stereophile does it right. reviewers don’t know the measurements until their review is complete.
In this particular aspect, I agree, though I have seen JA completely misread his own measurements, that's another story.
Measurement Bias
Measurement bias is the idea that if you know the measurements of something that information will already bias your perceptions of it’s performance. For instance, knowing the g-force at which car A might slip vs. car B could affect your perception. B, having a higher g-force rating should be a "better" car but if you did not know this you might rate A as better. It may be more fun to drive.
I’ve seen this happen in a review in (I believe) TAS. The review was for a DAC I purchased. The reviewer noted it as "noisy." I read this after I had purchased and been listening to the DAC for a while. I was more than a little shocked, I could hear no noise whatsoever from the DAC. I pulled out an oscilloscope and sure enough, there was unexpected ultrasonic noise on the outputs. I eventually did sell the DAC, but not because it was at all noisy, but because new DACs handled Redbook (44.1kHz/16 bit) tracks so much better. Nowhere in the review did the reviewer mention they had measured it, and they certainly did not point out the deficiencies in Redbook playback, but the reviewer absolutely presented this DAC as noisy but otherwise OK.
So, my point is, that making assessments on the experience that comes from a measurement in audio is tricky business, and if the reviewer is aware of the measurements ahead of time it will absolutely bias them into hearing things which they’d otherwise not, and leave them blind to other real world challenges.
If you want to put together desirability with measurements you need to look at the work Floyd Toole or Bose have done and others in this area and you wont’ find it in a frequency response chart. Of course, Bose’s research is proprietary, but absolutely no one one earth has spent more money on assessing value vs. measurements and manufacturing dollar than Bose.
PS - Please don't argue the quality of Bose speakers here. I'm not arguing for or against them. I'm arguing that the research done in tying together desirability and engineering direction is outstanding. That is all.
Showing 4 responses by erik_squires
Well, I think THX did a pretty good job for home theater systems in auditoriums which included acoustic requirements and in specifying speaker requirements for homes as well. We just kind of ignore it all for stereo. |
I should point out that the opposite effect can happen as well. Using measurements and listening to gear can change your hearing. You start to hear music like a piece of test gear instead of enjoying it. I know this has happened to me. I get very good at predicting frequency response charts from listening sessions and... it doesn’t make my enjoyment of the experience any better. It just makes me more skilled at estimating frequency response graphs. As a result of this, I know I hear differently than other audiophiles. Is it better? No, not really, but it is different and now I buy different gear or build different gear. There IS a large part of being a music listener and audiophile and mastering engineer which is about social listening and a shared experience. The mastering engineer is trying to connect with the buyers and their gear, and vice versa. Not with tools and technology, and yet we do need to rely on them. |
@carlsbad2 - Absolutely. There's also the idea of "modernity" bias. Something something kevlar something beryllium something something...
|