It is proven by acoustics that we hear qualia corresponding to physical invariant properties of any vibrating sound source...

Sound is not mere vibrations in the air but real qualia in the vibrating sound source perceived with and through the vibrations in the air...

Ears/brains is not only and more than just a Fourier computer...

Now imagine someone defining sound qualities with a few electrical measures of separated pieces of gear in no room and for no ears...😊

Music is not abstract ratios but concrete "timbre" perception by the brain/body...

Then making claims about hearing without knowing what is hearing and equating it always and mostly as potential delusions in the context of marketing a site, tools and products is at best if not fraud pure ideology but certainly not sciences...

In audio psychoacoustics rules design not the reverse... Tools are tools not truths... Interpretation  linking chains set is the core acting mind guiding gesture ...

Amir anyway sells his "site" ASR as "science" ...The zealots takes it as gold coin. Then anyone using his ears out of a double blind test with ABX is mocked there as a deaf bat..🦇

Imagine if i dare to suggest to the zealots my experiment to them using a piece of shungite and of quartz to demonstrate the impact of the materials on our perception of qualia in the vibrating sound source ... They will call me "tin foil hat" if they stay polite...😁 ( Amir by the way is always polite by contrast )

They equal hearing theory with Fourier maps at best at worst it is a deluded sense easy to fool then not truthfull at all for them . Period...

As in this cartoon measures understanding is backward and hearing understanding is forward... 😉

Acoustics is their regulated correlation. Ears is gold and measures are silver.

I forgot to say that the cartoon above is draught by the genius of Tom Gauld ...

https://www.tomgauld.com/

Now to answer your only one argument it seems :

I just say, "you need to listen to know anything"

This will not do at all ...😊

This debate between objectivist and subjectivist was going on for years...

And you attacked me ad hominem because i used too much words...It seems you are the joke ...

If you try to think for an hour without joking, you will understand that to settle this question once for all we need to understand what is hearing and what hearing is about ...

Then read the articles i gave in my posts above instead of attacking my character ...

By the way even if we are in complete disaccord Amir never attacked my character for the 7 days we discussed together few months ago...

I prefer his character to your character it seems even if we think the same about the importance of trusting and training our ears... ...😊

« Dont forget that my goddess love your goddess »-- Groucho Marx 🤓

I am sorry but i said acoustics elementary facts as they are...Which FUNDAMENTAL fact is precisely contradicted by many ASR objectivist if you are able to understand what my sentence imply .

I put above others post with many articles of science who explained it all and justify my short last post...

Mocking my writing will not help...Others already did it by the way...

What i learned i learned it in my 2 years experiments room ...

And if you think i am pretentious being short and on the point with this sentence which only express fundamental acoustics truth :

«It is proven by acoustics that we hear qualia corresponding to physical invariant properties of any vibrating sound source...»

What i must think after your mocking of my few sentences about your sentence

:

Let us be still and listen and feel the divine Mother loving us.....right now and forever.......then send that love out to all our childrem (everyone on the entire planet).

When you throw a pot you think the flower you throw after is a gift coming from your divinity ? 😊

I dont like to be bullied and i dont bully but i am ready to be corrected and i corrected when i can... ( my knowledge is limited)

Grow and if something is WRONG in my first sentence CORRECT me without mocking my posts lenght or lack of humor .,.. I dont joke all the time get used to it...I already posted jokes above...It is enough ...

There is an acoustic revolution right now and the articles i posted are proof about it... You dont read them and will not because their lack of jokes and

Just too dang many words

?

And i will correct you :

My post is not a joke and i am not beautiful...

And i dont need to prove anything... I like helping in this debate which is very important... Acoustics is a matter that interest me because my main subject is philosophy in general...

The articles i posted here are for ONE or TWO person who will be interested. I always posted supposing my readers are intelligent and of good faith...i like discussion more than jokes...

Put your feet in my shoes...

He mocked my post as pretentious non sense...Lacking jokes...

How this sentence sound to your ears if you are the target :

Your first sentence seems to come from: "I am an advanced college Physics teacher and I will tell all you kindergartners what is real. You are all too young and ignorant to understand but someday after you get your Doctorate you will then know that I speak truth."

I dont liked it ...Is it  such " astonishing interpretation" for your working brain ?😊

And few trolls here this week mocked already my words count posts length and syntax instead of adressing my arguments..

And if you are interested more to character targetting yourself than by the CONTENT of what is acoustics in this thread and in my post stay out of the discussion...

I will give you a point though : i probably overreacted as usual but i am fed up this week in particular by few idiots attacking my posts WITH NO ARGUMENTS...

I am used to discuss and i never attacked character when someone gave arguments... And by the way my arguments go in the same direction than ricevs then why mocking my post ?

I dont patronize people character here i discuss their arguments then i dont tolerate character targetting ...Not my character nor other character... Period...

By the way read the articles i posted above before commenting about my "character" They are the content, not my character ... ...Or will you go back with another post without content about my character ? This answer of mine to ricevs dont concern you ...

There is not even a scintilla of "mocking", "bullying" nor "attacking" in @ricevs post.

How can anybody interpret the post this way is really astonishing.

Sorry but your post is a poison wrapped in sugar...

A character attack with lies:

First :

Who actually replies to Mahgister?.....not many. Who is he talking to?......himself.

Have you read all my posts contributions since a year here , concrete contributions ?

In musics, classical and jazz ?

In acoustics which is not room acoustic , but the science of hearing , the matter that interested me ...

many people answered and thank me here or in private mail...

I discussed 7 days with Amir here , in complete disagrement and he never attacked my character as such as you just did doing what you accuse me of doing : patronizing other behind a false good faith ...

