Why Some Audiophiles Fear Measurements

[Alan Sircom]

Dear Kal: I think that many " problems/controversy " in manufacturer specs or magazynes measurements reside in which standars the specs have foundation: JIS, IEC, DIN,EIA,etc, etc. We all need to use and understand the same standards, like the RIAA one that unfortunately not all audiophiles understand it and its critical meaning.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

What?

The RIAA 'standard' was nothing of the sort. It wasn't even standardized across the US recording companies for most of LP's 'reign'. CCIR, Columbia and Decca curves were similar to - but not standardized with - RIAA. I've got Columbia, Decca and DG albums from the 1970s that say they are 'compatible with' RIAA.

 

[Ron Party]

Personally I like Ron Party's suggestion that there might be three camps
1 subjectivist

2 objectivist

3. Rationalist

Thanks Ron

Thanks, Steve. But me, personally, I'm not even sure what camp # 2 is.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Personally I like Ron Party's suggestion that there might be three camps
1 subjectivist

2 objectivist

3. Rationalist

Thanks Ron

Strictly speaking, rationalist thought is the basis of subjective processes, just as empirical thought is the basis of objective processes. In reality, no-one is so rationalist that they deny the existence of the oncoming car and no-one is so empirical that they observe the temperature of the water before diving to save the drowning child. We are all somewhere on the continuum.

 

[cjfrbw]

a subjectivist is anti-rational.

an objectivist is an irrational mechanist.

a rationalist is in denial

 

[Ron Party]

Based on the latest posts, the answer to Jeff's question Why Audiophiles Fear Measurements apparently is they neglected to study philosophy.

 

[Ethan Winer]

However, from my own opinion and prior experience:
If a product sounds good and measures good... highest recommendation
If a product sounds good and measures bad... recommendation
If a product sounds bad and measures good... no recommendation
If a product sounds bad and measures bad... no recommendation

I could almost agree with that except for one Inconvenient Truth: What "sounds good" one moment may sound bad the next. And vice versa. Surely everyone who listens to recorded music frequently, whether for a living or as a hobby, has noticed this. So your points 2 and 3 above seem reversed to me. Or at least biased toward unreliable listening versus more reliable measuring. Assuming that everything important is measured, of course!

--Ethan

 

[FrantzM]

has even one mind ever been swayed by one of these type threads, i suspect not. but maybe we get to know each other a little better, which is a good thing i think.

oh Yes Mike, mine ...

 

[Alan Sircom]

Based on the latest posts, the answer to Jeff's question Why Audiophiles Fear Measurements apparently is they neglected to study philosophy.

This is surprisingly not far from my assessment of the Great Divide in audio. Audiophiles hold key statements as axiomatic - a secular form of the second verse of the 'Adoro Te Devote', and a couple of lines from Hamlet Act 1, Sc 5 - and those two allow building of great audio edifices without fear of breach from attackers.

Your homework is to find out WTF I'm talking about!

 

[Alan Sircom]

I could almost agree with that except for one Inconvenient Truth: What "sounds good" one moment may sound bad the next. And vice versa. Surely everyone who listens to recorded music frequently, whether for a living or as a hobby, has noticed this. So your points 2 and 3 above seem reversed to me. Or at least biased toward unreliable listening versus more reliable measuring. Assuming that everything important is measured, of course!

--Ethan

I agree, which is why snap decisions in listening tests are so unreliable. A longer-term observation of the amount of time spent listening - and types of musical genre listened to - over a several week period gives you an idea of what does and does not refresh the parts other audio components cannot reach.

 

[FrantzM]

Quote Originally Posted by RBFC
As I read this, I continued to wonder about measurements supplied by manufacturers. In light of the 86 vs. 94 dB sensitivity (almost twice as loud at the same input!), do any of you have concern that the frequency of "inaccurate" measurements supplied with audio components is higher than we would hope?

Lee

Well in some instances, such in the case of dipoles or electrostatics, it's harder to define their efficiency.

Not it's not .. for a speaker tall enough to be approximated as a line source the fall off is about 3 dB for each doubling of the distance .. That's the only difference else they get to be measured the same way ...

 

[RBFC]

I would submit that at the level of many of our members' systems, there cannot be purely objectivist nor subjectivist viewpoints. One cannot achieve the sound of Mike's or Steve's or (fill in the blank)'s system without having a reasonable working knowledge of how electrical and acoustic measurements contribute to the final sound of a product. One would also know about electrical compatibility between various components, and how to track down irregularities when either a measurement or listening impression signals a problem.

Where the "art" lies, IMO, is in knowing what "flavor" will best interact with one's particular system and room to achieve the best result. There have been discussions regarding "inverse" distortions and how they combine to produce a better result than either single component... the total system/room synergy is a more complex amalgam that draws on both objective and subjective data points.

Lee

 

[The Smokester]

...Where the "art" lies, IMO, is in knowing what "flavor" will best interact with one's particular system and room to achieve the best result. There have been discussions regarding "inverse" distortions and how they combine to produce a better result than either single component... the total system/room synergy is a more complex amalgam that draws on both objective and subjective data points.

