC if its the sources ... makes it very, very difficult to surpass

 

[Soniclife]

The only value I place on SINAD measurements is that one with relatively poor numbers on SINAD may also be poor elsewhere, or deliberately (or sloppily) engineered, so I should be wary of it.

Or as a pure engineering race, which makes it about as interesting as F1.
I personally wish the chart hadn't been done, reading the whole review is required to understand why something is good. If people want simple buying advice I would prefer a running list of DACs under simple headlines, e.g. cheapest transparent single ended DAC etc.

 

[SIY]

Amir already makes listening notes.

I'm just asking for the addition of a audibility threshold so a chart the site already uses.

Problem is that "the" threshold doesn't exist. It depends on the source of the SINAD limit, as well as the spectrum of both signal and nonlinearity or noise.

 

[JJB70]

Subjectivism is usually viewed in the context of allegedly golden eared audiophiles. There is another way to view subjectivism, if you like it and it sounds good to you then why would anybody else's opinion (good or bad) matter? I like good engineering and I would pay for SOTA measurement, equally I have audio equipment that is probably well behind the curve in terms of measured performance but which sounds fine. I honestly think that there is a point at which obsessing about measurement essentially becomes the same as golden eared subjectivism. It's a bit like politics, political extremism ends up in the same place, so extremism in most things tends to join up a circle rather than being a linear left - right spectrum. If I look at DACs, yes they clearly measure differently, but unless you buy one of the minority of very badly designed DACs or one purposely designed to have coloured sound then any audible differences that are there are so minor as to be irrelevant IMO. Now that's not to tell people not to buy an expensive DAC as there are lots of reasons other than SQ for buying audio equipment (I'm a real sucker for old style built like a tank quality) but it's something to recognise.

 

[GrimSurfer]

You're not of the Instagram generation.

Perhaps you have noticed the influence of new members to our site who post things like "what's the best DAC to go with my headphones".

The mass market doesn't want to become experts;

There are a few problems with this approach.

First, it looks for a single simple answer. Such answers are not always suitable. For example: If the answer is a $10k DAC, does that mean that it is wise for the shooter to buy one to pair with their garage sale speakers and amp? Of course not.

Second, it serves no learning value. While not everyone wants to become an expert, having a basic knowledge of how things work in this increasingly technological society is a good thing. Otherwise, it places a person at a disadvantage.

Third, simple answers lead to confusion because it boils down a number of factors into a meaningless answer. For example: Let's say the answer is a mythical product known as "Magicus DACus". But Magicus DACus only has AES connectors... or isn't Roon/MQA/etc. compliant... or has some idiosyncrasy that makes it really, really good for some users but not others.

Fourth, simple answers bring us closer to the point of a subjectivist debate. For example, if two DACs have the same specs but the reviewer thinks one sounds better then we're into the he-said/she-said debate that makes most serious audiophiles want to lock themselves in the garage with the car running.

Fifth, it removes value from the equation... or at least a relative sense of value. For example, a DAC with an effective resolution of 16 bits that costs $200 versus a 20 bit resolution DAC that costs $10k. If you're on a budget and seek pretty good sound, that $200 DAC is a clear winner (and to my middle class sensibilities, quite a good value). If you're seeking your first Grammy on a shoe string (as a mastering engineer), $5k for an extra 2 dB for your home mastering work station sounds like an incredible bargain. Ditto if your company has just gone public and you're flush with cash and, for some strange reason, no longer care about the cost of anything any more.

Finally, the mass market is unlikely to do any research before heading to Best Buy. They wake up in the morning and say to themselves "I need a new AVR" before brushing their teeth. Granted, the more industrious ones might look for a review on the internet, where they're more likely to find comments by an "influencer" whose knowledge of the product is less than the revenue their web site generates. But if they do find a good source, which to they believe? They have no background knowledge to determine which is the better of the sources. Their choice comes down to deciding whether "forest green" or "sea foam green" is the highest rating. LOL.

Simple charts, simple data and simple colors is (sic) for simple people. The more the Instagram generation eschews some understanding of how things work, the more likely they will be to falling prey to hucksters or becoming enslaved by the technology they use.

 

[CDMC]

I think I have said this before, but I find it quite telling that those people who I know who have Bose products are very happy with them and keep them for a long time. Compared with the typical audiophile chopping and changing and looking for something better I kind of think that maybe Bose buyers are the sensible ones in many ways. Their noise cancelling headphones are superb.

I don’t like the way they sound and objectively they don’t measure well, but if the person who purchases them is happy and enjoy the product, that is what is important. The percentage of Bose owners happy with their stereo is probably at least double of the audiophile community at large.

Separately, remember when Bose sued consumer reports when they were given a low rating because other products measured better? So much for better sound through research.

 

[CDMC]

Don’t different types of distortion have different audibility thresholds? I think I saw research on that. So the all-in SINAD, in a perfect world, might need to be adjusted for different sources of noise/distortion.

I don't know how correct it is, but John Curl is adamant that 7th order distortions are heard disproportionately and have a large effect on what people hear as grain and harshness in amplifiers. I believe he refers to it as the devil's harmonic.

 

[sergeauckland]

I don't know how correct it is, but John Curl is adamant that 7th order distortions are heard disproportionately and have a large effect on what people hear as grain and harshness in amplifiers. I believe he refers to it as the devil's harmonic.

I'm prepared to accept that a 7th harmonic is more objectionable than a 2nd or 3rd at the same level. However, most amplifiers and DACs have a distortion spectrum that falls in level as harmonics rise. Consequently, the 7th harmonic will be well below the level of the lower harmonics, so I can't accept that a typical amplifier with the sum of all harmonics around -80dB and therefore the 7th is likely to be below -90dB will sound any worse than one with the 7th harmonic totally absent.

In other words, provided the distortion of an amplifier is low enough, (and that covers pretty much all modern amplifiers) what that distortion is made up of is irrelevant, it won't be audible.

S.

 

[watchnerd]

Simple charts, simple data and simple colors is (sic) for simple people.

Well, sure, but how are Amir and @Thomas savage going to reach their long term site traffic and business model goals by appealing only to the top 5% of the intellectual pool?