Have you discovered a digital source, that satisfies you, as much as your Turntable?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#681
BigE said:
Joel, I disagree with that completely. Long term listening is effective at *cementing* and revealing bias. IMO, it is totally ineffective at actually identifying sonic character.

Here is an example story: I once thought I was listening to a different piece than I was actually listening to -- for weeks. When I discovered that was the case, the sonics changed from a nice deep warm sound to thin and lightweight within about 3 seconds. It sounded as if tone controls were being operated, but the only thing that had changed was my knowledge of the equipment in use.

Since then I do not trust anyone's sighted comments... even my own.
Click to expand...


I've had similar experiences but never for long periods.. I've had my eyes closed for a time period(forgetting where I was) while listening to an AM radio in a 1960's pick-up truck and imagined it sounded like a concert hall, then open my eyes and realizing where I was, the sound turned into crap sound.. Same conditions, mentioned previous, with eyes closed for a some time and the concert hall sound turned into AM radio sound with eyes remained closed.. Depends on your mental focus at the particular moment..

similar phenomenon: Earlier this year I was was writing online.. I had 3 words I wanted to type then the phone rang. I quickly typed thinking I put down 3 words, came back from the phone looked at the monitor and saw the 3 words written, perfectly clear, but suddenly the middle word disappeared, then appeared for 2 seconds, then disappeared permanently.. I had typed only the 2 words, my expectation generated my hallucination but it didn't last long..

There is many of these experiences...
 
Last edited:
#683
"Alter from optimum"? How? ie. what is "optimum"... Do you have any references for this comment?
Click to expand...
In the sense that other media players produce better results, from the same input files, on the same hardware - IOW, less distortion.

What type of distortion? The crucial one, IME - excess distortion of low level detail in the presence of high level signals - which is something that is never tested for, objectively. The difference between good and poor performance is that the ear/brain has to struggle to pick up what's going on with the poor - hence early onset of fatigue - whereas in the good even when not paying attention all that low level detail is easily, comfortably resolved.
 
#685
Joel Wesseling said:
I've had my eyes closed for a time period(forgetting where I was) while listening to an AM radio in a 1960's pick-up truck and imagined it sounded like a concert hall, then open my eyes and realizing where I was, the sound turned into crap sound.. Same conditions, mentioned previous, with eyes closed for a some time and the concert hall sound turned into AM radio sound with eyes remained closed.. Depends on your mental focus at the particular moment..
Click to expand...
A good anecdote. With eyes closed, without focusing, the brain could go the extra round of unraveling, and interpolating the sounds it was hearing, to recreate the "music" experience. "Awake", or focusing, that illusion can be easily overridden, and all aspects of the sound can be studied.

The point about "convincing" sound is that even when one intensely focuses on trying to make the illusion go away, it doesn't! The information getting to the brain is too coherent, and it overrides your rational knowledge that you're listening to 'fake' sound. This is one of the markers of the experience - talking about bias is just silly in the face of hearing reproduction work this well ...
 
#686
especially when its low frequence that is so loud your hearing gets shut down and is taken over by the sense of pressurechanges in your lungs and airwaves hitting your skin.
You can enjoy this soundlevel with your eyes, if your eyes can focus and your hair does not obscure your wiev.
 
#694
Jay said:
When we do tweaking, without measuring, we have to believe in our ears. Sometimes I was not sure whether I really heard differences or not, but I always follow my feeling.

With times, I have learned that this "feeling" is not something to be under-estimated.

Lately I was introduced to Foobar ABX. Using Foobar is very different with tweaking. But I found out that Foobar ABX is sufficient to validate our hearing, tho in a different way.

With Foobar ABX I can hear (8/8) absolute phase reversal and audibility of zobel network. In real life I found it easier by using feeling.

With Foobar ABX I only know if there is a difference but often don't know which one is better. In real tweaking I will easily know which one is better because I simply use my "feeling", i.e. knowing how much I'm disturbed.
Click to expand...

I can relate to this kind of feeling thing going on when evaluating sound. not just hi fi but also musical instruments
 
#696
Jay's "knowing how much I'm disturbed" is a good way of expressing it ... with me it's got to a simple Yes/No - the sound's either 'correct', or it's not - no midway points, at all. If first exposure gets a thumbs up then you just start turning up the volume, at some point the quality will start to collapse, become 'incorrect' - depending upon the gear there may be a natural limit, because of the overall design, no point in trying to wring more out of it - or a flaw may be exposed, which requires attention ..
 
#698
Exactly right, it is an illusion. But when the system works wells enough that illusion is extremely robust, "convincing" is the term I use - when the illusion sustains in spite of efforts to spoil it, say by moving to a "wrong spot" then I also call it, "correct".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom