“Psycho-acoustics is the science who put the right question here , and the answers are complex and multidisciplinary , never simplistic as claimed by the two opinionated groups above ...”
What are the competing theories in psychoacoustics pertaining to well established thresholds of human hearing or the current models of how we process and store aural memories? I was not aware of any actual theories in psychoacoustics that challenge the current body of studies that have already established those thresholds of human hearing or any theories that challenge the current models of how we filter and steer focus when listening and how that information is further filtered through data reduction and additional steered focus. Can you point us to any literature in the field of psychoacoustics that talks about these competing theories?
|
There’s no debate in science about the nature of electrical audio signals. In the world of electrical signal transfer and processing it’s about the simplest thing there is. You want complicated? Signal processing via satellite for real time GPS that literally has to calculate the effects of special relativity because the speed at which the satellites travel create micro mismatches in synchronization due to time slowing down at faster speeds. That’s complicated. Audio signals from 20 hz - 20 kHz is really simple in comparison. And none of those far more complicated technologies are using “high end” cables or power cords. They use gear and materials based on their measured performance. And it works.
|
@calvinj Great thread! IMO many have not had enough experience around HEA. It's easy to be critical over the unknown. Secondly with the recent escalation of budget audio Youtube reviewers and vinyl collectors, they have the attitude that the music is 100% more important than the electronics. Lastly many can't accept value is a subjective opinion that varies with the individual.
|
"Electrical audio signals are not particularly complex. Determining whether or not there is a change in an audio signal is pretty simple as well."
Actually not so, science apparently is still not sure about electrical current workings see: "Two New Theories for the Current Charge Relativity and the Electric Origin of the Magnetic Force Between Two Filamentary Current Elements" paper.
"I don’t perceive sound any differently than you or anyone else." I am pretty sure this is questionable, at least.
|
people are usually partisan as to what they already have......they realize that their wallets are not fat enough.
|
”It doesn't seem to have worked that way for you, does it?”
Sure it did. I don’t perceive sound any differently than you or anyone else. I resolved those conflicts by accepting the objective data and accepting the realities about how I hear and process sound.
|
Electrical audio signals are not particularly complex. Determining whether or not there is a change in an audio signal is pretty simple as well. Same goes for proper listening comparisons to determine whether he thresholds at which various types of change in an audio signal are audible.
|
Aren’t the conflicts between your beliefs and the large body of research in psychoacoustics a cause for examination of one’s personal beliefs?
It doesn't seem to have worked that way for you, does it?
|
my post was my opinion and not aimed at you but being after your post it was in some way related to your post...😁
My opinion is that there is many sciences involved not only one as in electrical engineering ...
Then in audio we must add all multidisciplinary factors at play ...
Then i cannot be subjectivist nor objectivist ... This is my opinion ..
And psycho-acoustics so technologically advanced it is and it is, had no complete understanding once for all of human hearing ... There is only competing theories ...
It was not my intention to attack you but to give my opinion here ... When we say that something make no difference because electrical engineering said so , it is not necessarily a scientific position ... Why ? because the problem is sometimes multidisciplinary and more complex than we think ... this is my point ...
And i dont like as you ad hominem attack ... we then can understand ourself ...
Dividing audio in two camps is useless...
I am certainly not parading as a scientist . One does not need to be a scientist to have a basic understanding of science. I don’t parade as a scientist but I listen to them, look at their research and give scientists and their work the credibility it is due. I am certainly not an objectivist. If logical fallacies are going to be pointed out then ad hominem needs to be called out here. It ain’t about me. My questions stand unanswered. So I will ask again. What do you think scientists in the field of psychoacoustics have been continually getting wrong for the past 100 years? Aren’t the conflicts between your beliefs and the large body of research in psychoacoustics a cause for examination of one’s personal beliefs?
|
I am certainly not parading as a scientist . One does not need to be a scientist to have a basic understanding of science. I don’t parade as a scientist but I listen to them, look at their research and give scientists and their work the credibility it is due. I am certainly not an objectivist. If logical fallacies are going to be pointed out then ad hominem needs to be called out here. It ain’t about me. My questions stand unanswered. So I will ask again. What do you think scientists in the field of psychoacoustics have been continually getting wrong for the past 100 years? Aren’t the conflicts between your beliefs and the large body of research in psychoacoustics a cause for examination of one’s personal beliefs?
|
Scientism has nothing to do with sciences ...
