Why are objective assessments important...

[Iving]

17 minutes ago, tapatrick said:

Yes to be convincing there would have to be this level of rigour applied. Any studies I have come across (which aren't that many) which depend on data from listeners preferences reveal that there seem to be very few people who are consistently accurate. The study on wine tasting experts not being able to tell good from bad was similar in this respect.

 

The whole point of Design/Method/Procedure is to contest these problems. The stats only demonstrate (or deny) reproducibility. That is their fruit!

 

Honestly I have no idea the extent to which manufacturers carry out rigorous performance studies prior to launch - but I don't want to open a can of worms.

 

For we consumers, the logic of our choices should afford us proportionate confidence or doubt. If we are right-thinking we are more likely to enjoy our online social environment (and less likely to wind each other up).

 

I presume that in the end we just want musical satisfaction. I'm only ever looking to improve the octane quality of my musical kicks.

 

Just love your post.

[tapatrick]

5 hours ago, Iving said:

the octane quality of my musical kicks.

...a line from a punk rock anthem with appropriate guitar riff..:)

 

[tapatrick]

On 2/23/2020 at 12:15 AM, Archimago said:

...For example, in my blind testing years ago, I found a group of people who preferred MP3 over lossless FLAC. I personally have no problems with this (since I don't think high bitrate MP3 sounds bad at all) but it would be very much "counterculture" to various "purist" forms of audiophilia (including strict objective ideal of "high fidelity" and absolute "transparency") that seeks less manipulation of the sound.

@archimago wondering what you think of this Genelec paper... questioning quick v slow listening..

[Archimago]

12 hours ago, tapatrick said:

@archimago wondering what you think of this Genelec paper... questioning quick v slow listening..

Hi @tapatrick, just entered a response on the topic.

 

I'd certainly be more impressed if the Genelec paper gave us a good example of a situation that proved their point about human hearing needing "slow listening". Like the issue with "break in" and also alluded to with our discussion about the human brain being plastic, evolves constantly based on experience, why should we not think that maybe over time what we perceive is actually a change within ourselves rather than a reflection of the true "difference" produced by the device being listened to?

 

Referring to "break in" again, we have all kinds of examples where audiophiles claim a cable changed sound over hours and weeks, but what evidence is there that the copper/silver/dielectric actually changed over that time - typically allowing them to sound "better"? This last part to me is a nice hint that it was the listener's brain that changed and became more relaxed about the awareness that he spent $$$$ on some wires and now feeling better about the money he dropped (because he consciously/subsconsciously wants that to happen as well!).

[Archimago]

FYI... Just posted some thoughts that originated in our discussions here.

 

https://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/03/musings-audio-music-audiophile-big.html

[fas42]

24 minutes ago, Archimago said:

FYI... Just posted some thoughts that originated in our discussions here.

 

https://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/03/musings-audio-music-audiophile-big.html

 

Right in the middle of a busy morning, so haven't yet digested the article ... but on a glance through, noted this,

 

Quote

I'm happy to spend time and disposable income to get things "right", what I've come to learn is that there's no need to sweat the small stuff

 

My thinking here this is completely on the other side of the fence - meaning that spending time and disposable income to get (the major) things right is only the start ... "sweating the small stuff" is the heart of the battle - IME, compromised SQ is all that can be accomplished, otherwise.

[Archimago]

47 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Right in the middle of a busy morning, so haven't yet digested the article ... but on a glance through, noted this,

 

 

My thinking here this is completely on the other side of the fence - meaning that spending time and disposable income to get (the major) things right is only the start ... "sweating the small stuff" is the heart of the battle - IME, compromised SQ is all that can be accomplished, otherwise.

 

I disagree @fas42...

 

IMO, the need and incessant focus on the "small stuff" without insight I believe is a sign of the neuroticism which is the nidus at the heart of what over time eventually leads to madness 😱.

 

Careful, dear audiophiles. 😉

[The Computer Audiophile]

20 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

I disagree @fas42...

 

IMO, the need and incessant focus on the "small stuff" without insight I believe is a sign of the neuroticism which is the nidus at the heart of what over time eventually leads to madness 😱.

 

Careful, dear audiophiles. 😉

But for many, the journey is as fun as the destination. Win some, lose some, but have fun the whole time. 

[fas42]

26 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

I disagree @fas42...

 

IMO, the need and incessant focus on the "small stuff" without insight I believe is a sign of the neuroticism which is the nidus at the heart of what over time eventually leads to madness 😱.

