If it's measurable, is it audible?

[Teresa]

Esldude or anyone else have never and will never convince me of anything.

 

You will have a very hard time finding anyone more open minded than me.

 

These two sentences seem rather inconsistent.

 

The two statements are most definitely not inconsistent and I will explain why. An open-minded person is willing to try anything and willing to change their mind based on what they hear. A closed-minded person will only trust the written word, technical tests and current scientific thought over what they hear with their own ears.

 

An open-minded person does not reject what they hear because they are having a hard time explaining it.

 

An open minded person respects ALL listening impressions of other people even when they totally disagree with them.

 

Finally, an open minded person will listen to other people's experiences and if interested try it themselves and more importantly never attack anyone because their experiences differ from their own. Also an open minded person will never be gullible enough or closed minded enough to allow someone convince them of anything without listening for themselves.

 

In short a open minded person respects everyone's listening impressions and only comments on things they have actually tried themselves and never insists their listening impressions or their understanding of science applies to anyone except themselves.

[Don Hills]

The two statements are most definitely not inconsistent and I will explain why. An open-minded person is willing to try anything and willing to change their mind based on what they hear. A closed-minded person will only trust the written word, technical tests and current scientific thought over what they hear with their own ears. ...

 

A truly open minded person will be open to the possibility that their ear/mind system is deceiving them.

[Teresa]

A truly open minded person will be open to the possibility that their ear/mind system is deceiving them.

 

A truly open minded person would be open to the possibility that their ear/mind system is not defective and they are being deceived by people out to destroy audiophiles and the noble quest for the best music experience possible. Don't be sucked into their obscene mediocrity. My ears have not let me down yet, and I know they never will!

 

Open your ears and open your mind and trust what you hear. To reject what you hear is very closed minded IMHO.

 

"The words Wilma Cozart Fine lived by were "trust your ears." This was the guiding principle that defined her working life. For those who don't know the name, hers was a working life to remember." - Trustees Award: Wilma Cozart Fine

[Teresa]

P.S. I wish I could make my ear/mind/body system deceive me as I could save a ton of money by magically turning an entry-level audio system into a $50,000 high-end system. Where do I find some of that magic?

 

My ears have saved me a ton of money by revealing what sounds poor, I have rejected and returned much more product than I have ever purchased. A lot of what I returned had great measurements. I have to hear it in my system with my music and my ears to know if I like it. There is no other way on Planet Earth to find out what something sounds like without actually listening to it. And guess what? It's our ear/mind/body system we use to experience music with!

[mayhem13]

A truly open minded person would be open to the possibility that their ear/mind system is not defective and they are being deceived by people out to destroy audiophiles and the noble quest for the best music experience possible. Don't be sucked into their obscene mediocrity. My ears have not let me down yet, and I know they never will!

 

Open your ears and open your mind and trust what you hear. To reject what you hear is very closed minded IMHO.

 

"The words Wilma Cozart Fine lived by were "trust your ears." This was the guiding principle that defined her working life. For those who don't know the name, hers was a working life to remember." - Trustees Award: Wilma Cozart Fine

 

So 'open' minded people such as yourself are only responsive to sensory input and derivatives such as what they hear, see, touch, smell and taste? This is good information if accurate. Thank you.

[Teresa]

So 'open' minded people such as yourself are only responsive to sensory input and derivatives such as what they hear, see, touch, smell and taste? This is good information if accurate. Thank you.

 

Yes, that is correct but even more importantly open minded people also respect what other people hear, see, touch, smell and taste and never try to tell them what they can and cannot experience. Open minded people never belittle or insult other people's experiences. Also open minded people are willing to experiment with things that interest them without the blessing of others.

 

It's our ear/mind/body system we use to experience music with.

It's our smell/taste system we use to enjoy food with.

 

I would not depend on others to tell me what I can and cannot enjoy eating, I prefer deciding what my favorite foods are myself, as everyone else should. By the same token I don't depend on others to tell me what I can and cannot enjoy listening to, I let my ear/mind/body system determine what it enjoys the best. This is the only logical course of action I have ever discovered.

[MrAcoustat]

While some of my friends are busy measuring, i'm busy LISTENING i don't have time to lose, life is to short.

[audiventory]

The human ear is sensitive not for any difference of measurements.

 

Examples:

1) We clear listen difference between irregularities ±1 and ±10 dB of frequency responce.

 

2) We don't listen defference between 0,1 and 0,2 % THD.

