Ralph what you are referring to in terms of measurements is far removed from what we are presently being provided from these sites and their advocates. I would sincerely welcome legitimate and predictive measurements.
@charles1dad ASR is actually providing a lot of information, much of it quite useful. They don’t always hit the nail on the head (see the PSAudio regenerator review where Amirim pretty well missed the point). But they do graph distortion vs frequency and usually show the distortion spectra. I’d like to see the distortion spectra a -6dB of full power in addition to 1 Watt, and also see the distortion vs frequency at 1 Watt, -6db of full power and also full power. They could do all that if they caused their hands to move. So my opinion of them is higher than yours; and I think they can do better with little effort.
If you see distortion rising with frequency take that as a Bad Thing (likely bright and harsh, not what you like if my guess is right 😉). Your SETs don’t do that, neither do our OTLs or any zero feedback amplifier. Amps that run feedback need to not do that too. So right there you know something very useful that is routine on that site.
|
To me ASR does pretty good with DAC measurements and Speakers, especially since he got the Klippel.
|
@djones51
ABX and blind tests are the platinum standard. Sighted tests are dismissed as irrelevant, no way to have a control for bias. I fail to understand this idiotic aversion to science.
This aversion to science seems to be endemic amongst throughout history.
Let's not forget that Galileo, Darwin and Freud have all been vilified for daring to even suggest that mankind is perhaps not the God created centre of the known universe.
As you might expect, most of the anger came from those that had a vested interest in denying the evidence that was presented, namely certain powers in the church.
With audio, you could argue that the reasons for denying science are somewhat less principled.
Here, amongst certain unscrupulous corners of the industry, it's not a question of a possible theological or even philosophical belief, but merely an attempt of sheer greed by deception.
As we already know, not even scientists and engineers can live in a world free of outside political and economic influence and temptation. Some can be easily bought and sold all too easily in this age of pragmatism.
Now as to the reasons why some consumers would reject scientific data, perhaps it's just a question of pigheadedness?
|
@cd318 Now as to the reasons why some consumers would reject scientific data, perhaps it’s just a question of pigheadedness?
I haven’t noticed any participant on this thread rejecting scientific data, who’s doing that? I would acknowledge that there are posters (including myself) who believe reliance on measurement is no substitution for listening. Ralph has eloquently pointed out that relevant measurements are rarely utilized and presented even though they’re available.
Speaking of scientific data rejection, why are some so seemingly narrow minded and dismissive of the research and information regarding the fascinating study of ear-brain processing of interpreting sound? Too complex to bother with? Science demands curiosity, humbleness and an open mind. Probably a lot simpler and reassuring to just cite data from a sheet of paper.
The effort to delve into the science of human hearing may just be too daunting for some, so it’s easily ignored.
Charles
|
Great post which express my own opinion too...
I haven’t noticed any participant on this thread rejecting scientific data, who’s doing that? I would acknowledge that there are posters (including myself) who believe reliance on measurement is no substitution for listening. Ralph has eloquently pointed out that relevant measurements are rarely utilized and presented even though they’re available.
Speaking of scientific data rejection, why are some so seemingly narrow minded and dismissive of the research and information regarding the fascinating study of ear-brain processing of interpreting sound? Too complex to bother with? Science demands curiosity, humbleness and an open mind. Probably a lot simpler and reassuring to just cite data from a sheet of paper.
The effort to delve into the science of human hearing may just be too daunting for some, so it’s easily ignored.
Charles
|
This problem of audiophiles living their lives according to how things were 30-40 years ago has caused a lot of suffering (and to be clear, when people have made up stories about life and life does not agree with those stories, that is the source of all human suffering). Back then, if the manufacturer, distributor or dealer's lips were moving, he was lying
I go back to the 60s, thank you very much. I'm not sure where you are shopping but there is no incentive to have a disappointed customer unless you are selling speakers out the back of a white van. A good dealer will help you on your journey through the maze of possible choices. You probably need to shop at better stores if you think you are being lied to and being sold "snake oil".
|
Who dismissed science of how we hear? The plascidity of the brain? Certainly not me. For instance do speakers " break in" or does our brain adapt to the sound of the speaker room interaction. Looking at the components of a passive speaker there’s very little that would benefit from break in of more than a few minutes to a few hours but it can take our brain a few days or weeks to adjust to a change. I agree there are far to many who reject science not only of how things work but of how we work as well.
|
@atmasphere If you read that post again, that was not a posit, rather a question? I can't make that posit without having heard the components I speak of. You posit they'll all sound the same, apparently, you trust the measurements over human sensory perception. This in a nutshell, speaks to difference between O and S, I need to listen, O's don't.
