Worth mentioning again that my "measuring stick" is the type of sound described in the link in this post, http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...ch-preamplifier-part-ii-5163.html#post3911407. Progress or regression is determined by whether the sound gets closer to, or further away from this standard - how does one 'measure' this?
Last edited:
The psychoacoustics explanation holds regardless.
Going "back and forth" merely reinforces the illusion.
Exactly the way you have been doing so. It is not objective it is the psycho part of psychoacoustics.
I see ... all right, I'll hit you over the head alternately with a hammer, and a feather duster. Since pain is a subjective experience, any difference in pain felt is merely an "illusion" - any complaints by yourself can be safely ignored by the experimenter ...
wrong analogy. Similar to claiming success because you can identify Motown from Mozart.
Try having someone hit you over the head with two feather dusters - one with 100 feathers, the other with 101.
Best done blindfolded and hit from behind.
Better still if the hitter is also blindfolded. You'll need a third person to hand them the dusters in a random pattern. This third person needs to be completely silent and the dusters need to be handed over exactly the same way regardless of which duster it is.
40 hits should be ample. If you can correctly identify the dusters in, say, 30 of the hits you are close to a statistically significant result.
Feel free to translate that to your situation.
Try having someone hit you over the head with two feather dusters - one with 100 feathers, the other with 101.
Best done blindfolded and hit from behind.
Better still if the hitter is also blindfolded. You'll need a third person to hand them the dusters in a random pattern. This third person needs to be completely silent and the dusters need to be handed over exactly the same way regardless of which duster it is.
40 hits should be ample. If you can correctly identify the dusters in, say, 30 of the hits you are close to a statistically significant result.
Feel free to translate that to your situation.
And the subjective reality is between the two extremes: a better analogy is listening to Mozart, and someone scratching a blackboard at the same time, alternately with two differently shaped objects, made of different materials. Because the "unpleasantness" sticks out like a "sore thumb", contrasting with what the primary listening focus is, it's trivial to pick the difference between them ...
Edit: and there's a very clear message there - I'm listening to, and for the distortion, not the music when I've got my critical hat on; the music ceases to exist, I'm listening to a pattern of "meaningless" sounds ...
Edit: and there's a very clear message there - I'm listening to, and for the distortion, not the music when I've got my critical hat on; the music ceases to exist, I'm listening to a pattern of "meaningless" sounds ...
Last edited:
Yes, intelligent analysis would certainly pick it up - but no-one seems interested, 
. RFI does similar sorts of things to the sound, but when was the last time fourier deconstruction was used to pick up the telltale traces, ?
The ear is the fast track method - do I have a problem or not? If one is after a solution to achieving good audio quality then it serves its Sherlock Holmes purpose well - equivalent to the AM radio radio trick for detecting interference ...
. RFI does similar sorts of things to the sound, but when was the last time fourier deconstruction was used to pick up the telltale traces, ?The ear is the fast track method - do I have a problem or not? If one is after a solution to achieving good audio quality then it serves its Sherlock Holmes purpose well - equivalent to the AM radio radio trick for detecting interference ...
Your chosen analogies show how you think and that is the cause of your confusion. The example above assumes that the beauty of a woman is an objective thing which you could either see with your eyes or measure with an instrument.Obviously there are some people out there who have no ability to distinguish, say, a beautiful from an ugly woman ...
It sounds like you have convinced yourself that your "critical" hearing experiences are solely caused by the sound field produced by the equipment you use. I assume this is because you have never been stumped by a DBT or you believe that psychoacoustics somehow don't apply to you when critically listening.
If psychoacoustics really don't apply to you, then this startling fact would be by far the most productive line of research for you and for others.
You've picked up on the materials comment, don't you think this has not been studied.
Obviously there are some people out there who have no ability to distinguish, say, a beautiful from an ugly woman ...
Analogy doesn't hold water...
In fact they have worked it out, it's all about the proportions of the parts of the face - get the right ratios, a bit of makeup - and you're busting to make a good impression! But no-one wanders around with a tape measure, checking out potential good sorts ...
Of course pyschoacoustics applies, but one aspect that they never check out, because they never use equipment capable enough, is that sufficiently competent playback can produce convincing sound - they've got a tyre rated at 150mph to test, but the fastest car at their disposal does 80, with a tailwind.
With respect to audio, no - I've spent some googling over the years, but haven't come across anything significant.
I can't "prove" I detect a difference that's meaningful - I might as well ask you to "prove" that the last armchair you bought was more comfortable than another one you looked at. Of course, if comfort is completely irrelevant to your purchase then just buy the first thing you come across, that looks reasonably well made - it's a way of living life,
...With respect to audio, no - I've spent some googling over the years, but haven't come across anything significant.
I can't "prove" I detect a difference that's meaningful - I might as well ask you to "prove" that the last armchair you bought was more comfortable than another one you looked at. Of course, if comfort is completely irrelevant to your purchase then just buy the first thing you come across, that looks reasonably well made - it's a way of living life,
Then look in terms of material effects on electronic signals...and electronic assemblies.
As for beauty, left right symmetry has a lot to play...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.