Trust your ears

[skikirkwood]

I was reading a recent review of Shunyata Research's Everest 8000 power conditioner last week in The Absolute Sound. $8,000 and a lot more with a bunch of >$1,000 Shunyata power cords. As expected, the reviewer heard an obvious and immediate improvement in sound quality:

 

Quote

Casual listening was more than enough to hear the difference: My system sounded significantly better.

 

For any Absolute Sound (or just about any for-profit audiophile publication) reviewer, publishing a post where they could not hear a significant sound improvement would lead to immediate termination and the need to find a new career. And of course, the usual comments thread occurred, with both supporters of Shunyata and those who believe it was not possible for this equipment to make any noticeable sound quality improvement.

 

So this reminds me of my own quest to improve the sound quality of my system many years ago. My CD player died and a friend suggested I check out the new Squeezebox Touch as a replacement. Not only could I play back rips of my extensive CD collection, but I could also listen to Internet streaming services. I got a unit and absolutely loved it. Not only for the convenience of playing any CD I owned without finding the physical disk and inserting it into a CD player, but also for the sound. It sounded great, a big improvement over my old CD player.

 

But after a year or two I started reading about asynchronous USB DAC's and the substantial increase in sound quality. A friend of mine had just purchased a super-expensive DAC and loaned me his HRT Music Streamer USB DAC. It took me a while to install and configure a plug-in for the Logitech Media Server, "Enhanced Digital Output", that allowed you to output a digital bitstream from the Touch to an external DAC, bypassing the unit's built-in DAC.

 

At this time I had B&W 803 speakers and a Bryston pre-amp and amp. Not a super high-end system, but perhaps around $15K of audio hardware. I finally got everything configured, fired up one of my favorite albums, something by Mark Knopfler I believe, and wow! The sound quality was so much better with this new asynchronous USB DAC over the Touch's built-in DAC. Was it the low jitter due to how asynchronous USB works? Who knows, but I was blown away. I don't use audiophile reviewer words like "increased micro and macro transients", better soundstage, more air, blah, blah, blah. But if I did, I would use all of them to describe the improvement in audio quality. The sound was just an immediate and obvious big improvement.

 

After my 30 minutes of bliss I walked to the back of my sound system to adjust a cable. And I realized something. I had forgot to switch my pre-amp source to the output of the HRT Music Streamer. I was still listening to the built-in DAC of the Touch.

 

I thought I could trust me ears, but clearly I could not. This happened almost 10 years ago I think. And ever since, every time I read a "professional" review in an audiophile publication, or a comment in a forum like this, when someone says "trust your ears", I just kind of laugh. Confirmation bias is a very powerful tendency we humans all have.

 

 

[AnotherSpin]

Wonderful story. Describes the case of chronic audiophilia very aptly and colorfully. And, of course, it's not about this type of lunacy only.

[Iving]

Point well-taken!

imo - In SQ perception, as in life abroad, the truth may lie "in between".

e.g. #1 - Formal arguments may be presented reconciling "free will" and "determinism" - proposing that subjective experience of "control" is illusion/vanity (evolutionary advantage maybe etc) and that what actually happens is our resistance or acquiescence wrt the countless "invitations" that life throws at us moment by moment.

e.g. #2 - Women are brighter (better) than men vs. men are brighter (better) than women. Actually the average IQ is 100 in both sexes. Statistically the "normal distribution" may be flatter in men (more Mozarts, more dunces) and there are *small* differences in ability e.g. women better verbal and men better visuo-spatial.

Back to SQ. Of course we fool ourselves. "Cognitive Dissonance" is a well-recognised phenomenon in psychology. I suspect individual differences in suggestibility are in play too. Also the moral quality (good and bad) of audio kit businesses. There is much variation in the world.

What’s really interesting to me is the extent to which I may not be able to see distortion in my own perception. I am open-minded about this – yet it would going way too far to argue that my system has not changed roughly the way I think it has over big time.