As Charles previously stated, and I stated in previous post, we don't deny science and find it useful. We also don't deny the validity of our individual sensory perceptions for our OWN choices.
It has never been my intention to present my observations, listening experiences as some objectively verifiable truth. They are presented as an obvious subjectivist, my system and preferences there for all to see. And based on my observations the vast majority of posts here follow this pattern. I don't see much if any misrepresentation in posts that listener's experiences are shaped by their preferences.
I presume vast majority of visitors and contributors to this forum understand it's greatly dominated by subjectivists. ASR and some of diy forums, objectivists. I haven't dismissed ASR in any of my posts, and have in fact used them to some extent in purchasing decisions. And they do present their listening impressions on that forum, at least some there attach some validity to their sensory perceptions. I am in fact a hybrid of O and S for initial purchase decsions, however, I do attach validity to my sense perceptions for long term ownership.
|
I go back to the 60s, thank you very much. I'm not sure where you are shopping but there is no incentive to have a disappointed customer unless you are selling speakers out the back of a white van. A good dealer will help you on your journey through the maze of possible choices. You probably need to shop at better stores if you think you are being lied to and being sold "snake oil".
We need ways to determine if a dealer, manufacturer or salesman’s claims are factual, semi factual or total B.S. that is wittingly or unwittingly fabricated.
We can try doing that in our houses post facto after purchase, or using some measurements a priori.
I like to do as much of that in an a priori fashion as possible.
And realistically the dealer, and more to the point… salesmen, have a low track record for trustworthiness. Whether it is used cars or stereo gear, if they were EE types, or automotive engineers or mechanics, then they would be making things, or fixing things… not selling things.
I like bartenders and baristas as much as the next fellow... maybe more so…
But striving actors and philosophy majors are always interesting to talk to.
However I would not be taking their advice on technical matters, nor on medicine, nor on world politics.
We seem to want to trust stereo salespeople perhaps more than they should be trusted.
I set the bar at whether they can speak to a graph, or explain in some technical way why piece is worthwhile, and when they resort to magic and synergy, I pretty much put the shields up and engage engines to leave.
|
And realistically the dealer, and more to the point… salesmen, have a low track record for trustworthiness.
My first dealer, Walt at Woodland stereo always made sure I went home with the right stuff. He helped Arnie Nudel with his first loudspeaker the Servo Statik. Walt had the best sound of any SoCal audio shop. Many years later I was dealing with Kevin Deal, he has a good ear and I just have to tell him what direction I want to go in and he gets me there. If you haven't found someone that is on your wavelength, keep looking around and going to shops until you find that person.
|
@sns
@atmasphere If you read that post again, that was not a posit, rather a question? I can’t make that posit without having heard the components I speak of. You posit they’ll all sound the same, apparently, you trust the measurements over human sensory perception. This in a nutshell, speaks to difference between O and S, I need to listen, O’s don’t.
The point I believe that you might have missed is the fact that he is an amplifier designer and manufacturer.
I would be pretty disappointed if Ralph, Bruno, and/or a handfuls of other “engineers” were using tweaks and burning of incense to design gear.
I would reword your quote to be:
This in a nutshell, speaks to difference between us.
- I listen carefully to O that have a track record of quality gear as understanding the objective science.
- And I listen to S as story tellers, sometimes conveying the qualitative.
A good objectivist understands what tickles the toes of the pure subjectivist.
The reverse is almost never true.
Maybe a subjectivist could be in a middle ground of wearing the twin hats of objectivist, and liking the subjective experience. But I doubt it.
It seems more common that one either is not capable of understanding the technical nuance, or they just do not want to… and they like to hold up their hands and claim it is all unknowable.
At some point though it is true that no matter how glowing the prose is, it is hard to make believe that something is good, when it in fact, sounds bad.
Hence I would not say “Trust our ears”, but I would say, “Verify with our ears.”
|
The difference is O knows what's best for me, S suggests.
|
The difference is O knows what's best for me, S suggests.
That is a total straw man argument.
A better quote might be, “Os know why I like what like”.
|
At least some s also know why I and others like what they like. We're very aware of every issue o brings up, the difference between s and o is what we value. In the end whatever gets you off is fine with me.
|
@russ69
Q.: “ … I just can’t clear my head of this. I don’t want to start a measurements vs listening war and I’d appreciate it if you guys don’t, but I bought a Rogue nSphinx V3 as some of you may remember and have been enjoying it quite a bit. So, I head over to AVS and read Amir’s review and he just rips it apart. ….. Help me package that so I can at least understand what they are thinking without dismissing them completely as a bunch of mislead sheep. “
The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.
