Audio without numbers
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
Well, can't speak for all those battles if accurately represented, since it would clearly be a fools errand to use only objective metrics for an ultimately subjective multi-sensory experience.
That said, if the true nature of the challenge is to determine what sound one prefers with their ears, then there are indeed ways finding that subjective preference objectively. Which may or may not include eliminating sight. Words like sound and ears have defined meanings.
IIRC, you did such a test once. The results were as expected.
That would be a short thread because I like looks too, another subjective metric.
However, I'm a "numbers" type and all my speakers designed by "numbers", at demo's, including shows, etc, have been by me. Would any of those count?
Ok, color me confused.
So you do not use objective metrics like price to determine what cables, etc, makes you happiest subjectively? You can be as happy subjectively with $100 cables as $20k ones, or a Timex rather than a Patek, etc? You don't even need to know the price of things to enjoy them more or less?
Gotcha. Well, that's where are the "serious" listening is done.
Some old dude in his Barcalounger having daydreams in front of his stereo shrine....not so serious. But probably a whole lot more fun.
CPP
Active member
Some old dude in his Barcalounger having daydreams in front of his stereo shrine....not so serious. But probably a whole lot more fun.
Oh know, you got me. A 65 year old dude in his Stressless Chair at my age having a stressless daydream in front of my stereo shrine... Not so serious, and why should it be, I'm not curing some out of this world virus, and yes a whole lot more fun just relaxing listenin to tunes.
Retirement is indeed awesome 
So much to tell about this subject...
First of all i did the login this fórum in december 2017, i started 4 threads and i have 80 posts so far.
I did it because i felt that in this fórum we can talk about our hobby without fear. Fear of what? Precisely the fear of those objectivists who are dissiminate around the world like weed. Here, those who have expensive gear can talk free about that, and those, like me, who are always doing some experiences to improve the performance of the system, i feel they have a place too (*). Maybe it´s the name “shark” that scares and drives some small fish away…
irate:
In my opinion they are not real áudio objectivists. I prefer to call them áudio sceptics. Being an objectivist is their second choice. First of all they deny everything. They don´t understand and they don´t allow me to hear “things” they can´t hear. So, they became objectivists. As Mike said before, i doubt if they real have a system. Even if they have, it represents all they know about áudio. That´s why they don´t have the answers to Mike questions. They simply don´t know. Their knowledge cames from reading in the internet. That´s why they take refuge in measurements. That´s the way they assume they can beat people who hear “things”. They are not interested in learn how to improve their system. They only want to talk -and win the conversation. They never invite anyone to hear their systems. They don´t have the courage to make a simple vídeo where all the world can listen and get an idea about how good their systems play.
Saying so, can i walk with them, could i give them a chance, an excuse for their opinions? Why should i? :doubtful:If they don´t respect my opinion, why should i respect their opinion? They have dried up the real audio discussion: how can i improve my system? They have undermined all the debate forums a little everywhere. This audioshark forum is an oasis. We can talk in peace about what we hear in our systems. Thanks!
(*) Let me tell you i don´t have any chance to buy expensive audio gear. I have what i have. A 10.000 € system (not a 100.000 or 1.000.000) and i have noticed some big differences in cables, fuses, and all most every kind of devices and materials i use to try to improve the performance.
First of all i did the login this fórum in december 2017, i started 4 threads and i have 80 posts so far.
I did it because i felt that in this fórum we can talk about our hobby without fear. Fear of what? Precisely the fear of those objectivists who are dissiminate around the world like weed. Here, those who have expensive gear can talk free about that, and those, like me, who are always doing some experiences to improve the performance of the system, i feel they have a place too (*). Maybe it´s the name “shark” that scares and drives some small fish away…
irate:In my opinion they are not real áudio objectivists. I prefer to call them áudio sceptics. Being an objectivist is their second choice. First of all they deny everything. They don´t understand and they don´t allow me to hear “things” they can´t hear. So, they became objectivists. As Mike said before, i doubt if they real have a system. Even if they have, it represents all they know about áudio. That´s why they don´t have the answers to Mike questions. They simply don´t know. Their knowledge cames from reading in the internet. That´s why they take refuge in measurements. That´s the way they assume they can beat people who hear “things”. They are not interested in learn how to improve their system. They only want to talk -and win the conversation. They never invite anyone to hear their systems. They don´t have the courage to make a simple vídeo where all the world can listen and get an idea about how good their systems play.
