Audiophiles Who Don't Trust Their Ears...

[Groucho]

An assumption seems to be that out there, somewhere is 'perfection' and that, using our ears we can eventually track down that perfection. But what if there is no single 'perfection. Or what if there are several 'perfections' no better or worse than each other? If the latter, what if we naturally get bored with a single version of perfection over a relatively short time? What if the only time we truly love what we hear is when it is new to our ears? Must we, in fact, keep changing our systems to keep our ears refreshed?

 

[bonzo75]

Ked you really should read Floyd Toole's , 'Sound Reproduction' ,live music is one thing, its reproduction something else.
Unsighted comparisons are useful to remove sighted bias, personally I prefer large and measurable improvements.
Keith.

I do a lot of unsighted comparisons. So do Audiophile Bill and others. You assume we do not because we use Shun Mooks.

I have bought an XTZ analyzer. Haven't used it yet. You should try going to a live show sometime.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Very easy to feel good about trusting your own convictions. Can you please list all classical live shows you have been to in the last 5 years? I can list the ones you have been to, because there were 4 or 5, all happening in a short burst earlier this year, after which you decided you were happy with the sound you already had. Amazing you were already on the right journey. If I were you, I would go to classical live shows for a year (after which it would be hard to stop like you did), and am sure my taste would change from what it was before. I guess it's natural.

Not to mention your positive experience with the Datasat in the worst possible room actually means you liked it a lot, and you should pursue a few more, but that is a lot of effort. Better to upgrade grounding, cables, and preamp in the current system.

Not many on these forums are keeping up w/you Bonzo on the live front. Your criticism should be aimed at the membership at large. Anyhow, I reiterate I've made big strides to listen to music in lots of situations, w/different topologies, and a reasonable amount live.
Don't make this a p*****g up against the wall contest on live experiences.
I go to a lot more live jazz than you, the acoustic and tone is very different from live classical, but you don't hear me pontificate that your's and others' experience is somehow inferior as a result.

 

[asiufy]

I think an interesting topic is Audiophiles who do not have confidence in their ability to hear.

This is NOT, I repeat NOT, about having "golden ears" or being a "gifted listener" or any such lofty nonsense.

It is about the ability to trust your experience, your perceptions, and what your ears are sending to your brain.

So many here want to see measurements to "back up" what they have heard, and many also seek approval from
others in the hobby to justify their purchases.

I believe that the "measurements" folks are in a different hobby altogether. The pursuit, the end goal, might be the same, but the paths are as different as they can be.
Now, I think the "seeking approval" is way more common in our hobby, from the people I met and know. There *is* a herd mentality, and with the Internet, it has spread further. Before, people would follow magazine Y and reviewer X. Now people are following poster A or B, without knowing their biases, commercial or not, and that is a very dangerous thing.
Jack mentioned something that's crucial as well: people need to know, for certain, what they like. I know what I like, and I enjoy figuring out what others like too. But in order for you to really know what you like, you need a frame of reference. And that's only possible by auditioning. I find it odd that a lot of people online claim they have "the best this", "the best that", and when asked, they said they never compared their "best this" to any other "this". They just assumed, for some reason, they got the best, perhaps because it's from a respected brand, maybe because it's expensive, or because other folks ended up buying the same "best this".
We all need to respect people's preferences, but they need to come from experience, not hearsay or "this guy said this is really good"...

Maybe I am just out there, but I still own the same amps, speakers, and cables I bought 7 years ago. The only things that have changed
are my digital sources.

I have absolute confidence in my ability to believe what I am hearing. Anybody else?

So you're saying you haven't heard, in 7 years, amps, speakers and cables better than the ones you have right now? You really haven't been to my store then (THAT'S A JOKE, BTW)


cheers,
alex

 

[Al M.]

Faith is belief without evidence.

That is an extremely debatable statement. But discussing it here would be off topic, so I'll let it slide.

 

[microstrip]

All my family play musical instruments, but we only have the reproduction of that event to listen to at home.
If you read Toole's book you would understand the differences.
Keith.

If we read and understand Toole book we will see that the primary references for sound quality of Toole and most audiophiles are quite different. See for example the first articles of Harry Pearson about The Absolute Sound in TAS.

IMHO this difference is the deepest source of our divergences - we have to live with that. It is why we now have a peaceful section of this forum entitled "Science" with special rules.

 

[rblnr]

Bigger question is whether people really know for certain what they like.

I think this is exactly it, and sticking just within the audio world, it's why reviewers can have a lot of sway.

If you're an audiophile w/o confidence in what you hear/knowing what sounds right to you, you're lost -- stuck in the backseat w/someone else at the wheel. And probably relegated to a life of constant cable swapping

 

[bonzo75]

All my family play musical instruments, but we only have the reproduction of that event to listen to at home.
If you read Toole's book you would understand the differences.
Keith.