P. T. Barnum
Nothing draws a crowd quite like a crowd.
P. T. Barnum
“And in what business is there not humbug? “There’s cheating in all trades but ours,” is the prompt reply from the boot-maker with his brown paper soles, the grocer with his floury sugar and chicoried coffee, the butcher with his mysterious sausages and queer veal, the dry goods man with his “damaged goods wet at the great fire” and his “selling at a ruinous loss,” the stock-broker with his brazen assurance that your company is bankrupt and your stock not worth a cent (if he wants to buy it,) the horse jockey with his black arts and spavined brutes, the milkman with his tin aquaria, the land agent with his nice new maps and beautiful descriptions of distant scenery, the newspaper man with his “immense circulation,” the publisher with his “Great American Novel,” the city auctioneer with his “Pictures by the Old Masters”—all and every one protest each his own innocence, and warn you against the deceits of the rest. My inexperienced friend, take it for granted that they all tell the truth—about each other! and then transact your business to the best of your ability on your own judgment.”
― P.T. Barnum, The Humbugs of the World: An Account of Humbugs, Delusions, Impositions, Quackeries, Deceits and Deceivers Generally, in All Ages
“Nobody ever lost a dollar by underestimating the taste of the American public.” ― P. T. Barnum
There's no such thing as bad publicity'
P. T. Barnum
|
taking a tube amp and measuring it against a modern chip amp is a lesson in futility. Engineers have been able to get cheap chip amps to measure perfectly for some time now, and the kinds of outcomes that Amir bleats from the rooftops were never in doubt. Yet people still keep buying tube amps, and will continue to do so as long as they produce the sonic goods…
|
@sns
At least some s also know why I and others like what they like. We're very aware of every issue o brings up, the difference between s and o is what we value. In the end whatever gets you off is fine with me.
Beautifully put in a nutshell.
This thread has generated interesting and thoughtful commentary.
Charles
|
Based on my observations of this controversy over many years I will attempt to elucidate the divide.
I cannot speak for all s, but at least a portion of us believe we can best achieve our goals for sound reproduction with audio systems by listening. We believe with experience and mindfulness, listening skills can be valid means to accurately convey to our minds and senses such that we can accurately choose components and systems that conform as close as possible to our aural memories of live non-amplified music. This being possible while at the same time understanding and acknowledging our sensory limitations and/or subjective qualities of them. We don't deny the validity of measurements, we simply believe current measurement protocol isn't capable of measuring what our ears and senses convey to us.
Again, I can't speak to all o, buy my understanding of their position is that as imperfect as present measurement protocol is, if that is even an admitted liability, it is still superior to the most skilled listener in ascertaining component and system sound quality. The senses are not and cannot be relied upon vs measurement.
If I have this right, I don't see the divide ending anytime soon. both sides are going to hang onto their beliefs. Some 0 may disagree with my use of the word belief attached to their argument, my retort to that is current measurement protocol doesn't explain everything, thus, some measure of belief applied to o argument.
I'll only make this one last argument to defend the s side. Again, I don't want to speak for all s, but I believe many, if not all of us live life to pleasure our senses. We enjoy good food to pleasure our palate, we love to gaze at esthetically pleasing form to pleasure our sight, we love to hear music reproduced on audio systems that pleasure our hearing. In order to attain pleasure of the senses one needs to simply enjoy, not always second guessing or analyzing and/or doubting our senses. Yes, part of this is monkey brain, we have inherent needs for pleasure. While we are aware of the limitations of our sensory perceptions, we can trust in them enough to derive pleasure from them.
I derive great pleasure from my present audio system, I'm well aware of it's limitations, but it conforms close enough to live non-amplified instrument and vocal timbre, and also conforms in other parameters of sound quality enough to believe live performance is taking place in my audio room. And this doesn't take a lot of mind twisting and/or suspension of reality to achieve. I'm well acquainted with this aspect of stereo reproduction and perception, and I know the less work one has to do here pays off handsomely in pleasuring one's senses. Whether the pleasure I currently experience from my unique audio system conforms to some other persons idea of what a system ought to be, frankly, doesn't bother me in the least.
|
This divide between O and S comes from the focus on electronic tools and components...
They together ignore the psycho-acoustic and acoustic impact which is way over some "taste" for gear or over some "measurements" evaluation of the same gear...