 

Careful, dear audiophiles. 😉

 

Ahh, that's the important bit - as highlighted ... you need to know what the point is of what you're doing, and be able to assess whether there is an audible improvement, as a result ... flying blind will not an efficient approach, 😉.

 

Speaking of flying, that's the sad thing about audio - it's not the power of the  engines, nor the shape of the wings that brings aircraft down - it's that the mechanic used the wrong size bolts when replacing something, or that the fuel needed was calculated using the wrong units, a mental glitch of the moment ... all the "small stuff" is vital for making planes safe in the air - and so it turns out to be in audio also, the best SQ only eventuates when all care is taken.

[Archimago]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

But for many, the journey is as fun as the destination. Win some, lose some, but have fun the whole time. 

 

Sure @The Computer Audiophile... As I said in the post, there is for each of us a need to "regress in the service of the ego" once awhile and just have fun. Partake in the silliness of this world and irrational wish fulfillment that could be joyful.

 

But I think it's important not to end up too far down in a state of self delusion especially when money is exchanged and some parties could be benefiting in less-than-honest ways!

 

[tapatrick]

7 hours ago, Archimago said:

...why should we not think that maybe over time what we perceive is actually a change within ourselves rather than a reflection of the true "difference" produced by the device being listened to?

....that he spent $$$$ on some wires and now feeling better about the money he dropped (because he consciously/subsconsciously wants that to happen as well!).

Thanks and good points.. A change within ourselves is all part of the 'science' from my point of interest which includes (trying) to understand subjectivity.

For sure spending $$$ is always going to be a major influence on any assessment.

 

[tapatrick]

14 hours ago, Archimago said:

FYI... Just posted some thoughts that originated in our discussions here.

 

https://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/03/musings-audio-music-audiophile-big.html

I think you have done a good job in your blog post of covering all the relevant areas involved from music production to listening. And maybe the conversation is now concluded. 

If only everyone would acknowledge and respect each others 'intent' as you put it then there would be a lot less misunderstanding. I am none the wiser which measurements matter but I have to say I'm now clear that measuring and analysing equipment outside of listening leaves me cold. I will leave that to others more qualified but I will keep an eye on developments.. .

[fas42]

23 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

But I think it's important not to end up too far down in a state of self delusion especially when money is exchanged and some parties could be benefiting in less-than-honest ways!

 

 

And it's statements like this which will ensure that the chasm between the two sides will remain as deep, and rubble strewn as ever ...

[Archimago]

On 3/2/2020 at 5:52 AM, tapatrick said:

I think you have done a good job in your blog post of covering all the relevant areas involved from music production to listening. And maybe the conversation is now concluded. 

If only everyone would acknowledge and respect each others 'intent' as you put it then there would be a lot less misunderstanding. I am none the wiser which measurements matter but I have to say I'm now clear that measuring and analysing equipment outside of listening leaves me cold. I will leave that to others more qualified but I will keep an eye on developments.. .

 

Hi @tapatrick, 

I have some thoughts about the "which measurements matter" question that I'll post on the blog in the next while...

 

 

[Archimago]

On 3/2/2020 at 4:23 PM, fas42 said:

 

And it's statements like this which will ensure that the chasm between the two sides will remain as deep, and rubble strewn as ever ...

 

Regarding my comment: "But I think it's important not to end up too far down in a state of self delusion especially when money is exchanged and some parties could be benefiting in less-than-honest ways!"

 

Sometimes we have to just be honest especially regarding some highly questionable companies. As "objectivists" and "subjectivists" we can certainly come to a point where we agree to disagree on what we believe depending on what we're after in this hobby. I still don't understand your "conjuring" for example but you're having fun and not asking folks for money... That's cool with me.

 

A company like MQA is a beautiful example. They were asking to be paid for nonsense and was willing to take liberties with terms like "lossless", "deblurring", etc... That's not cool. And let's not delude ourselves into following along with Bob Stuart and his claims.

 

IMO, as consumers, we always should be vigilant about questionable companies asking for money to purchase their products without presenting a case for the benefit. It would simply be naïve if we believe this is not true! This is NOT creating a chasm between the 2 sides (subjectivity and objectivity), it's simply stating a fact about being a consumer. The fact that you don't see it this way is a bit disturbing, actually.

[tapatrick]

1 hour ago, Archimago said:

 

Hi @tapatrick, 

I have some thoughts about the "which measurements matter" question that I'll post on the blog in the next while...

 

 

Thanks for letting me know. Look forward to reading your thoughts.