He obviously has very little understanding of digital. So little it would be hard to argue with him because he's blinded by the same frame of mind many other "smart" people have in the belief bits is bits. If it was all 1's and 0's and perfect it would make all our lives much less expensive and we would all be happily enjoying "perfect" audio in our listening rooms. Is anyone here experiencing perfection? :) |
It still doesn't explain how no blind tests have yielded credible results in how we as listner's can perceive differences in an accurate setting. |
To me music is a often a spiritual experience and I actually seem to hear more into the music.I don't think I would ever have that experience during a DBT. I think the stress of it alone would be enough to throw off results. |
The fact that DBT/ABX testing does not support the fact that there are audible differences between two different audio components just raises the question: what is wrong with that sort of testing?
Many years ago, I participated in an ABX test Stereophile once sponsored between two different amplifiers and was correct 90% of the time, btw.
The answer lies in phenomenology as explicated by Heidegger.
Listened to out of the context of something's role as part of a system that reproduces music one is listening to something thoroughly "broken". And all broken audio products sound the same. It takes special training to "beat" an ABX test.
I can tell you this: the "same or different" decision is made by listening with one's whole body and must be done in one, or two seconds. After that, one just hears the "broken" component. |
Nietzschelover, I agree the real question is must DBT/ABX testing be invalid if it shows no audible differences. |
This method of testing has flummoxed me enough to conclude the same: the test just doesn't do it for me. Discerning differences hasn't been so difficult in my admittedly sparse critical listening experience. The question of which has been superior has proven more difficult for me and has required more extended listening. (Actually, I've also thought about Heidegger re:audio, at least vaguely [e.g., "opening a world"]. To be less vague, I'd have to read him again, and that's unlikely to happen anytime soon). Anyway, this is why there are 30-day trial/audition periods, right?
Back to the original intent of the thread, I'm only mainly able to talk about this stuff with friends who really, really enjoy music. Most people I know like songs--they focus on the songs and rarely on how they sound. I do a bit of community theater, and talking to audio engineers can be very frustrating, because so many of them see it as their sacred duty to debunk flaky audiophiliac observations. To think too much about it seems silly and almost childish to them. Certainly, there's some serious audio voodoo out there, and it's nice to have clear heads with grounding in the fundamentals and hard experience to balance that out. But their general attitude seems to be that if you get stuff that's correct and set it up correctly, then everything will sound correct. Case closed. For them, "correct" is enough, regardless of obvious differences; it seems that sonic differences are tolerable as long as they aren't technically incorrect. I've regarded this as the general pov of mainstream consumers (e.i, "most people"). Audio purists are a narrow contingent.
The "zeroes and ones" argument is a bit simple, isn't it? There's error correction, timing, d/a conversion, output, etc. Does your brother regard these differences as audibly imperceptible? |
Thanks for accordance Tbg.
It remains an open question as to when DBT/ABX testing actually is appropriate, however.
To the unconvinced, I would propose that, phenomenologically, such testing is useful when the DBT testing experience does not differ from the one that is had when the object being so scrutinized is normally being utilized.
For example, this is the case with wine tasting.
No one ever asks wine tasters to participate in a DBT of wine glasses (that they could not touch), though. Nonetheless, analogously, that is precisely what is being asked of the "component testers". |
My question to you Larry is How do you two get along otherwise?:) There appears to be something deeper going on than your question. If this isn't the case the only other answer, as it is to most non-audiophiles is, "it really isn't that important to me, why is it so important to you" ...(wink and smile)? Hypothetically lets say you could prove it to him with 15 people in a room agreeing with you, do you really believe at this point that he would acknowledge that he was mistaken? Sometimes we try splitting too many hairs when the answer is quite obvious. Ok, there is a difference, SO WHAT, what are you trying to prove to me? No one has ever said that to me but there have been times when I suspected it was going on at which point I drop it, why bother? |
All of this reminds me of an old joke.
