Where is Audio Truth ?

[chriss71]

It's common for people to envision and represent a digital signal as a series of 1s and 0s. As such, there's really no room for error, at least according to this binary theory. Is a digital signal simply a series of 1s and 0s?

 

Charlie Hansen: Unfortunately not. The "1"s and "0"s are just abstractions that are easy to think about.But in the real world, something real needs to represent those two abstract states. In modern digital electronics, we have almost universally chosen a voltage above a specific level (that varies from one "family" of electronic parts to another) to represent a "1" and a voltage below a different specific level (that again can vary) to represent a "0".

 

Here we have the first misunderstanding (in our High-End story). When the stream hits the DAC he is true, in a pure digital domain he is wrong... He explains how the DAC interprets that bitstream. Before, you can do with that bitstream whatever you want, when at the end comes the same bitstream to the DAC it would sound the same...

 

Reading with interest this article...

[chriss71]

But aside from the data being true, there is so much more. How much energy is wasted delivering the data seems to have an effect on sound. As with increased energy usage the amount of EMI/RFI radiation also increases. This might be a reason why applications sound different. If we look at the "top" command in the Terminal application on OS X we see a programs usage and percent time and all the processes associated with that program. In practice the applications with the least required processing time also sounds the best. This may have an indication of why file types sound different. If you unpack a lossless file on the fly the processing time increases measurably and that tends to decrease the sound quality.

 

OK, now he is speculating. He thinks it sound different and is looking for a reason on his observation. Now it comes to a following question for me: Have he EVER looked on his observation on a double blindfold test? We are here in pure computer science. I will tell him the following: All of the computer processes will NOT have an impact (with a small limitation if all CPU cores goes to 100%), because the data are buffered in the cache of the processor or the RAM. So, in this case he is wrong (off-topic: Is it rude, when I say, he is wrong? Is there another word which are not rude?)

[chriss71]

Just seen that there is a thread on that article here: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/conversation-charles-hansen-gordon-rankin-and-steve-silberman-16609/

 

I will post my comments about the article there...

[Snowmonkey]

Chris, leaving aside the fact that the musical information travels from the bus to the DAC as a sine wave, rather than a stream of discreet digits, it is always a mistake to predict with certainty how complex systems will behave based on logic, because we humans simply do not possess the knowledge of all the variables at play in nature. In the immortal words of that great philosopher Donald Rumsfeld, there are the "unknown unknowns". The best we can do is to make educated guesses at what will happen, then investigate the reasons why we are at times wrong. That's science.

[bdiament]

It would appear there are many threads on many forums debating computer audio evidence vs hearing differences when listening...

 

Thank you David.

A very well considered post.

 

I've often thought the real difference between so-called "objectivists" and "subjectivists" is the denial on the part of the former that they are in fact, merely a variation of the latter.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

Barry Diament Audio

[Blake]

Very good post David.

[NOMBEDES]

Some old bluesman once said; "It's not the notes, it's the space between the notes". So, indeed, zeros and ones must be abstractions.

 

All of the discussion above is a bit odd given that each speaker/amplifier combination will sound different.

[Audio_ELF]

Okay... Here's a supposition...

 

A lot of people say measurement is pointless. They also say that DBT is pointless.

 

So when you listen to two cables (let's say SPDIF cables) how do you know the boutique cable is really better and that its not the "generic" 75ohm video cable (that possibly measures better) that's the best?

 

Oh yes... People will say one cable sounds more life like - more like the concert they last went to... But haven't we already ascertained that aural memory is imperfect?

 

Eloise

[Guidof]

 

Oh yes... People will say one cable sounds more life like - more like the concert they last went to... But haven't we already ascertained that aural memory is imperfect?

 

Eloise

 

Yes, we have. But that aural memory is imperfect does not necessarily make it useless.

 

Guido F.

[Audio_ELF]

Yes, we have. But that aural memory is imperfect does not necessarily make it useless.

Sighs and snorts...

[Kiwi2]

A lot of people say measurement is pointless. They also say that DBT is pointless.

 

So when you listen to two cables (let's say SPDIF cables) how do you know the boutique cable is really better and that its not the "generic" 75ohm video cable (that possibly measures better) that's the best?

 

Don't forget about 'priming' though. Researchers know full well the power of suggestion to preconceived what we will see or hear or think.

 

Our brains at a very deep subconscious level takes shortcuts where it can in our decision making process and in how we interpret the world around us. If you have been primed to see or hear a particular thing or feel a certain way, then that is what you will see or hear or feel. There are dozens and dozens of such experiments to demonstrate this effect on us. Marketing people know this full well and spend years studying all this at university.

 

Take the priming for this USB filter for example...

 

Aubisque USB Filter | ULTRA FI

 

By having the image of a middle aged man and in a room with a audiophile's sound system with soft warm earthy colours, automatically conjures up thoughts of some nice classical music playing or some such. So this product they are selling has to be better than a similar product you could get for $20 at radio shack. You could even buy both products and compare them yourself. No doubt the $200 one from that classy looking webpage will sound better and you could swear black and blue that it does.

