Jump to content
IGNORED

Misleading Measurements


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I'm pretty sure that this differs person to person. You can try some of the easy to configure cross-feed plugins with headphones to get a sense of what is audible to you. 

 

I haven't figured out yet how to tell soundstage depth on headphones. Maybe there's a correlation with some parameter yet to be determined but I don't in general get a perceived image 'out of my head' enough to hear where the soundstage ends.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
15 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

This one, between AN and I, was started many years ago, long before DISTORT. By nature I'm a skeptic and so I ask questions, just like AN does. But that's where we differ: I don't ask questions just to prove the other side wrong. I ask questions because I'm really interested in finding and understanding the answer, and if I don't believe or understand the answer, I look for ways to learn and verify.  That's why I created DISTORT, that's why I created DeltaWave.

 

What I'm getting from this is that @pkane2001's motives are pure and @Audiophile Neuroscience's aren't. Since this is the Objective forum - is there like, um any evidence in support of this (implied) claim? Or did I misinterpret the implication?

Link to comment
  • 3 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...
2 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

Measurement is a critical subset of observation.   Biases/imprecision creep in with the typically less disciplined, relatively ad-hoc  'observation', therefore it is best/easiest to depend on more reliable, intrinsically more accurate objective measurement when at all possible.  

 

Yes, I understand that but I disagree - substituting measurement for (admittedly subjective) observation leads to reductionism. The solution to biasses in observation is more impartial observation, not measurement. 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, John Dyson said:

 I am for both, but you'll waste lots of time (per experience) if you live in the world of the subjective.   Maybe some people like tweaking -- I don't.

 

I certainly have spent (I wouldn't say 'wasted' myself) a lot of time in the world of the subjective. There aren't any short cuts to putting in the hours in the world of the subjective. I conjecture (but have no evidence for) that substituting measurement for subjective observation is an attempt to find a short cut, an attempt to avoid 'wasting' time. 

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

When you use a well considered 'measurement', it often does require more of an intellectual understanding of what is going on.   A quickie human observation is easy, but not always so accurate.   

 

I think it makes sense also to turn this around. To wit :

 

When you use a well considered observation it often does require more of an intellectual understanding of what's going on. A quickie human measurement is easy, but not always so accurate.

 

It seems (subjectively of course) to me you're saying that it matters how a measurement is done. Absolutely no disagreement there - the quality of a measurement is always going to be important. Just as the quality of an observation is. But that's my point really - quality matters, numbers don't.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

I agree --in our discussion a quicky human 'measurement' is the 'tongue' technique.

 

So, it all depends on how you define measurement -- I tend to see that (measurement) as with some clear 'measure'.   The using the 'tongue' as a measurement device, 'tongues' measure isn't very precise or stable.

 

I define a measurement as a subset of observation that produces a purely quantitative result. I.e. a number (or series of numbers). If the result is qualitative then the operation wasn't a measurement it was an observation.

 

The use of a tongue on a PP3 doesn't produce a number hence can't be classed as a measurement, at least to my way of seeing things.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

Being subjective when not absolutely necessary  is like 'giving up' on actual engineering.

 

Well yes - a tongue in place of a voltmeter would seem to be an example of this. Though if a voltmeter isn't available, then a tongue could be the only way to attempt a 'measurement'. 'Necessity' in my experience is typically a subjective determination.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, John Dyson said:

Unchecked subjective review is almost the same as relying on a high priest, and is even less valuable than a random choice

 

Quite the opposite (though I am assuming 'review' here simply means 'reporting one's subjective observations') - the checking function historically was always the role of the priesthood. 'Go, show yourself to the priests' was said by Jesus after a healing for example.

Link to comment
  • 5 months later...

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...