And sound quality perception is too complex to be reduced to electrical engineers explanation... Psycho-acoustics also play the most part in the sound studies ...
This does not means that amplifier designer work with their mere only taste to design more musical gear, they can use psycho-acoustics results, about harmonics perception ,the non linear time domain of the brain or crosstalk effects on the brain etc ...
As i said , objectivist and subjectivist are two opposed and deluded groups about a too complex problem : the objective conditions and the subjective correlated conditions in the perception of qualities ...
Psycho-acoustics is the science who put the right question here , and the answers are complex and multidisciplinary , never simplistic as claimed by the two opinionated groups above ...
«Complexity and intelligence begin as claimed the late Charles Sanders Peirce with the number three » -- Anonymus thinker 🧐
«The three musketeers were four because three is not the end of the world»-- Anonymus Alexandre Dumas reader
«For the sake of power any group can be usefully divided in two : the good and the bad »-- Anonymus Machiavelli reader
|
It’s not a straw man Calvinj referred to “a scientific measurement camp.”
|
It does strike me as problematic that science is seen as a “camp.”
That's a logical fallacy, straw man argument. There is a bias here against measurementalists, who often parade as scientists or "objectivists." But of course they are among the most biased on the group, the "nay-sayers."
|
“ I'm at the point where I refuse to deal with anyone who says they can't hear a difference in cables, power cords, fuses, etc...
Of course they do.
It's the same old thing, over and over and over and over.”
Do you think you could reliably identify those differences you believe you and everybody else hears in a proper double blind listening test? Speaking for myself I am quite confident that I can identify any and all differences in sound that I believe to be real in such a test. Further more if I were put to the challenge and failed to reliably identify differences I believed to be real that would give me cause to reconsider my beliefs. |
Pointing out the non intuitive nature of human biology isn’t hate. Nor is it a personal feeling. It is kind of ironic though that the typical response is that somehow I am an inferior listener. We are all humans and we are all subject to how the human auditory system perceives sound. It does strike me as problematic that science is seen as a “camp.” What do you think scientists in the field of psychoacoustics have been continually getting wrong for the past 100 years? Isn’t that conflict a cause for examination of one’s personal beliefs? Historically speaking how often have hobbyists been onto something that an entire field of scientific studies have been getting wrong for an entire century?
|
Oh, come on already.
I'm at the point where I refuse to deal with anyone who says they can't hear a difference in cables, power cords, fuses, etc...
Of course they do.
It's the same old thing, over and over and over and over.
|
@scottwheel i disagree. But I’m perfectly fine with how you feel about your audio experiences. But to tell us that cables and amplification doesn’t make a difference and that our auditioning is flawed is where I think a lot of audiophiles say that there is either hate against the high end or even those that have found ways to achieve those results for less money is where you lose me. Basically either you lack the hearing or experience to tell the difference is what most think about people that feel the way you do. I think when someone tells others that have been in this 20 or 30 years that it is simply flawed auditioning despite the fact that different materials, shielding , processes and building methods are used and that it makes 0 audible difference just doesn’t make sense to most of us and even in a scientific measurement camp that doesn’t make sense to us. I’m just saying. Not bashing you but the way you explained your points is exactly why we feel the opposite. Materials, processes, technology and build quality make a difference period.
|
I did not say anyone was delusional. I hear the same differences in non level matched, non time synchronized, non quick switching, non bias controlled comparisons as you and everyone else does. But the accept the science that tells why we perceive those differences when no actual differences in the sound exist. If that objective information conflicts with your beliefs it’s up to you how you want to reconcile it. Personally I want to know what really happened s audible and what is a byproduct of flawed auditioning. That informs my choices.
|
@scottwheel Here we go again. If you do not notice the differences, so be it.