That is life, acoustic is more complicated to decipher and read about than a few electrical concepts charts about an amplifier...
A room was a hard task to master...For me....
😁😊
Some say: garbage in from the source ,garbage out from the source...
I will say if your speakers/ room is acoustic garbage your head will be too....Nevermind the source...
It is way more easy to afford a relatively good dac than a relatively good room...
And you dont know your room if you dont work it....
|
Again, I can't speak to all o, buy my understanding of their position is that as imperfect as present measurement protocol is, if that is even an admitted liability, it is still superior to the most skilled listener in ascertaining component and system sound quality. The senses are not and cannot be relied upon vs measurement.
I consider myself entrenched in using objective measurements and I agree you can't paint all with the same brush but this isn't my position as far as someone building a system they enjoy.
|
|
@sns
Touche!
Listening to music is an emotionally pleasurable experience. I'm very grateful to be able to recognize and appreciate that it is truly a gift to mankind to enjoy. There is a music genre for every cultural and individual taste.
Charles
|
If I had a nickel for every time this topic has come up,
I'd have a bunch of nickels.
|
I've promised myself this is the last time I enter o vs s. I can only hope it holds. I only know I've said everything I've have to say.
|
You posit they'll all sound the same, apparently, you trust the measurements over human sensory perception.
We need to be clear about something. You specified that the measurements would be the same, and I have to assume that includes all measurements, not just 'some'. If that is true then indeed they will sound the same, having the same bandwidth, same distortion spectra, same distortion vs frequency curve, same output impedance and so on... yes, they will sound the same.
My point is that the important measurements just simply are not made nor presented.
Most of the differences we hear between amps is their distortion signature, to which most audiophiles refer to as the 'sonic signature'. I've described how the distortion affects the sound of the amp earlier.
|
Most of the differences we hear between amps is their distortion signature, to which most audiophiles refer to as the ’sonic signature’. I’ve described how the distortion affects the sound of the amp earlier.
Based on my newfound expertise wrt speaker cable resistance (or at least unusual speaker cable resistance), can I surmise with some accuracy that high output resistance of the average tube amplifier compared to the average solid state amplifier with typical speakers will be the dominant contributor to "sonic signature". It is able to make significant changes in system frequency response which I do not think anyone will argue with would be audible.
On the other issue, for all the paragraphs written, I do not perceive that O telling S what sounds best is the dominant issue or even much of an issue beyond some zealotry (much of that on both sides). I see that more as a deflection of the real issues of whether S can really hear the differences they claim exists and that O says do not exist. I think the average O may have some thoughts on what is "likely" to be pleasing to a wide audience based on tests by respected O's, but would accept that not everyone has average preferences.
|
can I surmise with some accuracy that high output resistance of the average tube amplifier compared to the average solid state amplifier with typical speakers will be the dominant contributor to "sonic signature".
Amp and speaker interaction cannot be simulated in lab amplifier measurements. Most all loudspeakers vary dramatically in load to an amp. Testing the amp and speaker separately is not an accurate measurement of how the components work together. Some speculation can be made sometimes but not always. So the method used is measuring with a simulated 4 ohm load and a simulated 8 ohm load but that is not how the system is operating.
|
Amp and speaker interaction cannot be simulated in lab amplifier measurements. Most all loudspeakers vary dramatically in load to an amp. Testing the amp and speaker separately is not an accurate measurement of how the components work together. Some speculation can be made sometimes but not always. So the method used is measuring with a simulated 4 ohm load and a simulated 8 ohm load but that is not how the system is operating.
My EE circuit skills at this level are not superb, but my expectation would be this is a factor of the stability of the amplifier which could be impacted by the impedance of the load compared to a pure resistance. I would expect amplifier designers such as Atmasphere consider this, and also that for most standard speakers (not electrostatic for instance), they expected range of speaker reactance is not so great they cannot account for it. When I was researching speaker impedance after discovering the high resistance cable, I noted that the phase angle seemed to be bounded though my research was not extensive. It seems an inherent element of most speakers is some significant series resistance.
This is a good point but not the nature of my question. If the amplifier has a characteristic output resistance that is significant, then knowing the characteristic input impedance of the speaker, we can simulate/model how that will change the frequency response. This has been validated by an EE strong in circuits so I am confident that is correct. I believe that would be dominant over distortion, but I am not fully confident in that belief. I do understand that high output resistance would also impact woofer movement which may not be easily modelled.
|
we can simulate/model how that will change the frequency response.