You can’t resort to ABX only. ABX is convincing when it is demonstrated. But the absence of a statistically significant effect is not proof that one doesn’t exist – nor that other effects not considered may be in play. You can’t cover all bases with a single ABX challenge. You can only *develop an argument*.

Even though I spend way too much time online, I don’t think I have ever read about a single actual large scale study convincing enough to settle things in favour of “audiophools” on the one hand or sceptics on the other. As in science proper – even when a statistical effect is absent *or* present – the protagonists carry on arguing over the Research Question, the Design, the Method and the logic/rigour of Conclusions.

The *real* problem here is a human / relational one. It arises when someone (on either side) just gotta be right. Cause of all wars etc.

:-)

P.S. Just say we are terribly deluded about SQ - just as in your vignette. It makes me wonder how mastering engineers ever cut their mustard. “I tweaked this or that - but how may I know it is better or worse?” ABX we reply? For goodness’ sake!

[lucretius]

13 hours ago, Iving said:

e.g. #1 - Formal arguments may be presented reconciling "free will" and "determinism" - proposing that subjective experience of "control" is illusion/vanity (evolutionary advantage maybe etc) and that what actually happens is our resistance or acquiescence wrt the countless "invitations" that life throws at us moment by moment.

 

Unfortunately, the idea of unreconciled (incompatibilist) free will fares worse than reconciled (compatibilist) free will, contrary to our libertarian instincts; that is to say, neither of these ideas are very satisfying.  Likewise, acceptance that there is no free will is even less satisfying (due to it's implications for moral responsibility and human dignity).  Nonetheless, I don't see how this is an example of where the truth may lie "in between" -- rather, you have free will or you don't (a binary condition).

 

[AnotherSpin]

2 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

Unfortunately, the idea of unreconciled (incompatibilist) free will fares worse than reconciled (compatibilist) free will, contrary to our libertarian instincts; that is to say, neither of these ideas are very satisfying.  Likewise, acceptance that there is no free will is even less satisfying (due to it's implications for moral responsibility and human dignity).  Nonetheless, I don't see how this is an example of where the truth may lie "in between" -- rather, you have free will or you don't (a binary condition).

 

 

If you have a free will could you choose your next thought? 

[lucretius]

2 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

If you have a free will could you choose your next thought? 

 

If I could choose my next thought, then it must be the case that I could choose to choose my next thought.  But herein lies a regress that always ends in darkness.  This morning, I looked out the window and the sun was shining and I smiled.  No need for words, my friend.

[AnotherSpin]

48 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

If I could choose my next thought, then it must be the case that I could choose to choose my next thought.  But herein lies a regress that always ends in darkness.  This morning, I looked out the window and the sun was shining and I smiled.  No need for words, my friend.

 

Exactly. And there is no no need to choose anything for sun to shine and for day to be beautiful. By the way, can you choose your next thought? 🙂

[Allan F]

On 5/9/2021 at 11:57 AM, skikirkwood said:

I thought I could trust me ears, but clearly I could not. This happened almost 10 years ago I think. And ever since, every time I read a "professional" review in an audiophile publication, or a comment in a forum like this, when someone says "trust your ears", I just kind of laugh. Confirmation bias is a very powerful tendency we humans all have.

 

Your story is a good example of confirmation or expectation bias, but IMO it does not support your conclusion to most of those who "trust their ears". That is because they do not draw conclusions based solely on listening immediately after making an equipment change. Rather, they listen to a variety of music with which they are very familiar over an extended period of time to determine if they hear a difference. And that necessarily also involves comparisons. They have no cause to share your laughter.

[skikirkwood]

6 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

Your story is a good example of confirmation or expectation bias, but IMO it does not support your conclusion to most of those who "trust their ears". That is because they do not draw conclusions based solely on listening immediately after making an equipment change. Rather, they listen to a variety of music with which they are very familiar over an extended period of time to determine if they hear a difference. And that necessarily also involves comparisons. They have no cause to share your laughter.

 

Well, I am definitely not like most of you who "trust your ears". And I have to respectfully disagree with the logic of your argument here. My point was because I expected a significant increase in sound quality, I thought I actually did hear a very big improvement. And I was listening to a track that I've played for years by Mark Knopfler, so I was very familiar with it. 

