That's interesting, slow listening sighted then test yourself blind .I can buy that, to the extent of giving a listener as long as he likes to zero in on the details he believes to be hearing.
But if after all that, if he can't reliably pick them out with his eyes closed, I have to write it off as erroneous.
Firewalled. Just because it is published on AES does not verify it. Let us know when 'slow listening' has been independently verified.
You cannot generalize here. When I bought my first CD player in 1985 I also bought 3 CDs, one of them "Body and Soul" by Joe Jackson (A&M 395000-2, DDD = full digital recording). The sound quality and the dynamic is excellent, even (or especially) today. So at least a few engineers were able to do a very good job from the beginning of digital audio.
Of course not!
The amps had to be powerful enough to drive the speakers without clipping have an even frequency response and not have audible distortion level.
There was a plethora of enthusiasts who, like you, were saying much the same but nobody actually came forward to prove what they were on about.
I assume they were afraid to fail and puncture their belief.
I am sure they would have done. Both. And I think that is why none of the vociferous fans took up the challenge, fear of being the naked emperor.
They pick amps which are high powered with low distortion so they narrow the choice down...
At the same time, I think it`s too simple to just discard sighted long-term listening out of hand. Humans have managed to develop quite a few things by using ear alone. Musicians, conductors, piano tuners etc - they all work (mostly) by ear, and honestly it has worked quite well. Last time I checked, the world of acoustic music was relatively well-functioning. This doesn't mean that anybody's listening is infallible, of course. But sighted listening does provide data points, at least. For those of you who are AES members, here's a fascinating paper by a couple of the engineers in Genelec: https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/conferences/?elib=19621
For those of you who are AES members, here's a fascinating paper by a couple of the engineers in Genelec: https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/conferences/?elib=19621
Firewalled. Just because it is published on AES does not verify it. Let us know when 'slow listening' has been independently verified.
Do you perchance have a doi number for this?
...to things outside the very cheapest crap and the marginal stuff being sold to the minuscule "audiophile" niche. I.e., the big broad middle.
OK, so see if you can hear those "nuances" without peeking. Maybe you can, but I am skeptical.
Conference paper, so not peer-reviewed.
Conference paper, so not peer-reviewed.
And for the vast majority of subjective impression reports, that is exactly what they're worth, ZEROhis. All the unreliability of subjective listening pours down to discarding completely any subjective sighted (or not level matched or both) impressions like its worth is zero.
This is the best statement about sound quality I have heard in a long time. I'de rather listen to good recordings on cheap equipment than to lousy recordings on highend equipment.
I'd rather listen to good music with lousy recordings and cheap equipment to anything else.
And for the vast majority of subjective impression reports, that is exactly what they're worth, ZERO
All you have to do is pick up the latest issue of one of the subjective mags or read their websites and you realize its 90% BS. Heck no two reviewers can agree on the sound of a interconnect. LOL
From the audible reviews of power cables, SATA cords, snake-oil SR products, ,,,, must I go on?
With so much absolute garbage being written as gospel, how are you to separate the fact from fiction?
There are ONLY two ways, using a combination of measurement and bias controlled DBT, you can gather some reference to the facts.
There are ONLY two ways, using a combination of measurement and bias controlled DBT, you can gather some reference to the facts.
And for the vast majority of subjective impression reports, that is exactly what they're worth, ZERO
All you have to do is pick up the latest issue of one of the subjective mags or read their websites and you realize its 90% BS. Heck no two reviewers can agree on the sound of a interconnect. LOL
From the audible reviews of power cables, SATA cords, snake-oil SR products, ,,,, must I go on?
With so much absolute garbage being written as gospel, how are you to separate the fact from fiction?
There are ONLY two ways, using a combination of measurement and bias controlled DBT, you can gather some reference to the facts.