that’s called a “joke”. equality of women should be noncontroversial, agreed?
Do you trust your ears more than measurements?
I have a lot of audiophiles that say the ear test is the best. I believe them. Some of us have to do blind tests etc. I’m in the camp of trusting your own ears because no matter how something measures. Is it more pleasing to you with a particular cable, placement tweak etc. What are your thoughts everyone?
75 responses Add your response
Thanks for your kindness ... I just want to precise that i am fooled by the usual biases as anyone is...But in a bit less powerful way than for most people...😊 Because i picked a set of new biases more powerful than the traditional one in audio which are : publicity, price tags, esthetics... My new set of biases is the three working set of controls, mechanical and electrical and especially acoustics... Then even if i can be fooled by my old biases the same as all people biases, the new one act as knowledge act on "black cat" superstition... A doctor can have this fear of black cat inherited from childhood, but after his training knowledge the superstition even if it subsist in his unconscious, has less power because of the new set of conscious biases : medical science...
Biases are inherited as the result of habit and conditioning, but some can be the results of training and created by our new practice... Audio is grounded first and last in psychoacoustics not on price tags, esthetic, or gear design... But we must learn how to put this set of biases at the place of the other set of biases...
|
I'm leaning towards warm and clean. I also run and integrated streamer/dac, so recording compression and sound levels make a difference. For instance, I think my aq's cables sound more veiled than my low end audience, but then again it's much fuller and doesn't sound like a full range 12 inch horn either. Lol The clean also seems to factor on low resolution recording. I was getting obsessive and ready to go manic between cables, until I saw the current differences seemingly effect the speaker and resolution quality, with some still probable other factors. |
@benanders +1 It’s like getting invited to what you think is a dinner party, and it turns out to be a lecture; no conversation, no food, no booze. No fun! |
I can almost always tell a tube amp from a solid state amp. I can always tell vinyl from other sources (and no, it's not because of clicks and pops). I can tell the difference and tube amps and vinyl sound better to me. Granted, I had to work my way up the upgrade ladder to get where I wanted to be, but measurements don't really matter to me, unless I need a 1.5 Meter interconnect as opposed to a 1 Meter one. Otherwise, I trust my ears. Further on this-- whenever I decide to mess with the placement of my speakers, I always mark where they are currently situated. Why? Because I always go back to that placement, not because of the measurement, but because that's where they have always sounded best to me. |
@liamowen +1 one last thing. I get what people say about bias. But my ears are not biased. My ears will not let my mind lie to me! lol . If smthg sounds good it sounds good. If it cost more or cost less good is good if I can save and get better sound then great. If not I’m paying more. Some people also have a price bias. If it’s more expensive I tell my mind that my cheaper stuff sounds better. But sometimes my ears will not let my mind lie to me. lol |
I use measurements for what they're good for, and use my ears for the rest. Most everything I have is vintage, so it winds up on the bench for safety and performance checks. If it's possible, I will listen first, then measure. We don't listen to square waves on purpose, but that is one measurement from the old days that is still a valid predictor of sonic performance. |
There is no one objective standard nor one subjective standard... This is common place fact... But this common place fact dont justify those who called their gear choice my "taste" and conclude that the job is done... There is a process of necessary and possible correlation for each of us between objective measures and our subjective physiological biases and hearing history and training.. Then this is true :
Psychoacoustics standards concerning all acoustic factors are established by a set of CORRELATED experiments where all parameters are varied with different subjects... No subjects will perceive "timbre" the same way... but they can train themselves as acousticians and musicians do in their own way at their own rythm...I did it... Timbre is a multidimensional factors experienced it is experience by fis specific ears/brain and only measured in a multidimensional way in varying controlled conditions...... All this does not means that we cannot for ourself in our own room modify the measures parameters at play and then created for ourself an experience of timbre which will be satisfying for us... Using acoustics experiments and concepts and parameters is better than purchasing an upgrading amplifier and called this "our taste" as if it is the end of the job and the end of the audio road... i trusted my ears in my acoustics experiments when i changed parameters in an incremental way... Then if there is no one objective nor one subjective standard there is a a numbers of tools and parameters we can use in an incremental process which we will all agree on, like all acousticians agree on the way to create a good room and agree on the necessary possible tools and process to do it from some starting point ... Being stubborn and justifying laziness by saying each one of us differ by taste is only a way to procrastine what must be acoustically done ... |
This also assumes we hear the same. We don't. When I look at a red car do you see the identical color red? Probably not. Thus we all adjust to our own unique perceptions and, in turn, make adjustments for this uniqueness in our prefered SQ. For me It's more about just having fun with the gear and enjoying the music than striving for a single "best" result. |
Yes. Both. The R&D test (objectives) narrow down the field. The test drive determines if everything is satisfactory. How does a car enter your sphere of consideration without first knowing its most important objectives? You can't always tell by looking. A Corvette may look fast, but a Civic Type R may smoke it around the track. That's why you need to look at measurements. |
Too many bad recordings out there to just trust your ears.
Case in point. So many recordings have a "grunge" (maybe digital?) to them due to whatever somewhere along the process of getting the original session to the final CD. Better recordings don't exhibit this, but I find it to be somewhat common, maybe especially among earlier CDs. Additionally, it is frequency dependant and my L200/300s barely exhibit it at all..., but also miss so much else in this frequency area. I designed my own speakers in and for the room in which they are used and have been tweaking them (e.g., changes to the crossovers) for years. I found with the right part selection, I could get rid of the grunge and most things just sounded better without it. BUT!!! I found that it's removal had artifacts. For example, the Hohner Clavinet through the wa-wa pedal lost some of its characteristic "jaw harp" sound. Ultimately, I figure that the grunge is there and any truely high fidelity system is going to exhibit it in the microdetail.
|