 

I would fully expect that my mind's expectation bias would continue had I listened to additional familiar albums over an extended period of time. If I had not heard a significant improvement in sound quality after the immediate equipment change, that would be a different narrative.

 

But perception is reality, and if people hear improved sound from $1000 speaker cables, power conditioners, and the like, I have no issue with that. I do have issue with arrogant "audiophiles" who talk about their golden ears, if you can't hear a difference in sound with some equipment it's because you don't have a high enough system, etc. Too many people in this "hobby" have a stick up their ass. 

 

I have friends who have spent $17K on network streamers, huge amounts of money on high end speaker and interconnect cables and always challenge them to a $1000 bet they can't distinguish something like their $17K streamer to one one of my Raspberry PIs, both outputting to the same DAC. Nobody has taken me up on my offer to date.

[AnotherSpin]

Also, human perception does not remain unchanged. It is something that changes constantly and is never the same. We don't hear the same recording the same way in the same set of equipment. And if we hear it as "the same", it's only because the mind has once again tweaked and leveled our perception. Similarly, we don't see the same object the same way every time we look at it, we don't feel it the same way when we touch it, etc.

[Rexp]

10 hours ago, skikirkwood said:

 

Well, I am definitely not like most of you who "trust your ears". And I have to respectfully disagree with the logic of your argument here. My point was because I expected a significant increase in sound quality, I thought I actually did hear a very big improvement. And I was listening to a track that I've played for years by Mark Knopfler, so I was very familiar with it. 

 

I would fully expect that my mind's expectation bias would continue had I listened to additional familiar albums over an extended period of time. If I had not heard a significant improvement in sound quality after the immediate equipment change, that would be a different narrative.

 

But perception is reality, and if people hear improved sound from $1000 speaker cables, power conditioners, and the like, I have no issue with that. I do have issue with arrogant "audiophiles" who talk about their golden ears, if you can't hear a difference in sound with some equipment it's because you don't have a high enough system, etc. Too many people in this "hobby" have a stick up their ass. 

 

I have friends who have spent $17K on network streamers, huge amounts of money on high end speaker and interconnect cables and always challenge them to a $1000 bet they can't distinguish something like their $17K streamer to one one of my Raspberry PIs, both outputting to the same DAC. Nobody has taken me up on my offer to date.

Does it depend on the Raspberry Pi and how its connected/powered or anything will do? 

[botrytis]

Human perception is based on the experience and ideas of the listener, it is not universal, unless you are talking the 'Flight or Fight' type of reactions. Expectation bias is subjective and depends on the listener, so it is not really universal.

 

I think, that, trust your ears but VERIFY is where I am at. Too many people can fool one, like going to an mQa listening session where they tell you what to expect and low and behold one does hear, it and it may or may not be there. Also, discussing, listening as the only way to make decisions on anything in audio, is fraught with errors and bias.

 

It has to be a combination between measurement and listening, yes, I like DBT's for that reason. It levels the playing field.

 

I remember going to a listening test of high end Cables. The designer was there and described what to hear from the newer cables as compared to the previous generation of the cable. I didn't listen to his spiel as I didn't want to influenced by what he said and just objectively listened. My wife and I were the only ones, besides a friend of mine, to actually think the older cables sounded better and the newer ones were rolled off and lifeless. People who listened to the spiel, thought they were amazing. Who is right here?

[Allan F]

20 hours ago, skikirkwood said:

I have friends who have spent $17K on network streamers, huge amounts of money on high end speaker and interconnect cables and always challenge them to a $1000 bet they can't distinguish something like their $17K streamer to one one of my Raspberry PIs, both outputting to the same DAC. Nobody has taken me up on my offer to date.

 

So what! This says far more about you than it does about them. You apparently have a need to prove that you are right, whereas they are content - as am I and most who trust their ears - to be guided by their experience and simply enjoy the music. They have neither the need nor the desire to take you up on what they see as needless (annoying?) challenges. 🙂

[PeterSt]

10 minutes ago, botrytis said:

Who is right here?

