• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

PS Audio speaks

JSmith

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
5,153
Likes
13,213
Location
Algol Perseus
but I guess before that the equipments has to measure good, no PS noise and etc.
Certainly makes sense and is logical... however is often not the case at all, hence some products have been shown here via measurements to be poor performers or even "broken" yet the manufacturer espouses otherwise.



JSmith
 

Gorgonzola

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2021
Messages
1,017
Likes
1,398
Location
Southern Ontario
I definitely believe you hear differences. I just don't believe those differences have anything to do with the soundwaves entering your ear. Our brain contributes just as much(or more) to the sound we hear as our ears. My mind would be easily changed with a blind test, though.
That people imagine differences that aren't really there is undoubtedly true. So for example people were sold "Brilliant Pebbles" and believed that they made a difference to the sound of their playback. It seems to me that that these "pebbles" will make no actual difference to the sound, BUT if you want to try them test them, I believe they are still available from THIS source.

mh4e90d339.jpg


On the other hand there might be difference that are audible even if not yet proven to be audible. That would be the result of inadequate testing criteria and methods. Let me point out, though, I believe all audible differences are measurable though we might yet understand how to measure or which measurements are relevant.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,947
Likes
8,694
Location
New York City
That people imagine differences that aren't really there is undoubtedly true. So for example people were sold "Brilliant Pebbles" and believed that they made a difference to the sound of their playback. It seems to me that that these "pebbles" will make no actual difference to the sound, BUT if you want to try them test them, I believe they are still available from THIS source.

mh4e90d339.jpg


On the other hand there might be difference that are audible even if not yet proven to be audible. That would be the result of inadequate testing criteria and methods. Let me point out, though, I believe all audible differences are measurable though we might yet understand how to measure or which measurements are relevant.

I can't imagine Kait's nonsense is anything but a "Sokal"-type hoax, but others here believe he is/was utterly sincere. Even crediting him for the hoax, he's annoying. He's disappeared from Audiogon, and googling around, I'm not sure he's active anymore. Here's his business' FB page, last update 2017, although I've interacted with him in 2018, at least.
 

Gorgonzola

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2021
Messages
1,017
Likes
1,398
Location
Southern Ontario
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
47
Likes
27
I realized something was up with PS audio when he called the optical output built into the headphone jack of the mac mini "cheesy." It's a toslink connection that goes up to 192,000hz built into a mass market, affordable computer, he should be praising it! A universal stereo connection to whatever DAC you want to use, with no USB noise to worry about, what more do you want?
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
Hans Beekhuyzen often makes factual errors in describing how digital audio works, but Paul here is just describing what is also my personal experience with equipment, particularly with the spatial reconstruction. At the end of the day, he is not saying that there is magic involved, he is saying that he can't understand why they sound different from the measurements he has.
In any case, it doesn't seem a good commercial practice for an audio manufacturer not listening to their products...knowing that they will be judged mostly by listening.

got DBTs?
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
I wonder , what ears do the use at the end to qualify products?

I know some brands uses some Audio expert (trained ears) to do the las tweeking, I think Yamaha have some expert and some other brands, but I guess before that the equipments has to measure good, no PS noise and etc.

Yamaha, Denon, Marantz etc all have special dudes who wave their magic wands over gear and give it final approval. Which is a good thing if you ask me, as their engineers can often fail to see the wood for the trees and miss patently obvious flaws, particularly usage scenarios they never considered.
 

Count Arthur

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
2,192
Likes
4,880
I wonder , what ears do the use at the end to qualify products?

