Audiophiles Who Don't Trust Their Ears...

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Monsieur Andre,

After reading your above post, I was thinking; am I properly/emotionally conditioned/ready to absorb the music in its true essence/light?
If intensively involved/concentrated in activities of the brain, and physical...I might not perceive immediately that some type of music is not contributing to my inner peace ... épanouissement.
Only when distracted for a moment that I stop the activity that I was performing, and change the music...say for classical music...as it flows in harmony with every part of my biological constitution and spirituality...in the vast majority of times. ...Some other genre of music as well...but classical music on top of everything else.

When the music vibrates my inner chords on a higher emotional level, I forget about everything else...even the gear.

So, my emotional comfort state dictates my stronger trust...more than my set of ears. I don't think that it matters if my gear is ultra hi-end or simple hi-fi.

The direct relation that the music has with my inner self (soul) is the main essence of "trust". ...Way of speech.
I know I know...it goes against conventional wisdom in our material world...still it is what I trust the most...my emotional ? comfort zone first.

But I know what you're saying Andre...I just shared my perception according to my personal confidence's level...soul vibrations.

Ok, so you are saying it is not your ears at all. Rather it is the magnitude of the emotional connection you get to the music. Your ears are merely a conduit in the overall scheme.

I do not disagree at all that music has great power. Listening to music - classical, like you - is absolutely one of my favorite things in life, and it moves me emotionally, in a very gratifying deep and enjoyable way. Except, I do not always react in the same way to the same piece of music that might have stirred great emotions not long before. Same music, same system. No, it is not a question of power grid variability or relative humidity or whatever. To me, it is a simple matter of the unpredictable variability of our emotional responses, irrespective of the actual sound that carried the music. Why do we assume we, our ears, our perceptions, our emotional receptivity, are, in effect, constants?

So, to me, great sound is important in achieving the very best musical experiences. Except, sometimes even at live concerts, where the sound is absolutely ideal, I am not necessarily in the right emotional frame of mind to receive the art of the music in the optimal way on a given night.

Bottom line, to me sound is sound. And, music is an emotionally stimulating art form that uses sound as the sensory stimulus to merely communicate that art. Better sound usually equals a preferable, more pleasurable musical experience, but not always. I think trying to use emotions in the judgement of audio systems is totally confusing and counterproductive, in that it distracts us from the quality of sound, which is not itself an art form even remotely in the same league as the art of music, which I absolutely adore.

I just read somewhere about a speaker designer who avoids using music to evaluate his own designs. Instead, he prefers to listen initially to recordings of very familiar spoken voices, like those of his own family members, assessing them in sonic terms he is intimately familiar with. Evaluation with music comes later in his scheme. I see his point.

Here in the Philly area, we once had a mid/high end retailer named Bryn Mawr Stereo. They were later acquired by the now long defunct Tweeter chain. But, for a long time in the 60's -80's, they had an absolutely brilliant marketing slogan: "we sell goosebumps". What a brilliant diversion. If only goosebumps could be directly correlated to better sound, as opposed to the magnificent art of the music itself.

 

[NorthStar]

I listened to my Mom's voice all my life...I like to listen to music now...it is more spiritually stimulating because my mom used to swear. :b

Anyway the music goes through my ear's canals and then it vibrates inside...deep in my soul's chords.
I don't listen to my gear...I listen through it...the electrical audio signal flow...which comes out as MUSIC. And Music speaks directly to my inner self...I don't think about the gear, I don't think about the gear, I don't think about the sounds, I think about nothing...I just let it flow all over me and that for me is the true essence...nothing else matters, nothing.

I am not confused...some sounds are stressful others are peaceful and melodic...it's all sweet music the one we love...and nothing else matters, nothing is counterproductive...it's all in the mind, in the mind of whoever thinks like that...I don't think like that...I listen to the music I love first...not the gear...I don't listen to the gear, I don't listen to the gear, my ears are a receptacle of the music passing through...the music I feel deep down...all is in the emotions the music provides to the person listening to the music passing through his ears and reaching the depth of his soul in ways that are transcendental like a trance, like a dance, like a pleasurable sublimity...apotheosis. ...A deep pleasurable emotion that squeezes the heart just right, just right for the listener, the music lover, the soul of the people.