During the night, a passerby spots a fellow, apparently, searching around on his front porch for something. The good Samaritan offers to help and asks him what he's looking for.
"My car keys," the man replied. And so, together, they get down on their hands and knees and commence rooting about.
After several minutes of fruitless searching, the Samaritan asks the fellow, "Well, exactly whereabouts did you drop them?"
"Over by my car in the driveway," the man replied.
"Then why are we looking on the porch?" the Samaritan queried.
"Because the light's better here." |
it's possible that we are complicating a simple phenomenon of acuity. some people hear what others do not, for what ever reason. this is true for all the senses, and applies to diferences in taste, sight and touch that are perceptible to some and not to others. |
Need help,
anybody tell me how much for a new one Gryphon S100?
I'm going to buy it |
Mrtennis,
"perceptible to some but not to others"?
This obviously denotes a level of superiority. More than this, I think, is the fact that some care about the differences but most don't. The fact that most don't care about the differences does not necessarily mean they can't perceive them. |
Tubegroover...
"My question to you Larry is How do you two get along otherwise?:) There appears to be something deeper going on than your question..."
I was talking to a friend, who's also a shrink telling him about some of our interactions, like the time..
I had bought my wife a beautifully restored Classic Jag XK.
Drove it to Lexington to show it off--his first question,
"What kind of mileage does it get?"
The shrink burst out laughing...me, of course I was pissed.
He said, "Larry you don't see this as sibling rivalry, plain and simple?"
Guess I didn't, but his daily goal seems to be to 'light me up' about any and everything, this being one example.
Good call Tube...
Good listening,
Larry |
I started in this 'hobby' some 40 yrs ago in college and early on I had a conversation that has shaped my thinking on the differences in the sound from a system. The conversation was with a roommate from a couple of yrs earlier and he told me how crazy he thought I was (some things never change) when I was pushing the loudness button, high or low filters, or adjusting the tone controls and he couldn't tell any difference. But he had bought a stereo in the meantime and then he started to actually listen. He finally got to the point where he could hear the difference those adjustments make.
I hear the difference cables make, don't really care if someone else doesn't and because of my old roommate, don't spend time trying to explain or justify it to someone that doesn't. Just real happy when I find somebody I can talk to about my 'hobby'. |
All I say, is I think you are WAY over estimating the intelligence of this person. Just because someone has obtained a degree or has read a Windows operating systems book certainly does not equate nor qualify them as being intelligent. And certainly, with the given occupation of this person... As the public school systems in the US are a complete and total failure, to say the absolute least. |
sense perception and intelligence, however its defined are independent of each other. the question shoule be rephrased to :
why do people deny audio differences ?
this question could also apply to other subjects. |
I sincerely hope that all of you realize one thing...many years ago, I would admonish my customers at the retail level..."This is a singular hobby, don't expect your friends to begin to understand."
They'll come over, you'll be all excited about your new preamp, speakers, whatever--try to sit them down for a listen...you'll turn it on, and up louder for maximum effect...they'll sit there impatiently, squirming a bit, looking around, then blurt out, "That's nice, you got any beer?"
So, when I make these statements about my brother, it transcendends even my logic circuits--I know at the most basic level, the futility of anyone caring as much as I do.
Good listening,
Larry |
Lrsky, this is a problem with all passions. Were to collect Barbie Dolls, race catamarans, make modern furniture, climb mountains, etc. what you say would also be true.
Fortunately, the internet and cheap long distance telephone calls have allow us to find others with similar passions and to occasionally meet in assemblies that we call "shows." I live in a city of about 80,000 with an adjacent city of about 70,000 people. There has not been a dealer in audio for the 32 years that I have lived here. I know of no other audiophile here. But an audiophile friend is coming up on Saturday for a visit.
