|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 21, 2019 5:52:16 GMT
While scouting around the Mad Scientist website, I came across this blog from a couple of years ago, written by Bob the proprietor. It's possibly the best written and most convincing argument for hi-fi subjectivism (with some measurements and logic thrown in) I have yet read. It mirrors my views perfectly and especially rubbishes 'double-blind' tests which people often cite but are virtually impossible to conduct with hi-fi equipment. Amusingly, there is someone named 'Objectivist' in the comments section who argues with Bob over the article. He trots out all the usual objections exactly as if he hadn't read the article at all. Or ever listened to music. blackdiscus.blogspot.com/2017/09/why-audio-objectivists-are-so-wrong.html |
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 21, 2019 10:25:01 GMT
What measurements tell us are certain values of the thing we are measuring.
Nothing else.
What is currently measured is a small part of what is going on.
EG: Measuring temperature does not give humidity and sometimes how hot or cold you might feel.
Nor does it measure how you feel, metabolism, how you react to temperature
I find most Measuring Objectivists are actually subjective.
Insisting one set of measurements is the answer is often *not* the answer
|
|
|
|
Post by Slinger on Aug 21, 2019 12:30:07 GMT
I always avoid the objectivist v subjectivist argument, mostly because it's pointless. Neither side will ever convince the other that their argument is the only one that holds water.
Here's my take, for what it's worth...
If a DAC (for the sake of argument) is what I consider to be well specced by the manufacturer I will consider investigating it further. If an article full of graphs, equations, and numbers tells me what a great DAC it is I may start searching for reviews from people who have actually heard the DAC, and have based their reviews on how it sounds in their system.
If graphs and numbers could predict how great something sounds all equipment would be built to the same uniform standard and sound equally "good".
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinch on Aug 21, 2019 14:53:04 GMT
I always avoid the objectivist v subjectivist argument, mostly because it's pointless. Agreed. I think I started a thread about this in the early days of the forum. In general, I find that the positions are too ill-posed to reconstruct the dispute in a way that makes much sense! But, for what it's worth, my own view is that the notion of a failed listening test tends to be misused in these discussions, and there's tendency in some camps to over-conclude from the fact that certain things cannot be told apart. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 21, 2019 15:00:55 GMT
On your last point, Tom, it takes time for some changes to sink in. Once they do, you can detect them more easily. There is no way that quick tests with possibly an unknown system and/or unknown music are going to hear these changes. Therefore the outcome could be 'there is no difference' which in the long run would be incorrect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinch on Aug 21, 2019 15:16:01 GMT
Indeed. But I guess I was making a more basic point: From the fact that a subject can't reliably tell the difference between two things on a given occasion, it does not follow (i) that there is no difference, nor (ii) that the subject is not visually/auditorily/etc sensitive to the element which makes for that difference. These quite basic points tend to be overlooked when double blind testing gets wheeled into discussion. But to reinforce the point you just made: all that follows from the fact that certain things were not discriminable in certain circumstances is that they were not discriminable in those circumstances, it certainly does not follow that there are no circumstances in which they would be discriminable.
|
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Aug 21, 2019 15:43:11 GMT
Do you know, I wonder why subjectivists have to validate themselves so frequently ?
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 21, 2019 20:23:04 GMT
But to reinforce the point you just made: all that follows from the fact that certain things were not discriminable in certain circumstances is that they were not discriminable in those circumstances, it certainly does not follow that there are no circumstances in which they would be discriminable. Well put. It also amuses me that the best measurement device available for assessing playback quality comes in pairs and are stuck to our heads, and the processing computation for them is installed in between! |
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 22, 2019 4:14:24 GMT
Tony has shown me his equipment working and a quick example of noise from connectors can cause. Fascinating to see.