 

[Andre Marc]

Monsieur Andre,

After reading your above post, I was thinking; am I properly/emotionally conditioned/ready to absorb the music in its true essence/light?
If intensively involved/concentrated in activities of the brain, and physical...I might not perceive immediately that some type of music is not contributing to my inner peace ... épanouissement.
Only when distracted for a moment that I stop the activity that I was performing, and change the music...say for classical music...as it flows in harmony with every part of my biological constitution and spirituality...in the vast majority of times. ...Some other genre of music as well...but classical music on top of everything else.

When the music vibrates my inner chords on a higher emotional level, I forget about everything else...even the gear.

So, my emotional comfort state dictates my stronger trust...more than my set of ears. I don't think that it matters if my gear is ultra hi-end or simple hi-fi.

The direct relation that the music has with my inner self (soul) is the main essence of "trust". ...Way of speech.
I know I know...it goes against conventional wisdom in our material world...still it is what I trust the most...my emotional ? comfort zone first.

But I know what you're saying Andre...I just shared my perception according to my personal confidence's level...soul vibrations.

Thanks for your wonderful post. I spend my days looking for that "emotional comfort zone" as well.

 

[Andre Marc]

Ok, so you are saying it is not your ears at all. Rather it is the magnitude of the emotional connection you get to the music. Your ears are merely a conduit in the overall scheme.

I do not disagree at all that music has great power. Listening to music - classical, like you - is absolutely one of my favorite things in life, and it moves me emotionally, in a very gratifying deep and enjoyable way. Except, I do not always react in the same way to the same piece of music that might have stirred great emotions not long before. Same music, same system. No, it is not a question of power grid variability or relative humidity or whatever. To me, it is a simple matter of the unpredictable variability of our emotional responses, irrespective of the actual sound that carried the music. Why do we assume we, our ears, our perceptions, our emotional receptivity, are, in effect, constants?

So, to me, great sound is important in achieving the very best musical experiences. Except, sometimes even at live concerts, where the sound is absolutely ideal, I am not necessarily in the right emotional frame of mind to receive the art of the music in the optimal way on a given night.

Bottom line, to me sound is sound. And, music is an emotionally stimulating art form that uses sound as the sensory stimulus to merely communicate that art. Better sound usually equals a preferable, more pleasurable musical experience, but not always. I think trying to use emotions in the judgement of audio systems is totally confusing and counterproductive, in that it distracts us from the quality of sound, which is not itself an art form even remotely in the same league as the art of music, which I absolutely adore.

I just read somewhere about a speaker designer who avoids using music to evaluate his own designs. Instead, he prefers to listen initially to recordings of very familiar spoken voices, like those of his own family members, assessing them in sonic terms he is intimately familiar with. Evaluation with music comes later in his scheme. I see his point.

Here in the Philly area, we once had a mid/high end retailer named Bryn Mawr Stereo. They were later acquired by the now long defunct Tweeter chain. But, for a long time in the 60's -80's, they had an absolutely brilliant marketing slogan: "we sell goosebumps". What a brilliant diversion. If only goosebumps could be directly correlated to better sound, as opposed to the magnificent art of the music itself.

FYI, the speaker designer you refer to may be Alan Shaw of Harbeth, who uses recordings of his daughter's voice as a reference.

 

[Don Hills]

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?

I know I enjoy driving my car more when I've just washed and waxed it although there's no difference in performance, and I can't even see the exterior when I'm driving. And I'm familiar with the honeymoon effect - playing track after track on a changed system, discovering things in the music that I'd previously missed. And there's a funny thing - if I decide I prefer the sound the way it was and revert to the old setup, I still hear those new things on the old system...

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

FYI, the speaker designer you refer to may be Alan Shaw of Harbeth, who uses recordings of his daughter's voice as a reference.

Right, exactly, thanks. That was in the recent TAS review.

 

[Andre Marc]

Right, exactly, thanks. That was in the recent TAS review.

I own Harbeth Compact 7ES-3's...

Great, great speaker..7 years and counting!

 

[Gregadd]

Originally Posted by tomelex

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.






Been a while, glad to chat with you. So, try this good man. Listen to a song on your system. Now listen to it again, and finally listen to it one more time, now which time did you hear more details and more of what is going on in the music? The measure
ments get it right the first time, we tend to focus differently as per our mood or whatever, and so you hear the same song three times but the last or second time you notice new things....there you have it!