There is no need to convince others that they are "delusional", just annoying.
|
bob70 I had that eight track player that you referred to which I lovingly installed in my 1969 Plymouth Fury. The sound quality was- loud- and glorious to my then acute ears. Felt like the Allman Brothers were in my backseat.
has anyone defined "high end" for purposes of this discussion? Seems impossible, since the term is inherently relative. I enjoy my system, and have stretched financially to make upgrades from time to time. Yet, for some the cost of my system would be immaterial . Those folks can, if they choose, put together a system that would far exceed the quality of mine. I understand that you generally get what you pay for and it doesn't make me jealous that there are components I will never be able to afford. My system brings me joy actually listening to music which is a lot more important to me than what someone posts a on some forum. I think it's about taking your budget, whatever that may be, and putting together a well matched system, that makes you happy. This is not a competition
those that make it so should take some time for quiet reflection
|
Basic competent cables are audibly transparent as are basic competently designed and built amplification. Same for anything digital at red book or above. Power cords and numerous other after market tweaks don’t affect the sound. This is not based on jealousy, a lack of experience or hatred of high end audio. These are facts based on solid science. There is a mountain of evidence in support based on numerous controlled studies designed to objectively determine human thresholds of audibility of various forms of distortion. We also know through years of research that we can not reliably compare an aural memory to real time sound perception. Unless comparisons are done level matched, time synced, double blind with quick switching then the results are prone to be unreliable. Science doesn’t care how we feel about objective reality. One either accepts that or not. I care deeply about sound quality. I do not dismiss anything out of jealousy, anger or hatred. If these things really made a difference I would want to know it so I can make well informed choices as an audiophile. But if impressions about sound quality are made under uncontrolled conditions based on long term aural memory I want verification under proper conditions. I want to know objectively what does make a difference and what does not.
|
Basic competent cables are audibly transparent as are basic competently designed and built amplification. Same for anything digital at red book or above. Power cords and numerous other after market tweaks don’t affect the sound. This is not based on jealousy, a lack of experience or hatred of high end audio. These are facts based on solid science. There is a mountain of evidence in support based on numerous controlled studies designed to objectively determine human thresholds of audibility of various forms of distortion. We also know through years of research that we can not reliably compare an aural memory to real time sound perception. Unless comparisons are done level matched, time synced, double blind with quick switching then the results are prone to be unreliable. Science doesn’t care how we feel about objective reality. One either accepts that or not. I care deeply about sound quality. I do not dismiss anything out of jealousy, anger or hatred. If these things really made a difference I would want to know it so I can make well informed choices as an audiophile. But if impressions about sound quality are made under uncontrolled conditions based on long term aural memory I want verification under proper conditions. I want to know objectively what does make a difference and what does not.
|
Hate is a strong word, I'd prefer to say frustrated. Some posters come here looking for wisdom from more experienced members, and instead get: recommendations that are way above their price point, suggestions to replace their entire systems, comments about their equipment being junk, condescending comments about knowledge, etc. etc.
I can see that after a while it can sour an attitude.
|
Hater love to hate ... You are right ...
But your explanation is simplistic ...
It is not necessary to spend big money to have a minimal acoustic satisfaction if we learn how to do it ... most people are lazy or lack the time to learn ( i am retired) ... Some hate high end for the reason you mention , some hate the price abuse because they dont know how to make any system at any price great and optimal for his potential specific level of S.Q. and needs ...
Some with high end systems hate also people like me happy and who knows why and how to be happy with acoustics knowledge and a low cost system because in their head the price tag only have a meaning and i claim too much and devalorize their costly gear by my claims ( it is not true because there exist for sure differences in S.Q, level qualities )...
hate have many roots as you see not only one ; and when you are creative as some are you dont loose your time in hating ...
But it is knowledge who rule audio minimal acoustical satisfaction not price tag ... This threshold is enough for most people .. And trust me my system is not a frustrating stopgap... One can be proud of his very costly system as Mike Lavigne who worked hard to created it and i am not envious at all , i admire him; and i am as creative as he was but with a low cost system in a dedicated room ...