 

But surprisingly (or not surprisingly) the moment it becomes a blind A/B test those "differences" vanish and you can't pick one from the other.

 

It isn't mystical or unexplained. There is a very well known and understood reason for it.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Okay... Here's a supposition...

 

A lot of people say measurement is pointless. They also say that DBT is pointless.

 

So when you listen to two cables (let's say SPDIF cables) how do you know the boutique cable is really better and that its not the "generic" 75ohm video cable (that possibly measures better) that's the best?

 

Oh yes... People will say one cable sounds more life like - more like the concert they last went to... But haven't we already ascertained that aural memory is imperfect?

 

Eloise

 

Hi Eloise,

I'm not saying measurements or DBT are useless, just not 100% reliable (or 100% specific, 100% valid….) as is often held to be true. The truth appears to reside in probabilities not absolutes.

If you are listening for differences between cables you have to ask yourself how well can anybody discriminate between same and different? This gets down to chasing 'the truth' if that is your goal and as elaborated in the post. What is the truth, how do we know, what is scientifically acceptable etc ? Now factor in that some people are more skilled at discriminating certain qualities eg musicians maybe for pitch perception, audio-engineers for maybe noise backgrounds, audiophiles for maybe soundstage….and racing car drivers maybe have quicker reaction times. Human beings have huge individual variations, aptitudes, experiences and skill sets. Now factor in things like soundstage can't even be measured afaik. Now factor in individual tastes. Do you like a recessed sound or more forward presentation, classical or rock, summer or winter, CD's or vinyl. "Better" is relative. "Better" is subjective. "Better" Measurements can help guide you but some would argue may also distort your judgement.

[REShaman]

Hi Eloise,

I'm not saying measurements or DBT are useless, just not 100% reliable (or 100% specific, 100% valid….) as is often held to be true. The truth appears to reside in probabilities not absolutes.

If you are listening for differences between cables you have to ask yourself how well can anybody discriminate between same and different? This gets down to chasing 'the truth' if that is your goal and as elaborated in the post. What is the truth, how do we know, what is scientifically acceptable etc ? Now factor in that some people are more skilled at discriminating certain qualities eg musicians maybe for pitch perception, audio-engineers for maybe noise backgrounds, audiophiles for maybe soundstage….and racing car drivers maybe have quicker reaction times. Human beings have huge individual variations, aptitudes, experiences and skill sets. Now factor in things like soundstage can't even be measured afaik. Now factor in individual tastes. Do you like a recessed sound or more forward presentation, classical or rock, summer or winter, CD's or vinyl. "Better" is relative. "Better" is subjective. "Better" Measurements can help guide you but some would argue may also distort your judgement.

 

Well stated perspective that has a symmetry that makes good sense and draws from a spectrum of clarity among other awareness.

Best,

Richard

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

 

the moment it becomes a blind A/B test those "differences" vanish

 

well except that Real differences can exist but not detected by typical AB testing. If you stand on scales and it says 70KG and then someone hands you 2KG to hold but the scales do not move do we conclude the correct weight is 70Kg or 72Kg? Consider it may be the test device and/or procedure that is lacking....is the methodology valid .....a debate for another time.

 

[Kiwi2]

If you stand on scales and it says 70KG and then someone hands you 2KG to hold but the scales do not move do we conclude the correct weight is 70Kg or 72Kg? Consider it may be the test device and/or procedure that is lacking....is the methodology valid .....a debate for another time.

 

Or one could look at the scale's specifications to note its +/- % range and realise they need to buy a better set of bathroom scales next time.

 

Nevertheless someone's subconscious preconceived notions about how a particular product performs is also a big part of the equation that can't be overlooked when discussing such things. It isn't just measurements or someone's opinion that A is better than B... but what that person has been primed to think as well.

 

What the subconscious thinks, will physically alter what the conscious experiences no matter how impartial you think you are being.

 

This isn't eerie theory stuff... it's another branch of science.

[sandyk]

So when you listen to two cables (let's say SPDIF cables) how do you know the boutique cable is really better and that its not the "generic" 75ohm video cable (that possibly measures better) that's the best?

Eloise

That's where longer term listening is beneficial. Listen to the new item for at least several days, then revert to the original.

Aural memory is imperfect to a certain extent, but if something doesn't sound as good as it did the day before, it may also indicate the desirability of checking blood pressure for an older person, or a degree of stress. l With audio, how relaxed you are is highly important too.

 

Regards

Alex

[Don Hills]

Eloise

That's where longer term listening is beneficial. Listen to the new item for at least several days, then revert to the original. ...

 

Better: Get someone else to revert to the original for you. Or they pretend to but don't. (And no peeking...)

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Or one could look at the scale's specifications to note its +/- % range and realise they need to buy a better set of bathroom scales next time.

 

...exactly, and replace the faulty ABX test with a newer version, or if needed, design a whole new test

 

Nevertheless someone's subconscious preconceived notions about how a particular product performs is also a big part of the equation that can't be overlooked when discussing such things. It isn't just measurements or someone's opinion that A is better than B... but what that person has been primed to think as well.