Saying so, can i walk with them, could i give them a chance, an excuse for their opinions? Why should i? :doubtful:If they don´t respect my opinion, why should i respect their opinion? They have dried up the real audio discussion: how can i improve my system? They have undermined all the debate forums a little everywhere. This audioshark forum is an oasis. We can talk in peace about what we hear in our systems. Thanks!
(*) Let me tell you i don´t have any chance to buy expensive audio gear. I have what i have. A 10.000 € system (not a 100.000 or 1.000.000) and i have noticed some big differences in cables, fuses, and all most every kind of devices and materials i use to try to improve the performance.
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
http://www.audioshark.org/speakers-10/big-brovo-soundfield-audio-axpona-2015-video-demo-7382.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=784nZbYAFA4
https://positive-feedback.com/Issue62/capital_audiofest.htm
Careful those imaginary strawmen, gross generalizations....and using videos to gather any inkling of SQ!!
Herb effect is widespread. There are crazed "subjectivists", wannabe "objectivists"...and a lot of folks in between.
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
Site software drama...
Careful those imaginary strawmen, gross generalizations....and using videos to gather any inkling of SQ!!
Herb effect is widespread. There are crazed "subjectivists", wannabe "objectivists"...and a lot of folks in between.
First of all congratulations for your results (good sound).
I wrote what i wrote thinking in particular individuals, those who are the major part of members of forums and write all day, everywhere. You know what i mean.
If you are in the middle of those crazy audiophiles, you don´t have to worry.
If i was a manufacturer, i would probably pay more attention to the measurements.
But, i am just a music lover, who wants to hear it the best way. And i hear with my ears, so, i don´t care about measurements.
In my own way, i´m an audio objectivist too. I try to achieve a sound free of coloration and distortion. I think is the right way. But i´m doing that with my ears, not with instruments.
I make a difference between audio objectivists and audio scepticals. This difference is very important, even if most of times they are the same. Hopefully not always.
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
Thanks and I think that is the point I'm trying to convey, that there is far more gray involed than black and white. We're all a mixture of objective/subjective to varying degrees.
When I sit back to enjoy my nightly tunes (shortly!), I couldn't give one iota about objectivity.
No "calculators" or other imagined straw props needed.
Just music...(ok, maybe an abacus once in a while, because I'm a Luddite
).cheers,
AJ
Mike Lavigne
Member
I've done such a test many times.
every other year since the year 2000 I've been a judge (one of 3; most years the other 2 judges were the late Winston Ma (FIM) and Bruce Brown (mastering engineer) in a speaker building contest for our local Seattle audio club. a curtain is raised and we have a judging form we fill out and typically 8-15 sets of speakers are involved. we never know what speaker is behind the curtain. the third year I did it I correctly identified the club speakers (ringers inserted unknown meant to trip up the judges) blinded out of 10+ others. but i'm not 100% blinded, and I have found that when i'm put under a certain kind of pressure to perform like the Randi speaker cable thing, that the anxiety of that does intrude on my enjoyment and sensory acumen (a well known factor of blind testing). it was something I learned about how my mind works. blind testing does tell you something, but what that is........is a big question. and I have found that my best and most useful listening is when I have my own music, i'm comfortable, sighted, and have lots of time. I can relax and reach my own zen state, and allow the music to come to me.
That would be a short thread because I like looks too, another subjective metric.
However, I'm a "numbers" type and all my speakers designed by "numbers", at demo's, including shows, etc, have been by me. Would any of those count?
no, I don't need any marketing about your speakers.
OTOH if you have applied your objective views to actual system building and gear choosing in detail then sure, bring it on.
none of my cables were chosen based on price; my speaker cables and interconnects use the same wire used inside my speakers (not cheap, but not premium expensive either), and my interconnects all use the 50 ohm 'zeel' interface proprietary to the darTZeel preamp and amps. system synergy trumps other issues in my system signal cables.
for power cables, since I installed the Equi=tech 10WQ balanced isolation transformer wall panel system in 2011, I use Absolute Fidelity (Genesis Loudspeakers) power cables which are not cheap but likely mid priced. they have no tonal effect on my system and compliment the Equi=tech by being very neutral and open. I did upgrade the plugs to the Furutech NFC level plugs. again; it's not price but system synergy I am after.