 

Possibly not you because you tend to object ? (and reject)

[Confused]

Deleted:

 

(Post moved to a more appropriate thread)

 

 

[skikirkwood]

14 hours ago, Rexp said:

Does it depend on the Raspberry Pi and how its connected/powered or anything will do? 

 

If two different network streamers get the same bits to the DAC that uses asynchronous USB, the sound will be equivalent from either.

[skikirkwood]

5 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

So what! This says far more about you than it does about them. You apparently have a need to prove that you are right, whereas they are content - as am I and most who trust their ears - to be guided by their experience and simply enjoy the music. They have neither the need nor the desire to take you up on what they see as needless (annoying?) challenges. 🙂

 

No, you got it totally wrong dude. I am totally content with my audio and home theater systems. I love music, I have no interest in upgrading fuses and trying out $1000 power cables. However *they* challenge me, telling me I need to upgrade my equipment, that everything matters, that you get what you pay for. In their mind it's impossible a $17K network streamer and $50 Raspberry Pi could generate exactly the same sound quality if they both feed the same DAC. It's impossible a relatively inexpensive speaker or interconnect cable could sound the same as something from Nordost or Audience.

 

So in response, like anyone born in Brooklyn, I say put up or shut up. So far, they've all shut up.

[skikirkwood]

5 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

So what! This says far more about you than it does about them. You apparently have a need to prove that you are right, whereas they are content - as am I and most who trust their ears - to be guided by their experience and simply enjoy the music. They have neither the need nor the desire to take you up on what they see as needless (annoying?) challenges. 🙂

 

A specific example is it was suggested I upgrade one of my Raspberry Pis (I have several that act as network streamers) to a Lumin U1. A U1 costs $6,100, doesn't have built-in Wifi, and has a small, monochrome text display. My $120 Pi setup does have built-in Wifi, along with a color touchscreen interface. So would I "upgrade" to a Luminary's U1? That's a question for an insanity test. It would be a downgrade.

[PeterG]

1 hour ago, skikirkwood said:

 

If two different network streamers get the same bits to the DAC that uses asynchronous USB, the sound will be equivalent from either.

Maybe if you had a higher end DAC you could tell the difference between sources?

 

I have a Mc/B&W main system comparable to yours, and an NAD/B&W secondary system that costs about 1/10 the price.  Schiit Yggy DAC on the main, Schiit Modi on the secondary.  I recently bought a Bluesound Node that sounds just fine on the secondary system, but is a big disappointment compared to ripped CDs on the main system.

[One and a half]

1 hour ago, skikirkwood said:

 

A specific example is it was suggested I upgrade one of my Raspberry Pis (I have several that act as network streamers) to a Lumin U1. A U1 costs $6,100, doesn't have built-in Wifi, and has a small, monochrome text display. My $120 Pi setup does have built-in Wifi, along with a color touchscreen interface. So would I "upgrade" to a Luminary's U1? That's a question for an insanity test. It would be a downgrade.

The question is did you review/test the Lumin U1 over the Pi over a period of time. That's using your ears, oh wait, you laugh at that. I have a U1 and contemplating a Pi to use as a sequencer for powering up the audio system and a daily driver PC, so I have to use my ears as they are the only qualified analytical tool I have and are portable.

[skikirkwood]

30 minutes ago, One and a half said:

The question is did you review/test the Lumin U1 over the Pi over a period of time. That's using your ears, oh wait, you laugh at that. I have a U1 and contemplating a Pi to use as a sequencer for powering up the audio system and a daily driver PC, so I have to use my ears as they are the only qualified analytical tool I have and are portable.

 

How could I possibly test or review a Lumin U1? The closest dealer to where I live has this website: http://www.sounddecisionsaudio.net "Built by WebSite Builder", Copyright 2013. Yeah right.

 

Hey, I like the machined aluminum case the U1 has, but I will challenge anyone a large sum of money that in a blind test they could not differentiate the sound of U1 from a Pi using the same DACs. 