It is not really clear when you see so many differences between audiophiles, non audiophiles, speaker and electronic technologies, you choose to believe one book has got it completely right and covered everything there is for everybody. My guess is because it gives you a lazy way to live by instead of putting real effort in understanding what improves sound

 

[ddk]

I think an interesting topic is Audiophiles who do not have confidence in their ability to hear.

This is NOT, I repeat NOT, about having "golden ears" or being a "gifted listener" or any such lofty nonsense.

It is about the ability to trust your experience, your perceptions, and what your ears are sending to your brain.

So many here want to see measurements to "back up" what they have heard, and many also seek approval from
others in the hobby to justify their purchases.

Maybe I am just out there, but I still own the same amps, speakers, and cables I bought 7 years ago. The only things that have changed
are my digital sources.

I have absolute confidence in my ability to believe what I am hearing. Anybody else?

I always knew what I was hearing and trusted my ears but I didn't always know what to listen for; there's no substitute for experience. I regularly come across this with many audiophiles (industry members too!) who can hear but lack the experience to make the right choices or fix simple missteps.

Measurements are basic tools, I use specs as a starting point, measure tubes for biasing, matching, condition, etc. and once in a while have rooms measured for acoustics but then I rely on my hearing and experience to proceed...

david

 

[Gregadd]

Faith is belief without evidence. Do you know that your ears ignore the first echos under about 24milliseconds....flat out your brain ignores them. I started a thread similar to this but the tone of the forum at the time allowed hypsters to derail the thread. Hopefully this thread can mature.

Yes, I believe don't that I surely hear what I think I hear, but I can prefer some things I think I hear. I surely know that I don't "hear" as well as measurements do.

I find this topic fascinating. You hear something, then look at measurements and decide you did not hear it. If I stated it correctly.
Edit: I have deleted the portion about auditory illusions and psychotrphic drugs. I apologize if it offended anyone.
I do find this subject intriguing. If anyone is aware of any research on the subject, could you please send me a pm.

 

[PeterA]

If I can trust my ears enough to help keep me from getting run over, I sure as heck trust them enough to get me through something as trivial by comparison as a hobby.

Bigger question is whether people really know for certain what they like.

In a thread with many good posts, this one from Jack is truly excellent. Toward that end, I find listening to a lot of live music, acoustic or amplified, and also hearing many other systems belonging to audiophiles who care about proper set up and component matching, is the best (perhaps only) way to inform, or reinforce, the impressions the listener learns about the sound of music and the many, many different approaches to reproducing it in a room.

To some listeners, the mantra seems to be: "TRUST your ears, but VERIFY with measurements." I often go to a classical concert on Friday afternoon and then listen to a similar piece of music on my system later than night. My ears do the verifying because I do not know how to make the measurements correspond to what I hear from row G, seat 21 at Boston Symphony Hall.

I also frequently visit my audiophile friends and listen to their systems. Tubes, SS, digital, analog, cones, panels, full range, minis plus sub, etc. These visits also contribute greatly to my own sense of what sound I prefer.

 

[amirm]

Mod: Seems like we have created yet another thread to argue the subjectivist vs. objectivists. It is fine but I am confident a few pages down the road, someone will then say, "I am sick of this forum because there is too much science talk." This leaves us in a difficult spot to manage because the thread is created by subjectivists and subjectivists are happily debating it.

So here is the thing: no subjectivist should read and complain about this thread. Please be on notice. Sanctions may be handed out if you ignore this advice, read the thread, and then express dissatisfaction with what is in it."

My personal advice for the people participating is to think whether any new ground is being covered. And regardless, let's stay respectful and non-partisan.

 

[Robh3606]

I trust my ears but it depends on what I am try to use them for. I don't need measurements when I walk into a room to evaluate if I like what I am hearing. Building DIY speakers is no place to trust them completely. You need to have good measurements and validate those measurements with your ears.

Rob

 

[Andre Marc]

Andre, I'm with you 100% on this one.

As a former pro musician, I know that my ears are to be trusted...and that I have trained them to listen to what a) the other musicians are doing and b) what is the most musical sound that I can achieve.
When listing to musician's performing in a 'live' event, I know that this is the ultimate goal of my home system. IF...a very BIG IF, I can get anywhere near the sound of the musicians and the tonality that the
instruments portray in the 'live' setting, then I am getting close. I do suspect that playing an instrument does give one a good "understanding" of what that instrument should sound like...particularly if it is an acoustic instrument.
I actually feel sorry for those listeners who have never really experienced what an instrument in a 'live' setting sounds like ( by actually picking it up and listening to a note that it produces, or being close enough to it to hear same); no wonder they are constantly looking for re-enforcement of their understanding of that sound.

