If we knew what the missing measurement parameters were, we'd be using them and they'd no longer be missing.
What are we objectivists missing?
I have been following (with much amusement) various threads about cables and tweaks where some claim "game changing improvements" and other claim "no difference". My take is that if you can hear a difference, there must be some difference. If a device or cable or whatever measures exactly the same it should sound exactly the same. So what are your opinions on what those differences might be and what are we NOT measuring that would define those differences?
- ...
- 141 posts total
What self-proclaimed objectivists are missing is: The majority of perceived differences between cables and components are SUBTRACTIVE. And steady-state measurements can only measure ADDITIVE "distortions." Not surprisingly components that measure best with steady-state signals are most likely the ones that subtract the most information. If you measure using real music signals (into real loads under dynamic conditions) it is easy to see what has has been removed by the very design strategies that give good results using sine waves. There is also the issue of loudness compression; which as far as I know is the number one reason audio does not sound like what was happening in front of the microphones and it is not measured at all. herb |
"I figure subjectivists are like religious people and objectivists are the scientists. There is no proof that a new cable, silver fuse, etc improves the sound, but they believe it does As @djones51 said, until you take vision out of any audio testing, there's going to be bias." - mr.skeptic Scientists are objective? They're human and prone to the same biases as anyone, and in some cases more so with the hubris that science can prove everything. The fallability and inadequacy of man-made instrumentation is the weakest link of all. One day we'll train animals who have much keener hearing to choose our cables and components for us. |
In audiophile threads objectivist are not scientist, they are at best some engineers focused on their design tools measures and at worst people obsessed by blind test... They miss the fact that acoustic experience is a science correlating objective and subjective factor...A disctinct science than electronical engineering.... In audiophile threads subjectivist are most of them buyer and consumer obsessed by some brand name product ... They ignore that the sound experience is linked for a great part to acoustic and mechanical and electrical factors which are not dependant on the electronical design itself only but on the way it is embedded... Objectivist and subjectivist partake one thing in common: they are obsessed by a piece of gear and/or the tools to measure it...They are in the cult/business of consumerism gear technology marketing... They miss the acoustic scientific principle correlating objective device disposition and measure with an evaluating and an evaluated subjectivity... All serious engineer designer trust their ears and their design tools TOGETHER...They use acoustic knowledge too .... |
It’s simple. There are far too many variables in audio for anyone else to tell you what a change will do in your system. Only buy from sellers who let you return the cable or the tweak if it doesn’t improve the SQ in your system. Give it time to burn in, if it’s a cable or component, generally 100 hours or so, listen to it for a day, go back to what you had before and decide what you like better. |
- 141 posts total