"Things that cannot be measured"

[ShiZo]

Something the subjectivist crowd often brings up. "There are things we cannot measure but the human ear/brain can hear it."

We retort, an analyzer can hear much better than any human can. Which is the truth. But thinking about the question I did being to wonder... Could it be possible for there to be a form of measurement we have not found yet? Is science completely clear on this point? Or is there possibly another measurement out there be to found. Usually in my experience science is evolving.

Of course, I am not saying that the measurements used are not valid, they have helped me personally assemble some amazing sounding systems. I'm not as well versed in the science of audio as others in this forum. But I was wondering if there is a possibility, that there could be other measurements "underdiscovered". Or at this point are we just increasing our abilities to further analyze (as well as improve the actual technology) in the ways we already know how?

 

[TimF]

You are apparently asking if there is a perceptible phenomenon beyond or in addition to that which we consider and include in the range of what we call hearing. I believe hearing includes perceptions registered via the bone structure of the head. It would indeed be very very surprising to discover an entire new human perceptual field or organ of perception. So that leaves us with the realm of the spiritual and extra perceptual, or you might say metaphysical. I think the spiritual, extra perceptual and metaphysical are generally not covered in this web site (sight). Maybe I am wrong.

 

[scott wurcer]

Something the subjectivist crowd often brings up. "There are things we cannot measure but the human ear/brain can hear it."

Plain and simple there aren't any, everything we hear is a physical phenomena transferred via the air around us.

 

[AdamG]

Emotion. Can an instrument measure the emotion of a performance or the emotional impact of a particular song or passage has upon an individual?

 

[Wombat]

In audio propagation, emotion is a neurologic/psychologic reaction to how what is heard is perceived via brain/mind processing.

Lots shown in Google Search. E.g. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780125587044/the-measurement-of-emotions#book-description

 

[Emlin]

If the waveform recorded is accurately reproduced by the replay equipment then there cannot be anything missing, Emotion happens in your head as a result of exposure to the waveform, it is not in the waveform.

 

[dualazmak]

This is an eternal issue for endless discussion, I assume...

Just let me share this again here, which I have once shared in my thread post #316;

I had interesting communication at Watchnerd's thread entitled "Poll: Best Looking Stereo Integrated Amp", and the specific communication on "musicality" started by Doodski's post #851 showing Yamaha's (advertisement) YouTube video clip for the development of their integrated amplifier A-S1100;

In the video clip at 1:09, Mr. Taro Morii, Supervisor HiFi Group, specialist on fine tuning of Yamaha amplifiers, said;
We have developed it (A-S1100) based on the concept from A-S3000. The sound concept is "musicality", or to be more specific, the quality of low frequencies, the straight-forwardness of response, and authenticity of the sound...

really subjective comment, but it looks they are/were actually fine tuning the amplifiers based on this, i.e. what they call "musicality", in the final stage of their development by using their ears and brain.

And I believe no amplifier nor speaker is released to the market without the intensive ear-listening final fine tuning. Then the whole of "audio gears + room + environmets" is our HiFi "music istrument"...

Furthermore, we (you) do not always "like" the audio gear(s) which measured to be the best.

 

[Sawdust123]

The limitations of measurements was something I covered in my 2015 RMAF talk, "What the specs don't tell you and why." And I only scratched the surface in that talk. I sold audio test gear for 15 years and sat on standards committees too. In a nutshell, we measure what we do because we can do so easily. It is my opinion that we can get A LOT more from instrumentation but choose not to because the financial reward for doing so is not there.

 

[scott wurcer]

Emotion. Can an instrument measure the emotion of a performance or the emotional impact of a particular song or passage has upon an individual?

What are you trying to say, these things vary day to day they are not qualifiable?

 

[scott wurcer]

The limitations of measurements was something I covered in my 2015 RMAF talk, "What the specs don't tell you and why." And I only scratched the surface in that talk. I sold audio test gear for 15 years and sat on standards committees too. In a nutshell, we measure what we do because we can do so easily. It is my opinion that we can get A LOT more from instrumentation but choose not to because the financial reward for doing so is not there.

We need more slack.

And BTW post under your real name or you don't deserve an answer.

 

[Emlin]

The limitations of measurements was something I covered in my 2015 RMAF talk, "What the specs don't tell you and why." And I only scratched the surface in that talk. I sold audio test gear for 15 years and sat on standards committees too. In a nutshell, we measure what we do because we can do so easily. It is my opinion that we can get A LOT more from instrumentation but choose not to because the financial reward for doing so is not there.

You certainly have opinions, but where are your facts?

 

[Wombat]

This is an eternal issue for endless discussion, I assume...

Just let me share this again here, which I have once shared in my thread post #316;

I had interesting communication at Watchnerd's thread entitled "Poll: Best Looking Stereo Integrated Amp", and the specific communication on "musicality" started by Doodski's post #851 showing Yamaha's (advertisement) YouTube video clip for the development of their integrated amplifier A-S1100;

In the video clip at 1:09, Mr. Taro Morii, Supervisor HiFi Group, specialist on fine tuning of Yamaha amplifiers, said;
We have developed it (A-S1100) based on the concept from A-S3000. The sound concept is "musicality", or to be more specific, the quality of low frequencies, the straight-forwardness of response, and authenticity of the sound...

really subjective comment, but it looks they are/were actually fine tuning the amplifiers based on this, i.e. what they call "musicality", in the final stage of their development by using their ears and brain.

And I believe no amplifier nor speaker is released to the market without the intensive ear-listening final fine tuning. Then the whole of "audio gears + room + environmets" is our HiFi "music istrument"...

Furthermore, we (you) do not always "like" the audio gear(s) which measured best.

I read their description of musicality to mean accuracy.

 

[ShiZo]

It could be a ridiculous question for all I know.

Is it the case that every single thing can be measured?

 

[Emlin]

It could be a ridiculous question for all I know.

Is it the case that every single thing can be measured?

If you are talking audio waveforms, then yes.

 

[restorer-john]

Could it be possible for there to be a form of measurement we have not found yet? Is science completely clear on this point?

Wife Acceptance Factor (WAF). There are no commercially driven target curves or 'preferred' set of parameters for WAF. It varies wildly from subject to subject and can achieve polar opposite responses/results from week to week.

Science (and scientists) have wisely been reluctant to stray into quantifying this esoteric phenomena and to my knowledge, no measurement equipment for it exists. Probably should be considered as accepted science at this point and not questioned.

 

[Emlin]

Wife Acceptance Factor (WAF). There are no commercially driven target curves or 'preferred' set of parameters for WAF. It varies wildly from subject to subject and can achieve polar opposite responses/results from week to week.

Science (and scientists) have wisely been reluctant to stray into quantifying this esoteric phenomena and to my knowledge, no measurement equipment for it exists. Probably should be considered as accepted science at this point and not questioned.

That's beyond crass.

 

[Wombat]

NO.

But the physical aspects of audio are measurable to an acceptably high degree.

 

[Wombat]

That's beyond crass.

Are you a lifelong bachelor or just lucky?

 

[Benedium]

Maybe more importantly, doubters should realise that the ones who will come up with new ways to measure or interpret performance will most likely be audio science students or audio engineering professionals, not the random customer.

 

[dualazmak]

If you are talking audio waveforms, then yes.

Partly agree wtih you. It looks, however, they do not objectively "measure" their final fine tuning, but they do it by subjective ear-brain listening...