Amir and Blind Testing

Enough of the us versus them.

@mapman +1

people who refuse to use their senses and rely on tech measurements, exclusively

This is focusing on tools, and ignoring another variable - preferences.

An analogy. Two people like red cars - same preferences.

One will investigate the properties (measurements) of the paint and say it is a red that is OK. The other will use their eyes and say that it is a red that is OK.

Now - let’s change things a bit. The first person now likes silver cars, and the second still likes red cars.

Different preferences, *and* different methods of arriving at their preferred solution.

I would say with some certainty that the second person who likes red could also use properties (measurements).

Examples - the recent Carver amp. Nelson Pass’s kit (? camp) amp. Some other things that Amir places in the red corner of his rankings - useful information!

When making purchases in this hobby/sport, at some stage we have to bite the bullet and trust our senses. There are products and technologies that exist that effectively re-create the music we love with more finesse, more sense of realism and triggers a response for recognition of music/ instruments with less effort, engendering more enjoyment.

I do understand that different doesn’t equate to better, however, variety here might be the distinguishing factor that makes a different device stand out or be of interest.
I would hope after a point of exposure to higher quality equipment and setup, and opportunity to hear live music played in a variety of venues, we the end users can recognise truly better gear when we hear it?

“I weight my senses as the final arbiter.”
I do subscribe to this thinking, and yet I see no weakness in trusting the skills of veterans in this craft if they are willing to point out and describe differences while listening. I believe it’s the recognition, the statistical matching of the authentic and the re-created that transports our consciousness into more or less accepting the artificial as pleasant and beautiful.

If we can’t at all trust ourselves, how are we supposed to engage in swapping out and reorganising our system to allow for the variety the sound the system can itself make to the presentation??
We change music for variety, I think we change our system for it as well.

It puzzles me why the debate about measurement vs. subjectivity sometimes gets so fierce. Why can't we have both? I certainly want both. I appreciate that what we can measure may not represent the sum total of our listening experience. But if properly done it represents an accurate, objective characterization of at least one dimension of a product. It is better than nothing.

I like to trust my senses but oh how they can lead me astray! As several of you have said already in reference to your selves; I know that my listening reflects my mood, my physical state and many other variables. I liken it to wine tasting, some pretty plain wines can taste pretty great in the right setting, with the right company and/or the right food and vice versa.

At some point the differences get large enough that quality can be discerned fairly consistently. But much of the audiophile pursuit is just pushing boundaries a few percent or less at a time. That is where the really big money gets spent and ironically that is where data is almost never presented.

Lets continue to push for as much data as possible along with the knowledge to connect the numbers to our sensations; but meanwhile we all will also have to keep listening as well as we can. I follow Amir and the folks at ASR and learn some things there, just like I do here. When there is overlap I usually get more interested.

I read ASR when I want a laugh. For someone to say you do not need to listen to a piece of equipment before buying it and also that the synergy of various components makes no difference is so funny. Seriously, the site is a joke.