Then you lied about me and caricatured me ...

Then you used your 5 cents psychology to patronize me... You did with me what you say i did... But in the post i wrote above which you mocked i stated acoustics facts perhaps above your head i dont know... Then here you come and you patronize a "beta" me as the "alpha" you wanted to be with a sugar like guru mantra of false love attitude declaration.. True love is gesture not lesson because who claim to teach others here ? You, not me who discuss arguments from others and not their character stating acoustics facts and important articles you NEVER READ...

On a public forum we cannot be alpha to another.....we are all equals. We are each others parent and child but we cannot lay down "behavior modification techniques" like a parent to a child.

We are not parent and child to one another, we are adults and more than mature one...Your claim is absurd as ridiculous pop psychology...

You are so pretentious , you are your own caricature and lying dont seems to pose a problem to you. How can you say that about me : have you read all my posts and discussions? have you read the private posts of people thanking me ?

I already talked a lot about concrete methods to create a good system... ( By the way just few post above i suggested a CONCRETE EXPERIMENT with shungite and quartz) But the last years i was more interested by hearing theory...Are you so ignorant to think that "tweaks" only matter and not acoustics which is not room acoustics ? You suppose no one is interested by hearing theory ?

And now YOU DECIDE WHAT PEOPLE HERE NEED and you declare that my post are useless..

I would love to hear some simply stated words from Maghister about some things that would actually improve my sound or my happiness. I don’t want to hear the word "acoustics" said over and over. I want some real knowledge that I can implement so I have larger goosebumps when listening. That is what I want......a better stereo.....and most peopel here...that is what they want.

Your post is a caricature and a character attack...Your own ego is so big it is comic to read you speaking of the ego of others...

i will stop here because you have no arguments... Save you dont like someone different from you claiming anything over your head as hearing theories facts...

You yourself present yourself as an audio guru with a site...

I am here to discuss with adults about acoustics and music...( not child-parenmt)

I am of good faith even if my posts may be clumsy ( english is not my language)

You never spoke to me nor answered my arguments or articles, you do your show to show others here your own importance by attacking a character a bit too large for your taste it seems ... Despicable ..And pathetic...

«Your ego is too big mine is really small»-- Groucho Marx 🤓

Now guru ricevs the subject matter of this thread is not about cables measures...

It is about ASR ideology, which is grounded in an erroneous theory of hearing...

My suggested articles and comment here are around these articles under my posts  which express if you dont know it , and you dont know it yet by the way , they express and explain  an ACOUSTICS revolution about hearing theory...

Then guru ricevs if you are not only a big humble ego only giving character lesson to others, but also a small proud ego about your own audio understanding, read that and EXPLAIN TO ME AND TO AMIR why these articles facts matter and how they destruct the ASR Amir ideology about audio OR NOT ...

if you are not able to do that but only able to talk about tweaks and cables and attacking others character because they take too much place with a false loving attitude,

Then shut your mouth about my character ..

did you get it ?

https://www.academia.edu/63847071/The_Body_Image_Theory_of_Sound_An_Ecological_Approach_to_Speech_and_Music

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377699983_Bodily_maps_of_musical_sensations_across_cultures

https://physicsworld.com/a/human-hearing-is-highly-nonlinear/

Replace the information in the 4 articles above and explain something to us...

Why mocking the positive content of a poster?

Why deciding for all that i am a big ego with no content ?

Why mocking people instead of thinking ?

Is this  sarcastic post against someone without even understanding the matter submitted to discussion  your own glorious post ? 😊

"We all wait for your glorious easy next post ..."

So, you are the spokesperson for this community 🙄.

Thanks.

Ok you seem reading your last post a person of good faith...

I perhaps reacted too much...

But you wrote yourself in your ego bubble...😊

My discussion here was not about how to improve our system as you said nor about tweaks , this thread is about Amir ideology and ASR ...

Mahgister,

I don’t need to read articles about sound to know how to listen. I know how to tweak my system and room pretty darn well

Then you missed the point about my posts and artcles claiming that i was pretentious..

I just gave my opinion about why Amir is wrong grounded in acoustics hearing theory...

My articles are pure science not audio magazine articles about tweaks ..

I really don’t care that Amir and the like believe the way they do. I don’t NEED to prove him wrong.

Your claim here is contradicted by your own post just before criticizing my "ego" where you explained why you are not OK with Amir ideas...

The problem is your argument are simplistic repeated already by other people other than you before ..

My arguments are deeper grounded in science articles and in hearing theory then other people than you can be interested by the thread matter if you pretend now to be not interested by them ...

Then why attacking my alleged  "arrogance" or pretentious ego?  if my goal was not so much contradicting Amir  because  he dont discuss with me in this thread anyway , but my intention was to communicate to all people here new facts in acoustics very recent one you dont know yourself , neither Amir nor anyone here ...

I had the right to communicate objective discoveries without being attacked by someone who claim that i spoke by arrogance or only  for my "ego" satisfaction...

For what reason do you speak yourself ?  As Amir you are an expert with a site and something you sell ( your service) no ?

Me i spoke and dont sell anything , i spoke here as an ordinary educated audiophile ... No other motives... You cannot say that...

What are we wanting with the behavior and feelings that we put out. Are we defending ourself or are we being of service?.

Now before questioning my motivation why not questioning your own attack on my ego alleged pretentious claims?

Are you yourself so high in wisdom that you can decide for all people  in this thread which arguments benefit to all and which arguments does not benefit to all  ?

I dont think so...

I decided myself that new scientific facts matter and must be known, especially if they can be used as  rational argument against an ideology dominating the world right now :

manterialism and nominalism and techno-cultism and transhumanism ...

