Serious Question: How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent? Are that many confused?

[raistlin65]

Is it just me, or are there more and more subjective perceptions here on ASR?

To be fair, subjective impressions are a part of speaker choice (if you are referring to that), as there is (yet) no statistical model of speaker preference that is true for everyone. Although there certainly are some objective practices that should be used when evaluating speakers.

 

[Julf]

Do you have measurements to support that hypothesis? Or is it a subjective opinion?

You do have a point...

 

[TomB19]

A/b comparisons become less reliable as differences become minute but that doesn't make the technique entirely invalid in all situations.

Subjective opinions still matter, also.

Sure, objective testing is a revelation but that doesn't mean old school techniques are evil. They just need to be kept in perspective as to their efficacy but sometimes it's all you have to go on.

 

[SIY]

A/b comparisons become less reliable as differences become minute but that doesn't make the technique entirely invalid in all situations.

Subjective opinions still matter, also.

Sure, objective testing is a revelation but that doesn't mean old school techniques are evil. They just need to be kept in perspective as to their efficacy but sometimes it's all you have to go on.

Subjective is not the same as uncontrolled.

Opinions arrived at with no controls are worthless unless the differences ate gross. And even then, they are of far reduced reliability.

 

[tuga]

A/B comparisons only make sense instantaneously. To think you can detect differences over a period of time, spend a day or two on A, a day or two on B, then going back to A is unreasonable.

That (instantaneously) is why they're useless.
You don't have time to focus on anything...

 

[Purité Audio]

You focus on just one element , then another element, then another.
Keith

 

[TomB19]

Subjective is not the same as uncontrolled.

Sure. That's why I cited them individually.



I would never argue against objectification. I love what ASR is doing. This site has been a revelation for me and I am extremely grateful.

I'm not pushing back against objective methods; they are the best. I simply contend the age old methods of controlled comparison has proven to work adequately for fifty years.

 

[tuga]

Keith

I forgot to put you on ignore...

 

[SIY]

Sure. That's why I cited them individually.



I would never argue against objectification. I love what ASR is doing. This site has been a revelation for me and I am extremely grateful.

I'm not pushing back against objective methods; they are the best. I simply contend the age old methods of controlled comparison has proven to work adequately for fifty years.

Perhaps your definition of objective is too narrow? I would include ears-only (i.e., double blind) subjective evaluation as an objective measure. And that’s the basic thing I mean by “control.”

 

[Deleted member 12179]

Measuraments can measure all the measurable things, and nothing more. All the immeasurable stuff, good luck analysing that without subjectivity, or using psicoacustica that is pretty much witch work.

As Amir said in his review of those huge old JBL wooden boxes recently, the speaker is like another member of the band, due to all the reverberation, out of time, and all the defects on those boxes. Well, let me tell you something, bring on an extra member on the band, the fifth beatle. If it's like james tailor in the rolling stones, it will sound so much better than the best studio monitor. and then will sound awful with any 201X "music". Good luck categorizing the defects and putting them in the good defects box, and the bad defects box. Would be cool if DSP could be properly programmed to have all those nice defects. Long life to HiFi sound!!!!

I WANT TO BELIEVE !!!!!!

 

[TomB19]

There is an objective component to double blind comparisons and, to a lesser extent, even to direct transparent comparison but it's not the same and a well designed and objective testing regime.

For example, the flattest speakers tend to not bring the most pleasing sound.

I think we have arrived at point where pleasure curves (that makes me giggle) can be imposed on any equipment. With dsp processing, I wonder how important these traits are in a speaker or amp, anymore?

The dsp modes on my avr are butchery but what if they were less brutal? What if I had a nearly flat system and then loaded my preferred curve on top of that? Perhaps the BBC curve, or whatever.

If we could do that, with minimal processing distortion, the most pleasing speakers would no longer be the best choice. You would be better advised to select the most capable and add your preference bias later. That would slightly negate the value of a/b comparisons.

Just a passing thought.

 

[Purité Audio]

I find the finest measuring loudspeakers bring the most pleasure, but loads of listeners enjoy colouration, I am just not one of them.
Keith

 

[Milesian]

My final arbiters are my ears regardless of how things measure. However, I do respect and heed the measurements and graphs that Amir posts. Not because they tell me how something will sound, but because they tell me if something has been badly engineered. That’s where the true value of ASR lies for me and I applaud the work being done here.

 

[A800]

+1

 

[JohnYang1997]

Measuraments can measure all the measurable things, and nothing more. All the immeasurable stuff, good luck analysing that without subjectivity, or using psicoacustica that is pretty much witch work.

As Amir said in his review of those huge old JBL wooden boxes recently, the speaker is like another member of the band, due to all the reverberation, out of time, and all the defects on those boxes. Well, let me tell you something, bring on an extra member on the band, the fifth beatle. If it's like james tailor in the rolling stones, it will sound so much better than the best studio monitor. and then will sound awful with any 201X "music". Good luck categorizing the defects and putting them in the good defects box, and the bad defects box. Would be cool if DSP could be properly programmed to have all those nice defects. Long life to HiFi sound!!!!

I WANT TO BELIEVE !!!!!!

Measurements can measure everything. It's the interpretation of the measurements that's lagging behind. For reproduction use it's already more than enough. For something else, you may want to check out mercuriall's plugins for high gain amp heads as well as neurodsp's. They modelled the distortion and every small characteristics of the amps very well. Also kemper profiling amp.
There's a big difference between measurements and interpretation then between implementation. And we are doing very good in either.

 

[Deleted member 12179]

measures can not measure everything. they can measure the sound behaviours, but I don't see in the reviews, ever, any brain pleasure measurements, intensity of those brain reactions. Bass calm pleasure? If those measurements existed, then there would also exist a sound equalizer which levels would be those parts in the brain, and sound would change according to the reactions in the brain.

So no, measurements actually are measuring very little. I see frequency response graphs on the reviews, a lot of them. I see no ear fatigue over time graph, over distance, over tone, over level. And the list of not measured stuff is infinite.

 

[JohnYang1997]

measures can not measure everything. they can measure the sound behaviours, but I don't see in the reviews, ever, any brain pleasure measurements, intensity of those brain reactions. Bass calm pleasure? If those measurements existed, then there would also exist a sound equalizer which levels would be those parts in the brain, and sound would change according to the reactions in the brain.

So no, measurements actually are measuring very little. I see frequency response graphs on the reviews, a lot of them. I see no ear fatigue over time graph, over distance, over tone, over level. And the list of not measured stuff is infinite.

You can measure those. You can measure brain wave behavior. You can measure what chemical released in your body while enjoying. You can measure all aspects of sound. If you know how to interpret such measurements you still have to implement such thing. It's difficult yes. But it's possible. Measurement is not something that's limiting all of this.

 

[audiophile]

Measurement is not something that's limiting all of this.

But the cost and impracticality of taking such measurements is.

 

[RayDunzl]

measures can not measure everything. they can measure the sound behaviours, but I don't see in the reviews, ever, any brain pleasure measurements, intensity of those brain reactions. Bass calm pleasure? If those measurements existed, then there would also exist a sound equalizer which levels would be those parts in the brain, and sound would change according to the reactions in the brain.

Do you require this level of introspection for other products you might or might not buy?

 

[Wes]

A/B comparisons only make sense instantaneously. To think you can detect differences over a period of time, spend a day or two on A, a day or two on B, then going back to A is unreasonable.

Yup.

Agreed, but it might be wise to spend a day or two listening to both A & B to familiarize yourself before doing an A/B/X