"Audio Without Numbers" by Herb Reichert

[Nordkapp]

14 minutes ago, greyscale said:

Just had a look at AS. There is a new video by AR regarding a record cleaning device. If I didnt know better, I'd swear these guys are trying to get fired. Or perhaps, the people at HiFi are going to buy the rights to Charlie Hebdo in Paris, and post equipment revues there. I dont find a reference to the Christian religion or a Nazi salute funny. Perhaps I'm just too sensitive to this sort of humour, but what the hell are these types of comments doing in a HiFi equipment review publication?

Would you please post the link? Thnx

[fas42]

14 hours ago, semente said:

 

Measurements are made by comparing the signal going in with what is coming out. So yes they have.

Will this tell if you like the outcome: no.

 

Gradient even performed an AB comparison where the listener would hear the recording in one channel and the live feed from a speaker reproducing into an anechoic chamber. Only one speaker was deemed"transparent", but that was in the early 90's if I'm not mistaken.

 

It's actually pretty easy to assess audio playback if one knows what to listen for - most rigs are audibly highly flawed - which is why they don't fool anyone, they don't sound like "the real thing"; it's trivially easy to pick that you're listening to a recording. Competence, rather than absolute accuracy is the goal - the latter is an impossibility for a whole set of obvious reasons ... and competence is marked by a number of subjective behaviours, which can be "objectively measured", if so desired.

[greyscale]

4 hours ago, greyscale said:

Just had a look at AS. There is a new video by AR regarding a record cleaning device. If I didnt know better, I'd swear these guys are trying to get fired. Or perhaps, the people at HiFi are going to buy the rights to Charlie Hebdo in Paris, and post equipment revues there. I dont find a reference to the Christian religion or a Nazi salute funny. Perhaps I'm just too sensitive to this sort of humour, but what the hell are these types of comments doing in a HiFi equipment review publication? link:https://www.audiostream.com/

 

[Daverz]

40 minutes ago, greyscale said:

 

Vacuum RCMs are not very exciting, but it looks like a nice machine, and the demo of how relatively quiet it is was helpful.  I wear ear protection with my VPI.

[firedog]

13 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

But it works both ways. If you don't expect to hear a difference, the effect of confirmation bias will be that you won't hear it even if there is one.

You can't consciously be sure of what your confirmation bias is. You may think you know, but you actually don't. 

[firedog]

 

3 hours ago, greyscale said:

Just had a look at AS. There is a new video by AR regarding a record cleaning device. If I didnt know better, I'd swear these guys are trying to get fired. Or perhaps, the people at HiFi are going to buy the rights to Charlie Hebdo in Paris, and post equipment revues there. I dont find a reference to the Christian religion or a Nazi salute funny. Perhaps I'm just too sensitive to this sort of humour, but what the hell are these types of comments doing in a HiFi equipment review publication? link:https://www.audiostream.com/

The record cleaning device was at Analog Planet, not Audiostream. 

What references are about Christians and Nazis are you referring to? I don't see/hear them. 

[Allan F]

3 hours ago, firedog said:

You can't consciously be sure of what your confirmation bias is. You may think you know, but you actually don't. 

 

You may not be consciously sure of what your confirmation bias is.

[ARQuint]

10 hours ago, greyscale said:

Just had a look at AS. There is a new video by AR regarding a record cleaning device. If I didnt know better, I'd swear these guys are trying to get fired. Or perhaps, the people at HiFi are going to buy the rights to Charlie Hebdo in Paris, and post equipment revues there. I dont find a reference to the Christian religion or a Nazi salute funny. Perhaps I'm just too sensitive to this sort of humour, but what the hell are these types of comments doing in a HiFi equipment review publication?