Then the new facts i asked people to read and  studies in the 4 articles above had nothing to do with your non sensical "peace and love" discourse after your attack on my "ego" ... What was your true motives ?😊

You seems a good person then i overeacted perhaps but i dont regret my reaction because it seems you must learn yourself a lesson here...

`"I am not alone to own an "ego" ...At least i dont sell anything to anyone here unlike you and Amir , i only want to discuss in good faith ...

I will repeat also that even if it was tough discussion with Amir he was  a gentleman by the way and never attacked my personality and character...

i am happy to say at the end that you seems also a gentleman at last ...

Thanks for the clarification but myself too i needed to clarify .....

my sincere wish for the best to you ...

I just solved a problem with ricevs here in a gentleman manner but clearly ...

Sorry but what if someone attacked you publicly about your character?

Will you invade his private mailbox?

I never attacked people but i answer directly immediately and where the post was : publicly .. ...

It is my own way to never entertain grudges and makes thing clear...😊

It is why just today , my problem with Hilde was so well solved i could thank him for an information he gave which is useful to all including me ... Only petty mind keep grudges... I am not such ...

Then learn this :

I pay people with what they gave me : kindness and a less soft reply but always a rational one if they attack any person here even when it is not me ...

Discussion here must be rational with no character attack . Period .

By the way i dont have rivals...

Read the four articles above and if you dont fall off your chair because it is important matter i will be surprized...

I dont consider anyone here as rivals but as friends...

The problem is some people dont like "intellectuals" or suffer from inferiority complex it seems... And are not interested by deep science ..

Hearing theories values and aspects are deep science and matter for all audiophiles...

This was my point linking together these 4 articles especially in this thread matter ...

Instead of thanks some attacked my character ...😊 and it was not Amir who always was a gentleman ...

@mahgister , Why don’t you and this other son of some eternal mother, hilde, etc (all your apparent rivals) resolve your differences in private messages? Might be easier that way...

Audiophiles needs to understand a bit acoustics, objectivists as subjectivists to stay less ignorant and understand what to do to improve greatly any system at any price without upgrading blindly when it is not necessary ...

It all still boils down to that oh-so-common Achilles heel of N = 1. For listening pleasure, that’s all any audiophile needs.

What is the relation between Fourier Map and Timbre perception?

Enlighten us if you know everything and post only to criticize ?

We all wait ? Go and explain it because for you it is a well known dead horse ..

a clue : you must not only read the 4 articles but understood the link between them ..

We all wait for your glorious easy  next post ...

because for you i stuck a dead horse anyway ...

😊

Pretty sure this horse is dead, rotten and skeletonized at this point.

Probably time to quit beating it.

What we measure when we hear a music piece is only a Fourier map of the sonic event. the "waves" associated with the sound qualia. The sound qualia is not interpreted yet by the ears/brain/body.

This sonic fundamental event is a "timbre" among other acoustics factors revealing to our consciousness the qualitative information coming from this vibrating sound source states ( empty full, peirced with holes, in wood , in metal the list goes on ).The sound source in vibration can be a ripe fruit or a violin anything .

But also the timbre affect our own emotional and physical body in precise location which are universal among cultures independant of the music styles we are all affected in the same way as humans in our own body. See the artcles.

What is the relation of this with Amir ideology ?

For Amir the Fourier maps of the "waves" tell all the story and with his few set of electrical measures all the audio story is told about sound qualia...listening is delusional and illusory to the point any claims by an audiophile is pure hallucination with no objective value ...

This techno cultism evacuate any qualitative information and emotions as secondary and superfluous to evaluate sound , a tool overcome our body/brain /ears value ...

The 4 articles above which are pure science research , not audio magazine marketing, contradict this ideology which is techno cultism reduction of man power and his control in the case of Amir to sell something in the case of big corporations to control humanity ...

i stay short to spare the patience of some ... 😊

Guess what your own brain body will detect if on a sound vibrating element in the chain of the physical events implied by the sound experience i put a piece of shungite or alternatively a piece of quartz ?

A qualitative new state informing us of a change in the audio system not measured by Amir but existing objectively though for anyone brave enough to do experiments ...

The subjective and the objective are not completely separable in the sound phenomena ...if we did it for the sake of science or for our pleasure we loose something : the object of acoustics science.😊

You are not completely wrong...

Three or 4 idiots harass all my posts in many threads... ( even in my private mail)

They posted no content at all unlike me ...

They gave character attack , nobody answered them because it seems my content displease ...

Then you are right...

Thanks for spelling to me what is evident to all it seems...

Not one read the articles and dare to communicate his thinking ...

😊

We are not here to discuss?

Anyway ,

my best to you  and my apology for my answer...

😁😊

I am very glad to read someone wise and polite.

Wiser than me at least...

Thanks for the advice...

I like discussion about deep matter but silent contemplation will be better than uninvited answers to unasked questions.

My best to you sincerely ...

@mahgister , Get out of the house and pay a daily visit/walk the dog to some coffee shop near your house, preferably one where intellectuals, university professors, students, spiritual kooks, etc show up. Talk about some of these things in real life, listen to some music on your headphones, take your books, play some chess, start talking to the pretty ladies who show up at such places, etc...i.e., get youself entertained out of the house.

An online forum filled with grouchy old men may not be the right place/medium for the type of conversations circling in your head.

Thanks rankaudio for this video...😊

A very clarifying video that confirm for me the importance of the measurements that matter at the end and the most important : acoustics physical parameters of the speakers and of the room and ears/HTRF measures...

Any electrical measurements of a piece of gear must be interpreted in an electrical, physical and acoustical  context and cannot alone define what is S.Q. at all .