In the 1960s and 70s, even in a smaller city, there were three audio dealers and I had at least four local friends who were audiophiles. But there were only really four or five manufactures of audio equipment. No one knew of what was going on in Europe or Asia, and I was much younger and poorer. Life was great then and now! |
Back to this 'old thread'.
I recently saw the movie, 'Hereafter', directed by Clint Eastwood, starring Matt Damon...I LOVED this movie, and the main theme, played thoughout, written by Eastwood, is a treasure. He has orchestra playing it, classical guitar, piano (think Eastwood played it)...it's haunting and beautiful. But THAT'S not the reason to write today.
Lush said...
"It still doesn't explain how no blind tests have yielded credible results in how we as listner's can perceive differences in an accurate setting."
There's a wonderful scene in the movie, in which Damon and Dallas Howard are taking a cooking class, and one 'exercise' is to taste food blindfolded...then tell what it is that they're tasting.
Overall, they were unable to tell what most items were.
I'm convinced that the 'Blindfold Test' that most people talk about...creates an 'angst'...some blocker, that causes most people freeze...to not be able to pereceive differences that one would normally think, are easily noticed.
I have NO scientific data to support this...but I had heard, before the movie of course, that under blindfold conditions, people don't perform within normal parameters...who knows...just thought it interesting.
Maybe someone out there DOES know.
Good listening.
Larry
By the way...I have a Book for sale on Amazon.com/Kindle it's a Political Action Thriller...called, "In Plain Sight"...it's a fast paced fun work...go check it out...$2.99--sorry for the commercial...but as a ten year poster here...maybe I've earned the right to plug this...I hope so! |
Lrsky, having several times participated in single and double blind experiments, I have no further interest in them. I could not hear which was the same versus different in 30 sec. listenings. Even one experiment long ago where we did longer listening sessions and knew preamps only as A, B, etc. and did our rankings, resulted in an improbable winner. I took one home afterwards and took it back a week later.
As you imply, such sessions are invalid indicators of what is good sounding in the long run. I don't have much respect for what reviewers report either as they don't work to maximize the component. Fortunately, I have an extensive network of audiophile friends who can hear. This is especially important as dealers have vanished. |
i think i have the answer to the question, originally posed--selective inattention.
if you lack interest, you won't bring to bear your full powers of concentration. a consequence is a reduction in one's efficiency of observation.
thus if one is not interested in audio, one may not pay attention and not hear differences.
if you are not looking for something you won't see it and if you are not trying to attend to the quality of sound, you won't hear differences. |
OR, if you don't care the differences don't matter which I think is most often the case.
OR, you kinda care but the differences beyond mediocre aren't worth the extra money required.
I'm not entirely convinced that it is a perception or lack thereof issue. I think most people can hear the differences between excellent and mediocre audio. IMO: It's more a matter of values. Some value excellent sound reproduction and most could care less.
|
I thought I would give a manuf perspective on this, since I have about 30 years experience and have been exhibiting at CES and RMAF for about 13 years. I am an engineer and designer, in addition to running a business.
The things that I have noticed with my own system over time and other customer, reviewer and show systems:
1 invariably, the system uses an active preamp, which tends to homogenize the sound and mask the detail and imaging. This is due to compression, harmonic distortion and noise added by the active pre.
2 If the system is digital, the jitter from the master clock, either in the CD player or computer interface, is too high and adds significant noise. Sometimes this noise is like an echo, so the listener can be fooled into thinking that this is a bigg soundstage, when it is not.
3 if the system is digital, the DAC invariably uses digital filtering, the so called "brick-wall". This does the most damage to the sound. This is
why NOS DACs are so popular.
listeners With the above symptoms often still feel that their system is extremely resolving, when in fact it is not, compared to systems that address the above issues properly.
How to address the above issues?
1 eliminate the preamp, by using the best volume control technology available in the DAC or use a transformer based linestage, such as the Music First
2 Use the computer interface or the CD Transport with the very lowest jitter clock technology.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