First low cost gear is not to be confused with cheap gear as you do ...
Second good low cost gear can give very great acoustic result even if for sure it is under the quality of high end system potential ...
Third if someone dont study, experiment and learn how to create S.Q. with acoustics, then anyway with high end or low cost system he will be sensitive to critics and he will react with hate often or with very forceful dislike and scepticism ...
Psycho-acoustics and creativity rule audio not price tag ....
Those who ignore the first and do not bother with the second are sentenced by their attitude to hate at worst and frustration at best ....It is the case with high end owners as wii5th low cost system owners ...
Haters just want to hate.
Seriously, I think the hate comes from people who don’t want to spend more money on better sound, so they justify and rationalize that by convincing themselves that cheap gear sounds as good as high dollar gear.
|
Haters just want to hate.
Seriously, I think the hate comes from people who don't want to spend more money on better sound, so they justify and rationalize that by convincing themselves that cheap gear sounds as good as high dollar gear.
|
Do you think the way things are going you will end up selling your high end gear to eat? Time will tell.
|
|
Thanks for the nods and welcomes! It's been a while since I've participated in a forum. I'm looking forward to sharing some thoughts and laughs.
BTW, if your first car-stereo wasn't an 8-track, attached to a hanging bracket that was bolted onto the underside of your metal dashboard (ALL metal, called a "Chicklets maker"), rejoice (!), as you may not be old yet. Mine was a '64 Belair, which some of us know could accommodate up to 8 teens..
|
@jacobsdad2000 hey yes is I am both. But I’m an audiophile first. I ask the question as an audiophile. I been an audiophile longer than I been both. I’ve been blessed to do well in my career. I enjoy helping clients find their way as audiophiles too. I say this because I listen to my rig daily. Brings me a smile. Spent years getting to this point. It’s not just an expensive system. It’s one that I took my time researching, tweaking and carefully choosing the gear in it. Based on the knowledge I learned for years. I only became a dealer because I truly believe in the designer and the product. If I didn’t I would just do what I been doing. Just being an audiophile. Take care my friend.
|
Welcome @bob70
Man, I miss the days when I drove an American jalopy - stereo was a Pioneer in-dash with Jensen 6x9s under the package deck - some of the best days of my life!
|
@bob70
Welcome to the forum and please stick around. We need more of your common sense wrapped in a package of humor around here.
|
In my experience money and high end upgrades so superior they could be matter way less than acoustics with an (s)...
Even the definition of what is the source of the playback is confused with the choices of a dac or a turntable creating meaningless debates about the gear choices and by putting emphasis on gear fetichism , missing then the acoustics /psycho-acoustics problems which are conflated then , not even to mere room acoustic controls but this last conflated with few panels on a wall ...
The source is acoustics of the recording original room process , nevermind the digital or analog choices , the end result is not FROM the speakers but from the ears/brain/system-speakers/room parameters ..
Sound experience is a qualia , a wholeness we can control to some point with acoustics/psycho-acoustics ...But it is not a mere quantity, save for those who confuse the experience with some parameters, and those who conflate sound experience acoustics conditions with the gear experience...
Most audiophiles i observed if i read threads brag about their gear not about their acoustics knowledge and experience .... And anyway even the embeddings electrical and mechanical controls matter as much that the gear choices and prices in most cases ...
|
@calvinj
Yes, music can impact us in ways we may not fully understand.