 

You must be kidding. To give you the benefit of the doubt, you may have a different cultural context and/or English isn't your first language. Michael Fremer used to do standup comedy and, if you've ever seen him in person doing one of his turntable setup seminars, he still does. He's very funny and makes something as dull as setting azimuth entertaining, which is saying something. To provide some basic humor tutulage for you here: With the reference to "Grunge Tuesday", he's making fun of the shirt he's wearing and the "albino Hitler salute" comment was the sort of spontaneous physical comedy that Robin Williams used to do so facilely. (Fremer is Jewish, by the way.)

 

I've gotta say. Given some of the vitriol and name-calling that happens on CA when things get heated, that someone find's MF's schtick offensive is kind of...funny.

 

Badaboom.

[adamdea]

On 07/04/2018 at 8:03 PM, Ralf11 said:

What if I let 20 people listen to music on 2 different types of equipment (blind, A/B/X) and guess which X is A or B?

 

That is subjective, right?

 

Suppose I then apply statistical analysis to determine the chance they guessed right by chance?  

 

That is objective, right?

Sounds about right 

[sullis02]

On 4/4/2018 at 6:10 PM, Ron Scubadiver said:

The Hydrogen Audio TOS is not evenly enforced and is also imposed on observations that indicate a malfunctioning piece of gear.  They also reject measurements, which are objective for the rest of us.

False.  What 'they' also reject is this sort of argument:

"Look at how different an mp3 waveform is compared to lossless.  Therefore mp3 sounds worse."

or

"This DAC measure with 0.0003dB less distortion than this other one.  THerefore it sounds better."

 

 

[sullis02]

On 4/4/2018 at 8:51 PM, Ron Scubadiver said:

Nothing has changed and that will get you banned, but some members are obviously getting away with a lot and the guy who runs the forum breaks his own rules whenever he feels like it.

 

Who is this 'guy' who 'runs' the forum?  There are multiple administrators , monitoring different sections of HA.  

 

You are not a  reliable source of information about HA.  Stop. 

[sullis02]

On 4/5/2018 at 1:50 PM, Norton said:

 

Isn't this just a rather impolite label for "people using their systems to enjoy music"?  E.g.99% of the population?

 

Rather, it's a rephrasing of the phrase 'routine ignorance of psychological bias'.  With the word 'ignorance' meant literally.

 

Most people either aren't educated about, or refuse to give credence to, the fact of multiple biases at work whenever they make a decision. 

 

I'm seeing it in this thread, and on this forum generally, in spades.

 

All 'objectivism' boils down to, for routine listening , is: allowing that your impression isn't formed only by the sound waves hitting your eardrum.  

 

Shorter version: what you believe, might be wrong. To be more certain, you have to do work. 

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

[sullis02]

On 4/5/2018 at 2:59 PM, Albrecht said:

Except when you measure the wrong and/or irrelevant thing...

 

It's more like the Hawking quote

 

" The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. "

 

 

 And how is subjectivism, unmoored from doubt, anything but an 'illusion of knowledge'?

[sullis02]

On 4/7/2018 at 12:49 AM, Rexp said:

The quality of a fine audio system and the quality of a fine wine are both subjective judgments and since no one has come up with an objective way to determine quality, i'll stick with my opinion and opinons of others I trust and not some nerd with a scope.

 

I take it you've never read up on the interesting things that happen to preference ratings when wines are compared 'blind' (i.e, without the drinker knowing anything about the price or label). 

 

What if your opinions of sound 'quality' are in fact being informed by things other than the sound?

 

 

[sullis02]

On 4/7/2018 at 4:28 AM, adamdea said:

QED

 

er...sorry , *what* is demonstrated by that post?

[sullis02]

On 4/7/2018 at 11:28 AM, firedog said:

I'm certainly not a hard core objectivst or subjectivist - I'm somewhere in the middle, so in the end I just try to make the best evaluations of SQ I can and accept the results - even if I'm "fooling myself". In practical terms, there isn't anything else most of us can do most of the time.

 

That you are willing to entertain the possibility that you are 'fooling yourself' puts you in the objectivist camp. Welcome!