I seem to have an attraction to hard to drive loudspeakers. Some with wild impedance swings and nasty phase shifts. I had one amp that totally rejected one frequency with one loudspeaker and a switch to another amp proved there was not a speaker issue (other being hard to drive). Not sure you can simulate that without using the loudspeaker.
|
I am not stuck on audio measurements! I am stuck on what it sounds like. That's all that matters. The bifrost DAC flunked the test measurement of an expert tester that is popular. Hey, it sounds great! My ears tell the story. Tube equipment won't spec as well as transistor. My ears tell me it sounds better on my system. That's all that matters.
|
Tube equipment won’t spec as well as transistor.
It seems Amir does not make any concessions to design type, where as Stereophile makes comparisons to similar designs, not chalk and cheese. If the piece under test doesn’t measure as well as an A/B Solid State amp with some solid feedback, it fails and doesn’t even deserve a listen. The vast number of high-end tube equipment on the market must suggest that many like the way tube gear sounds in no compromise systems.
|
How about the concept of reserving the term audiophile for those interested in sound and music, while coining a new term such as
Audiospecophiles for those interested in the measurements of gear?!?
|
I have already coined Audiokarens. That’s for audiohiles who tie their self worth to their equipment purchaes and get bent out of shape when measurements show it’s not as perfect as they told everyone or it is of questionable benefit.
|
Over this fight between " gear tasting fetichists" and "measuring obsessed zealots", all of them are anyway mesmerized by the gear importance, focused on a brand name to listen to it or to measure it anew ... Why not?
I use the term "Acoustic Analphabet" to describe the two warring groups...
Only acoustic and psycho acoustic can explain sound experience and make us able to not only control all his factors with ANY system at ANY price but also learn each of these OBJECTIVE factors with SUBJECTIVE listening experiments and integrating them in our body/room with the right devices and measures in acoustic balanced treatment but especially in acoustic optimal mechanical control...
We can operate and control a room/speakers relation at will or not...
If not,we can imagine that the peak of the audiophile experience will be changing an amplifier for another costly amplifier... 😁😊
The fact that one measure better than the other means little if you locate the system in a bad room...And all uncontrolled room are relatively "bad" unbeknonwst to the owner who will vouch for this acoustically unverified claim that his room is good... The difference between a room controlled and uncontrolled exceed almost any upgrade in improvement power... Save upgrading a 100 bucks amplifier for a 100,000 bucks one...Or a really bad one for a really great one...No normal usual upgrade can compare to acoustic mastery...
This upgrading obsession is the first symptom of acoustical analphabetism....
By the way the basic vocabulary of music is not the basic vocabulary of audiophile, and the basic vocabulary of audiophile is not the basic vocabulary of acoustic...
Then we must learn to translate one vocabulary into the other...
The rosetta stone is the relation between speakers A and B and ear A and B ...
A stereo system sound optimal when we feel like there is almost 4 speakers in the room sometimes, relatively to the recording....Is it not incredible? No it is not quadraphonic, only stereo well done...In some recording we are on the stage and the musicians are around us...There is an acoustical way to mechanically create these sound impressions...
How many experience that?
This is acoustic power...
After that upgrading is preposterous in most case if the system is relatively already well chosen for sure...And well chosen is not related here to price tag....
My post goal is to motivate people to think before throwing money...Especially nowadays...
|
My post goal is to motivate people to think before throwing money...Especially nowadays...
That brings me to another point about the products reviewed by ASR and their ilk. Why the obsession with what other people spend on gear and their insistence that anything over $1500 is just wasted money?
|
We want to try and understand this divide, do we not?
The longer a question sits unanswered, the greater the error in the formulation of the question. Not the grand question, mind you, but the complexity and the points of debate and qualities/bits of the given question, that sits in our individual minds.
Here is an overtly critical aspect of the question component set --that few ever venture into finding and understanding. It goes deep into everything in our world.
It’s the why of mathematics, and science, and linearity in thinking, and dogmatism, scientism, the why of the idea and execution/creation of ’engineering’ by the renaissance creative types...and so on.
Why such things like excellence in open creativity is not just feared but hated with passion by a notable percentage of human population. Why the ’natural’ (person who can do impossible seeming things) is feared and hated. Why Pareto distribution exists.
To exaggerate for framing and parallax depth of view creation..... this is why ASR is not about creative people, at all. ASR is a love letter to human mental linearity tied to being a blunt instrument of war, based in very deep fundamental fears against the creative and adventurist lateral thinking mind. Why it will, as long as humans exist as they do..why it will remain among us.
ie, music is about creativity and lateral expansion, flowery language (in high end audio), which is required in the creation of the new (the new in audio, finding it’s voice, solving those complex unknowns)... and measurement is about hammers and boxes, and safely marching up and down the square in green uniforms.