Back in the days when life was chaotic (dumpster fire would have been an upgrade), I found that at the end of the day, music was 100% predictable. Sit down in the listening chair, strap myself in and queue up something. In the Beatle's Martha My Dear, those horns would always arrive at the right place, at the right time, EVERY time. Gave me hope, and a little tranquility. And, peace. My investment was probably a "little above my pay grade." But, worth every penny.
|
@waytoomuchstuff when I started in this hobby I said I would never spend x amount of dollars. Well I’m way past that now. But I’ve grown in knowledge as well as income. Music has become more important. Not because of the gear because it’s my getaway. It allows me to think clearer. It brings a smile to my face. The better it sounds the better I feel. This has been an amazing journey for me. I guess when those that don’t know you or your experiences make assumptions about you, your system, your expenditures or your motives it can be a bit much. But then we should expect it. The world is full of brash thumb thuggery on the internet. Can’t let it bother you. Why lip wrestle with folks that already know everything. Enjoy what you have and keep it pushing. 99.9% of the time you are arguing with people who will never hear your system or that you will ever meet in life or more importantly even care to know.
|
@calvinj
We've come a long way from the opening synopsis. Your last comment was an excellent recap of the various conversations.
I couldn't have said it better myself. No, really, I couldn't have.
|
@bob70
Very well written man! (i'm 53) maybe that's my problem? Plus the world as it is today. I've lost my patience with "jerks".
|
I agree with mitch2 . "At the end of the day, it’s only a stereo". There are many, many things in life more important than a stereo. You get what you like and be happy. I think my angst is usually directed to "know it alls" and some are dealers just trying to elbow into the conversation ultimately to sell more gear. But there are other arrogant people like the measurements crowd. I say just listen and be happy.
BTW arrogant people really don’t understand how irritating they are. Some know a-lot but don’t really know how to share knowledge. Some think they know something but it’s really just opinions. Everyone has a different one, and it’s not really a matter of wrong or right. Also to assume someone wants to gut a room and make it a better acoustically sound environment for a sound system but spending $30k,,,, well regular people don’t do that?
|
|
I'm brand new here, so sticking my head out from around the corner on this may be a bit dangerous, but I live for danger.
I think if one perceives negativity from some folks re: this "hobby," especially younger people, the reasons may be the same as those at play now societally.
We are boomers. Everyone hates boomers, bcs everything that sucks "is our fault." We're all male, (one forum I was on had one woman), we're probably all white, we almost have to (Itals are less offensive than caps---don't be keyboard-finger-lazy.) live in $ingle-family, detached hou$ing, and we have way more discretionary income than most, and probably have had it for a long time.
Discussing any "toy" that costs thousands of dollars, seems bougie in a time when a 1950's, modest ranch is $925k and an apple costs $3. To the majority of the population, if you can't eat it, live under it, wear it, or drive it, it's completely a luxury.
We're self-indulgent (which is de rigueur w/Millennials, so I really don't understand that one). We want the best "anything" available and usually get it, and we whine a lot, or so others may think. (No, they're right, we do. "Whaaa, my brand new $12K ________ won't _________.")
Finally, there's the unrelatability of the very things that interest us. What's really a head-scratcher, is that ya gotta know what a forum like this is for, and to whom it appeals, to even visit.
Words like, "high-end" and "audiophile," are automatically elitist to most people. That's a very bad word these days. It's a little difficult for those of us who came from nothing and aspired to become "elitist." However, that, for most of us, was a matter of striving for academic and professional achievement, not a desire to be wealthy or exclusionary. That would be silly, because I've always known I'm better than the plebes who surround me.
Of course, I'm kidding. It only chaps me when the neighbors' poor relatives park their American jalopies.in front of our property and block the passersby views of our luxo landscaping.
|
@waytoomuchstuff we all are sound obsessed to a point but. Some either have more resources or will take it financially further than others are willing to. Our systems and gear brings us peace and joy. Some take it too far. But too far is always open for interpretation
|
@calvinj
Hope you received the answers/responses related to the topic you were looking for?
Thanks to A’Gon moderators for allowing us to get a little "off topic" and keep this discussion going. Probably not going to see too many people change their opinions on the topics discussed. But, the value of the exchange of ideas and viewpoints from very smart, often humorous, and definitely unique individuals on a variety of subjects is immeasurable -- IMHO.
|
Most gear/system price bragging result from acoustics ( with an S) ignorance ...