 

And yes, I have researched this topic, reading articles like this, of people who did invest a significant amount of time and effort trying to understand would there be a difference of networked streamers in general: https://archimago.blogspot.com/2019/02/musings-computer-audio-mythos-comment.html

 

I'm sure @Archimago would be happy to do a test of a Lumin streamer if someone would loan him one.

[skikirkwood]

1 hour ago, PeterG said:

Maybe if you had a higher end DAC you could tell the difference between sources?

 

I have a Mc/B&W main system comparable to yours, and an NAD/B&W secondary system that costs about 1/10 the price.  Schiit Yggy DAC on the main, Schiit Modi on the secondary.  I recently bought a Bluesound Node that sounds just fine on the secondary system, but is a big disappointment compared to ripped CDs on the main system.

 

But the Bluesound Node has a built-in DAC, doesn't it? So are you bypassing that and just sending the digital output to the Modi?

 

I would love to test the sound of a Schiit Yggy, but don't want to pay the restocking fee should I not hear a difference in sound quality. If I ever get down to L.A. from Palo Alto I would love to drop by the Schiitr and do some sound comparisons of their DACs, amps and preamps.

[Teresa]

On 6/16/2021 at 3:14 PM, skikirkwood said:

 ...I have friends who have spent $17K on network streamers, huge amounts of money on high end speaker and interconnect cables and always challenge them to a $1000 bet they can't distinguish something like their $17K streamer to one one of my Raspberry PIs, both outputting to the same DAC. Nobody has taken me up on my offer to date.

 

I don't have any friends as rich and extravagant as your friends.

 

7 hours ago, Allan F said:

So what! This says far more about you than it does about them. You apparently have a need to prove that you are right, whereas they are content - as am I and most who trust their ears - to be guided by their experience and simply enjoy the music. They have neither the need nor the desire to take you up on what they see as needless (annoying?) challenges. 🙂

 

I agree, I trust my ears (with long term listening) even when the results don't seem logical! Such as preferring music from my $254 Yamaha Blu-ray / SACD universal player more than digital files played through my $800 Teac UD-501 DSD USB DAC. I have no doubt that the DAC in the cheap Yamaha player is much cheaper than the DAC in the 3 times more expensive Teac DAC. It doesn't make sense to me, still I have to go with my ears and enjoy the music. 

 

2 hours ago, skikirkwood said:

...I am totally content with my audio and home theater systems. I love music, I have no interest in upgrading fuses and trying out $1000 power cables. However *they* challenge me, telling me I need to upgrade my equipment, that everything matters, that you get what you pay for. In their mind it's impossible a $17K network streamer and $50 Raspberry Pi could generate exactly the same sound quality if they both feed the same DAC. It's impossible a relatively inexpensive speaker or interconnect cable could sound the same as something from Nordost or Audience.

 

So in response, like anyone born in Brooklyn, I say put up or shut up. So far, they've all shut up.

 

I'm also totally content with my audio / video system. I'm a subjective, however I have zero interest in upgrading fuses or trying out $1000 power cables. Please don't put all subjectives in the same basket.

 

No one has ever challenged me, no one tells me I have to upgrade my equipment. If they did I wouldn't feel the need to do what someone else tells me to do, I do what I want. Thus, I have no problem with extravagant spendthrifts whither they are spending on audio equipment, cables, $1,000+ perfumes, purses, body creams or $100 hamburgers.

 

I'm perfectly happy with my $30 per pair Monster cable interconnects, $3 per foot Monster speaker cables, and stock power cords. Music through my system when playing the best engineered and mastered recordings sounds very realistic. In short I am thrilled with my audio / video system. 

 

What other people spend or don't spend on anything doesn't bother me as it is their money. BTW I paid $1 for my perfume from Dollar Tree.

[One and a half]

In any case @skikirkwood needs to provide objective graph like data to prove a point here. So far there's nothing... perhaps this thread should be in the General Forum? Other than that it appears only to big note his ideas. Free expressions, no problem, no need to listen them either.

[Teresa]

I have a question: why is a thread called Trust your ears in the Objective-Fi forum?