What the subconscious thinks, will physically alter what the conscious experiences no matter how impartial you think you are being.This isn't eerie theory stuff... it's another branch of science.

 

Agree with everything and it is in a closely related branch of science that I work within. The whole "subconscious" thing is a bit 'Freudian' and "old" school though, and I'm a bit too "Yung" for that...sorry, bad pun :-)

[sandyk]

Better: Get someone else to revert to the original for you. Or they pretend to but don't. (And no peeking...)

 

Very few changes jump out and grab you by "the short and curlies" We don't always immediately know why we prefer one thing over another. It often takes longer term listening, with different types of program material.The time of day is often important too, due to varying levels of ambient noise.

[Blake]

The time of day is often important too

 

Without question, my best listening sessions are late at night. My listening room is surrounded by windows, so everything is quite dark and relaxing. Perhaps the lack of light helps me to better focus on the sound, perhaps less ambient noise- I am not sure, but for critical listening, I always listen late at night.

 

Also, I find that after listening for several hours, at a certain point, the listening becomes less enjoyable, perhaps because my sense of hearing gets over-stressed. If I am demoing new gear or doing product comparisons I always do those at night, and I avoid listening to music during the day so that my ears are fresh at night.

[Kal Rubinson]

You can study pc audio technology in isolation to human hearing as you can study physiology in isolation.

I am not sure how to parse that. Do you mean that you can study physiology (of hearing) without studying audio technology? Sure and some of us do.

 

Or did you mean that you can study physiology without physiological beings (or reference to one)? I question that.

[InfernoSTi]

I believe that my intended goal of my stereo system is to provide enjoyment to me. Everything else depends on what "makes me happy" more than anything else. And we all know that happiness is an emotional state that is inherently subjective to the individual and highly dependent on many unrelated emotions and experiences (more on this later on). If one things makes one person happy but not another, that doesn't mean anything other than individual preference.

 

Some people feel more comfortable being told "the numbers are what make it better" and others feel more confident that "they heard a difference with their own ears." Those that believe in the numbers can't understand why others aren't as confident in them as they are; conversely, those who believe in their own experiences can't fathom why somebody would trust a set of data over what they actually know first hand.

 

So what is the point of the objective data in the first place? The answer has to be that better data achieves better sound. Nobody would use objective data to try try to prove that better data achieves poorer sound. There is no use in data collection at all unless the objective is to create a more enjoyable experience which will always vary from person to person and for reasons that might be related more to personality types and past experiences than to anything having to do with the equipment itself.

 

So if that is true, what is "better" sound? In the end, "better" is entirely a subjective experience not because the data was right (or wrong or didn't even measure the important types of data) but because "better" resides in what gives an individual "more" enjoyment from their stereo and the key is the person, not the the data (and not even the equipment).

 

To that point, for me, I like the sound of the equipment I build myself (and if it is a commercial product, I like the sound of it better if someone I know modified it). I feel an intellectual/emotional connection to the gear that perhaps doesn't make it sound any better objectively than any other (similar) gear...it is simply my feelings that make it so.

 

I really like knowing that Mundorf SIO coupling capacitor "changed" the sound to "my preference." For me, a lot of the enjoyment is trying new little things and seeing if I can hear a difference that I like. I would rather have a unique system that I can explain every part of than an off the shelf product that sounds identical that I don't understand why at all. This is because of my personality type and it doesn't change a thing about the objective data or the subjective experience (assuming they are in all aspects identical). How can that be true unless the goal is my personal enjoyment?

 

I also know that for others, all that DIY stuff would be a huge hassle and suck all enjoyment out of the stereo. And for others still, they may prefer the "most expensive" or the "best sound for the dollar" or perhaps they always wanted a brand they read about as a teenager and now have a chance to own. Or perhaps they like the look of the gear itself. Or they like new equipment and have to change. Or they like keeping that old amp "in the system" no mater what else changes. I could keep going but the individual always has to come back to their enjoyment of the system for their own reasons, most of which have absolutely nothing to do with the objective/subjective debate (even if they believe strongly in one side or the other, that is mostly because that is what gives them the most enjoyment).

 

Back to my opening thesis, both objective and subjective are not seeking the right measure of a stereo: only if it makes your enjoyment grow, can it be better.

 

Best,

John

[The Computer Audiophile]

I believe that my intended goal of my stereo system is to provide enjoyment to me.

 

Back to my opening thesis, both objective and subjective are not seeking the right measure of a stereo: only if it makes your enjoyment grow, can it be better.

 

Best,

John

 

Hi John - There is really nothing more to say. You said it as well as anyone could have said it.

[REShaman]

Hi John - There is really nothing more to say. You said it as well as anyone could have said it.

 

And it has been advocated by many of us for a considerable time. No matter. Amen.

 

Best,

Richard

[The Computer Audiophile]

And it has been advocated by many of us for a considerable time. No matter. Amen.

 

Best,

Richard

You bet Richard.