One other minor point...or perhaps not so minor...
Measurements are designed to relate as closely as possible to what we hear 'live'...question is, who's doing the 'live' listening? IMHO, we all do hear a little differently and we all seem to attach various connotations to what we hear. With that said, I do think that if a piece of music sounds great to our ears and is reproduced that way, the fact that measurements are showing something different would lead one to believe that we are not yet measuring what is that important to our ear/brain interface. BTW, I never saw too many musicians in the studio or elsewhere who are too concerned about the
way their piece of music measured...engineers, yes--- musicians, not so much. It either got our feet tapping or it didn't. Perhaps that is what it's all about at the end of the day. As a good musician friend used to say..."you either got mojo or you ain't!"

Excellent points all around.

Of course you are correct, we all hear a little bit differently, but a consensus always seems to form at some point. Sometimes, in rare cases it is 50/50.

Not measuring what is important to our ear/brain interface? SPOT ON!

 

[Andre Marc]

I trust my ears, and they're the final arbiter of all decisions I made in the audio world, but I also try to be aware of the lengths my brain will go to try to fool me.

That goes for all situations, btw, not just hifi. After all, I apparently mishear what my wife says to me on a regular basis.

You are absolutely correct...one must be aware that we may be hearing what we WANT to hear, and that we can even fool our selves. That is why
when auditioning a product, multiple listening sessions are paramount.

 

[Andre Marc]

I always knew what I was hearing and trusted my ears but I didn't always know what to listen for; there's no substitute for experience. I regularly come across this with many audiophiles (industry members too!) who can hear but lack the experience to make the right choices or fix simple missteps.

Measurements are basic tools, I use specs as a starting point, measure tubes for biasing, matching, condition, etc. and once in a while have rooms measured for acoustics but then I rely on my hearing and experience to proceed...

david

Agree that measurements are valid starting tool..they point you in the hopefully down the right path.

Interesting note about knowing what to listen for...I think the easiest way to get there quicker is know what you dislike...

I personally do not like bright, analytical sound...and when I identify that in a system I know what direction to go in.

 

[Andre Marc]

An assumption seems to be that out there, somewhere is 'perfection' and that, using our ears we can eventually track down that perfection. But what if there is no single 'perfection. Or what if there are several 'perfections' no better or worse than each other? If the latter, what if we naturally get bored with a single version of perfection over a relatively short time? What if the only time we truly love what we hear is when it is new to our ears? Must we, in fact, keep changing our systems to keep our ears refreshed?

Interesting.

Then why do we generally not get bored of "perfect" HD TV, a "perfectly" prepared classical dish, a "perfect" piece of art..

I think audiophiles get "bored" with their systems because the end game is NOT to set it and forget it, it is to constantly change
for change's sake, and the seed planted by a very clever industry that if you are not upgrading and auditioning you are being
left behind.

 

[Andre Marc]

If I can trust my ears enough to help keep me from getting run over, I sure as heck trust them enough to get me through something as trivial by comparison as a hobby.

Bigger question is whether people really know for certain what they like.

Great post, our ears are very good at keeping us alive. They can certainly tell us if we like an amplifier...

And on that note..I do know what I like..not sure why someone would not.

 

[asiufy]

Interesting.

Then why do we generally not get bored of "perfect" HD TV, a "perfectly" prepared classical dish, a "perfect" piece of art..

I think audiophiles get "bored" with their systems because the end game is NOT to set it and forget it, it is to constantly change
for change's sake, and the seed planted by a very clever industry that if you are not upgrading and auditioning you are being
left behind.

Hmm... The way I see it, even those that *do* know what they like (and what their goal is), sometimes *change* that goal. And sometimes maybe not for "change's sake", but because their tastes have changed! It's not uncommon to have people who like tubes to go SS for a while, then go back to tubes, or a mix. I have a friend that ended up with two systems, in a big room, one on each end, with his chair in the middle. One side has tubes, and the other heavy-duty SS. And he got 2 pairs of the exact same speaker Here's a guy that knows what he likes, but instead of moving the goalposts every couple of months, he settled for 2!
With TVs, I don't think there's this kind of choice out there. Maybe when plasma/LCD were competing, but not now...
It is far easier to gauge a "perfect" TV than a "perfect" 2-ch stereo, no?

 

[Andre Marc]

Hmm... The way I see it, even those that *do* know what they like (and what their goal is), sometimes *change* that goal. And sometimes maybe not for "change's sake", but because their tastes have changed! It's not uncommon to have people who like tubes to go SS for a while, then go back to tubes, or a mix. I have a friend that ended up with two systems, in a big room, one on each end, with his chair in the middle. One side has tubes, and the other heavy-duty SS. And he got 2 pairs of the exact same speaker Here's a guy that knows what he likes, but instead of moving the goalposts every couple of months, he settled for 2!
With TVs, I don't think there's this kind of choice out there. Maybe when plasma/LCD were competing, but not now...
It is far easier to gauge a "perfect" TV than a "perfect" 2-ch stereo, no?

Good points.

I have both solid state and tube amps and tape and digital in my two systems.

It is not because I don't know what I like..it is because I like them both..but also..truthfully, running tubes in July and August can be a
a sweat fest...