How could anybody come up with anything for you? As you stated, you compared and could not hear a difference. You are very high on the luck scale, this hobby of mine eats up a lot of time, thinking, discussion, effort and money. No need to worry yourself silly, it's a problem for others who heard a difference, not yours. It is similar to a person blind since birth attempting to contemplate the color green or expect others to explain or bring some evidence about it to him. Enjoy the beautiful universe you can perceive, it is more than plenty. 🙂
True, but my better half would pester me about it day in and day out afterwards. 😀
Last edited:
What a patronizing comment.
I keep an open mind to stuff that I might have never focused on, and therefore not noticed.
But others must first prove that at least they can hear it in a double blind listening test and tell me what to listen for.
One such example where this exact thing has occurred, is in the artefacts of perceptual coding and high crest factor sounds. I can now hear that, as I couldn't before.
Just as an objective test, I think it would be less distracting/open to interpretation than music.
Like I said, you must have experience in...
I know, you are describing what you feel.
All this is what you feel.
Apparently he is entitled to it (in bold) and therefore others cannot challenge it. 🙁
In subjective listening method, right?
You asked what to listen, I gave you how I learned and pointers on listening. And then you profess to own a recording studio, is authority of good ears from people in recording business and heard no difference on abx comparison using many systems, clearly you have access to resources not available to many of us.
You can ask those trying to sell stuff to you if you want proof. You are free to commission someone you trust or a panel to do it for you, request result of such tests from manufacturers or whatever, its DIY. As I said, some of us lowly diy commoners are tight on resources and not scientific, but we discuss and share what we found as honestly as possible that may help others like us. Feel free to give my posts any value that you deem suitable. Nothing for me to gain in doing a DBT. At the moment I'm not selling anything audio and has no immediate need to provide proof to anyone. I build to please myself and share my experience with others for improvement.
You want objective? Go ask those trying to sell stuff to you. My audio is my entertainment, I got me and my family to satisfy. Some measurable difference I can hear, others my wife can but I can not, others both of us can hear no difference. But your opinion of my system is of no concern of mine, different ears and different requirements. 🙂
But you gave no proof that YOU can actually hear it.
I fact you refuse to provide that proof.
Then I can't rule out that you are, very likely unintentionally, fooling yourself. As is the case for the vast majority of human perceptions. Iow your a human being, just like me.
But you have something to lose by doing it.
And yet you use that to challenge those who bring up objective data as if your subjectivity and their objectivity have equal validity.
You are missing the point of my post. Your earlier reply to Bill Coltrane shows your arrogance in trying to equate subjectivity and objectivity when you omitted the portion of Bill's reply "ridiculous experience amps in ABX tests." in the quote as shown in the screenshot attached.
Attachments
I'm sorry but providing "proof" is very very difficult and people on this forum can only be expected to provide a little evidence, it's never going to be anywhere near proof, it's literally "hear say" 🙂
Sure, get the proof yourself. It actually is the only way. Everybody perceive audio a little differently, different ears, brain, environment, listening space and experience.
My ability to hear is of very little value to you, I may not be able to perceive differences on some aspects you can clearly hear. Why should you settle for an equipment based on what others hear? I won't, therefore I build. 🙂
Very good correction.
What I need to go check an audible claim is:
A full ABX report with enough repetitions, say 20, and hash. Plus the tell.
Your ability of what you can hear is of great importance to me.
One, I have a giant amount of curiosity.
Two, I can't stand it that others can hear stuff I can't. (old age sucks)
Third, I have a studio. So it's important what others can hear, even if I can't.
Good one 😀
With as much time I have in this hobby, the little objective testing I’ve done in the last year or so does not align with my 40+ yrs of subjective testing. And what is ‘supposed’ to be.....as in what is objectively accepted as gospel does not make for better sound.
Maybe it’s the objectivists that have fooled themselves?
Edit.... I like your previous ^ post Bill
Last edited:
There are a great number of older members here who profess to having very good hearing acuity, coincidentally many of them are in the audio business (or act like they are 😉) I think our hearing is quite plastic and probably even with hearing loss it's possible to not miss much, although it sounds like you have some direct experience in this matter which would interest me.
It can be difficult to objectively test the sound at your ears (wesayso's thread). It can be correlated to subjective impressions, Toole, Olive, Linkwitz, Geddes....(wesayso) etc show how hard it can be. Most of us can only do it subjectively.
Well as far as I’m concerned the part that reaches your ears is the most important part.....
The system as a whole must be considered including source and source material, everything else in between down to the room effects and how the sound you’ve created reaches your lp/ears.
The system as a whole must be considered including source and source material, everything else in between down to the room effects and how the sound you’ve created reaches your lp/ears.
I don’t believe all room issues are actually issues though as in they can be beneficial in building a 3d soundstage.
Some of the early speaker work(mid century through the 70’s) is quite interesting.
Follow Winslow Burhoe’s career back and some of things involved.....quite interesting.
Some of the early speaker work(mid century through the 70’s) is quite interesting.
Follow Winslow Burhoe’s career back and some of things involved.....quite interesting.
Last edited:
For some, seeing space (or knowing it exists) behind your speakers is enough to help create "depth"