Hearing theory matter. Gear synergy matter. Electrical design specs matter way less.

In my experience discussing with him for 7 days here , he confuse sound quality and electrical measures of the gear for 2 reason:

--- For one, it  is his own selling pitch , he sell his site, products and expertise,,,

---The second one is he think acoustics is room acoustic.. Even if he know the difference  between acoustics and room acoustic he had no idea what we hear when we hear a qualia and a physical property of the vibrating sound source in our own non linmear time domain  because for him the ears is a deceptive tool compared to his electrical devices, period.

...

It is science : hearing theories are the core of acoustics...

He know nothing and dont want to know nothing about that ...

Fourier maps is the territory for him . Period...

But sorry Fourier maps are not the acoustic human territory ...😊

it is easy to understand the huge difference if we study.

It is an engineer in software  and a seller and a gentleman  ...😊

What seems dead is politeness in serious discussion about serious matter...

Personal character attack replace content...

Ignorance presented as the norm seems the way to go ...

Anyone head over the crowd must be cutted ...

😊

Amir is full of himself and a total narcissist.

I dont think that it is good politic and proof of understanding to attack any character or person here instead of discussing his rational arguments...

I myself discussed for many days already here with Amir and he never attacked my character. For sure some posters on ASR as in Audiogon can gangstalk someone and many had attacked or mocked many people here or in ASR . But Amir was and is a gentleman...😊

I disagree completely with him about the order of the factors importance : hearing theory and experience must rules gear measurements not the reverse. And anyway physical speakers/room/ears acoustics measurements takes the cake over some small % differences of some cherry picked electrical tool measures applied to one piece of gear design, out of any specific system synergy and out of any specific room acoustic for no specific ears ...

Anyway only rational discussion makes us different from raging apes..😊

myself i think the same as

However, I do find his site and tribe useful for me to figure things out.

Some gear that is praised to the hilt on this site was also not preferred by me. I have learned to understand the sonic preferences of A’gon posters. That give me some context.

mahgister

 

I agree with you, however, you should see what he and his henchman do to others who say anything that doesn’t jive with their cultist methods or how they sensor people who question their methods. Amir deserves everything that was said to him.

I know how you feel...

I was served the same medecine by some ASR zealots when i posted unusual experiments propositions with Quartz and Shungite.Then i quitted ASR under sarcasms and not very polite comments about these experiments propositions .. And i decided to stay here 😊 I only read time to time many excellent threads on ASR .... But i dont think Amir will go so low himself attacking people opinion, he is enough confident in himself to act civilized and rational with his own arguments ..

But ganstalking fanatics exist even here ...

We must pick our language carefully then... I dont think Amir is a "narcissist" because his hearing theory is superficial and subordinated to what  he measured in a short set of measures presented as the main element to pick the right gear piece .. ...😊

i apologize if i reacted and gave my opinion on your post but ...

My best to you sincerely ...

Amir hates tube amps because they measure bad, yet countless audiophiles love tubes, myself included. The guy wouldn’t pass a blind test to save his life. He needs a chart to tell him.

I am very far myself from techno-cultism pervading the engineers crowds especially in A.I.

I dont confuse not reduce wisdom and knowledge. I dont reduce knowledge to science , and i dont confuse science with technology. and I dont confuse technology with techno-cultism religion.

But hearing studies are sciences also not only emotion...

All my audio system is stunning at peanuts price because i learned and study acoustics basics... Acoustics measured parameters with my ears or not, matter in audio experience way more than ASR fetichism of electrical engineering what we evaluate an audio system"room and even with a piece of gear ... Thats my point of contention with Amir...

Calling him names is childish ...😊

Emotion is what i felt with my stunning system each day thanks to acoustics basics...

I tuned my resonators and diffusers by ears by the way because the tools needed to do it will cost more than my system price and will not  do better  ...😊

There is as much  bad tube amplifiers  as there is bad or not so good S.S. amplifiers..😊

And we cannot judge there difference  each type will make in any different system room by measuring only some of them...

i will not go back in my acoustics hearing theory rant...

Anyway it seems very few read science articles..

I posted many...

Our ears are designed in a specific way to grasp some qualitative meanings about vibrating sound source these qualia reflecting direct physical invariant of the sound sources. "timbre" is the main exemple.

For Amir all there is to say is in some types of cherry picked electrical measurement about the gear through Fourier linear mapping of a reality which anyway exist not as a linear Fourier map and exist in his own non linear time domain in our perceptive and interpretative consciousness reflecting in himself some physical invariants of the vibrating sound source...

Then Amir stance about sound quality rooted in some set of electrical measures is half truths at best ...

Then ricevs is right here :

How can he be "right" if he thinks that measurements directly correlate to sound.

The Map is not the reality.... The Fourier tools are only that : "tools" ...We dont understand hearing without the vibrating sound source many physical invariant ready to be directly perceived as qualities of sound, timbre, speech, music ...

Also apart for these qualities extracted from vibrating sound sources describing properties of these sound sources. ( is the vibrating object is made of metals or wood or plastic , is it dense or hollowed, is it made of many holes etc )

Apart for the physical invariants of the sound source Acoustician Edgar Choueiri say this:

«

Spatial music is music in which the spatial aspect of sound—the perceived location, extent, and movements of sound sources in surrounding space—is more or less equal in stature to the traditional aspects, or elements, of music—pitch, timbre, texture, volume/dynamics, attack/duration/decay, melody, rhythm, and form. We shall call this traditional aspect of music canonical and contrast it with the spatial.