Ask Mike Lavigne who knows something what is the ratio cost of his dedicated room versus his gear price and the ratio of S. Q. possible in this acoustic dedicated room versus with these speakers or other speakers or versus different amplifiers ... The room controls is the main determinant even if all matter for sure ...
|
Plain and simple, People Suck! Not all people though. Miserable people just try to tear you down so your miserable with them especially "keyboard warriors". If you are happy with the sound of your system, and post what you have and people just tear you down "that gear is junk! you didn't spend 20K on that". I have noticed that on these forums. Especially in other topics like record cleaning (not Vinyl's) that drives me nuts' LP Records are not even made of Vinyl. Results are results! (not talking about Tap water, Windex or WD40) Anyways that's my thought. Sometimes I wonder why i load up this forum site. Humans ruin your hobby (yeah it's a hobby) for some it's a way of life (Music) and i do get it. Here is my system and it blows me away on how good it sounds.
Mofi Studiodeck, Audio Technica AT540ML, Outlaw Audio RR2160MKll, Pioneer CS99-A speakers, Dahli Zensor speakers, Outlaw Audio M8 Subwoofer.
Happy Holidays Everyone! 🤗
Eddie
|
|
People hate what they can’t afford or people hate what they can afford, but don’t want to put the money into and buy it! Why do you think so many people complain about sports cars?
|
Because we can't afford that gear, and are glad is is not providing the 'bang for buck' that our gear does (unlike for example in the car world, where 'normal' to 'crazy' is a factor of 10 ($300k vs $30k) car, while in the audio world, the factor is 100 ($300k turntable vs $3k turntable).
|
We need on earth a change of the scale there was in the American revolution against the British...
Ask the Europeans with a brain if they appreciate the American empire way to sell them gas and piloting them through the corrupted European union ...
Effective real change in systems are necessary at some point , like earthquake at some threshold point ... We are there , all corporate big powers are not only corrupted to the bones they destruct Earth, nature, and even science ...
Ask doctor Bill Gates, Ask Ursula Von der Leyen among other monsters with or without brain ....And ask Robert Kennedy why the most important event in political history the murder of the two Kennedys is not under a serious inquiry after 72 years. like murders of a president in a banana republic ...All the others unanswered questions are related in a way or in another to this elephant in the room ...Oliver Stone spoke well of this in a popular easy to understand way...
US is a nation in denial ... As was the soviet for other reasons ... Lies are the rule in the two cases ... Calling one freedom against evil is a slogan invented by CIA agent ...
No, they’re not. Effecting real change in systems is rare. Yes, it happens, but incremental change is much more common.
No, they’re not. Effecting real change in systems is rare. Yes, it happens, but incremental change is much more common.
|
I fought a case to the U.S. Supreme Court and got Scalia to write an 8-1 opinion in my favor. I’m likely the only dialectical materialist to get Scalia to agree with him…twice! Can’t do that without first, dreaming, second, designing, third planning, fourth executing like hell. I changed constitutional law by getting The Supremes to overthrow 12 cases that came before me that went the other way
Are you the one who brings the green been casserole to the annual Scalia Thanksgiving feast every year?
|
@cleeds
Of the 3,000 books in my library, I have several shelves devoted to history books that unequivocally dispute your assertions about the frequency of change.
As for your other comment about 1/6, you clearly did not cognitively grasp what I said.
As for dreaming, I fought a case to the U.S. Supreme Court and got Scalia to write an 8-1 opinion in my favor. I’m likely the only dialectical materialist to get Scalia to agree with him…twice! Can’t do that without first, dreaming, second, designing, third planning, fourth executing like hell.
I changed constitutional law by getting The Supremes to overthrow 12 cases that came before me that went the other way
OK, outa here before the moderator pulls down what is otherwise a normal thread.
|
unreceivedogma
Systems are changed all the time, either at the ballot box, through grassroots organizing with thousands of others, through catastrophe ...
No, they're not. Effecting real change in systems is rare. Yes, it happens, but incremental change is much more common.
... or through revolution,…you know, like that Thing that we celebrate every July 4.
Dreamers like you tried that kind of change on Jan. 6. We saw how that worked out.
|