I've used the same signal and power cables now for 7+ years. I don't think about cables anymore. my cables do their jobs.
there was a time 13 years ago I biamped my system with 2 sets of $34k Transparent Opus MM speaker cables. but that was then. you would have nailed me for excess and been correct. but that was a long time ago.
Gotcha. Well, that's where are the "serious" listening is done.
Some old dude in his Barcalounger having daydreams in front of his stereo shrine....not so serious. But probably a whole lot more fun.
you would be welcome to come and listen to my 'assembled by sighted listening' system and judge for yourself.
NorthStar
New member
Question to the audio gurus of this planet:
Why some of the top speaker's and amplifier's designers use precise tools and measurements to create their masterpiece?
Audio by the numbers.
Why some of the top speaker's and amplifier's designers use precise tools and measurements to create their masterpiece?
Audio by the numbers.
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
Yes, this is quite in line with 100+ years of physical and perceptual sciences. Loudspeakers with sometimes vastly different 3d polar radiation, are by far the easiest to hear differences and identifiers.
This is precisely why Harmans extensive testing regime is not ABX, ABCHR, etc, etc. JND/"difference" tests, but rather simple A/B preference tests. No sane person disputes the easily measurable and correlated audible differences with loudspeakers. Of course, if one is interested in what one's ears prefer, then those type tests are essential. Bravo to you folks doing so.
Yes, it is a well known factor that when beliefs are debunked, stress is inevitable. Again, 100 years of sensory testing has accounted for that and has continued forward with countless valid results for hearing, health related treatments, physics experiments, etc.
Blinding is essential for serious listening. For totally casual, non-serious, multi-sensory, biased and belief filled sit-back-and-enjoy type listening, sure, you can do whatever you wish..and obtain consequent results. There is no "test" occurring there...nor anything remotely related to "trust ears" "just listening".
We, as in both so called objectivist/subjectivists, do so everyday.
Well, whatever system I build per your "challenge", would be based on my speakers as a cornerstone. So I guess the moving goalposts preclude my systems due to "marketing".
The fact of the matter is that all those systems were assemble by me, the "objectivist" (despite not being a follower of Ayn Rand), after extensive "numbers" testing by me, placed in far more hostile environments than your custom built space, in far, far less time....but with my base and knowledge of objective science. It seems that there may be more than one way to audio nirvana and the "objectivist" folks Herb was ranting about may actually know a thing or two about "good" sound from stereophony.
You know, the thing invented by a "numbers" guy, EE/scientist Alan Blumlein...and used by all those anti-numbers folks
Fair enough. It was a bit confusing, since you seemed rather adamant about price being a driving factor here with the challenge:
Thanks. As I have said on more than one occasion previously, if I'm ever in the PNW, I'd love to drop in.
Out of curiosity, do you know James Johnston (aka "JJ")?
cheers,
AJ
Mike Lavigne
Member
again....blind testing does tell you something.....but more about the test than the object tested. but sometimes (judging a speaker building contest, or auditions for an orchestra position) it's the best of all the poor choices. an imperfect answer. I prefer the very enjoyable sighted listening myself and feel my method has served me well. YMMV.
it has zero to do with beliefs. period.
Well, whatever system I build per your "challenge", would be based on my speakers as a cornerstone. So I guess the moving goalposts preclude my systems due to "marketing".
The fact of the matter is that all those systems were assemble by me, the "objectivist" (despite not being a follower of Ayn Rand), after extensive "numbers" testing by me, placed in far more hostile environments than your custom built space, in far, far less time....but with my base and knowledge of objective science. It seems that there may be more than one way to audio nirvana and the "objectivist" folks Herb was ranting about may actually know a thing or two about "good" sound from stereophony.
You know, the thing invented by a "numbers" guy, EE/scientist Alan Blumlein...and used by all those anti-numbers folks
well......then get to it! I will look forward to reading about it.
if you read what I wrote, it was that the 'objectivists' were the ones intimidated by their perception of my system and cited the 'cost' as an impediment to their system performance. which conflicted with their mantra than listeners/subjectivists overspend and buy with their eyes.
