Yes, selection. Science Is based exclusively on the selection of the useful eventscqa's, critical quality atributes.
Same goes for other professions. Like doctors. You can test for lots of stuff, but not all is useful.
You only have to root around on the now closed Blowtorch thread and the Bybee discussion to know that characterising subjectivists as 'generally the most honest' is someway off the mark.The truth is in between. Those far to the subjective side are generally the most honest. However some objectivist will (often dishonestly) insist that a certain measurement proves that this product is better, when its certainly not the case.
I would like to see a good ranking for a product on audiosciencereview when buying, but number 20 on the list might be the better amplifier. The best measuring speaker may not be very good for my room and taste.
If it was simple I would have had a satisfactory system 35 years ago, but Im only just getting there. False information held it back a lot.
Cheers.
PS. I didnt watch the video
You are creating a definition of what 'well-designed' means, from what is in reality an opinion. Not everyone likes or wants that type of HPA effects box that you prefer.A well designed HPA will manipulate at least some measure of crosschannel to get a reasonble in-your-head soundstage.
Generally speaking, and all things being equal, the soundstage one hears during playback is a result of the recording room’s particular acoustic characteristics, you know, reverberant decay, echo, etc. of course things are often not equal due to such things as (1) system out of polarity, (2) listening room anomalies, (3) errors in the system and (4) less than ideal microphone set-up during recording. In a perfect world the soundstage you hear should be an expansive 3-dimensional hemisphere. actually you could even say 4-dimensional since some of the acoustic characteristics are a function of time t.
Did you ever figure out how to measure what a Bybee does to affect sound?You only have to root around on the now closed Blowtorch thread and the Bybee discussion to know that characterising subjectivists as 'generally the most honest' is someway off the mark.
Seems like what happened in that Blowtorch thread is that nobody realized they were overlooking a likely fruitful measurement. Didn't stop people from jumping to conclusions though.
Cross-mixing on headphone amplifiers is not an effects box. Some recordings (binaural) suit headphone listening, but if not recorded specifically for headphone listening, cross-channel mixing can produce a more realistic listening experience since if you are listening to speakers or a live performance, you get natural cross-feed.You are creating a definition of what 'well-designed' means, from what is in reality an opinion. Not everyone likes or wants that type of HPA effects box that you prefer.
If you listen to some of the early stereo pop recordings the channel separation was stark and virtually unlistenable.
The above is illustrative of a lack of understanding of science, both philosophy of science in relation to "proof," and specific science in relation to how humans perceive sound. It also appears derisive of people with different beliefs.How does he know that we do hear differently? Did he hear what someone else hears? Or did he just state that it is so because that is what he believes and want to prove? This is why subjectivists think they win, they have no idea what they are talking about and what is "proof".
Seriously Mark, let's not go down that rabbit hole.Did you ever figure out how to measure what a Bybee does to affect sound?
Google 'audio ground box'
Sure it is. Its to create an illusion of spatiality by artificial means.Cross-mixing on headphone amplifiers is not an effects box.
Not only that, but a HPA with no switch to turn off crossfeed would be a crappy design, not a good one.
Last edited:
Bybees are not ground boxes. You know better than that.Seriously Mark, let's not go down that rabbit hole.
Google 'audio ground box'
Moreover, I believe it should not be too difficult to measure what Bybees do to affect sound. I wrote about it in the forum some time ago. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154881
Some prior discussion:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154011
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154061
Last edited:
“Did you ever figure out how to measure what a Bybee does to affect sound?”
When you try to measure what effect a Bybee has on the sound the effect disappears.
When you try to measure what effect a Bybee has on the sound the effect disappears.
I think that once distortion is below audibility, then I see no real reason for stiving for lower amounts in a home audio setting. It doesn't hurt to do so, and it doesn't help, either.It would be lovely if it didn't! My personal experience is the less distortion you have in your replay chain, the better. Probably unrealistic to hope for though...
How we perceive distortion as individuals and it's effect on our listening experience is the can of worms that's interesting to me and John's take on how our consciousness deals with it is what I found interesting.
That makes it subjective, by your own description, until you can actually isolate what is different in what you are hearing. Not saying you are wrong, but your friends agreeing is simply anecdotal data, and not necessarily surprising. Double blind testing, or a similar analytical process, would be a good way to start.As a scientist, analytical biochemist, analytical instruments is my profession. So i am objectivist by profession.
But when amplifier with unmeasurably low distortion sounds worse than other amp with much worse parameters, i can not help it. If all my friends hear the same and agree, hence my statement. That does not make subjectivist, just someone who decides what amp to use by extended listening sessions, not specs.
Don’t fret, Mark, it’s a quantum mechanics joke. I take it you haven’t heard of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics. I spoke with Bybee on the phone once upon a time, he wasn’t familiar with quantum entanglement but I sent him some crystals to play around with by way of John Curl.
Last edited:
I honestly think so - if one can use EQ, define a target curve to ones liking and in general set up a system in a proper manner, the best measuring (BW, power, IMD, phase, noise) amplifier will always sound the best.So, technically, according to you, we do not even need to bother to listen to amplifiers, just look at amir's list of thd on asr site from low to high for all amps tested to know how each sounds. Great, problem solved.
//
Which category is that?One more quip before the thread gets to its inevitable conclusion:
THD should be put into the same category as PRAT.
High THD gives a grey, boring, non "musical" presentation. PRAT is governed by other things than THD - I'm quite sure of this after I have taken part of the results of a rather controlled test.
//
I don't know what they do to the sound. Do you remember that one of these things was disassembled and found to be a vanilla resistor embedded in gunk?Bybees are not ground boxes. You know better than that.
Moreover, I believe it should not be too difficult to measure what Bybees do to affect sound. I wrote about it in the forum some time ago. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154881
Some prior discussion:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154011
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154061
What I do know is the claims made do not stand up to scrutiny and in general, that's what came out of the BT thread. There are some capable physicists on the forum, why don't we ask them to carefully read Jack Bybee's claims and then comment based on the science?
As already noted, hearing is hostage to cognitive bias - psychologists have studied this stuff for decades so it is well known.
My point about the ground boxes is that the Bybee claims are just as egregious and as a guy that has spent many hours trying to understand EM radiation and how to minimize it wrt building quiet amplifiers, I find in both cases the product claims to be seriously wanting.
Assuming that there is even something like "best sounding" 😉the best measuring (BW, power, IMD, phase, noise) amplifier will always sound the best
I would rather word it the other way around, which one sounds worst.
Because eventually there will be a threshold where we can't point out any differences anymore.
For exactly the same reason that a 32k display is also totally pointless at 4-5 meter viewing distance.
What's kinda remarkable, is when it comes down to video, most people seem to find that extremely obvious.
But when it comes down to audio, all of a sudden we seem to have an infinite amount of resolution apparently.
Not only that, but it even seems to be "cool" to have the (apparent) highest amount, like it a competition of some sort?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- Why the objectivists will never win!