As long as basic honesty controls are refused, it indeed has NOTHING to do with reality. Or rather, everyone has his own reality.
You say that 'those others' are fooled but you are not. Which, of course, is exactly what 'those others' say about you.
You, sir, are as easily fooled as the rest of us. You are one of us, whether you like it or not.
Jan
Last edited:
As long as basic honesty controls are refused, it indeed has NOTHING to do with reality. Or rather, everyone has his own reality.
You say that 'those others' are fooled but you are not. Which, of course, is exactly what 'those others' say about you.
You, sir, are as easily fooled as the rest of us. You are one of us, whether you like it or not.
Jan
Have you ever met a reviwer who said that a device was offering good sound, even if it wasn't his kind of sound?
I did, way back in 1997.
As opposed to most people, I can distinguish between poor sound and a sound which many will like, even I don't. Besisdes, I openly admit to being a nasty nitpicker, detail may make me say it's good but not my kind of good.
It would be a mortal mistake for an audio manufacturer to concentrate on objectively pure sound if he knows that the customer goes for shiny boxes and 2-inch thick cables. Most audio manu's are not in the business of financial suicide
Jan
Well, good for them, Jan.
I am beyond manufacturers just now. Those that I would buy are afr too expensive so I can't, and those I can afford are nowhere near to what I desire, so I won't.
What about the Q/P of the haflers' amps ?
hiraga writed in the 2000's in "La nouvelle revue du Son" than it was beating many expensive amps. He used to like the P4000 and when no too much power was needed a little one of 60 W TA1600 or 1100 IIRC.
For him the Transnova design was enough to solve the class A needs...
One New Years day I was at the Killingworth Castle a local pub . Morris dancers 32 F 0C outside with triangle and non vibrato violin. Strangely it worked OK and shouldn't . I had to pinch myself as I was reviewing the sound as if amplifiers. The triangle was Naim and the violin Quad. Good lesson. Also it filled a space it shouldn't.
A well-used anonymous witticism, often misattributed to Oscar Wilde, states that you should "try anything once except incest or Morris dancing".
Hafler . Hiraga. Yes.
A well-used anonymous witticism, often misattributed to Oscar Wilde, states that you should "try anything once except incest or Morris dancing".
Hafler . Hiraga. Yes.
Last edited:
Which is, of course, exactly what most people say
jan
Which they usually soon prove to be just idle talk, because in practice they must have it their way.
Actually Jan, I don't give a damn what other people think of the audio I have because they don't live with t, I do. I am not in this to impress anyone, much less to have my way, I am in this because I love it for itself and for what it can do for me.
An example. As I write this, I am listening to my Marantz 3250B preamp drive my Marantz 170 DC power from, from NAD C565 BEE CD player as the sourcem, to the first of two discs from a double farewell CD album by The Shadows ("Memories of 36 guitar moods", MCDLX014), which I purchased in Edinburgh in summer of 2009. Cabling to my B&M 1041 Monitor speakers by van den Hul, interconnect Neotech silver cable. Incoming power from the grid is filtered by my own power line filters. It's pouring rain outside.
And I love what I'm hearing. I feel great. It sounds just the way I like it to sound, and I don't care if that's the absolute truth or not. I feel my efforts over the last years are now fully justified. And, as I see it, that is the whole point of this entire hobby. I leave absolutes to others.
I'm quoting myself because it takes not much time at all to check the above content, less than twelve minutes, and I consider valuable information.
...And no comment were made at all, from no one!
For me, this is logical science; a correlation, more or less, between human tools and human psychology (state of mind in time and space at the speed of light.)
I came to the same conclusion myself, back about 35 years ago. I had to ask myself: "Am I imagining this?" Yet the audio differences reappeared once I settled back to listening to my equipment 'openly', rather than with an ABX box. Several of my contemporaries (fellow audio design engineers) believed in 'hearing no difference, most of the time' and went into other areas of engineering. I did not, and instead, I made an attempt to find out WHY.
I found that the ABX method was more a 'trick' of the mind, much like people like to describe 'open' listening tests to us. But the reality of my life experience continued on as before: I heard differences in just about anything I did to change an audio system, and I have kept on from there, refusing to deny my own subjective experience and that of others, when they were like minded about hearing audio differences. It has been a long road, since then, and rather successful I should think.
I found that the ABX method was more a 'trick' of the mind, much like people like to describe 'open' listening tests to us. But the reality of my life experience continued on as before: I heard differences in just about anything I did to change an audio system, and I have kept on from there, refusing to deny my own subjective experience and that of others, when they were like minded about hearing audio differences. It has been a long road, since then, and rather successful I should think.
Last edited:
Northstar, much has been said about this very topic thousands of messages back, it's in the log.
Admittedly, most was about how the CD format was being actually misused in pursuit of greater loudness, even clipping was allowed to go on for inordinate periods of time. This totally offsets the whole idea of dynamic range, resulting in usually rather poor sounding recordings.
The man has made a an interesting video, but most of us here are only too aware of that problem, so it's nothing new to us.
Admittedly, most was about how the CD format was being actually misused in pursuit of greater loudness, even clipping was allowed to go on for inordinate periods of time. This totally offsets the whole idea of dynamic range, resulting in usually rather poor sounding recordings.
The man has made a an interesting video, but most of us here are only too aware of that problem, so it's nothing new to us.
Level matching -
No comments? ...... I think we already knew about the affects of level on the freq response (F-M curve) as is demonstrated. And, it has been shown that something like a 0.1db level difference can be 'detected' if the Q of a peak in response is broad.
