Jump to content
IGNORED

Misleading Measurements


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Putting on an objectivist's hat, I would argue that it's a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_of_safety, an engineering safeguard to ensure that in all possible circumstances that the audibility will always lie well below what's borderline audible.

I don’t see how this relates to objectivists disliking that which can’t be heard but also publicizing that which can’t be heard when it fits an agenda. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

And why I find this thread both pointless and insulting...

Please help me understand rather than just complain. 

 

If we all posted all the caveats and possibilities, there's be nothing worth reading. For example, objectivists who love measurements, except those who like them and don't view them as the end all be all, and except those who only go by measurements, and except those who only love some of them, and except those who continue to do experiments themselves, etc... 

 

It gets pointless. We have to have some leeway when writing and reading that allowed people to discuss topics without carving out exceptions for all possibilities. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Well, audibility thresholds are not some voodoo magic, they are not a new concept. These can be (and have been) studied. I myself invested a lot of time and effort to create tools to aid in such studies. I wouldn't waste my time if I believed that everything is known and there's nothing new to learn in this space.

I'm with you on this one. There are studies that the objective crowd accepts and that's totally cool with me. In essence, that's the basis for my entire topic here. 

 

I just don't understand why objectivists love some inaudible aspects of this hobby and eschew others. 

 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I'm not at all complaining about this thread, I like the ability to have a rational discussion. But, I've experienced over and over again this attempt to lump all the objectivists into a single straw-man, with all the extreme views rolled into one. As if we are all one individual and all think the same. I assume that's what @kumakuma is reacting to. Perhaps it's human nature, because I see the same occurring on ASR, but in the opposite direction.

It's just not possible to carve out all the exceptions while maintaining some readability. I highly encourage people to read with their glass half full and realize All and None statements aren't meant to group everyone, they are just used to further discussion. 

 

If people don't want to have a discussion without all the caveats carved out, that's fine too but I believe they'll be looking quite a while to find an acceptable discussion. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Summit said:

don’t get why presenting measurements "below level of audibility" would be consider misleading. To do the opposite and not show how a gear actually measured OTOH would be far more misleading and confusing IMO

Great point. 
 

If, as objective leaning people believe and according to studies, there is something below the level of audibility, what is the benefit to consumers to know this information? What is the possible harm to consumers?

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, bluesman said:

Sleepless nights wondering why they can’t hear a difference.

I certainly hear you but if there’s harm in unmeasurable USB cables then the same harm is there for unhearable measurements. 
 

I don’t see any harm, but the double standard is blatant. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Summit said:

 

Not all objectivists believe that. Many objectivists and subjectivist know that noise, jitter etc despite not being directly audible can have negative affect on other electrical devices and other audio gear downstream.

 

What’s the point to manipulate the measurements, it is literally like open a can of worms?

We don't need to go around the loop again and state that not all objectivists believe etc... Of course not all of anything is one way. 

 

Nobody is suggesting manipulating measurements. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

This wouldn't work for the many folks on this site that can hear things below these thresholds or hear the effects of sound waves below these thresholds on sound waves above them.

Fortunately, this is in the objective sub forum and I'm talking about how objective people talk about items that are below the threshold. Surely objectivists can agree on a level of human hearing and below which nothing matters. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

This may be a good start, as a summary:

 

http://www.aes-media.org/sections/pnw/ppt/other/limitsofhearing.ppt

 

That was a good start, but I can't put the data into the real world with respect to measurements. Sure I understand this sentence

 

Screen Shot 2020-06-30 at 11.35.02 AM.png

 

and this one

 

Screen Shot 2020-06-30 at 11.35.29 AM.png

 

 

 

But I can't figure out how the rest of it relates to items below 0 dB. My understanding is limited and I'm susceptible to being swayed by measurements that I don't understand, that may have nothing to do with what I hear :~)

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Why do you believe this is possible? I've never seen any evidence suggesting that audiophiles can agree on anything.

Because I believe people are generally good and don't seek to solely disrupt discussions with endless ands, ifs, or buts. There are always edge cases and those don't really concern me for this discussion. If objectivists can agree that human adults can hear up to 20 kHz, they can surely agree on other limits when presented real data. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
52 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

The goal is simple: let the consumer pick a device based on features, build quality, engineering, price, esthetics, etc. As long as the consumers are aware that there's no audible difference, they can concentrate on other qualities that matter to them. There's no double standard in @Archimago's work, as far as I can see.

 

What about USB cables? Do you put them into the same category as DACs if all the cables and DACs have no differences above the threshold of human hearing? 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Can you please show me where the highlighted statement has been made and why do you think that all objectivists think this? Of course there are poorly designed DACs and badly constructed cables that cause obvious, likely audible, distortions and errors.  That's why measurements are useful.

 

Armed with some knowledge about distortion audibility and with detailed measurements of a device, anyone can decide for themselves whether the device is fit for their consideration. I wouldn't consider a DAC with THD of 0.1% as transparent, for example.

Hi Paul, I think I used the wrong terms in my question. I don't think anyone has ever said it how I wrote it. That was my mistake.

 

I'll rephrase my question.

 

What about USB cables? Do you put them into the same category as DACs if the cables and measured DACs have no anomolies above the threshold of human hearing? 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
Just now, pkane2001 said:

 

Hi Chris,

 

USB cables introduce a lot less variability into the overall playback chain than the DAC, the analog stage, the amp, and especially the transducer, speakers or headphones. Usually this is well below the threshold of audibility. I've seen a few broken USB cables that caused obvious errors, but a cable that conforms to USB spec should just work.

I hear what you're saying, but a DAC that measures below the threshold of human hearing must also be in that "should just work" category correct?

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
Just now, Jud said:


I was thinking along the lines of practical tutorials like "OK, you've got a ground hum. Here's how to find what's responsible and eliminate it." 

 

Even better, since I think hum and noise that isn't consciously audible may subconsciously affect enjoyment (cf. the Iowa gambling task experiment), what is the equipment and what are the measurements to take to determine noise levels when there's no audible hum or noise?

As my friends and I used to say, with Spectral the added hum is a feature :~)

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...