If one wants to understand these never ending discussions, and why they will not end, ever....then this is an essential video.
This is about music, this forum. this is filled with the creative types, in at least some greater part of their expression, overall.
Thus it draws the linear minded conservative types to it like a zealot is drawn to correcting error as it sees danger to itself in those differences. This mind type will NEVER stop trying to kill it off with all the force of it’s being.
It’s a fight between consciousness and unconsciousness, in life and living to some degree, in the expression of human growth and having a viable growing future.. Probably more than you might think.
forums like audiogon, the idea of subjective reality and creativity is 1,000% essential to to humanity and it’s future.
Whereas... the idea of ASR, is to kill that, with vehemence. To kill the very thing that gave it life, shape, and a future. Excessive rigor and framing to the point that it has no future, as real world paths have curves, skips, blanks, and meandering.
Overt Linearity kills, if it is taken too far. Scientific rigor also has it's very important place! It’s a simple fact tha overt rigor, imposed - is dangerous to creativity. rigor and framing and linearity is good in the main/middle but not in the sum. If one watches the video in this post and, critically...understands it contents... this will become quite clear.
|
That brings me to another point about the products reviewed by ASR and their ilk. Why the obsession with what other people spend on gear and their insistence that anything over $1500 is just wasted money?
I would be more concerned with why it bugs you so much when all they do is measure equipment and publish results. It's a rather unemotional thing.
|
I would be more concerned with why it bugs you so much when all they do is measure equipment and publish results. It's a rather unemotional thing.
not true at all. the negativity at that website is allowed to run rampant. It's out of balance.
the balance attempt is evident at audiogon, as you are allowed to post here.
If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I'd be removed in almost seconds.
So no, it's entirely emotional over at ASR, with a false cloak of reason and correctness as a cover story.
|
To exaggerate for framing and parallax depth of view creation..... this is why ASR is not about creative people, at all.
I would estimate that overall the intelligence of ASR posters is above average. As opposed to typing unfounded meritless attacks that further the divide as opposed to bridging a gap which you claim to want to do, how about spending 5 minutes on Google? The correlation between intelligence and creativity is well known and researched. The relationship breaks at about 120, i.e there is no additional advantage but even studies show it may extend.
Product, process and device physicists and engineers are literally tasked with doing what has never been done before, or doing it cheaper, more efficiently, etc. They spend much of their working life creatively applying the knowledge they have obtained. Knowledge is their tool just like a guitar is a tool to the musician. It is not their failing that you do no not see the creativity in what they do.
|
Thus it draws the linear minded conservative types to it like a zealot is drawn to correcting error as it sees danger to itself in those differences. This mind type will NEVER stop trying to kill it off with all the force of it’s being.
Really now. I have read some of the political discussions here. Pretty conservative bunch.
Your post, a hostile diatribe at best, at worst is ultimately an attack meant to silence an opposing view while disguising it as freedom fighting. Your post lacks humanity, understanding, and most of all shows a lack of creativity of thought in your inability to understand an opposing view.
|
There is creative people in all forums....But the zealots predominate in all charcterised oriented forum...
ASR is measured oriented....
Audiogon is subjective listening very oriented...
Psycho-acoustic is NEITHER of these orentations alone...But their concrete correlation in a room...
It seems to escape most that sound cannot be explained by subjective experience
nor by electrical measures on the linearity response of processors etc...
For the I. Q. spiritual factors and cultural environment and education play a greater role, openness of the mind and senses, than strictly only I.Q.
John Stuart Mill endowed with a superhuman I.Q. is not Leonardo Da Vinci nor Goethe, not Swedenborg and not Ramanujan nor Grothendieck neither Bach...His I.Q. is the same or near them....
And the highest I.Q. ever measured, he is out of any measuring scale in fact, some give him 250 or 300, which seems plausible after reading his biography, William James Sidis was very much studied in the golden age of I.Q. testing just before and after the second world war in the US decided at 12 that he never will created new technology for agressive "apes"... Freedom was his near focus and cultures...He spoke nearly any language after few weeks... He teached in a public confrence at 11 years old at Harvard fourth dimensional geometry in 1912 answering question about the new relativity theory and his time conception as the fourth dimension compared to his own spatial interpretation......This is all redacted verifiable facts ....😁😊
He deduced in a book i have read the existence of black hole from his own thermodynamical thinking alone... He predicted the existemce of anti matter and the existence of biological matter by his own deduction....He was 16 years old and published the book under alias at twenty years old... he despised in an obsessive manner all aspect of publicity...He published books under aliases... Anyway, who among human will be proud to beat an ape at chess? His life is science fiction stuff... I speak about for those curious...His talents will humbled every one among us who think he is intelligent... Try him...It is an exrercise in humility for those who think their 20 points over the 120 barrier is a big deal... 😁😊It is not... It is only the door to a profession sorry...
