What Audiophiles Could Learn from Food Scientists
btw, on Harmon - I think sometimes the things the average customer likes about a customer in a quick showroom demo may be different from what makes them happy night after night at home. Listener fatigue is a big thing IMO. This is, to me, a big deal.. I do think that there are ways to sell a speaker that are different from ensuring long term enjoyment. |
| Post removed |
@erik_squires Interesting Thread... I'd like to think that there is one additional metric that the food industry uses that I also hope the audio industry uses...especially the "little guys"..and that is safety. I tend to think of quality assurance as consistency from batch to batch...but safety is all of the product design/testing done up front to make sure that the product won't hurt people. For audio, that means catch fire, shock people, suddenly play at insane volume levels, etc. Finally, as for Harman type testing...no doubt that their spinorama data can get many people "into the park" at least as to what type of loudspeaker might sound good to them...notice I used a lot of qualifier words because with our hearing and sound preferences, there are a lot of variables. Along those lines, let me mention just one...spinorama tends to point you in the direction of controlled directivity...BUT...if you have a really large room, there is a good chance that you will actually prefer speakers with more horizontal dispersion as it will likely add more ambiance and spatiousness...but as above, this is not a "guaranteed" will work for everyone. |
It seems like it is all or nothing in the battle between 'objectivists' and 'subjectivists". I admire the way most of the ASR types stick to falsifiable observations (a scientific habit), and I find the independent measurements useful. However, I'd agree a few of them show just as little humility as the many golden ears here about the limits of their audio epistemology. In general, I give very little credit to anyone who rants with 100% certainty about non-falsifiable theories. For instance, I infer from his/her bluster that the individual here who told me to "GET OUT OF THE GAME" when I admitted i couldn't hear the difference between many high end amplifiers, was compensating for some personal issue that has nothing to do with me, or amplifier differences. I make similar inferences about an ASR denizen who gratuitously dumps all over people who claim to hear differences in electronics and cables. I favor skepticism in all things, but most particularly of individuals declaring their certainty from a pulpit. I don't bother with those who write in a way designed to obfuscate, condescend, and complicate, rather than clarify in a spirit of mutual discovery. Perhaps more to your point, I don't understand why one would evaluate one's future purchases in a way that has nothing to do with how one consumes them. Why not evaluate your equipment *exactly* how you consume it, so you can be sure you'll be happy with it in the long run? If my brushed metal faceplate and high quality internal construction is improving my listening experience, so be it. I stipulate a 'subjective' contribution to the listening experience*. Put it on the rack and let me bask in its fierce permanence. Of course, they (our now badly stereotyped ASR objectivists) are free to enjoy the hobby any way they like. Personally, I spend exactly none of my time measuring my equipment. I'm weird that way. *in fact, I think the evidence is abundant on this point. |
| Post removed |