I have been doing that ever since I bought my first playback system. What do carpenters say? Measure twice. Cut once." There simply is no correlation between measuring and listening. The brain interface is capable of infinite evaluation. We possess only a small number of measurements by comparison. Can music make a machine laugh.cry, hurt, dance,etc. Measurements can only capture snapshots of the musical event, Moreover they are useless without human interpretation..

Allow me to cite an example. You would have no reason to know. Before "crack" people snorted powder cocaine using currency to form a makeshift straw. Someone with a lot of time and "grant money" ,no doubt, wanted to see what percentage of currency was used for this purpose. There had to be some residue left on these bills. So they used a machine designed by mind too detect a sample of cocine characteristics. Thee is no way a human could detect these amounts. But could the machine get "high" ? Of course not. Heck the machine is incapable of deciphering its own readings.

Although I did not log on, I have read a sample of your posts from time to time.

 

[Barry]

I can't imagine why anyone would ignore measurements, but let's face it, if you don't learn to use them, how will you ever know their value?

I think your ears and measurements have benefits and limitations that are complementary. There is no "perfection", but measurements are essential to working through sonic tradeoffs and achieving the sound you want. For me, they have even helped me perfect my listening skills. Finally, they are timesavers.

I can't measure "sound stage", but I know I can position both speakers within a .1" from the listening position using a laser distance meter and significantly improve what I'm hearing. Ditto, speaker toe in. This level of precision positioning is impossible to get to by ear alone.

It's possible to do room treatments and achieve good sound. Even better sounding results are possible with a tool like REW running frequency and waterfall graphs. I've spent a couple of hundred hours playing with this. Most insightful were subtle measured room acoustic delay anomalies that I hadn't been able to hear; but once recognized, were then able to fix. Also interesting were room treatment changes that were measurably different, usually on dips, but not always audible. As a result of this experience, I am sure acoustic consultants wouldn't be in business long if they weren't doing room measuring with something.

I have an actively tri-amped, 2 channel, audio system including a pair of subwoofers; that's 6 separate amplification channels with individual gain settings. Please don't make me adjust this by ear when I can use a digital voltmeter to balance left and right channels within millivolts and hear a perfectly integrated sound stage. More applicable to most of you, how on earth do you get your subs dialed in correctly without running frequency sweep and waterfalls plots to make adjustments? I did this by ear for years. It's a real PITA, and the results didn't sound nearly as good as using REW. Life is just way too short to do this by trial and error.

Yes, your system may have defects you might not be able to hear; some you can hear, but can't measure; and some you can measure, but don't matter. However, by both measuring and listening, you will be a lot happier with what you're hearing. Amir couldn't have said it better: " No one worries less about measurements when listening to music than those who believe in measurements!"

 

[DaveyF]

I can't imagine why anyone would ignore measurements, but let's face it, if you don't learn to use them, how will you ever know their value?

I think your ears and measurements have benefits and limitations that are complementary. There is no "perfection", but measurements are essential to working through sonic tradeoffs and achieving the sound you want. For me, they have even helped me perfect my listening skills. Finally, they are timesavers.

I can't measure "sound stage", but I know I can position both speakers within a .1" from the listening position using a laser distance meter and significantly improve what I'm hearing. Ditto, speaker toe in. This level of precision positioning is impossible to get to by ear alone.

It's possible to do room treatments and achieve good sound. Even better sounding results are possible with a tool like REW running frequency and waterfall graphs. I've spent a couple of hundred hours playing with this. Most insightful were subtle measured room acoustic delay anomalies that I hadn't been able to hear; but once recognized, were then able to fix. Also interesting were room treatment changes that were measurably different, usually on dips, but not always audible. As a result of this experience, I am sure acoustic consultants wouldn't be in business long if they weren't doing room measuring with something.

I have an actively tri-amped, 2 channel, audio system including a pair of subwoofers; that's 6 separate amplification channels with individual gain settings. Please don't make me adjust this by ear when I can use a digital voltmeter to balance left and right channels within millivolts and hear a perfectly integrated sound stage. More applicable to most of you, how on earth do you get your subs dialed in correctly without running frequency sweep and waterfalls plots to make adjustments? I did this by ear for years. It's a real PITA, and the results didn't sound nearly as good as using REW. Life is just way too short to do this by trial and error.