I hope it happens. and no, I don't personally know 'JJ' that I know of, but his name is familiar to me.
- Thread Author
- #34
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
Sure, in audio, it tells sound>ears. In say wine testing, taste/smell>consumer. In Physics, whether results are statistically relevant. In Pharmaceuticals, the effectiveness of the drug per population, etc, etc, etc.
So it depends on what one is seeking. Sound>ears...or something else entirely. Like how pleased one is when knowing about something, looking at it and sitting back in the Barcalounger enjoying a multi-sensory bias and belief filled weeks-months-years long sessions.
How did you determine that? Using what viable, scientifically valid alternative to verify the accuracy/correctness of the blind test results? Entire industries and fields of science would be very curious about that alternative method!
Sure, that's called purely personal multi-sensory preference. Zero "test" is required. It's self fulfilling.
It has everything to do with beliefs, otherwise, what is there to stress over?
I and numerous others have taken/undergone blind tests without "stress" manifesting.
It's part of the Harman online training program, Klippel, etc, and vital to those who want to improve their speaker designs, etc. There was zero "stress" involved, period.
So obviously the source of "stress" must originate from the listener, not the test per se.
It's in those show reports. Speakers that adapt to and work with room acoustics via specific power radiation pattern variation, non-pathological electronics/cabling that is visually pleasing and at very very last resort, acoustic treatment of room outside of "furnishings".
The direct sound from the front should be highly directional and controlled over near full bandwidth via horns at HF and gradient radiation at lower frequencies for both the off axis and control of LF sound power exciting room modes/modal decay. The rear/indirect radiation from the front main speakers is delayed, diffuse and decorrelated, as well as being remotely variable in intensity. Ideally, rear channels are involved also, if sourced from stereo, then matrixed decorrelated signals with all directional detection cues stripped.
That certainly sounds like cost is a factor in this challenge one way or another.
Well, he is a "numbers" guy that puts me to shame, who assembled a "numbers" system that allowed maybe not so numbers guys to have a listen to what "numbers" folks are capable of http://www.onhifi.com/features/20010615.htm
He's in your neck of the woods I believe.
One day I'll find myself up that way and take you up on your gracious offer.
cheers,
AJ
KeithR
Active member
"Whenever I get a new Stereophile, I read the measurements first because I am a nerd, I admire JA, and I find them intriguing. Besides, they might help me understand a little more what the reviewer experienced." - HR
Sums up my experience. I try not to be dogmatic with gear, but JA provides a very interesting and valuable service for readers.
Sums up my experience. I try not to be dogmatic with gear, but JA provides a very interesting and valuable service for readers.
a.wayne
Well-known member
http://www.audioshark.org/speakers-10/big-brovo-soundfield-audio-axpona-2015-video-demo-7382.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=784nZbYAFA4
https://positive-feedback.com/Issue62/capital_audiofest.htm
Careful those imaginary strawmen, gross generalizations....and using videos to gather any inkling of SQ!!
Herb effect is widespread. There are crazed "subjectivists", wannabe "objectivists"...and a lot of folks in between.
You folded up an 18" woofer , I wanna see dat ....
a.wayne
Well-known member
Would love to see her face .....
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
Interesting points of view on this from Stereophile’s Michael Fremer in the ARC Ref 6 review in 2016:
“Younger readers should know that in the early days of ARC, the idea of designing by listening as opposed to solely by measuring was a radical concept.—MF”
And the from William Z. Johnson (founder of ARC), whom Mikey is quoting based on an earlier interview:
"[T]he measurement techniques we use today really don't necessarily tell you about the sound quality. Obviously, if it measures badly, it isn't going to sound good. But the simple fact that it measures well doesn't assure that it will sound good."
https://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-research-reference-6-line-preamplifier#BvWFBobWGomJ75yB.99
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
“Younger readers should know that in the early days of ARC, the idea of designing by listening as opposed to solely by measuring was a radical concept.—MF”
And the from William Z. Johnson (founder of ARC), whom Mikey is quoting based on an earlier interview:
"[T]he measurement techniques we use today really don't necessarily tell you about the sound quality. Obviously, if it measures badly, it isn't going to sound good. But the simple fact that it measures well doesn't assure that it will sound good."
https://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-research-reference-6-line-preamplifier#BvWFBobWGomJ75yB.99
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