For most listeners, it is only about freqs.... a good use of DBT where a go-no go response can be determined.... which has more or less bass, for example. Which sounds brighter? ETc. Level matching for those questions are very tight. The closer the levels are matched the more same the music is when the music is compared to itself (same song).
If you also tried to listen for spatial qualities and those differences, small level/amplitude differences are not very important. The placement of sounds (musical instrument) between the speakers and the depth of field of that sound ETC. How easily can you hear the room sound (reverb time decay) and other such details of High End quality reproduction.... whole different thing from the studio pop singer (nearly mono?) song of You Tube demo. High End requires a lot more of the system.
THx-RNMarsh
No comments? ...... I think we already knew about the affects of level on the freq response (F-M curve) as is demonstrated. And, it has been shown that something like a 0.1db level difference can be 'detected' if the Q of a peak in response is broad.
For most listeners, it is only about freqs.... a good use of DBT where a go-no go response can be determined.... which has more or less bass, for example. Which sounds brighter? ETc. Level matching for those questions are very tight. The closer the levels are matched the more same the music is when the music is compared to itself (same song).
If you also tried to listen for spatial qualities and those differences, small level/amplitude differences are not very important. The placement of sounds (musical instrument) between the speakers and the depth of field of that sound ETC. How easily can you hear the room sound (reverb time decay) and other such details of High End quality reproduction.... whole different thing from the studio pop singer (nearly mono?) song of You Tube demo. High End requires a lot more of the system.
THx-RNMarsh
I suppose it is like faith in religion. You have to believe and that's all there is to it. Unlike religion I see no reason to suspect it causes war or whatever. As I said to Colleen the people in my industry are very nice people and really do no harm. If only kids would build hi fi. I would be so happy. Better than spelling and all the other archaic forms. If this idiot can write anyone can. I accept I would never earn my living doing it. No lie, I started to write December 2003 because my boss another dyslexic insisted.
My religion is hi fi? Yes it is. I value the comments of my friends here even if I don't take the same path. I would echo the thoughts of Bob Cordell in his intro of his book but keep that to myself.
My religion is hi fi? Yes it is. I value the comments of my friends here even if I don't take the same path. I would echo the thoughts of Bob Cordell in his intro of his book but keep that to myself.
Last edited:
Absolutely. No problem at all. It's not the only topic that comes up cyclically.
And it's no bad thing, either.
Being dyslexic is not a problem for having a beer, or a pinta cider, I hope? I'm counting on it!
these "special conditions" for hearing differences are a hoot - if there is a real ability then training should let you rewire your processing neural to overcome the abx "repetitive listening errors"
after all that's pretty much how mixing/mastering is done - on short snippets, repeating all day long - one engineer I know of complained of one "musician" where he had to do over 300 edits in in a 4 minute cut to correct timing, pitch and just plain missed notes
if training with abx in a honest an sustained effort to learn if it can detect the proposed differences is too difficult then try finding, verifying a protocol that preserves blinding, gives results with subjects that can be replicated
training, focus are quite vaild and desired in sensory testing - not excluded by it - just showing ignorance weakening your case to claim otherwise, you are perfectly free to listen for soundstage, imaging effects in abx
it would be a weird evolutionary fault if the brain gave up in fatigue or boredom on localizing sounds that may warn of danger or opportunity
as for Richard - as a manager at a national lab I hope would have fired any engineer or contractor offering similar excuses for tossing the Scientific Method
after all that's pretty much how mixing/mastering is done - on short snippets, repeating all day long - one engineer I know of complained of one "musician" where he had to do over 300 edits in in a 4 minute cut to correct timing, pitch and just plain missed notes
if training with abx in a honest an sustained effort to learn if it can detect the proposed differences is too difficult then try finding, verifying a protocol that preserves blinding, gives results with subjects that can be replicated
training, focus are quite vaild and desired in sensory testing - not excluded by it - just showing ignorance weakening your case to claim otherwise, you are perfectly free to listen for soundstage, imaging effects in abx
it would be a weird evolutionary fault if the brain gave up in fatigue or boredom on localizing sounds that may warn of danger or opportunity
as for Richard - as a manager at a national lab I hope would have fired any engineer or contractor offering similar excuses for tossing the Scientific Method
The special condition is being relaxed and saying who's money is it mate?
Boredom kills a test as does me not liking someone. I think I am very good at not counting that. Better than any man is my guess.
I also find not knowing impossible. I just loose interest. I don't like things being played over a system I wouldn't buy and music I don't like. I don't like rooms I don't like and presenters who seem to be in love with themselves.
I don't like volumes too high or too low. I don't like seeing amps although must know a bit.
I don't like being told what I am expected to hear. I know no one suggests that to be professional, it is what passes as showing things.
I don't mind a real instrument to compare and voice. I don't mind being statistically wrong.
Most things I have done like this "is which is least worse "? Like the woman to marry no "coup de foudre".
Boredom kills a test as does me not liking someone. I think I am very good at not counting that. Better than any man is my guess.
I also find not knowing impossible. I just loose interest. I don't like things being played over a system I wouldn't buy and music I don't like. I don't like rooms I don't like and presenters who seem to be in love with themselves.
I don't like volumes too high or too low. I don't like seeing amps although must know a bit.
I don't like being told what I am expected to hear. I know no one suggests that to be professional, it is what passes as showing things.
I don't mind a real instrument to compare and voice. I don't mind being statistically wrong.
Most things I have done like this "is which is least worse "? Like the woman to marry no "coup de foudre".
- Status
- Not open for further replies.