Why evaluating the sound of a single speaker is essential

[sublemon]

but i don't care about having *some* of my biases or imagination come into play.

This truly is the golden age for people who want good sounding audio in their homes.

possibly. anyway, off topic.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

but i don't care about having *some* of my biases or imagination come into play.

Nobody is saying you need to--that's totally fine! But this is a site dedicated to audio science, so naturally it's not a good place to proselytize your personal, idiosyncratic, subjective, unfalsifiable views.

 

[krabapple]

If everything trends to "perfect" automated spinorama/klipple type measurements, everything will sound the same and this hobby will be pretty boring, at least the equipment part of it. ironically the only thing left to differentiate will be aesthetics. lol.

Why do you want your speakers...whose task is merely to convert electric signal into acoustic waves -- to add colors?

Do you want your DACs coloring? Your cables? Your amps?

You can add all sorts of colors after the fact, by myriad means.

Maybe what you really want to be is a *sound engineer*.

 

[krabapple]

incorrect, i'm not talking about comparisons between speakers. so there is nothing to level match. not everyone is as susceptible to "sighted listening effects" as you are.

Lol, and here we go again....

 

[sublemon]

Nobody is saying you need to--that's totally fine! But this is a site dedicated to audio science, so naturally it's not a good place to proselytize your personal, idiosyncratic, subjective, unfalsifiable views.

I was never doing such a thing. I was just saying that I don't mind allowing for my own potentially non-audio preferences to impact what I prefer. lol.

 

[krabapple]

I get that it may be hard to stay on topic after almost 1000 posts in a thread, but some of the recent posts belong elsewhere or in new threads. Please ensure your posts are relevant to single speaker listening or they may be deleted.

Thanks!

It's the same old subjectivist blather seeping in like a bad smell, now in the guise of "sociability". As if there were no other ways to 'socialize' here without musing - sometimes at stupendous and repeated length -- about one's sighted impressions of sound.

My advice to those socially starved in that particular way : Get a room.

 

[LevityProject]

not everyone is as susceptible

Are some people wired to fall for placebos?

Some people are born believers. Fake surgeries have been shown to relieve traumatic knee pain; “dummy pills” have wiped away migraines. A new report from Harvard University describes how certain genes predispose people toward believing placebos, or experiencing the “placebo effect.” It also...

www.pbs.org

The science of hearing tells us otherwise. Our ears are incredibly, amazingly adaptive to sound. This is precisely why it's important to have objectively neutral sounding speakers that have a neutral in room response.

I had an enlightening conversation with the owner of a big recording studio in Seattle. We talked about how we can make mixes jn our studios that we love, but miss details and realize it only after auditioning in other spaces and sound systems. Audio bias is very real and affects everyone equally.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I was never doing such a thing. I was just saying that I don't mind allowing for my own potentially non-audio preferences to impact what I prefer. lol.

You absolutely have been doing this, and it's not going well for you. lol.

I'm lowkey amazed that you've been a member since 2019 and have somehow managed to learn nothing in six years. Most of us came here believing a lot of the same canards as you are spreading here, but this forum is a great place to move beyond superstition and closer to real, meaningful understanding. It's a terrible place, though, for intractable, obstinate insistence on magical thinking and demonstrable falsehood

 

[sublemon]

You absolutely have been doing this, and it's not going well for you. lol.

I'm lowkey amazed that you've been a member since 2019 and have somehow managed to learn nothing in six years. Most of us came here believing a lot of the same canards as you are spreading here, but this forum is a great place to move beyond superstition and closer to real, meaningful understanding. It's a terrible place, though, for intractable, obstinate insistence on magical thinking and demonstrable falsehood

I absolutely did not "proselytize" any personal views, or do any of the other things you mention. I think it's odd that you would misinterpret what I was saying to such an extent. read back and see if you can identify anything I said that would be "magical thinking" or a "falsehood." I was just saying I accept some of the biases, predisposition, adaptation, whatever as part of the whole experience.

The science of hearing tells us otherwise. Our ears are incredibly, amazingly adaptive to sound. This is precisely why it's important to have objectively neutral sounding speakers that have a neutral in room response.

I had an enlightening conversation with the owner of a big recording studio in Seattle. We talked about how we can make mixes jn our studios that we love, but miss details and realize it only after auditioning in other spaces and sound systems. Audio bias is very real and affects everyone equally.

OF course, but that is why you listen to your mixes on various different systems, also because its fun to do.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I absolutely did not "proselytize" any personal views, or do any of the other things you mention. I think it's odd that you would misinterpret what I was saying to such an extent. read back and see if you can identify anything I said that would be "magical thinking" or a "falsehood."

lol nah, I'd rather read posts from which I'll learn something

 

[sublemon]

lol nah, I'd rather read posts from which I'll learn something

so you admit you didn't actually read anything, What I said was actually pretty trivial in the scheme of things. imo.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

so you admit you didn't actually read anything, What I said was actually pretty trivial in the scheme of things. imo.

On this we agree: everything you have said is completely trivial

 

[sublemon]

anyway back to the topic of single speaker listening. the fact that stereo or multi channel hides some audio flaws is actually nice if you don;t have unlimited funds (as the most linear designs do tend to be more expensive...) There is a manufacturer or two that take advantage of this I think by using arrays of inexpensive drivers. not that i personally prefer this approach but is it due to as some mentioned in this thread, our brains having to split attention between multiple sources, so we are less conscious of flaws, or is it because of more reflections etc masking the response? that was one thing I meant to ask about earlier.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I absolutely did not "proselytize" any personal views, or do any of the other things you mention. I think it's odd that you would misinterpret what I was saying to such an extent. read back and see if you can identify anything I said that would be "magical thinking" or a "falsehood." I was just saying I accept some of the biases, predisposition, adaptation, whatever as part of the whole experience.