;>

 

 

[sullis02]

On 4/7/2018 at 1:34 PM, Allan F said:

 

And others might argue that some deliberately describe the differences as being that subtle in order to justify their bias in not hearing and/or ignoring them.

 

There is a way to cut the gordian knot here, you know.  It's called blind listening.

 

 

[sullis02]

20 hours ago, ARQuint said:

 

You must be kidding. To give you the benefit of the doubt, you may have a different cultural context and/or English isn't your first language. Michael Fremer used to do standup comedy and, if you've ever seen him in person doing one of his turntable setup seminars, he still does. He's very funny and makes something as dull as setting azimuth entertaining, which is saying something. To provide some basic humor tutulage for you here: With the reference to "Grunge Tuesday", he's making fun of the shirt he's wearing and the "albino Hitler salute" comment was the sort of spontaneous physical comedy that Robin Williams used to do so facilely. (Fremer is Jewish, by the way.)

 

I've gotta say. Given some of the vitriol and name-calling that happens on CA when things get heated, that someone find's MF's schtick offensive is kind of...funny.

 

Badaboom.

 

What's offensive is the lameness of his attempts to be funny.    

[adamdea]

3 hours ago, sullis02 said:

 

er...sorry , *what* is demonstrated by that post?

 

Ok mate I'll run it for you in slow motion.

 

On 4/7/2018 at 9:28 AM, adamdea said:

 

In general the use of this sort of tag just helps people to make empty, pointless statements which sound clever to them. Best avoided if possible. 

On 4/6/2018 at 6:37 PM, GUTB said:

I dislike the term objectavist but it gives them a sense of scientific legitimacy that they don't remotely deserve.

On 4/7/2018 at 9:28 AM, adamdea said:

QED

 

[pkane2001]

5 hours ago, sullis02 said:

All 'objectivism' boils down to, for routine listening , is: allowing that your impression isn't formed only by the sound waves hitting your eardrum.  

 

Shorter version: what you believe, might be wrong. To be more certain, you have to do work. 

 

Stated like that it should put to bed all the debates between subjectivists and objectivists.... Yeah, right!

[marce]

On 05/04/2018 at 5:24 PM, Albrecht said:

 

It's funny, as many of these "bits are bits" flatearthers are the same people that defend the Koch-Criminal-Capitalist in other areas.

 

How can people who know bits are bits be flat earthers, sorry you have the wrong group, it is those who are not tech savvy that tend to be the flat earthers in this hobby.

[pkane2001]

1 hour ago, marce said:

How can people who know bits are bits be flat earthers, sorry you have the wrong group, it is those who are not tech savvy that tend to be the flat earthers in this hobby.

 

I've observed this in politics recently: the way to attack the opposing side is to accuse them of exactly the thing you're guilty of yourself.

 

[Ron Scubadiver]

10 hours ago, sullis02 said:

 

Who is this 'guy' who 'runs' the forum?  There are multiple administrators , monitoring different sections of HA.  

 

You are not a  reliable source of information about HA.  Stop. 

There is one in particular, and there is no reason to out him here.  Your accusation is not appreciated.

[Ron Scubadiver]

10 hours ago, sullis02 said:

False.  What 'they' also reject is this sort of argument:

"Look at how different an mp3 waveform is compared to lossless.  Therefore mp3 sounds worse."

or

"This DAC measure with 0.0003dB less distortion than this other one.  THerefore it sounds better."

 

 

Some measurements indicate a problem, others do not.  I favor freedom of speech over some philosophical problem they have at hydrogenaud.io.  If someone can't reject a silly claim, that's their problem.  It's easy to go overboard.  There are many claims I see over there supposedly based on blind a/b testing that can't be believed.

 

You might notice the discussions over there are rather stilted and most of the posts are foobar2000 help issues.

[Ralf11]

maybe reichert's column should have been titled "Audio Without Common Sense"