 

Better measurement - better sound. But we can't listen difference for some cases.

[audiventory]

While some of my friends are busy measuring, i'm busy LISTENING i don't have time to lose, life is to short.

 

MrAcoustat,

 

Measuring is suitable tool for audio development. Measuring show direction for improving of sound.

 

Other hand, we can't made all measurements for correct evaluation of sound quality.

 

Experts listen resulting sound of audio gears and describe it.

 

Developers make measurements and seek reason of the such sound description by experts.

 

Gears tune for improving of sound.

 

I note not all like sound of devices with features close to ideal. This sound named as "monitor sound" or "dry sound" or "boring sound"

 

= Yuri

[MrAcoustat]

MrAcoustat,

 

Measuring is suitable tool for audio development. Measuring show direction for improving of sound.

 

Other hand, we can't made all measurements for correct evaluation of sound quality.

 

Experts listen resulting sound of audio gears and describe it.

 

Developers make measurements and seek reason of the such sound description by experts.

 

Gears tune for improving of sound.

 

I note not all like sound of devices with features close to ideal. This sound named as "monitor sound" or "dry sound" or "boring sound"

 

= Yuri

 

For ME i will let the experts do the measuring and just keep on listening. - - -

[audiventory]

Fine loudspeakers. True speaker must have large volume.

[gmgraves]

A truly open minded person would be open to the possibility that their ear/mind system is not defective and they are being deceived by people out to destroy audiophiles and the noble quest for the best music experience possible. Don't be sucked into their obscene mediocrity. My ears have not let me down yet, and I know they never will!

 

Open your ears and open your mind and trust what you hear. To reject what you hear is very closed minded IMHO.

 

"The words Wilma Cozart Fine lived by were "trust your ears." This was the guiding principle that defined her working life. For those who don't know the name, hers was a working life to remember." - Trustees Award: Wilma Cozart Fine

 

 

Sounds a lot like "faith" to me. Nobody ever learned anything new by trusting in faith (especially faith in easily led astray human senses).

[sandyk]

Nobody ever learned anything new by trusting in faith

 

Absolute balderdash. Without Subjective reports, there wouldn't be the need for Objective measurements.

[Audio_ELF]

Absolute balderdash. Without Subjective reports, there wouldn't be the need for Objective measurements.

I agree Alex. An observation is the starting point for most (all?) scientific discoveries.

[esldude]

Sounds a lot like "faith" to me. Nobody ever learned anything new by trusting in faith

 

I don't see the interpretation the above statement is against subjective observation. It is against subjective or any other observations so colored by faith they leave no room for something new to be comprehended.

 

Much science does start or has started with subjective observation. But it is a continuous feedback loop of sorts. A theory from developed evidence may make predictions for previously unobserved phenomena so one goes to make the observation to see if the prediction was correct. Further observations may fill in details and advance the process all over again. Before such get very far along often objective verification of predicted results is the main part of it. Or maybe more so, failure to observe those predicted results is when real discoveries are made.

[Teresa]

You have consistently argued that its impossible that the accepted science of psychoacoustics that has repeatedly shown your ears are easily deceived is correct. Now you claim that wholesale rejection is proof you're "open minded".

 

Wrong, while I believe under unnatural listening conditions it is possible to fool the ear once or twice as those pseudo-scientists love to do. However the ears cannot be fooled repeatedly over many days, weeks, months and years, that is just flat out illogical. That’s why repeated listening and money-back satisfaction guarantees are so important. I am sorry you have been seduced by their scam.

 

I’m totally and completely opposed to blind faith and that is why I remain uninfluenced by science, advertising, reviews and so-called experts. The only important thing is “do I like it”, if not then all the rest means nothing. Being open minded is being open to everyone’s listening experiences without belittling or attacking them. And being open minded enough to know when you are being lied to by pseudo-scientists and their phony ABX DBT tests designed to make everything under the sun sound the same. Believing in such fake science over real experiences is as closed minded as any one person can get.

 

Sounds a lot like "faith" to me. Nobody ever learned anything new by trusting in faith (especially faith in easily led astray human senses).

 

I have no faith in anything except myself and have always said TRUST NO ONE and I mean that. The only thing one can listen to music with is the ear/brain/body system, to try to listen to music any other way is an extreme exercise in futility. Sorry, I don’t believe in your blind faith.

[gmgraves]

Absolute balderdash. Without Subjective reports, there wouldn't be the need for Objective measurements.

