Holy cow!!! Enjoying this thread. 
Dear all, Some thoughts on various posts
-I respect everyone. Subjectivist and objectivist. but when a person hears the difference, so in a way he is trying to bring an experience in to reality which was not known earlier, which will require new analysis & tests from Objectivist's point of view. How can we do that ? Only knowledgeable subjectivist knows the answer. So in a way one should be asking subjectivist to do some objective work.
-Regarding Cow test, as observation was separated by good length of time various other factors can also affect milk production so I would neither believe it nor deny it. Needs further exploration. Can it be repeated ?
- humans being social animals, to look for 'general' consensus statistic of '9 out of 10' is good point to arrive at 'some' conclusion and move forward.
-On which ever side of the fence you are, honesty and trust will plays big part if one wants to arrive at some facts.
-Strangely if one notices most of the subjective perception exists only and only if it moves away from the previously established facts. It will be interesting to know if unexperienced and unconditioned person auditions and hears the what sounds good or bad without telling him/her they are under test.
Regds.
Dear all, Some thoughts on various posts
-I respect everyone. Subjectivist and objectivist. but when a person hears the difference, so in a way he is trying to bring an experience in to reality which was not known earlier, which will require new analysis & tests from Objectivist's point of view. How can we do that ? Only knowledgeable subjectivist knows the answer. So in a way one should be asking subjectivist to do some objective work.
-Regarding Cow test, as observation was separated by good length of time various other factors can also affect milk production so I would neither believe it nor deny it. Needs further exploration. Can it be repeated ?
- humans being social animals, to look for 'general' consensus statistic of '9 out of 10' is good point to arrive at 'some' conclusion and move forward.
-On which ever side of the fence you are, honesty and trust will plays big part if one wants to arrive at some facts.
-Strangely if one notices most of the subjective perception exists only and only if it moves away from the previously established facts. It will be interesting to know if unexperienced and unconditioned person auditions and hears the what sounds good or bad without telling him/her they are under test.
Regds.
Last edited:
Hi,
Speaking of polls and the like...
It may or may not be pertinent to this thread, but a while back I suggested an approach to find a way to keep the Subjective/Objective debate reducing the SNR in threads that are NOT ABOUT Subjective vs. Objective. It may be amusing to review the responses to this suggestion and who they came from...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/190272-modest-proposal.html
Ciao T
Speaking of polls and the like...
It may or may not be pertinent to this thread, but a while back I suggested an approach to find a way to keep the Subjective/Objective debate reducing the SNR in threads that are NOT ABOUT Subjective vs. Objective. It may be amusing to review the responses to this suggestion and who they came from...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/190272-modest-proposal.html
Ciao T
Since the subject is on hearing differences
Artifact Audibility Comparisons
Above article (some terms I dont understand) says one can not hear artifacts below some decible levels and music mask artifacts. True ?
Artifact Audibility Comparisons
Above article (some terms I dont understand) says one can not hear artifacts below some decible levels and music mask artifacts. True ?
its funny, now you mention audibility of artefacts
on my new speakers I occationally hear strange sound effects, in the music
sounds more like effects they 'regretted', and tried to filter out
very very low level SPL
I don't think its supposed be 'audible'
and its certainly not integrated into the music
on many loudspeakers its probably not audible at all
but it is still there
well, it may have some effect on the sound
if such low level effects were removed completely, 'something' in the sound might change
but its probably not meant to be heard how its really done
on my new speakers I occationally hear strange sound effects, in the music
sounds more like effects they 'regretted', and tried to filter out
very very low level SPL
I don't think its supposed be 'audible'
and its certainly not integrated into the music
on many loudspeakers its probably not audible at all
but it is still there
well, it may have some effect on the sound
if such low level effects were removed completely, 'something' in the sound might change
but its probably not meant to be heard how its really done
Yes trying to learn all the views.
As said earlier some technical terms I dont understand, I did try the test but couldn't
differentiate, in some files for example I can't hear the noise he has mixed but probably because of very low-fi speakers or my ears. So I am not sure.