Yes, your system may have defects you might not be able to hear; some you can hear, but can't measure; and some you can measure, but don't matter. However, by both measuring and listening, you will be a lot happier with what you're hearing. Amir couldn't have said it better: " No one worries less about measurements when listening to music than those who believe in measurements!"

Barry, say you have inserted a new piece of gear into your system and it measures horribly, BUT sounds great. What do you make of that? Or--the opposite, a great measuring piece of gear...that sounds terrible.

 

[amirm]

Barry, say you have inserted a new piece of gear into your system and it measures horribly, BUT sounds great. What do you make of that?

That happens 100% of the time for 100% of the members the moment you put a loudspeaker in a room and measure it. Here is a sample response:

All the reflections in the room combine and subtract making that messy display there.

Fortunately, we know to ignore much of that because that is not what we hear. We can apply simple filtering to above and create a "psychoacoustically aware" version of the same measurement:

Now the "bad" measurements become (more or less) good measurements.

 

[NorthStar]

Every/each room has a sound signature.
Every musical concert event has a distinctive musical energy depending on the musician's performance, and the audience.
Every music concert hall has a sound signature.
Every loudspeaker has its own unique voice.

Everything we do to change the sound of the room, to improve the music recording (miking techniques), the positioning of the loudspeakers, the alteration of the first reflections, the balancing of the full audio spectrum, anything @ all...is the exploration of our personal journey into the technical preferred sound of our choice...@ home and from the music recordings we purchase from the mediums we love best.

A pretty young looking girl walks into my listening room while I am in ecstasy listening to Mozart.
Then she walks out after about two minutes.
I asked her why did she walk out; she said I'm into Heavy Metal music. ...Her ears don't lie to her; they like what they transfer to her own soul vibrations.
She was honest, she was courageous to follow her own heart, instead of staying with me listening to music that doesn't turn her on.
Later on that evening we balanced things out...in a different room...playing music of our own creation...together.

That is life...we trust what makes us feel good...for ourselves first...then together with our two sets of ears.

_______

The room is the temple, and in that temple the bells ring on their own rhythm. Music is magic.

 

[microstrip]

An interesting article about someone who believed we must trust in our years - Wilma Cozart Fine: The Muse of Mercury. http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/wilma-cozart-fine-the-muse-of-mercury/


The words Wilma Cozart Fine lived by were “Trust your ears.” This oft-repeated phrase was more than a mantra; it was the guiding principle that defined her working life. For those who don’t know the name, hers was a working life to remember

 

[Barry]

Barry, say you have inserted a new piece of gear into your system and it measures horribly, BUT sounds great. What do you make of that? Or--the opposite, a great measuring piece of gear...that sounds terrible.

Well, it depends on what the new piece of gear is, but of course the sound is the most important and I never said otherwise. I want to know what's going on and measurements are extremely helpful for some things. Generally, if it sounds good and measures horribly, I'm not too excited about it. The question for me if that happens is always, can I make it sound better.

Amir's provided the best and most critical example - speakers. IMHO optimized setup requires measurements to get the best out of them. Another example, I can't imagine not testing my vacuum tubes and replacing something if the system is sounding flat - it often cures the problem. I'm contemplating a new cartridge and will certainly measure and match compliance with tone arm mass - it's a mechanical system.

Of course there are a whole host of things I can hear and can't measure.

 

[microstrip]

Well, it depends on what the new piece of gear is, but of course the sound is the most important and I never said otherwise. I want to know what's going on and measurements are extremely helpful for some things. Generally, if it sounds good and measures horribly, I'm not too excited about it. The question for me if that happens is always, can I make it sound better.

Amir's provided the best and most critical example - speakers. IMHO optimized setup requires measurements to get the best out of them. Another example, I can't imagine not testing my vacuum tubes and replacing something if the system is sounding flat - it often cures the problem. I'm contemplating a new cartridge and will certainly measure and match compliance with tone arm mass - it's a mechanical system.

Of course there are a whole host of things I can hear and can't measure.

How can you accept the great sounding and horribly measuring Magnepan 3.6?

 

[Barry]

How can you accept the great sounding and horribly measuring Magnepan 3.6?