Creativity is linked to the freedom of the mind soul and spirit more than to i.Q. But for sure people who struggle mentally are chained by their too numerous limits more than others...Thats all there is between I.Q. and creativity passed this 120 I.Q. barrier...
|
If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I'd be removed in almost seconds.
What I see being unapologetically not accepted is posts regarding listening reports where any difference by nature of the component changes must be very small, and the listening test is done with full knowledge of what is being listened to.
I will ask, do you have proof that their insisted methodology is wrong. Not feelings, not personal experiences, not unsubstantiated articles, but solid proof their insisted methodology is wrong?
I get the impression that if I demonstrated to them that things they did not accept were audulible are, they would be amenable to the idea especially if they participated. They would then analyse it 10 ways from Sunday and figure out why.
I am coming to the conclusion the opposite is not true. Even if it was shown that you could not hear a difference you are certain exists I don't think you would accept the results.
|
If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I’d be removed in almost seconds.
Being naive i tried the same thing, but i suffered the same circonstances... 😊 They recognise an amateur audiophile like me when they see one so to speak... Anyway the technological only mentality and hardwire focus is a limitation not less than people obsessed here by a gear brand name "colors"...
At least here i am not ridiculed for my creativity...
i understood at least how to control my room, how to decrease the noise floor, and to control vibrations by my own devices... So "nuts" they seems for some of them ....Some are pure acoustic and simple acoustic principles..
The most important one being:
For speaker A and speaker B there is also for ear Alpha a phantom speaker minus a and for ear Beta a phantom speaker minus b... These phantom speakers are real not only an illusion they are concrete "reflected" co-creator of the soundscape recorded in some album and emerge reflecting our own room control for each ear... The problem is to learn how control these speakers images with sound pressure level and frequencies timing waves front and reflected one for your listening position...I used different devices for that...
I used a foldable screen and acoustic crosstalk and acoustic crosfeed... In my primitive but effective way... Diffusers and resonators for sure also...Ordinary passive material treatment come first for sure but the real work begin AFTER minimal passive material treatment..... No headphones can compete at the end...
|
In a word, audio superior experience in sound quality does not end with the measuring process associated with a design and does not end after buying it and listening to some design picked by ears among all those who are good enough ...
Audio superior experience comes AFTER mechanical, electrical, acoustical and psycho-acoustical controls are put in place, never mind the price tag of the gear ...Never mind the design "color" or specs sheets, if it is not TOO bad design to begin with for sure...
Then....... 😁😊
Dont argue to death about Objective/subjective attitudes, study acoustic vocabulary instead....In acoustic vocabulary all which is objective will be correlated, at least in principle, with all that is subjective...
|
@deludedaudiophile
If you watch the video about creativity, (about an hour long) you’d find that not only lawyers are entirely non creative, but that it is the same largely (very largely, bordering on overtly) for scientists as well. this is partially due to the aspect of rigor and social cohesion among the group.
But that, overall, as a group, scientists are unoriginal and not creative.
At the peak of such a group, came the few imaginative creative renaissance men (at the time it was all men, relatively), who, using their creativity CREATED science as a system of well, systematic rigor. they walked right into the depths of the chaos and pulled a system of rigor and order out of it and then formalized it, for the benefit of humanity.
then, they created a different, less evolved rung of it, called engineering, where those who could not deal with the complexities of even minor creativity and imagination, could have a place to belong and be in the world, to feel good and comfortable and to move things forward in a way that satisfied them.
That system of engineering became the orignal emergent formalization of academic systems, in Bavaria in the approximately early 1720’s through the 1750’s. It’s why the Germans, to some.. have the best polytechnic schools, to this day. Formalized Engineering is their invention.
if we go down a rung, we get to those who think similarly, within the scope of how minds work, or are categorized (loosely) we end up with dogmatism replacing the idea of learning and knowing, due to metal speed differentials, different orientations in varied technical aspects, etc. (took different things in school)
If we go down another rung, we make it to the dogmatically minded who scream ’science, fool!’, but don’t know what it means, and spend some of their time crushing beer cans on their forehead, as a replacement for academic pursuit. These are the foot soldiers of projected violence, on (audio) forums, for the most part.