Our daily experience of sound outside of music is rich in the spatial aspect and poor in the canonical. We constantly hear sounds localized or moving in 3D space, but most sounds—the engine rattle of a passing bus, the rustle of tree leaves in the park, even a melodic birdsong—heard one day are not easily hummable in the shower the next. In most music the opposite has been true: We hum and remember the melodies, and we sway to the rhythms, but we have grown to accept that the spatial location and extent of musical sounds and their movement in space are, at most, secondary to the canonical elements. We are thus as oblivious to the music that is constantly unfolding in natural space as we have been unfazed by the lack of spatial sound in music.»

Then how measuring few electrical specs of an isolated gear design could indicate anything deep about the many sound qualities aspects really ?😊

I forgot to gave the link of this important Dr.  Choueiri article :

https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/going-spatial/

i think you say it well ...

😊

The word is not the thing.
The symbol is not the thing symbolized.
The map is not the territory.
The flag is not the nation.
The measurement is not the sound.
Gee, what do they all have in common? 
(hint) They are all approximations of sorts, a shorthand for reference, analogous at best and most definitely not the final or best say. To say they are is hubris from someone who wants to sell you a bridge.

All the best,
Nonoise

The sound qualia and qualities are acoustic physical and psychoacoustics phenomena.

I recommend this article as a complement to Dr. Choueiri article :

http://The Body-Image Theory of Sound: An Ecological Approach to Speech and Music

These qualia and associate qualities (vibrating sound sources information associated with physical invariants in the sound sources) and these 7 spatial qualities identified by Dr. Choueri ( Reverb; Envelopment; Depth & Proximity; Spatial Extent & Resolution; Motion; Spatial Modulation; and Spatial Segregation.)

With the orthodox classical qualities associated with music in history (pitch, timbre, texture, volume/dynamics, attack/duration/decay, melody, rhythm, and form. )

All of this is acoustics phenomenon. Not playback gear design measured specs manifestation.

Then sound quality experience cannot be evaluated nor predicted by few electrical sets of measures submitted to ABX double blind test because hearing is supposedly deceptive...

Ideology is not science even when ideology use electrical tools ...

By the way Amir is a gentleman and a pleasure to discuss with. I cannot say the same for many people here or on ASR who gangstalk people they dont like because they cannot have recognize or use rational arguments.

I think it could be useful to reproduce here the 7 spatial qualities images used by Dr. Choueiri in his article because they are so well done they speak well to our acoustic experience and intuition :

@coralkong

"use my brain/ears to judge how a product sounds to me.."

That’s your ’personal’ opinion. You can use your brain to conclude 1+1=3. But we don’t use your brain but use the measurements data/results to develop/analyze circuits/products. What we electrical engineers do at work modeling/simulation/measurements.

Sorry but acoustics is a science as electrical engineering is, And electrical engineering receive order from psychoacoustics and acoustics discovereies not the reverse : acoustics experience quality is not determined by few electrical sets of measures but by acoustics physical parameters and psychoacoustics parameters...

In my experience and experiment about good sound my ears experience and acoustics experiments to create what is "timbre" and "dynamics" and the spatial qualities of sound in my speakers/room matter more than a % of measured distortion to the xth decimals ...

i dont need ABX Double blind test circus either . Single blind tests as working tool is enough to tune a speakers/room to my liking...

Then claiming that using our ears/brain is not "science" is one thing but claiming that we must replace all along our ears/brain by some limited set of electrical measures is "ideology" or techno cultism ...

Then you do simulation rooted in human hearing universal abilities as measured in acoustics and this acoustics parameters gave electrical designer some frame to work with ...

This does not means that human hearing of the consumers cannot be used in acoustics and in gear design choice... Synergy between pieces is also related to the room and ears of the owner not only to electrical specs of each separate piece of design ...

Then accusing audiophile using their ears to be deceived is as preposterous as someone claiming that electrical set of specs measures had no value...

Objectivist tool ideology and subjectivist tastes gear obsession are marketing ideologies not acoustics science ...

In a word i dont want to buy what and only what ASR measuring Amir recommend and claim that all other recommendation based on subjective takes had zero value ...

Synergy exist, room exist, my ears/brain exist....

If i had done so as seems to recommend some ASR zealot i will be a credulous believer...

I believe only in my acoustics experiments and basic concepts with the relatively synergetical gear i choose because i can play with them and change my acoustics parameters .... Sorry ... 😎

By the way thanks to Amir who tried the Fosi SK1 preamplifier and headphone amplifier with his own ears and with his headphone too not only with electrical measures set and without double blind ABX test and liked it, i bought one and it is for the price a very good purchase, he was exactly right ! ... 😉

If you dont listen and compare your position is untenable.

Absolutely right!

We all listen and compare in specific acoustics environment ...

For ASR zealot 1+1= 0

Electrical specs measures +acoustics environment and psychoacoustics parameters cancel each other.

Or acoustics and psychoacoustics individual experience taken alone = -1 as a deceitful experience , if we speak about sound quality...

All there is to say is in the gear design as measured by ASR...

These specific acoustics parameters of the environment of our speakers/room are ONLY deceitful and reliable ONLY after ABX double blind test of each separate piece of gear ...😊

Comical!

4 years ago, i discussed here with an engineer in a respectful but very hot way for a week . He argued that the "timbre" experience acoustic variation using different acoustics conditions was only an added color or distortion, a deceitful experience of our ears/brain added  to the Fourier map of the sound.

( the fact that our ears/brain can directly perceive something true about the vibrating sound source physical invariant dont struck him as true)

It seems he had no idea what "timbre" is in acoustics save a trouble maker for scientific gear design 😊 ...

At the end after one week of discussion , in desesperation he send me in private his curriculum, a very impressive one, as argument ..