Lee

Perhaps so. But, these are all measureable and understandable.

 

[Old Listener]

Way back in this thread, someone commented that nobody would change their opinion based on this thread.

I have felt encouraged to read posts in this thread from other audiophiles who feel that measurements are worthwhile. My thanks to those people.

Bill

 

[MylesBAstor]

Ron is being extreme of course. Clearly someone with good hearing acuity can make observations that are useful, whether I hear the same or not. Many types of distortion have audible artifacts that can be heard by someone who knows what to listen for.


Myles that's not fair. Sean's day job is to provide quality assessments using objective and repeatable means for the designers at Harman. As such, he is just as much part of the R&D team as others actually figuring out what the next design should be. He also has a respected background at NRC where they spent a ton of time understanding what consumers liked and disliked in audio products. That his words help sell Harman product is a testament to good work that he does, not the other way around.

That's the way you see it Amir; I don't based on track record.

For the record, the literature is littered with as many mistakes made by those who measurement is the end all as with those who rely on listening with their ears. And in another ten years, we'll be laughing at and remarking how primitive the measurements being made today are.

Why is it that Ron knows what's accurate more than anyone here?

And the way Ron presents it, no high-end designer has ever conducted a measurement in their life.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I agree, which is why snap decisions in listening tests are so unreliable. A longer-term observation of the amount of time spent listening - and types of musical genre listened to - over a several week period gives you an idea of what does and does not refresh the parts other audio components cannot reach.

And I maintain that in many cases a product that initially sounds good after insertion into a system, doesn't pan out with extended listening. My experience is that there are certain cues the ear picks up initially (maybe related to survival) that prove fatiguing to listen to with time.

 

[RBFC]

I'd like to request that all involved take a breath and remember that we are all interested in the same thing. Although we may have different "angles" from which we observe this audio phenomenon, we all love music. In much the same way that the last ten years have undeniably proven certain theories and disproven others, so will time address the issues we are discussing here. While opinions may vary, nobody is completely right when conjecturing about the unknown.

Lee

 

[Ron Party]

Why is it that Ron knows what's accurate more than anyone here?

And the way Ron presents it, no high-end designer has ever conducted a measurement in their life.

Not only have I never said that, I don't believe it. Far from it. I'm humble enough to know my ears could be and often are unreliable. I'm humble enough to know I probably will learn quite a bit when the Harman software is available and I eagerly look forward to that education.

Read back a few pages of this thread, you will find a brief discussion between Mike and me. In one of my posts I stated that designers are not afraid of measurements.

So why is it that you continue to erect strawmen? Why is it that you feel the need to misstate my position? Why is it that you can't focus on the subject of this thread, i.e., why audiophiles (and not designers) fear measurements? I would submit that the answer to these Qs is patently obvious. Two words: golden ears.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Each camp could set up their system to the best of their ability at a show and have the public decide which sounds better.

And they would pick the one with blue lights.

P

 

[Jeff Fritz]

The only camps I see are these:

1. Those that want the whole picture.
2. Those that don't.

I'm OK with either camp if they are populated by strict consumers. Reviewers must be in camp 1. If you make claims about products versus other products -- including promoting products on message boards -- you should be camp 1 if you want to have credibility. If you simply like to enjoy music over your system -- end of story -- then either camp is fine.

Setting up straw men like "I'd rather be enjoying the music rather than paying attention to some silly old measurements" begs the question: why are you participating in this thread? It also makes a huge leap that those that do pay close attention to measurements don't listen. Again, this is a simple straw man and not worthy of further comment. We're not in the fifth grade.

I'll conclude the same way this started for me: If you are reporting on or seeking high fidelity, use everything at your disposal to make your assessment: listen, look, feel, measure or examine measurements, listen, compare, vet technical claims, and listen some more. You either want the whole picture or you don't. And it takes all this. It's really as simple as that.

 

[mep]

And some people would need some measurements before they decided whether they liked what they heard or not. I think this thread has turned into a waste of bandwith. I for one don't think the average audiophile is afraid of measurements. I like reading what JA comes up with when he measures gear. It is nice to know if there are design flaws in a piece of gear and the power supply is putting 60Hz or 120Hz on the B+ rails for example. On the other hand, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a piece of gear that I liked because I haven't seen any measurements. IMO reviewers have more to fear from measurements than audiophiles do. When you write a review, you are sticking your neck on the line one way or the other. If you praise something like MF did with the optical cables and then JA comes back and says they are flawed and are distortion generators, it doesn't look good for the home team. And this does happen from time to time. Anyway, I think this thread has taken a turn for the worse and it just lets the joy killers feed on what they love to feed on.

In closing, I don't fear measurements. I do grow weary of kill joys who only want to talk about measurements instead of how something sounds. How come most of the kill joys on this sight don't even list their gear (and you know who you are)?