Regards
As said earlier some technical terms I dont understand, I did try the test but couldn't
differentiate, in some files for example I can't hear the noise he has mixed but probably because of very low-fi speakers or my ears. So I am not sure.
Regards
Last edited:
I was once privy to a movie being made. It was pouring rain outside. The scene was supposed to take place on a quite summer night. I watched the sound man as he did some magic as the scene was being shot. When I saw the movie the dialogue was heard with a quiet summer night background. One would have never known.
I don't believe bad speakers could 'hide' the mixed-in stuff. What could hide them is a noisy listening background. You probably want to try again on a quiet night.
Or as suggested try with a headset.
jan didden
Maybe the cows enjoy the smell of vintage electronics.
Nobody knows yet. We need money to conduct experiments. For example, military people may be interested in a weapon that fools imagination of enemy soldiers, as if they hear some real sounds that disorient them. I know, it always easier to get funding of killing researches than entertaining ones. Well, except used for propaganda.
Hmmm...Tell the deaf guy that he is meant to be deaf.
Its well known that the ears can be very flawed (so that goes against your perfect theory). Its even more logical that every single brain processing those signals from your ears will create different conclusions for each individual based on their experience and their imagination.
Last edited:
Great discussion....
This is a great question too!!
I would say that if people accept "placebo" induced improvements who is anyone else to argue?? There is something to be said about spending more $$$ on any product, no one is immune to the marketing abilities of companies, governments, news networks or individuals (Think Bernie Madoff). This exists in all segments of the market place. In my field of computer consulting there is a certain "expectation" of $$/hr. Some big company (ie. IBM) bids at $450/hr vs an independant at $200/hr gets the contract sometimes because the company "Believes" there is a higher quality of work with that $450/hr. The reality is most times the reverse since IBM does not always send the best. The $200/hr guy is an X-IBMer with more skill and experience period.
Preception will always rule decision making process. Its alive and well accross the board and audio is no different. It only takes a little bit of marketing or bias information to make a large percentage believe in something (look at Fox News or MSNBC). People want to believe....its always been that way.
As long as people use belief based thinking processes its hard to break out of the subjective strong hold that grips most people.
Last edited:
Sure. And the more of individuals would react on sounds as if they are real, the better is their reproduction. It is the test I prefer for the equipment I design. For example, yesterday sitting here in the office I heard somebody is knocking in my living room. When I went there I discovered that the sound was produced by the drummers that was hitting snare edge. It was a live jazz record playing then.
When I worked for some large r/d company we had support contract with IBM. Once a fresh new server started producing some numerical error codes that nobody knew what they meant. I suspected that memory is bad, but anyway called IBM to ask what that codes mean. After usual half of an hour of phone football they said they are sending a technician. The next day the technician come and spent one more hour with them searching for the part number of the cord he needs to connect his notebook to the server. After he ordered the cord and left I found faulty memory module and replaced it. Tried to close the ticket, but after fifteen minutes on the phone decided that my time is more valuable and hung up.
Was it Placebo effect? No. Purchasing in big companies go by standard ways. It is a bit different from purchases by audiophiles, but when I hear awful sound in modern restaurants, theaters and cinema theaters I can't believe how bad are that standards, even in 21'St century!
Last edited:
Des Technokraten Gruselkabinett
Des Technokraten Gruselkabinett
I must give Jan Didden a big Siskel & Ebert "two thumbs up".
His "miscellanious" section at his linearaudio is loaded with studies on topics that the objectivist technocrati would just love to have go away.
http://www.linearaudio.nl/library-1.htm
http://www.linearaudio.nl/library%20misc.htm
We find such delightful topics as:
It is all seriously recommended...
Quel dommage, meanwhile Douglas Self must be congratulated for his discovery of "burn in", as published in LinerAudio Volume 1 as:
Together with Mr. Self's discovery that all sorts of capacitors have measurable levels of distortion and that for example "audio grade" parts happen to have lower distortion (something he cannot have been really happy about but published anyway in WW, yet carefully omitted from his books); we have pretty much proof for about everything that has been suggested by so-called subjectivists for years and which always gives the TEB (Tin Eared Brigade) Hissing Fits, Blind Staggers and Veitstanz...