I felt at the same time humbled but proud ...

If an ignorant as i am could learn something anybody can ...😁

Training is not mainly about the acuity of perception...😊

Certainly not about digital artefacts spottings...

This part made me laugh...

So useful it could be for audio design in digital signals engineering...And it is useful...But creating a dedicated room has nothing to do with that...

What i trained in my room for was learning how to recognize the main classical acoustics parameters in my room and the 7 spatial components of which Choueiri spoke about.Then i tried to created the necessary physical conditions for them to appear. Success is there when you can recognize all of them and you know how to play with them. Acuity is not the main factor, focussed attentive hearing after and before a parameter modification is.

Then my training was not based on "hearing acuity" as suggested by Amir but about "hearing intelligence" which was learning how to perceive concretely acoustics main concepts by varying the room acoustics parameters and then knowing what we speak about with our own ears nevermind our age and "acuity" ...😁

But for Amir any auditory qualia if not measured or measurable is deceptive illusion which will be debunk by ABX double blind test ... This idea is ridiculous because tuning my room mechanically is an incremental increasing process where simple blind test is way enough...it asked for recognizing acoustic concepts and patterns not perceive acutely digital signals from various formats.

I beg to differ, acoustics is not electrical tool measuring specs ideology sold as truth for audio ... Acoustics is about a system/eroom not about a piece of gear which someone want to sell as the best solution.. This is worst than lie this is marketing half truth.. The missing part is acoustics in any selling pitch... ( i could add mechanical vibrations/resonaNce control and electricaL GRID CONTROL )

Amir claim that he own "golden ears" in fact  and use them for all of us as Audio pope , i claim that i can made by myself  my room sound extraordinary with acoustics concepts implemented in it mechanically . No need for "acuity" only need experiments ( hundred of them )to master some basic concepts.

We cannot perceive anything meaningful if we dont have the necessary concept to grasp it...

I will let to Amir the "acuity" hearing prize proven to be secured in his hands with double blind test in spotting his digital artefacts...

I myself spotted ravishing music in acoustical dress which spoke to me each evening before dancing ...

😊😋😎

All audio empty deadlock discussion between objectivists and subjectivists are rooted in acoustic ignorance and with a common focus on gear design specific curves (Harman or not) or gear design branded names revendicated subjective taste and choices.Gear fetichism in the two "political" parties so opposed they are.😁

Acoustic principles exist by themselves and had nothing to do with the gear. It is the gear that must obey acoustics and psychoacoustics principles and serve them.😎

As anything in society right now in audio experience most walk on their head instead of their feet.

If i am wrong , how can i upgrade my listening experience with a straw of the right size located at the right place ?

Do i need an ABX double blind test to prove the reality of acoustics principles already written in science book?

Do i need to pay a big amount of money to prove that my (straw) upgrade if well placed may have a big acoustic value?

Asking the right question is already most of the answer.😊

1971gto455ho

did not read my posts arguments and the link (hearing theory) between the articles i posted here and i doubt he could even understand my point as i used it to point out how Amir is "not even wrong".

😊

Your thinking is wrong. All testing is done in time domain. The graphs are shown in frequency domain since it is hard for a human to tease out the noise and distortion from a waveform display in time domain. Keep in mind again that based on Fourier Theorem, time and frequency domain are interchangeable.

What are the REAL value of your information if the ears/brain do not work in the linear frequency/time domain of Fourier maps but in his own non linear time domain and recognise and decode what it was trained for by evolution for millenia and personal history of each one of us (QUALIA in speech and music and spatial attributes of sound)?

As it is proven already by acoustics research...And i already gives many articles about that...

Nothing can replace hearing ...

You put at the core of S.Q. analysis a peripheral set of tool at best...

But it is useless to discuss because what i say put your measuring set stance as a secondary tool unable to replace listening at all..

Then it is impossible for you to recognize truth here...It is the cost you must pay for promotion of your tools.

We must evaluate a piece of gear in a specific system for a specific room and by specific ears/brain.

His verified specs are in spite of their importance only secondary data relative to psychoacoustics parameters and system parameters in the room in the REAL evaluation and cannot replace it.

You sell as science about S.Q. a set of measures which so useful it could be are not the truth about S.Q.

It is an ideology.

😊

I bought the Fosi SK1 headphone ampli/preamp not because it measured well in your review but because you want to keep it for your headphone.

If you had not said so about your subjective experience i would never had bought it only because of good specs... It is not enough...

It seems my posts fall on deaf ear...

Anyway it seems people speak about something they dont even know they dont understand .

And insulting Amir because he dont even recognise the hearing problem will not go far...

Insults between subjectivist and objectivist about the way and moment to use and test hearing with the gear or test of the gear with hearing are useless😁... What about the fact Amir dont understand hearing for what we know about it( he only understand acuity for spotting digital artefacts, acuity being his main concepts in acoustics )...

What about the fact that most dont understand how to judge and evaluate and modify a system/room for our Ears/brain, i dont means by using a linear frequencies based  computation recipe here i means doing it mechanically by hands, a concrete understanding perception as a piano tuner?

There is two side of musical acoustics : materials acoustics and psychoacoustics.

Even Helmholtz was wrong about hearing because linear Fourier maps dont work to describe human hearing and Amir think he understand using his "acuity" measures and blind test?😊

It is like pretending to solve meaning problem in philosophy of science using grammar...

We had no choice in science as in life , we trust our hearing, test it yes and train it  but trust it. Only sellers can claim the opposite and say:  «All you need to know is in «my "objective" reviews» and we can prove it by debunking your ears as Edison debunked alternate current by inventing the electrical death chair (ABX double blind test) .