 

Now, there's a non-sequitur if ever I've seen one. A subjective report is an observed phenomenon, not a judgement made on faith. Observed phenomena need to be investigated scientifically; first to see if the observation is valid, and then to find out the mechanism behind the observation.

[sandyk]

Observed phenomena need to be investigated scientifically; first to see if the observation is valid, and then to find out the mechanism behind the observation.

 

But that's just too much hard work for most of the usual suspects here. They expect others to do the dirty work for them.

Now, there's a non-sequitur if ever I've seen one

 

Yet again, comments like that show just how far many of you are living in the past, needing to quote Latin, which is so beloved of Academics and has no real place in modern society.

Does it make you feel superior to be able to use Latin phrases ?

Do you use phrases like that in your motoring reviews ? If not, then why here ?

[gmgraves]

Wrong, while I believe under unnatural listening conditions it is possible to fool the ear once or twice as those pseudo-scientists love to do. However the ears cannot be fooled repeatedly over many days, weeks, months and years, that is just flat out illogical. That’s why repeated listening and money-back satisfaction guarantees are so important. I am sorry you have been seduced by their scam.

 

What's illogical about being fooled repeatedly? As a society we continually get fooled into re-electing our self-serving "leaders" over and over. Why would our ears be any different?

 

I’m totally and completely opposed to blind faith and that is why I remain uninfluenced by science, advertising, reviews and so-called experts. The only important thing is “do I like it”, if not then all the rest means nothing.

 

But that is faith, Teresa. You have faith that your ears are telling the truth and that what you decide you like is real. Admirable, perhaps that you are THAT sure, but your confidence is based on an assumption not in evidence.

 

Being open minded is being open to everyone’s listening experiences without belittling or attacking them. And being open minded enough to know when you are being lied to by pseudo-scientists and their phony ABX DBT tests designed to make everything under the sun sound the same. Believing in such fake science over real experiences is as closed minded as any one person can get.

 

I think you have close-mindedness confused with healthy skepticism. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" and all that.

The very fact that you call people who look for the truth using the scientific principle "pseudo-scientists" and their tests "phony ABX Tests" shows that you built-up a very unhealthy prejudice against the search for knowledge and have completely closed YOUR mind to the possibility that many of these phenomenon might be psychoacoustic and not real.

 

 

 

I have no faith in anything except myself and have always said TRUST NO ONE and I mean that. The only thing one can listen to music with is the ear/brain/body system, to try to listen to music any other way is an extreme exercise in futility. Sorry, I don’t believe in your blind faith.

 

But, you're the one with the blind faith, not me. YOU have absolute faith in your own hearing, in spite of all the evidence that the human ear/brain is fraught with bias, preconception, and misinterpretation of the sound heard. That's faith, milady, in it's most elemental state. BTW, just a personal aside: I'd hate to live in a world where I trusted no one. What a bleak, dark world.

[gmgraves]

But that's just too much hard work for most of the usual suspects here. They expect others to do the dirty work for them.

 

Well, I was speaking generally about the scientific method, not specifically about audio. But the fact is that some people (not necessarily hobbyists) do take the time and effort to do that hard work Is important. That their findings are, often at odds to the marketing hype and shrill insistence of those who believe only their ears, and are deaf to any criticism of their audio faith, doesn't mean that those findings should have no weight or should be discounted completely as some tend to do.

[sandyk]

That their findings are, often at odds to the marketing hype and shrill insistence of those who believe only their ears, and are deaf to any criticism of their audio faith, doesn't mean that those findings should have no weight or should be discounted completely as some tend to do.

That works both ways George. Unlike your typical member who makes a subjective report, I have gone to a great deal of trouble over the last 5 years to obtain further verification of my reports by suitably qualified members and others.

Neither do I post any reports that haven't been confirmed by others first within reasonable bounds. If others don't find those measures meet their expectations, then it's up to them to arrange for further investigations.

But that's just too much hard work for some here.

[mayhem13]

That works both ways George. Unlike your typical member who makes a subjective report, I have gone to a great deal of trouble over the last 5 years to obtain further verification of my reports by suitably qualified members and others.

Neither do I post any reports that haven't been confirmed by others first within reasonable bounds. If others don't find those measures meet their expectations, then it's up to them to arrange for further investigations.

But that's just too much hard work for some here.

