@Jax2 The point is that people read reviews of equipment, they come on to Audiogon and ask people's opinions of gear.. People/Reviewers respond in such detail about how certain speakers, amps, preamps, cables, etc sound to them. How accurate or useful can this information be if their hearing is compromised.
Audiophiles want to talk about how they can hear the difference in a cable. How much positioning, room treatments, stands, etc, etc, etc, can make a difference in sound, yet most here seem to be arguing that their ability to HEAR doesn't matter. IRONIC? Whether reviews come from someone here, a reviewer, or a reliable friend who you have a track history with, any and all of that should be a point of departure to varying degrees and ultimately you should make your own choices and base those choices on your own direct experience and not someone else's. At least for me, it is far more rewarding in that way. I don't come here to take convert peoples opinions to a shopping list. I do enjoy the discussion though, and especially enjoy talking about music and getting recommendations there. Aside from that, you did not really answer my question to you: What's the point of a "neutral perspective" since not any one of us listens from one? You might interpret something as sounding "warm" while someone else may say its "cool and analytical" to them, regardless of whether that component falls into some arbitrary idea of what is "neutral". You could establish "neutral" by measuring response with machines but none of us actually are machines and machines do not have emotions and experience and all the infinite complexities and imperfections that make us human. So I ask you; what's the point, even in the context of a discussion about how human beings experience this stuff? It goes to the argument of some "Absolute" or universal goal that all audiophiles should be striving for. Pardon me, but I believe that's total cow pie talk. If it were so the options would have narrowed down long ago and there would be a far sharper focus on the same kind of sound and design goals. This is far from the truth. Many different people = all kinds of tastes = all kinds of options = all kinds of ways of expressing and interpreting zeros and ones or the movement of a stylus on vinyl. Bring your music to one of the shows and take it from room to room and tell me what "neutral" is. My bet is if you do that and ten others do it you'll all come back with varying opinions. And that's all any of these discussions are about; opinions. Sad as it may be, there will be no George Foreman Grill prize awarded for the person who is the most rightest, bestest audiophile here. I hope no one was holding their breath on that one. |
Not that I hold any more stock in their opinions than I do for any other person with two ears and a heart and soul who happens to love music, but apparently some hold the staff of the audio rags in somewhat elevated esteem. I wonder the age of some of the senior writers and editors there. And what about the manufacturers of some of the most revered gear...why don't you go ask Nelson Pass to "reconcile his age"? I know at least two audiophiles who are deaf in one ear so they do not hear soundstaging cues, one I've known personally for over three decades. Both have made some of the most astute and sensitive assessments of how a playback system sounds that were dead-on to my own feelings about the same (obviously soundstaging was not included). I met a guy at a headphone meet recently who was mostly deaf and listened to headphones at 100++ db levels in order to enjoy the music he loved. Though the differences he heard were not as pertinent to me with my average hearing, who am I to question his profound enjoyment and enthusiasm for the hobby. Who am I to question someone elses enjoyment of music, or what sounds best to them? Sure, discussions can be interesting and may make one reflect differently on what they are hearing, or try something new out and compare. I've quoted a post before that rings true to me, and I'll paraphrase here - ultimately the recreation of a musical event is an illusion that takes place in ones brain via the stimulus provided to the various sensory systems involved and filtered through experience so individual as to never find a match in the entire population of this planet. Who are we to question someone else's experience of that illusion? It's their illusion, going on in their brain...not in ours. How is one illusion better than another and how would you ever possibly know that, to compare the two illusions...and why does it even matter? The enjoyment of music and of the reproduction thereof is entirely subjective. We are not machines spewing out graphs on paper. There are other very good points above, and there are resources online and at your local audiologist if you really want to test your hearing. Last time I checked last year I could not hear past 16khz at age 50. What does that matter really? I have not a clue. How did Beethoven reconcile composing his last symphony when he couldn't even hear the music except in his own mind? Not really the same question, but perhaps illustrates my question to you - what's the point? |
could some one define audiophile ? I'll give it a go from my own perspective. Someone who is interested in enhancing their enjoyment of reproduced music by optimizing the chain of devices and related variables that have an effect on how that music occurs to them. |