Glad you asked Francisco as it's pertinent to the measurement discussion. Siegfried Linkwitz questioned the validity of Stereophile's far-field measurements of the Magnepan 3.6s. The measurements certainly looked ugly in the review. The impulse response is still nothing to write home about and of course the speakers are not time aligned.

Here is the 1/6 octave frequency response and waterfall plot of my Magnepan 3.6 plus Kinergetics subwoofer towers (plus Rhythmik 15" sub) at my listening position.

To satisfy me, and maybe the subjectivists among us, in addition to the active Pass Labs crossover; this system uses a passive crossover between the tweeter and midrange consisting of Duelund Cast caps and inductors in critical series locations all matched to 1%, as well as Neotech UPOCC cryo'd copper hook-up wire. Everything was burned in over 5 days on an Audio Dharma cable cooker. The passive XO is indistinguishable in characteristics from the active one but almost as expensive.

The speakers sound very natural - even tonal balance, solid foundation bass-wise, very spacious with limited overhang, very good centered image for vocals, and much more transparent and immediate than stock with response down to 15 Hz. The measurements and listening experience are aligned on this one.

[

 

[marty]

I can't imagine why anyone would ignore measurements, but let's face it, if you don't learn to use them, how will you ever know their value?

I think your ears and measurements have benefits and limitations that are complementary. There is no "perfection", but measurements are essential to working through sonic tradeoffs and achieving the sound you want. For me, they have even helped me perfect my listening skills. Finally, they are timesavers.

I can't measure "sound stage", but I know I can position both speakers within a .1" from the listening position using a laser distance meter and significantly improve what I'm hearing. Ditto, speaker toe in. This level of precision positioning is impossible to get to by ear alone.

It's possible to do room treatments and achieve good sound. Even better sounding results are possible with a tool like REW running frequency and waterfall graphs. I've spent a couple of hundred hours playing with this. Most insightful were subtle measured room acoustic delay anomalies that I hadn't been able to hear; but once recognized, were then able to fix. Also interesting were room treatment changes that were measurably different, usually on dips, but not always audible. As a result of this experience, I am sure acoustic consultants wouldn't be in business long if they weren't doing room measuring with something.

I have an actively tri-amped, 2 channel, audio system including a pair of subwoofers; that's 6 separate amplification channels with individual gain settings. Please don't make me adjust this by ear when I can use a digital voltmeter to balance left and right channels within millivolts and hear a perfectly integrated sound stage. More applicable to most of you, how on earth do you get your subs dialed in correctly without running frequency sweep and waterfalls plots to make adjustments? I did this by ear for years. It's a real PITA, and the results didn't sound nearly as good as using REW. Life is just way too short to do this by trial and error.

Yes, your system may have defects you might not be able to hear; some you can hear, but can't measure; and some you can measure, but don't matter. However, by both measuring and listening, you will be a lot happier with what you're hearing. Amir couldn't have said it better: " No one worries less about measurements when listening to music than those who believe in measurements!"

Barry,
I've been on this forum a long, long time although I am far from its most frequent contributor. But I do read more than one might suspect based on my posts. I think your post could very well serve as the poster child for much of the serious as well as trivial discussions that have garnered these pages for years. Many know that I am a clinician scientist and what you have stated quite succinctly is that the like medicine, establishing a high caliber home music system and then listening to it for enjoyment should take advantage of both art and science. It's really that simple. Well done.
Marty
(lived in Philly from 79-90; happy to discuss the best cheesesteaks there anytime!)

 

[Barry]

Thank you for the kind words Marty. I wouldn't be surprised if our paths had not already crossed somewhere in cheesesteak country. Always make a point of reading your posts and learn from them.

 

[NorthStar]

Good reading...the above four posts. ...Straight outta WBF. ....Makes all good common sense to me. ...And deep deep down...I feel for one guy.

 

[Goliath]

Audiophiles who don't trust their ears? Probably the vast majority of them. They trust their eyes, knowledge ... + biases, prejudices ... etc, etc.

If audiophiles trusted their ears they would listen blind. Using the ears. Only about the sound. However that's not what happens. No, we have audiophiles who need to peek around, know, expect, feel, fidget, move around in order to "listen" effectively.

No trust in the ears at all, it seems.