Objectivist Audiophilism (1 Viewer)

[John Beavers]

No Chu, I’m trying to establish a baseline for comparing experiences. Same with asking Robert how his rig was setup and how he went about evaluating the products. I was looking for information in regards to similarities on key portions of the audio system. This has nothing to do with the cost of electronics, most modestly priced audio components will give results similar to high end ones, at least in regards to effectiveness of wire products. I’ve never tried Shatki stones or any of the other list of tweaks mentioned by Robert in his snake oil diatribe. So I cannot comment on their effectiveness. My guess is you and Robert have not tried the wire products I have, so our comparisons there would be only slightly illuminating. I’ve put my cards on the table in regards to what I’ve examined in my time in the hobby, now I’m looking for yours. So far I’ve not seen any, just a lot of posturing about why my experience isn’t valid, and why you don’t need to present any “specific” evidence of how your conclusions were formed. I’ve got some issues with DBTs as you well know. I don’t believe they are as effective in determining reality as you are. Unless the subject in a DBT is unaware it is happening, you are placing a variable not normally present when listening to and evaluating the effectiveness of a component. Or so it seems to me.

 

[alan halvorson]

If this must be done, then it must be done in every kind of subjective test, not just DBT. How might I (and how do you?) evaluate a component without knowing that it is under evaluation? Must someone sneak the component into my system and hope that I don't notice?

 

[John Beavers]

Not really, an audio DBT is an attempt to verify whether you can hear "differences" between setup A and Setup B (i.e. lampcord vs $20 a foot speaker wire), with no visual clue as to which product you are hearing. It's a mindset that is alien to what you do when you sit down to listen to music. It is a testing mindset, one in which you are striving to make a choice.

When I sit down to evaluate new gear, and am listening to music I am familiar with, I am focusing on how the music sounds, not if I can hear some difference between how it sounds now compared to how it sounded with the previous gear. I am not striving to compare, Iam being receptive to what the new component is bringing to the music I love. Subtle distinction maybe, but I have found it to have significance as to what I am perceiving. I have been involved in a DBT once, and it was then that I noticed how different everything was with my perceptions, it wasn't about my enjoyment of the music any more, it was a sterile feeling...one in which everything sounded pretty much the same. So maybe the objectionists are right, and what we believe we hear is more about what's in our head than what is being revealed by scientific tests and measurements. However, I don't listen in DBT mode and I'm not a measuring device, I listen in my very human, fully sighted, highly receptive mode. Which may be flawed, but it's more real to my actual listening experience, than all this other objectivist prove you hear what you hear BS.

 

[RobertR]

I accuse the High End industry of:

o Refusing to follow established scientific protocols to eliminate bias in human perception

o Engaging in flowery, overblown advertising claims that contain essentially zero actual scientific or engineering content

o Relying on completely subjective testimonials as a substitute for true objective research.

Explain how these accusations are false, especially as they compare to the company discussed here:


http://www.randi.org/jr/08-24-01.html

 

[Tim_S]

Just out of curiousity. . .many posts ago various people were mentioning that they preferred one beer over another. Can we see a show of hands for how many people formed those preferences through double blind tests? I could almost certainly measure all of those beers on a number of dimensions and show you that they will measure almost exactly the same. I could then interpret that to say that there should be no taste differences. Should I believe your subjectivist lunacy that they do taste different?

Two lessons here:

1. Of course, I could probably also measure the beers along other dimensions and show differences. The key with measurements is to make sure you get the right things measured. Are we absolutely sure we know what our scopes should be measuring to show differences in audio equipment?

2. These are not life/death choices here. When you make your beer preferences you don't really care if you have been suckered into buying something that is not really different so long as you are happy with it. Same with audio equipment. So long as the buyer is happy, who is anyone else to fault them for it?

Oh and one more point. If anyone says that it is ok in the beer choice case because "they don't make wild claims they can't back up." I will then ask you if you have a. ever seen a beer commercial and then b. if after drinking a Coors Light you suddenly had ripped abs and 3 leggy mostly-naked supermodels hanging off you? No? But that is the implicit claim in their marketing? Are you going to tell me that manufacturers other than audio manufacturers are not 100% honest and factual in their marketing? Geesh. Next you will tell me politicians sometimes shade the truth. . . .

Tim

 

[RobertR]

It's the reluctance to admit that high end claims are indeed based solely on what's in one's head instead of objective reality that's the true basis for objecting to DBTs.

 

[John Beavers]

Ahhhh...a fellow VMPS owner, a man of obvious good taste I must take back every unkind word I've said about you now Still, we'll have to agree to disagree about much of what we've debated here. I'll keep trusting my senses and you'll keep asking for proof under strict scientific protocals, and the world keeps going round and round.

 

[PaulDA]

With respect to beer (or my favourite, single malt scotches), I would submit that you're right re: ads with girls, etc. But as for flavour, even with my eyes closed I can tell the difference between scotches and different beers (though with beer, there are several brands that are very similar and thus more difficult to differentiate). However, I guarantee I can tell the difference between Kilkenny's Cream Ale and Bud Light. Can I tell the difference between Kilkenny's and another cream ale? Probably, but with more effort. The key differences are different combinations of ingredients, different densities of liquid, etc. Same goes for single malts. No one will confuse a Singleton with a Lagavulin. Preferences are another matter entirely.

Audio equipment, on the other hand, seems to vary much more at the speaker level than anywhere else (not that there are no differences, just that the difference between two level matched amps will be much more subtle than the difference between Cerwin Vega floorstanders and my Boston Acoustic VR-M60 bookshelf speakers). I believe the goal of many, if not all, the "objectivists" is to maximize your ability to influence the sound of your gear to your liking. Speakers (and room interaction) appear to be the most effective place to accomplish this, while 1000$/ft speaker cables seem less likely to offer a change that matters.