It is fraud or ignorance. In Amir case it is ignorance about what is hearing.(No Fourier linear maps explain hearing)

Complete rubbish quarrel which do not touch and stay above the ground : hearing theory...

What do we hear when we hear a sound quality and why do we recognize it as such ?

Bad answers:

----My branded name gear is picked by my taste and experience with gear.-

---- I read Amir reviews and i had bought ONLY what he measured as good .-

---- I only use ABX double blind test to select my gear 😋. ( This third answer is a joke, nobody go so lost as doing this  as the serious thing to do not even Amir whose "acuity"  anyway was measured as superiorly trained  spotting digital artefacts)

It is useless and preposterous to discuss the technical validity of some measures if this grounding point is not explained : how do we recognize sound quality ?

Sorry nor Helmholtz nor Fourier alone can explain it. A fortiori not Amir either ...

Insults and personal attacks are meaningless...

Arguments only win if we are wise enough to begin with the common ground for any subjectivist or any objectivist deadend : hearing theory ...

Gangstalking is child play here in Audiogon as it is in ASR ...

This point illustrate well the problem with most engineers sleepwalking in the A.I.  idolization right now...

It is techno-cultism, where the tool replace us as truth.

It is why Amir opinion about audio is the perfect reflection of the techno-cultist religion ...

There’s even a well known case that you actually had a Mark Levinson 360S DAC for 21 years until January of 2020 and only after you measured it, and found out that it was worse than the MEIZU dongle did you decide to say goodbye to it. You even admitted it yourself in own review which I’ve also linked below. You really don’t know what you’re listening to and those charts are messing with your mind. You ignore what you can’t even answer yourself about what I said using a single speaker with my jazz. Emotion is blasphemy for a mind like yours.

Amir is a gentleman when he discuss. Nevermind how wrong his idea about audio measurements meanings can be.

I am not fan of his zealots gangstalking anybody who beg to differ exactly like here i am not proud of SOME people easy to spot who like flies attack with insults and no sound argument...

Amir is not a narcissist...

It is a too strong word used here like an insult...

He think that because he learned how to spot digital artefact he trained his ears "acuity" potential...

He is right about that...

The problem is acuity to spot digital artefact means nothing about the way we must learn how to hear acoustics and musical concepts from a system/room...

But i had no doubt that his opinion reflect a general ideology about sound and hearing ...

i get what you want to say and you appear to me very rational...

ASR has a contribution to make. I just hate the forum culture that Amir promotes. And they don’t recognize they’re trapped in their own belief system, just like the colored fuse and audiophile network switch folks.  

But there is no middle ground between "paid a lot"  and suit my taste and "measured good" then proved to be the best ...

Subjectivist as objectivist dismiss acoustics as the main audio factor not price tag or few electrical measures and graphs , the two group even confuse acoustics with room acoustic.

This is why i criticized Amir about hearing theory and he had no idea of what i spoke about ...

Ignorance rule...

Thanks for your interesting opinion and personal experience..

He stay polite with me but never understood in good faith any of the scientific text i suggested the last time i dicussed with him...He could not anyway because it demolished his fragile ideology about his small set of measurements he put over hearing and even over hearing theory...

Probably  i am a very bad judge of people character and perhaps i am wrong about my objection concerning  the accusation of narcissism...

I cannot debate this in either way.... I will trust your judgment over mine in this...

😊

@rankaudio / @mahgister 

“This is why i criticized Amir about hearing theory and he had no idea of what i spoke about ...

Ignorance rule...”

rankaudio/magister, in a thread with similar posted outcomes last year, I asked amir about the value of a particular test for listening ability, a very accessible test on the internet to gauge listening ability over different resolutions of tests files. In reply, Amir said it was not a good test for its purpose, and referred me instead to a site purposed for those wanting to learn how to listen, oblivious to the fact that the test I had referred him to was one on testing inherent listening ability, and nothing to do with learning. He brushed away his misstep upon my pointing it out, but nonetheless acknowledged my listening abilities to have identified all resolutions accurately, only to lead on to a more conclusive but inaccessible test he had performed, in dismissing my result as being ‘undocumented’. He then proceeded to deride me when I called him out for not having even performed the said test I referred him to, accusing me of having ‘tricked’ him into believing I wanted to ‘learn’ from him, when all  I wanted was to prove him wrong.

mahgister, there are moments like this littered through all of Amir’s exchanges with others, especially the ones he has with you. He often fails to read the substance of the posts of others, conflates issues under discussion with either his credentials, or measurements of singularities as the end all, prevaricates when he has no answer, and never acknowledges his mistakes when made, which we all make as the imperfect beings we are. Everything about his behaviour in his posts point to cognitive dissonance, a vital cornerstone of narcissism.

The WebMD summarises well…

‘People who show signs of narcissism can often be very charming and charismatic. They often don’t show negative behavior right away, especially in relationships. People who show narcissism often like to surround themselves with people who feed into their ego. They build relationships to reinforce their ideas about themselves, even if these relationships are superficial.’

It goes on to add that narcissists have ‘a preoccupation with fantasies of success, power, or brilliance’ and are insisting of the fact ‘they have the best of everything’, which in amir’s case, are the instruments he measures with.

What the WebMD fails to state is that narcissists are of belief they are right about everything they stand for, which, for amir, is the half science of measurements.

Even you, mahgister, label him as ignorant, while deflecting all attention from your statement by accusing others of insulting and calling him names. The fact is, a reasonable diagnosis based on evidence of engagement, in your case ‘ignorance’, and in rankaudio’s case ‘narcissism’, does in no way constitute insult or childish name calling.