but obviously compromised hearing must degrade the ability to accurately judge a system from a neutral perspective. I'm not sure I get this. What's the point. Who needs to judge a system from a neutral perspective? Do any of us listen from a neutral perspective? What would a neutral perspective be judging a system based upon and how does that bear any relation to how any one of us may actually enjoy (or not) that system? That's like suggesting some culinary dish be judged from a "neutral" perspective...really, how do you do that and what is the point? I often get the feeling from this sort of slant on the hobby, that it's some kind of contest and there will be prizes awarded at some point. Who's gonna' win the shiny new George Foreman Grill this year?! I can't wait to find out. |
@jax There is no point. It was a disucssion for the sake of discussion. I don't see what part of "if you can't hear above 14hz then adjusting an eq all the way up or down above this makes no difference to you but droves others crazy" you don't understand. If you don't see any point in it then don't participate in this discussion. Simple as that. Your hearing is flawed, or not, and doesn't matter either way. Ummm, sorry, but you lost me there. I don't use an equalizer at all. I was not referring to that part of your statement, which seemed to be only an example you were setting forth. I said that I see no point in having a neutral standard for the reasons I've already stated, it is not that I don't see a point in participating in this discussion (or else I would not be). I questioned why you find such a concept advantageous (beyond your illustration of using and equalizer, which I'd guess that most folks in these forums do not). It's like trying to establish a neutral standard for criticizing movies or food or wine...it's entirely subjective and you're better off learning something about the tastes of the individuals making the criticism, how they might relate to your own, and then, even still, use it as a point of departure...a guide perhaps. If reproduction of the music in the upper frequencies is very important to you, then it might be worthwhile to find others who share that priority to seek out their opinions (which I would still use only as a suggestion to investigate on your own). I noticed in another forum I participate in that a good many of the members of the forum have very different tastes in music than I do. I have, more often than not, found also that their priorities in what components make that music they love really work for them is not necessarily the best solution for the music I prefer to listen to, but there are a few in that forum who do share similar musical tastes and I have found their preferences are actually closer to my own in the gear that works for them. That's the closest I've been able to come to some sort of more 'reliable' kind of approach to filtering out various criticism. There are so many infinitely complex things about how each of us respond to music, and to virtually everything else in life, that to try to classify it, graph it, stuff it neatly into little cubicles and quantify it, seems a bit silly to me. |
The live music standard is like any other, entirely relative as you've said. What live music sounds like to you may not be what it sounds like to me. It's like the difference of what a given wine might taste like to you and how it might taste to someone else. I have a very limited tolerance for the mediocrity of some of the live music presentations I've attended - either the venue itself, or more likely the mixing/amplification. This tolerance seems to be getting less and less as I get older and as my system has improved. In fact I find listening to my system more engaging than many live presentations of the same music...certainly more intimate. Certainly there are many exceptions too. |
So let's assume someone can only hear between 250hz and 2kz. Still gonna tell me it doesnt matter? I mean no offense to you if you are not trolling just trying to elicit a reaction, but I truly do not understand how you do not understand this point. No offense taken, and no, I am not trolling. I'm offering a different perspective which happens to be my own. I'm not saying that it doesn't matter that our hearing acuity is different from each other. I'm saying that is one of an infinite number of factors at play that might make you and the next person unique and different. I'm saying that another person's ability to hear and discriminate a way that music is reproduced by a system to their own personal liking does not hinge on any one thing, but a whole universe of of diverse factors. Pointing at one of those factors and judging that they are someone who should be ignored or listened to based on that single factor is ludicrous, IMHO (ie he's older than 60 so his opinion probably bears no relation to what a 30 year-old might prefer - in fact they may prefer exactly the same kinds of things). Take the example about the detective you liked that someone came up with (and I agree, it is a good metaphor for some of what is at play here). Make that detective a one-eye'd detective, or one who is otherwise visually impaired and may not see quite as sharply as the next person. I'd still posit that based on his/her experience (we'll assume he/she is a longtime veteran like Columbo - and Peter Falk actually does have a glass eye) he would see more at a crime scene than the average untrained and inexperienced person. Take my previous reference to my longtime audiophile friend who is deaf in one ear - I've listened to many various systems with him over the years, in many locations. I've listened to his comments on those systems and I will tell you for certain that he may not hear soundstage, but his ability to discriminate and facilitate improvements is top notch in my book. We also have somewhat similar, but not identical, musical tastes and I think that does help. So holding someones ability to hear above 15khz, 12khz, or