"Human judgments about a sensation or a product are strongly influenced by items that surround the item of interest, either in space or in time. This chapter shows how judgments can change as a function of the context within which a product is evaluated. Various contextual effects and biases are described and categorized. Some solutions and courses of action to minimize these biases are presented."

By such general principles of action as these everything looked at, felt, smelt or heard comes to be located in a more or less definite position relatively to other collateral things either actually presented or only imagined as possibly there.

— James (1913, p. 342)

The pub he referenced is James, W. 1913. Psychology. Henry Holt and Company, New York.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Perceptual bias is the tendency to interpret information about ourselves and our environment in a subjective way, causing our perception to systematically deviate from objective fact. This process is driven by internal factors like personal beliefs, past experiences, and expectations rather than solely by external sensory data. The brain employs this filtering mechanism to manage the massive amount of stimuli bombarding the senses.
This tendency is often categorized as a type of cognitive bias, but it operates at the initial stage of information processing. Perceptual bias involves the screening, selecting, and organizing of raw sensory input—what we literally see, hear, and feel—before complex thought or logical reasoning begins. In contrast, broader cognitive biases are errors in thought, logic, and decision-making that occur after the brain has already filtered and interpreted the sensory data."

What Is Perceptual Bias and How Does It Work?

Understand how your brain filters sensory data to construct reality. Learn the mechanisms of perceptual bias and strategies to reduce its influence.

scienceinsights.org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[sublemon]

On this we agree: everything you have said is completely trivial

come on bud there's no call for that.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

the most linear designs do tend to be more expensive

Maybe not as much as you think these days! very flat, neutral, accurate speakers have never been cheaper.

 

[sublemon]

"Human judgments about a sensation or a product are strongly influenced by items that surround the item of interest, either in space or in time. This chapter shows how judgments can change as a function of the context within which a product is evaluated. Various contextual effects and biases are described and categorized. Some solutions and courses of action to minimize these biases are presented."


The pub he referenced is James, W. 1913. Psychology. Henry Holt and Company, New York.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Perceptual bias is the tendency to interpret information about ourselves and our environment in a subjective way, causing our perception to systematically deviate from objective fact. This process is driven by internal factors like personal beliefs, past experiences, and expectations rather than solely by external sensory data. The brain employs this filtering mechanism to manage the massive amount of stimuli bombarding the senses.
This tendency is often categorized as a type of cognitive bias, but it operates at the initial stage of information processing. Perceptual bias involves the screening, selecting, and organizing of raw sensory input—what we literally see, hear, and feel—before complex thought or logical reasoning begins. In contrast, broader cognitive biases are errors in thought, logic, and decision-making that occur after the brain has already filtered and interpreted the sensory data."

What Is Perceptual Bias and How Does It Work?

Understand how your brain filters sensory data to construct reality. Learn the mechanisms of perceptual bias and strategies to reduce its influence.

scienceinsights.org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

but nothing I said disagreed with any of that, at least it was not my intention.

 

[sublemon]

Maybe not as much as you think these days! very flat, neutral, accurate speakers have never been cheaper.

there are some for sure, but you gotta spend a few bucks at least to get real response down to the 30s along with flat.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I was just saying that I don't mind allowing for my own potentially non-audio preferences to impact what I prefer. lol.

It's not that you "allow" anything. It's that you cannot prevent it.

but i don't care about having *some* of my biases or imagination come into play.

You (and we) cannot pick and choose which biases are in control of us. It doesn't work that way.

for the record, I agree everyone is susceptible to bias and placebo, just not to the same extent.

And how do we identify which extent is at work, and in whom ... including ourselves?

I still think self-reflection can help overcome to some extent.

A Double-Blind Test is the best method to control bias that we've found. It depends on physical control, self-discipline and rigor, not self-reflection.

... not everyone is as susceptible to "sighted listening effects" as you are.

There is no "degree" to which everyone is susceptible to "sighted listening effects". To believe that is to deceive yourself as regards your bias.

in any case, I can compensate for the "corruption" to some extent when evaluating the subjective impressions reported by other people. a skill that most here at asr seem to lack. lol.

Please read my reply above.

The criticisms that members have aimed your way involve the statements you have made, listed above. When it comes to the effects of bias, denial is not in the cards. Either we recognize it, accept the universality of it, and work to control it ... or we fall deeply in thrall to it.

You may think people here are just arguing with you for the sake of argument. That is not true. ASR is not a site like that. We are trying to help you understand the differences between science (which lacks emotional attachment) and human bias (of which emotional attachment is part and parcel.)

C'mon over to the Dark Side. We have cookies!

 

[LevityProject]

anyway back to the topic of single speaker listening. the fact that stereo or multi channel hides some audio flaws is actually nice if you don;t have unlimited funds (as the most linear designs do tend to be more expensive...)

.. hides flaws until there is something hard panned to one of the speakers. Then the flaws are exposed. This just means we will accept objectively bad sound and believe it sounds good until something knocks us out of the confirmation bias/feedback loop of what we are told by advertising and purely subjective reviews.

There is a manufacturer or two that take advantage of this I think by using arrays of inexpensive drivers. not that i personally prefer this approach but is it due to as some mentioned in this thread, our brains having to split attention between multiple sources, so we are less conscious of flaws, or is it because of more reflections etc masking the response? that was one thing I meant to ask about earlier.

Masking and smearing