If you watch the video, it might be that we can’t understand each other at all, and never will. not in this life or the next. Maybe, maybe not. Can’t really tell from here.
Nothing is definite, fact’s don’t exist and all of life is illusory, ephemeral and entirely subjective. Where..there is only one single FACT in existence... there are no others. Just the one fact exists--which is that facts DO NOT exist. Quantum paradox comes to life in the parent and progenitor of science..ie..philosophy.
Philosophy OWNS science’s ass. Totally. Irrevocably so. Philosophy and the rigors of logic in complex extremis, is what created, framed.. and gave the playground of existence TO science. Those renaissance men created the concept of objectivity, or they formalized it, and built it into formalized science, and formalized academia in/and for science.
The creatives (the literal peak and pinnacle of humanity's growth and future, BTW...humanity will literally die without them), their flowery language and all the attendant mess, are the ground that places like ASR walks on. Objectivity, like facts, absolutely does not exist, as your life is entirely subjective. Objectivity is an exercise in rigor in/of logic. Objectivity is a hypnotic game we play with ourselves.
When science runs amok it can and does become weaponized by the dogmatism inherent in a notable percentage of humanity’s minds, and it begins to eat it’s own parents and children.
So, you tell me, how well such hard, logical, reasoned and sensical posting would go over at ASR.
|
Creativity is linked to the pressure of events and more so on the freedom of the spirit...
There is two brain hemisphere, one is focus in details differentials relative to his mapping ability, the other one focus on background, and wholeness, on the territory not represented by a usable map...context attract him more than the litteral conditioned meaning...
These two hemisphere correlative working, they dont work so much well together in our own civilization after the Renaissance...Said neuro psychatrist Iain McGilchrist...
With transhumanism we assist at the suicide of the free mind...The erasure of the soul...And how many people understand this?
All creative mind are poets... The reason why is hidden in language dynamic between semantic and syntactic and acoustic correlated dynamics...i cannot enter in this here...
Some Nobel chemistry free mind professor wanted that his students wrote a poem, a sonnet, to understand this simple fact...i dont remember his name sorry...he was very wise...
If we read the great mathematician Grothendieck, his two books of 2000 pages are crossed and pollinated by metaphors deep one all the time...Then he would had thought poets with exercise in projective geometry for sure...Visualizing projective geometry is a music on his own with his system of spatial rhymes or operators...A projective sonnet so to speak... 😁😊
How about to teach audiophiles, subjective one and objective one here with mammal morphology like Goethe created it, unbeknownst to most?
Read Wolfgang Schad ,the great morphological zoologist then and prepared to be amazed without words...Or fell out of your chair...Recognizing a mammal for the first time being a grown adult who never seen one really but labelled them by habit is a great schock in one life... Try it...
Same thing apply to plant morphology, or music or complex numbers, knowing them by habit is not knowing them, it is not enough ...It is enough to work and for working in a profession yes, not enough to be creative...
Like said Robert Musil in his magnum opus " A man without qualities" there is two meaning related to the word Genius: one is linked to some ability like in the word engineer, and the other meaning is linked to the Divine ...It is like the two hemispheres version of the same word...
|
We want to try and understand this divide, do we not?
@teo_audio Probably the best post in this thread.
|
Agreed. That was a great post. Reminds me of the time when I said, on another thread a while back, that it could be that objectivists can't appreciate the beauty and nuances that subjectivists do in musical recordings, or at least, anywhere near their level. That really pissed some of them off.
All the best,
Nonoise
|
Why the obsession with what other people spend on gear and their insistence that anything over $1500 is just wasted money?
A marketing decision. Based on what they “subtly “ peddle. Just follow the money. It’s always about the money.
If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I’d be removed in almost seconds.
They will not remove you if you do that. They will keep you and will pile on you. On purpose. Like vultures. They have an official policy (not kidding), a narcissist procedure of “cat and mouse “ sort of game. They will play you from a position of competence and utmost superiority.
These are the foot soldiers of projected violence, on (audio) forums, for the most part.
Yup! Well put. Someone called them the Objectivist measurements activists. I would say Militants is most appropriate. And like missionaries, they have to go places. Other audio forums. All of them. Nothing to do with music or audio.
|
“ A marketing decision. Based on what they “subtly “ peddle. Just follow the money. It’s always about the money”
Like your old chum Chucky you mean !
|