For me, the two ideally should work together.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 22, 2019 6:16:23 GMT
I look forward to seeing Tony's new measurement kit in action. Perhaps we will get closer to measurements tallying with what we hear. Otherwise, the measurements will continue to tell only a partial story.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 22, 2019 7:17:30 GMT
I always come back to how we enjoy sound is unique to all of us but I also value someone technical knowledge
My only grip is reading absolutism in terms of my view is the only view point that matters
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 22, 2019 7:52:08 GMT
When I went down the Bughead route my listening was becoming quite anylitical, this was due to constantly listening to the minor changes in software coding that would bring a bit more micro detail or a sense of warmth I found during that time I was only listening to a few albums as I was just listening to the changes. After a period of time I started to see this was actually getting in the way of me enjoying music and perhaps more importantly discovering new music.
Thankfully I am back to discovering music rather than discovering sound
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 22, 2019 8:32:08 GMT
Even listening analytically to the Mad Scientists Donuts last night, I realised it was interfering with my enjoyment.
Tonight I'll go back to listening for enjoyment, without even the tablet on my lap. No distractions while listening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2019 9:08:25 GMT
I would suggest that not always to measurement tell us the whole story, prime example in digital audio when looking at transmitted PCM signals, having the most straightest edge on a square wave may not necessarily produce the most appealing sounds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2019 9:29:17 GMT
In the hifi world I believe that measurements have their place, but I agree with others that the biggest importance is what someone hears.
I always hark back to a Hifi show I went to years ago, where there was a speaker designer who was so passionate about how the measurements of his speakers were perfect and that they went this deep etc. Even to the point where he had the measurements on graphs up on the wall.
The speakers sounded dreadful, no bass, lightweight, very very bright, vocals were garbled, treble splashy. Just dreadful. Virtually everyone that went into the room walked out shortly thereafter because the sound was so bad.
I spoke to the designer, and he couldn't accept that the speakers were anything but wonderful. I commented on the fact that the room was empty the majority of the time and that those people that came in left quickly.
His view was that people clearly couldn't hear a good thing when it was presented to them. I decided there was no reasoning with him at that point, so went on my merry way.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 22, 2019 9:45:45 GMT
That is a good story Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Aug 22, 2019 10:45:29 GMT
Tony has shown me his equipment working Oooh! Missus  |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 22, 2019 11:03:49 GMT
I always hark back to a Hifi show I went to years ago, where there was a speaker designer who was so passionate about how the measurements of his speakers were perfect and that they went this deep etc. Even to the point where he had the measurements on graphs up on the wall. The speakers sounded dreadful, no bass, lightweight, very very bright, vocals were garbled, treble splashy. Just dreadful. Virtually everyone that went into the room walked out shortly thereafter because the sound was so bad. I spoke to the designer, and he couldn't accept that the speakers were anything but wonderful. I commented on the fact that the room was empty the majority of the time and that those people that came in left quickly. His view was that people clearly couldn't hear a good thing when it was presented to them. I decided there was no reasoning with him at that point, so went on my merry way. A perfect example of measurement blindness - thanks for that, Paul. May I ask whether that speaker vendor is still in business? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2019 11:05:39 GMT
I always hark back to a Hifi show I went to years ago, where there was a speaker designer who was so passionate about how the measurements of his speakers were perfect and that they went this deep etc. Even to the point where he had the measurements on graphs up on the wall. The speakers sounded dreadful, no bass, lightweight, very very bright, vocals were garbled, treble splashy. Just dreadful. Virtually everyone that went into the room walked out shortly thereafter because the sound was so bad. I spoke to the designer, and he couldn't accept that the speakers were anything but wonderful. I commented on the fact that the room was empty the majority of the time and that those people that came in left quickly. His view was that people clearly couldn't hear a good thing when it was presented to them. I decided there was no reasoning with him at that point, so went on my merry way. A perfect example of measurement blindness - thanks for that, Paul. May I ask whether that speaker vendor is still in business? I have never seen or heard of them since the Hifi show, so I very much doubt it. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 22, 2019 11:23:54 GMT
I always remember an Class D amplifier that looked like a coffin The person was wanting ridiculous money for it A few years later I saw it being sold on eBay for a few hundred quid
Remember the guy being very proud how well it measured
|
|