I know some brands uses some Audio expert (trained ears) to do the las tweeking, I think Yamaha have some expert and some other brands, but I guess before that the equipments has to measure good, no PS noise and etc.
1620338271214.png
 

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,195
Likes
11,808
It's a reasonable question - why not use sighted evaluation as the standard:

Sighted evaluation is inherently biased by other effects - the appearance of the gear, the time of day, frame of mind, expectations, etc., which I will summarize as "mood". So think of your listening impression as the sum of the pure sound (unsighted) plus mood. While some of the effects of sighted evaluation are stable, such as appearance of the gear, the mood inputs, at least, are not stable. As a result, your impressions of the gear will not be stable. One thing will work for you over time - you will acclimate to the sound of the gear (described inaptly by subjectivists as "break in"), but in other respects, your experience will probably vacillate around the more stable unsighted impression as mood inputs change.

I believe this reversion to sound is why so many audiophiles get hung up in the upgrade frenzy. That cable that perfected their system a few months ago is no longer doing it for them. And that realization will actually have positive feedback into mood and make things worse. Off to find the perfect new tweak. Of course, you can't admit the last decision was bad, so it must now be some other part of your system...a cable, perhaps.

In sum, sighted impressions are unstable and the customer's satisfaction may revert to unsighted levels over time. For these reasons, if you are aiming for *long term* satisfaction, unsighted listening is how a manufacturer should determine preferences.

Another important consideration, in my view, is ethics. Vendors should not make claims about sound without experiments that control for effects that aren't sound. As has been said around here many times, Rolex is not telling people their watches tell better time than a Timex quartz. They might, if time weren't so easily checked.


I've seen that hypothesis voiced before, but I'm skeptical.

For one thing, I haven't seen much good empirical evidence to support it.

In every audiophile forum there are threads about what gear people have owned and how long, and there are plenty who own gear, e.g. speakers, for very long periods of time. And there are plenty of "objectivist" types who own or have owned lots of different gear. In either case, people can "like the gear" and like to experiment, and in either case there are many who can very happily settle on their choice for a long time.

For instance, me: I've had my CJ tube amps since the 90's. I've thrown other amps in occasionally but what I think I hear from the CJs seems very "stable" and reliable, which is why I've kept them so long. Further, none of my impressions of the various speakers I've owned really changed. I have a very steady, reliable perception of their sound character. But I may simply hear another speaker that has characteristics that I enjoy too, and perhaps buy them (or replace mine). I like how speakers sound different.

And the hypothesis that buying a speaker from a company that uses unsighted listening test will yeild long term satisfaction where sighted tests won't...just isn't born out by any solid evidence that I've seen. Again, go to any audiophile forum and you'll find audiophiles who have very happily stuck with speakers they auditioned and bought sighted, created by companies that don't do blind testing. You'll find life-long quad users, maggie fans, Klipsch fans, horn fans, Lowther devotees, Spendor, Harbeth...you name it, some group of people have found lasting satisfaction.

I auditioned Revel speakers among many and while they sounded very competent they didn't grab me at all the way some other speakers have.
Why would I buy speakers thinking I'll enjoy them in the long haul, if they can't even get me enthusiastic in the short haul? The speakers I bought
keep me pinned to my listening seat in ways the Revel never did (for me).

That's not to say of course that sighted influence isn't at play at all. Maybe it is. But if it is, it seems at play pretty reliably given that in the actual way I will use the speakers - sighted, in my home - my impressions remain very consistent and positive.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,947
Likes
8,694
Location
New York City
I've seen that hypothesis voiced before, but I'm skeptical.

For one thing, I haven't seen much good empirical evidence to support it.

In every audiophile forum there are threads about what gear people have owned and how long, and there are plenty who own gear, e.g. speakers, for very long periods of time. And there are plenty of "objectivist" types who own or have owned lots of different gear. In either case, people can "like the gear" and like to experiment, and in either case there are many who can very happily settle on their choice for a long time.

For instance, me: I've had my CJ tube amps since the 90's. I've thrown other amps in occasionally but what I think I hear from the CJs seems very "stable" and reliable, which is why I've kept them so long. Further, none of my impressions of the various speakers I've owned really changed. I have a very steady, reliable perception of their sound character. But I may simply hear another speaker that has characteristics that I enjoy too, and perhaps buy them (or replace mine). I like how speakers sound different.