The simple fact is that Amir engages his important, and yet half science of measurements as a singularity, in ignorance of all other vital relationships, and does so with narcissistic tendencies of arrogance; and neither you nor rankaudio, are incorrect in your statements.

 

in friendship, kevin 

Thanks for your kind words...

Now try to read this one , i even bought the book of this writer :

The Body-Image Theory of Sound: An Ecological Approach to Speech and Music

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267327268_The_Body-Image_Theory_of_Sound_An_Ecological_Approach_to_Speech_and_Music

Then relate this article to this one which confirmed that the acoustician above is right :

Pythagoras was wrong: There are no universal musical harmonies, study finds

https://phys.org/news/2024-02-pythagoras-wrong-universal-musical-harmonies.html

This second article synthetize the research in this one :

Timbral effects on consonance disentangle psychoacoustic mechanisms and suggest perceptual origins for musical scales

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45812-z

This last one is very important too and confirm alll the others:

Bodily maps of musical sensations across cultures

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2308859121

Also, Mahgister, thank you for the link you posted earlier to that study regarding human hearing and the Fourier uncertainty principle - https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html

It helps explain a lot about what many of us have suspected/felt for as long as we have been in the hobby, in noticing both subtle and more obvious differences with each change of our systems. The way the article has been written is both simple to understand in form, and profound in critical content. ; )

 

It is clear that acoustics rules audio experience which is not mere room acoustic...

If we dont understand psychoacoustics we can anyway tune our system/room for sure without reading these articles above...😊

But if we want to really understand why Amir posit an ideology about a few tools as THE audio truth we must read these articles which explain what we hear and how this affect us, in a way no tools used as a set of toys to promote audio S.Q. truth could because it is only gear marketing in a new form.

There would be nothing wrong with Amir measurements if he did not disparage hearing and acoustics and users preferences parameters as basis and key, instead of the gear specs, so much important electrical synergy could be and is for sure to start a system /room journey... Acoustic synergy matter no less...

Gear dont matter at last anyway it is only a starting point ( it is budget dependant) acoustics matter at last if we want to do the best and the optimum with what we can afford ...

For sure you cannot replace a lesser quality component with acoustics knowledge nor compensate for it. Design quality matter too. Then in this sense specs matter.

But once said the impact of acoustics on a system/room exceed any upgrade in S.Q. improvement %... By far...

it is not well  known because marketers sell gear pieces as acoustic solution  to S.Q. problem...It is not even wrong because as i said design quality matter...

But no marketer sell their gear piece asking  the consumers to study acoustics to reach the optimum with their new piece of gear... They instead said that their piece of gear is "perfect" as it is for them... Unwrap and plug and be on top of the world...

Sorry it is false no system whatever his price can beat acoustics...

Ideological techno cultism propaganda suggested as THE "science" nowadays is so pervasive , that it ask for courage to simply communicate interesting acoustics "tweaks" as mechanical room equalization with a grid of resonators , or the use of mechanical crossfeed of stereo speakers for the ears/brain as i did as experiments in my room with a success exceeding most possible upgrade of gear at no cost.

imagine suggesting simple but more controversial experiments as shungite/quartz on interconnect cable or gear piece for the fun of verifying something ...I was classed as "tin foil hat" by people who do not understand with their own ears basic acoustics ... 😊

The objectivist crowd call people as myself "audiophile" meaning Ignorant...

But i demonstrated with the last science article discoveries in acoustics about hearing theory that many of the so called objectivist crowd had no idea of what they spoke about, software engineer or not...😊

Spotting digital artefacts on digital formats  has nothing to do with spotting system/room/ears qualitative parameters and acting on them as a whole. This is the difference between Amir and me. He need ear acuity, i need more acoustics concepts interaction concrete  understanding . 😊

You cannot win an argument discussing gear measurements with Amir. 😊

All the ideology behind his papal decree on his own measurements value cannot be erased no more than any other reviewers using his own measurements as the truth can be dismissed by discursive arguments ...

What is a sound as perceived by human hearing? what is a sound quality musically and in acoustics ?

Does these complex set of interelated  qualities can be predicted by few set of gear measures? No.

The subjectivist and the objectivist focus TOGETHER  on the gear piece... One with his ears the other with his tools...

We must focus on the system/room/ears... Then no piece of gear described by a small set of measure can say anything about the S.Q.experience perceived by one ears/brain in a specific room with specific pieces of gear.

😊

Period.

This sentence made no sense at all.

No, I am just going by the assumption that you are hearing a different sound with tube amps than transistor. That coloration is therefore added to every piece of music, making it different than what the artist intended.

First all tube amp are different as all S.S. amp.

Then it makes no sense to generalize saying that all tube amp are in the same bag : bad coloration.( i bet he does not know Berning Tube amp )

And what the artist intented to do do not represent a single intent but result also from what his recording engineer trade-off set of choices is adding to the artist intent. There is an acoustics complex set of information ( not a simple single intent) which is recorded and must be translated in your Room ACOUSTICALLY. The amplifier type does not play the main role here save for people completely ignorant of acoustics powerful impact .

Putting this double intention of the artist and of the recording engineer in relation with your amplification type is ridiculous.😊

it is complete acoustics ignorance promoting digital gear by a bias directly resulting from his digital software engineering background.

I already discussed all that with Amir here using  the work of a designer and physicist Van Maanen one year ago. Amir did not understood anything attacking this physicist reputation in audio ad hominem .. I will not use all this a second time...😁

If me a complete dilettante playing in my dedicated room with acoustics basic can see through this narrow ideology anybody reading science articles can...

Then it is useless to argue... We understand only if we are not paid to be deaf by money, pride or hubris...