 

Why investigate counterpoint when there's no correlating 1st hand experience to support it? You say you hear something. I say I didn't. You say someone else heard it too. I say I still didn't hear it and after extensive research, I can find nothing in a scientific sense to support that you or someone else heard it. In that ends the need for further investigations on my end. The burden of proof is yours.......and whoever shared your experience. That's the way the world works Alex......sorry.

[Teresa]

What's illogical about being fooled repeatedly?

 

It's not only illogical it is flat out impossible.

 

As a society we continually get fooled into re-electing our self-serving "leaders" over and over.

 

No we are not, in the USA we don't get to select who runs for office we only have a choice between those chosen for us by the financial backers who give them millions of dollars in exchange for favors. We don't have a democracy we have a plutocracy. So your comparison with music is invalid.

 

Why would our ears be any different?

 

Because we use our ears to enjoy music with, nothing external has control over them.

 

But that is faith, Teresa. You have faith that your ears are telling the truth and that what you decide you like is real. Admirable, perhaps that you are THAT sure, but your confidence is based on an assumption not in evidence.

 

So a total lack of faith in your twisted logic is "faith", what a bizarre attitude you have. My ears tell me what they like, if what they like is not real and what they dislike is real, it would not change what they like and what they dislike. Some say imaging, soundstaging, and other aspects of sound are not real however I enjoy them very much, thank you.

 

I think you have close-mindedness confused with healthy skepticism. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" and all that.

The very fact that you call people who look for the truth using the scientific principle "pseudo-scientists" and their tests "phony ABX Tests" shows that you built-up a very unhealthy prejudice against the search for knowledge and have completely closed YOUR mind to the possibility that many of these phenomenon might be psychoacoustic and not real.

 

I am open minded enough to believe that there are people who don't trust their ears and trust what is external instead and I have never attacked them or belittled them for their beliefs even when I find them bizarre. All people deserve respect.

 

But, you're the one with the blind faith, not me. YOU have absolute faith in your own hearing, in spite of all the evidence that the human ear/brain is fraught with bias, preconception, and misinterpretation of the sound heard. That's faith, milady, in it's most elemental state. BTW, just a personal aside: I'd hate to live in a world where I trusted no one. What a bleak, dark world.

 

I have studied that so called evidence and so far all of it is highly flawed.

 

If I don’t use my ears to listen to music with then there is NO reason to listen to music. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend? It is our ear/brain/body system we use to enjoy music with, take that away and there is NO music.

 

Finally, trust no one except yourself as no one's experience will always match your own. In the realm of audio that means checking out everything you have an interest in using your system, your music and your ears.

[sandyk]

If you want to prove me wrong, then it's up to you to do so, not the other way around. I feel that I have provided more than adequate confirmation to warrant further investigation.

I really don't giver a damn if a few closed minded C.A. sceptics like yourself don't wish to believe me . It's your loss, not mine.

You and your fellow "experts" are no closer to proving me wrong than you were more than 4 years ago. In the meantime, more and more people have verified my reports, and 100s of members have in the meantime posted other subjective findings in different areas of computer audio that you are unable to dismiss either. No amount of confirmation will ever convince you in those other areas either.

 

 

 

 

An admirable and well respected site devoted to computer audio is simply in denial over the Kethel research.

[Teresa]

Why investigate counterpoint when there's no correlating 1st hand experience to support it? You say you hear something. I say I didn't. You say someone else heard it too. I say I still didn't hear it and after extensive research, I can find nothing in a scientific sense to support that you or someone else heard it. In that ends the need for further investigations on my end. The burden of proof is yours.......and whoever shared your experience. That's the way the world works Alex......sorry.

 

Alex and others hear a difference you don't hear, so he does listening tests with multiple subjects (including me) and you still question his findings because you don't hear it yourself.

 

You have no valid comment to make in any manner whatsoever since you don't believe Alex's results. Isn't it time to admit you and Alex are not hearing the same thing? Why is that so hard for you to understand?

 

If you want to prove me wrong, then it's up to you to do so, not the other way around. I feel that I have provided more than adequate confirmation to warrant further investigation.

 

I really don't giver a damn if a few closed minded C.A. sceptics like yourself don't wish to believe me . It's your loss, not mine.

 

You and your fellow "experts" are no closer to proving me wrong than you were more than 4 years ago. In the meantime, more and more people have verified my reports, and 100s of members have in the meantime posted other subjective findings in different areas of computer audio that you are unable to dismiss either. No amount of confirmation will ever convince you in those other areas either.

 

Exactly Alex you have went way above the call of duty. Let everyone decide for themselves what they like best. I advise to quit playing their game.