 

[John Beavers]

That's for sure. The biggest leaps in audio quality for me were when I got my new speakers, and when I installed room treatments. Speaker cables did make a difference, and I've had a few expensive types, nothing approaching $1000 or even $100 a foot, but low and behold it was a relative inexpensive brand that provided the most improvement to my ears. I wired my whole system with it, speaker wire and ICs, for a little over $300. Not everything has to cost and arm and a leg to be good.

 

[JasonBrandon]

I am glad to see that I am not the only 'man of science' in the world of audio tom-foolery. Its too bad that more professional reviewers dont take a scientific approach to reviewing equipment. The Secret's DVD Shootout has to be the best comparison test I have ever seen. Its too bad we cant get more of that kind of information.

 

[Mike SJ]

"Now my question: Why?"

Michael, you are basically saying a preamp will can make sound unbearable to listen to after 30 minutes. prove it.

If I misnderstood you, what was your point? I highly doubt that situation would ever arise.

 

[RobertR]

You got it.

 

[Yogi]

That is the only problem I have with the objectivists is that they are trying to maximize the ability to influence the sound of my system from what theyread elsewhere. They can use that information to influence the sound of their system and I am all for that. But when someone comes to this forum asking for a certain type of warm/bright amp to suit his speakers or when someone in the forum speaks of their experience with a certain type of amp, out comes the objectivist trying to influence the persons personal experience with his knowledge that he acquired gleaning the cyber space. You however don't see subjectivists trying to influence the sound of others system from their experience.

Come to think of it when all hardware (amps/preamps/DACs/cables etc) sounds the same why do we even have the hardware forum. If all hardware choices should be based on features/specs/prices etc no one would ever need any advice on those as all the objective data is printed right on the spec sheet. You already know what features you are getting with a particular amp. You already know what power output its capable of. You already know what its price is. Then what is the reason for existence of the hardware forum at all? Any thoughts on that? Should we all request Mr. Parker to completely get rid of the hardware forum. We may just do with a barebones hardware forum that collects all the price/feature/spec information online and when ever one has question about a particular amp he could go look up the info and make a decision. At least it will make the administrators and the moderators lives easier. What do you all say? Chu, Robert should we start a poll on that? What do you think?

 

[RobertR]

The idea that subjectivists don't care if others don't adopt the subjectivist viewpoint is silly. Millions of dollars is spent on advertising and thousands of posts are made to promulgate that viewpoint.

 

[Chu Gai]

Tim_S: You are aware of the time wine experts were fooled when tasting wine that had been colored or that sometimes people's fanatical preferences for one beer over another is sometimes nothing more than that...fanatical preference.

The Great Canadian Beer Challenge
Analysis of the Reserve and the Regular Bottlings
Wine Experts Fooled

John, blind tests have been used effectively, whether they be DBTs, triangle tests, etc. in all of the sciences. If you wear glasses, (it looks that way from the picture of you), then you've been to eye exams. In audio, they've been used to tests the limits of human hearing with regards to sensitivity to level differences or in the development and refinement of codecs. In the food area they are used to test for raw material changes (consistency of the taste for Coke). In the areas of touch they are used to examine different weaving techniques, fiber origins, effectiveness of washing formulations, etc. for determining relative softness. The list goes on John. Would you posit that you'd get a better prescription if the doctor gave you one pair of eyeglasses one day and said walk around with these for a while and tell me how you like them?

When it comes to ascertaining small differences, controlled testing is the only way to obtain any results that have any reliability and meaning. Fletcher-Munson curves could never have been developed without them. Neither could the compression of video or audio to allow for transmission over the internet. Your adamancy to even entertain such a thought elevates your position to that of the person who says he's got the fastest car out there but refuses to test it and put his money where his mouth is. All talk and no show.

How much more of a handicap do I have to give you before you'll consider doing a legitimate test of your silver speaker cables? I'm quite serious. Get the ugliest lamp cord you can at your hardware store. To increase the handicap, submerge the wire in water for a day, then dry it in that nice hot California sun. Then just clean the ends off. The differences that you've reported elsewhere for the silver wire were significant enough that the DBT will have no problem if they're real. They are aren't they? It's not your imagination is it? It couldn't be that the guy who sold them to you and explained their substantial benefits was wrong, or worse, lying?

 

[Yogi]

How many subjectivist posts say amp A is definetly warmer than amp B. They usually have 'IMO' or 'YMMV' in their posts. They usually speak from experience. How many objectivist speak from experience? I have yet to come across one, but you already know the answer to that one.

Like I said, pushing one's knowledge over another's experience is what I have a problem with. Do you see my point Robert? Just say yes or no to the last question.

 

[RobertR]

Every single one I know of.

 

[Yogi]

And it contributes to the economy, feeds many families, etc, and some how you have a problem with that even though they are not your dollars? Now whats more silly, the subjectivist not caring weather the other person adopts his viewpoint or the objectivist worrying about the millions of dollars spent on unnecessary things that help in some small way to keep this economy alive and thriving?

 

[Lewis Besze]

You're kidding right? It's all over the place,maybe not directly, but it is certainly in a very suggestive way.People reffer to their experinces as gospels all the time,and if you hear it enough it can influnce unimformed people very easily.

 

[Yogi]

Could you elaborate on your experiences with different amps in your system? And test results that show how you came to the conclusion that all amps sound alike?