So, where does all of that leave the TEB and their Mantra "everything sounds the same"...
Ciao T
PS, the German heading is not really translatable, it is related to the concept of the classic Horror-Show, but not identical. Maybe the closes is George Orwells "Room 101" from 1984, so a room 101 for Technocrates and Objectivists, where all their worst fears are brought to face them...
Des Technokraten Gruselkabinett
I must give Jan Didden a big Siskel & Ebert "two thumbs up".
His "miscellanious" section at his linearaudio is loaded with studies on topics that the objectivist technocrati would just love to have go away.
http://www.linearaudio.nl/library-1.htm
http://www.linearaudio.nl/library%20misc.htm
We find such delightful topics as:
It is all seriously recommended...
Quel dommage, meanwhile Douglas Self must be congratulated for his discovery of "burn in", as published in LinerAudio Volume 1 as:
Together with Mr. Self's discovery that all sorts of capacitors have measurable levels of distortion and that for example "audio grade" parts happen to have lower distortion (something he cannot have been really happy about but published anyway in WW, yet carefully omitted from his books); we have pretty much proof for about everything that has been suggested by so-called subjectivists for years and which always gives the TEB (Tin Eared Brigade) Hissing Fits, Blind Staggers and Veitstanz...
So, where does all of that leave the TEB and their Mantra "everything sounds the same"...
Ciao T
PS, the German heading is not really translatable, it is related to the concept of the classic Horror-Show, but not identical. Maybe the closes is George Orwells "Room 101" from 1984, so a room 101 for Technocrates and Objectivists, where all their worst fears are brought to face them...
Last edited:
Hmm I didn't check the mail box today, I better see if my volume 1 has turned up yet. A lot of it is over my head, but that's how you learn stuff
I think you over-estimate the presence of "everything sounds the same" types here Thorsten There are certainly the "if you can't provide evidence I'm not going to take your subjective word for it types", but that's not the same.
All too often the latter I think are labelled as those who who say that everything sounds the same.
I've done some non-blind tests that I was sure I should be able to hear a difference with. I listened to my 100W mosfet amp (integrated) through the preamp which is an abomination of CMOS switches and unity gain buffers based on NE5534's with Bi-Polar electrolytics after each because of the excessive DC offset. The comparison was to bypass this completely and listen connected direct to the power amp through the final 1uF coupling caps.
I could not hear any difference at all!! Why? quite possibly because my speakers were a far weaker link in the audio chain, possibly because I didn't actually know what to listen for.
So what is the point of this rambling? Simply to say that perhaps *some* peoples views may be re-enforced by experiences like I had.
It certainly hasn't turned me into an all things sound the same type. I do retain a healthy scepticism about certain products that "enhance" the audio in somewhat unconventional ways, most of which I would discount out of hand, but I do think that there are areas where conventional wisdom does not fully cover the whole story and there are still things which we don't fully understand which leave a gap where some subjective impressions may be hiding.
Tony.
I think you over-estimate the presence of "everything sounds the same" types here Thorsten
There are certainly the "if you can't provide evidence I'm not going to take your subjective word for it types", but that's not the same. All too often the latter I think are labelled as those who who say that everything sounds the same.
I've done some non-blind tests that I was sure I should be able to hear a difference with. I listened to my 100W mosfet amp (integrated) through the preamp which is an abomination of CMOS switches and unity gain buffers based on NE5534's with Bi-Polar electrolytics after each because of the excessive DC offset. The comparison was to bypass this completely and listen connected direct to the power amp through the final 1uF coupling caps.
I could not hear any difference at all!! Why? quite possibly because my speakers were a far weaker link in the audio chain, possibly because I didn't actually know what to listen for.
So what is the point of this rambling? Simply to say that perhaps *some* peoples views may be re-enforced by experiences like I had.
It certainly hasn't turned me into an all things sound the same type. I do retain a healthy scepticism about certain products that "enhance" the audio in somewhat unconventional ways, most of which I would discount out of hand, but I do think that there are areas where conventional wisdom does not fully cover the whole story and there are still things which we don't fully understand which leave a gap where some subjective impressions may be hiding.
Tony.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.