whatever, does not seem like a given qualification for that person giving very valid and astute observations about the way a system sounds. In your example of someone whose hearing was severely impaired I just don't have enough experience with that to comment, other than there are speakers that I've heard with very limited range that are profoundly enjoyable. I suppose I would weigh severe hearing impairment in if it was something I knew about them, just as I might weigh in their preferences in music, sure. As far as the example of the dealers pushing some wire that Douglas mentioned in his post - one could as easily assert that they had an agenda in selling the wires they represented, over other possible choices as well as the one Douglas already owned (which meant no sale to them). Indeed they also could have had hearing impairments and tastes that do not match Douglas's tastes, and also could have been praising the wires based on their use in a different system. I don't know. I'm not sure why one would jump to the conclusion that they had hearing impairment and that was the cause of their preferring the wires they did. Again, so many things at play and all of that is just speculation and really does mean nothing. Ultimately what counts is what you enjoy yourself - I don't think one can elicit a formula for screening reliable candidates to provide you with those answers. The best candidate is you. |
Don't get me wrong, Farjamed, you asked a good question and it's prompted an interesting discussion. You have nothing to apologize for and I didn't really see you being offensive to anyone. Certainly no offense taken on my end. As far as your dad and the differences in what you hear, who knows. Just out of curiosity, have both of you actually tested your hearing to see if that is actually something that might be at play, or are you just assuming that because of the difference in your ages. If so, check out this article in the NY Times. And another fluff piece on CBS News here. It's not just older folks who are vulnerable to hearing loss. I am reminded of a recent audition I was doing of two headphone amps. I have headphones that are a bit challenging to amp well, and certain amps do a better job than others. I was trying two of the amps that are reputed to do a very good job with these particular cans (and indeed they do). I'd made my own assessments of the two amps. Then a good friend who is also a music-lover/audiophile with many years of experience came to visit. He's another person I've shared plenty of listening sessions with in various places and we actually have pretty similar tastes, but are not always right in line with each others preferences. He listened and gave his assessment. He preferred a different amp for different reasons and did not echo many of the ways I was hearing the two. Then a third person came by who was picking up one of the two amps which I was borrowing. He is a headphone buff (honestly I don't know what his experience has been but his musical preferences are in another world from mine). He also listened using his music (as I said, very different from what my friend and I listen to). He had entirely different things to say about the two amps. Who's right? Which amp is better? Should you pay attention to any of the three of our different opinions based upon age...musical preference...experience...a hearing test....or? Another example...over the years I've had many musicians come by and, usually in passing, hear my system (I never actually invite people to listen unless I know it's an activity they enjoy), whatever form it may take at the time. My wife's family has two musicians and my wife's degree is in music performance. Now a few musicians have stopped and listened in awe and have made some very vivid observations about what they were hearing, but many...no most, just get into the music and basically shrug off any appreciation for how it was being presented. My wife's family all know what's up with my system, but none of them really get it, and their few observations would not at all indicate they are listening from the same standpoint I am, or have the same appreciation of what's going on. I know none of them have the same priorities in assembling a system, and none really care about the same things I do. Who's right? Which approach is "better"? Are they deaf, or is their hearing otherwise impaired? Don't think so, and in many ways, musically they are far more sensitive to some aspects of presentation than I am. Still, they just don't care whether the music is coming out of a boom box or a thoughtfully assembled system that cost as much as a car. Who should you listen to for advice and on the basis of what? It's a valid question you ask about hearing. I don't know that the answer is so simple, except to say that ultimately you're the best judge of what sounds right to you. BTW, I love the illusion of soundstage (with a 2-channel speaker system) as well, so we're on the same page there. There are plenty of folks who feel it's way overrated, but it does thrill me. |
Hey, who you callin' a kid?! I turn 51 on Friday my friend. Over half a century of valuable experiences up for grabs...what a valuable resource...get it while you still can. This is a limited time offer. In a few more years I'll be partially deaf and poppin' pills to raise the family flag. I'll have to turn in my Audiophile Decoder Ring and ID badge. Between the pension from Audiogon and selling off the system to some young buck who can better appreciate it, I'll have enough to buy me a Bose Wave, a years supply of Depends™, and a hearing aid. Maybe the government will have implemented the Soylent Green program by then and I'll have that to look forward to instead. |