And the hypothesis that buying a speaker from a company that uses unsighted listening test will yeild long term satisfaction where sighted tests won't...just isn't born out by any solid evidence that I've seen. Again, go to any audiophile forum and you'll find audiophiles who have very happily stuck with speakers they auditioned and bought sighted, created by companies that don't do blind testing. You'll find life-long quad users, maggie fans, Klipsch fans, horn fans, Lowther devotees, Spendor, Harbeth...you name it, some group of people have found lasting satisfaction.

I auditioned Revel speakers among many and while they sounded very competent they didn't grab me at all the way some other speakers have.
Why would I buy speakers thinking I'll enjoy them in the long haul, if they can't even get me enthusiastic in the short haul? The speakers I bought
keep me pinned to my listening seat in ways the Revel never did (for me).

That's not to say of course that sighted influence isn't at play at all. Maybe it is. But if it is, it seems at play pretty reliably given that in the actual way I will use the speakers - sighted, in my home - my impressions remain very consistent and positive.

It seems to me you are arguing from exceptions. The vast majority of people I see on forums are on the upgrade treadmill.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
The vast majority of people I see on forums are on the upgrade treadmill.

Probably true. Ironic isn't it? The ones not on the "upgrade treadmill" anymore are likely listening more to the music, and less to the gear itself.
 

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,195
Likes
11,808
It seems to me you are arguing from exceptions. The vast majority of people I see on forums are on the upgrade treadmill.

There's plenty people showing up here looking for new DACs, Speakers, Amps etc (and many members have owned various gear).
There's also some here who own speakers from companies that don't use blind testing who seem happy over time with their gear.

It seems to me it's more about an individual's proclivities to enjoying aspects of audio gear than it is "subjective vs objective."
I mean it would be rather ridiculous to say other audiophile forums are "about the gear" but here members have transcended the gear and don't
think about it much anymore - we are "about the music." Look at how much
time members spend on reading and discussing gear here. A strict "Music lover" doesn't care about chasing down the last bits of distortion in DACs, amps, learning about speaker measurements, design and on and on. That's gear head stuff.

Again: I haven't seen any reliable evidence that gear designed by companies that do unsighted testing has led to more long haul satisfaction
with the product. The second-hand gear sourcing site, Hi-Fi shark, has tons of people selling off revel products just like other brands.
And even among Revel fans over the years, when Revel comes out with some new speaker it peaks their interest and some trade up.

So, again, I understand the intuitive vibe of the hypothesis, but I think it sort of falls apart in explaining lots of real world experience.
 

Spkrdctr

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
2,212
Likes
2,934
At end of the day, we know that the most likely(by far) explanation is simply that the difference in sound is being created by his brain. It doesn't exist outside of his head. We all somehow think we're immune, though.


It drives me nuts! Humans and the weird fascination with their own God like qualities is crazy. Many people who should know better (millions world wide) ALWAYS make statements that are opinion as fact. Making seemingly factual statements that are easily proved wrong by scientific test gear. Then when confronted, the person (Millions) will not admit what happened. They do what I call "double down on their ignorance" rather then learn anything. Of course, I know no one on this site would do this. :)
 

ta240

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 7, 2019
Messages
1,357
Likes
2,653
Probably true. Ironic isn't it? The ones not on the "upgrade treadmill" anymore are likely listening more to the music, and less to the gear itself.

Being able to not think "there might be something better" and just listen is a very good place to be.

It is very similar to the TV watching: "I kind of like what is on this channel but what if there is something better on another channel"
 

Astrozombie

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 7, 2020
Messages
388
Likes
144
Location
Los Angeles
I have to say I do enjoy watching his videos though, definitely some unintentional ASMR going on.
 

jgthomas

New Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2021
Messages
1
Likes
1
Totally agree with Paul. Measurements are necessary and useful yet not the end all. For me it all boils down to how well the music sounds through my headphones or speakers.
 
Top Bottom