10 Biggest Lies in Audio

[square_wave]

Just for kicks, heres a question!

System A:

Shindo Latour field coil speakers
Audionote ongaku amplifier
An audionote NOS tube dac

System B

Dynaudio or Genelec speakers
Rotel pre and power amplifier
Benchmark DAC1

Lets assume the source equipment (transport) is common. For all known scientifically verifiable parameters in audio, the system B will measure much better than system A.

Now if someone were to gift you one of these systems, which one will you pick ?

 

[doors666]

Just for kicks, heres a question!

System A:

Shindo Latour field coil speakers
Audionote ongaku amplifier
An audionote NOS tube dac

System B

Dynaudio or Genelec active studio speakers
Rotel pre and power amplifier
Benchmark DAC1

Lets assume the source equipment (transport) is common. For all known scientifically verifiable parameters in audio, the system B will measure much better than system A.

Now if someone were to gift you one of these systems, which one will you pick ?

Tube lovers will pick system A, SS lovers will pick system B.

 

[reignofchaos]

Awesome question - lets see what the objectivists have to say

 

[Kittu]

Square_wave, please please please if you know any one willing to gift A or B if not C also , let me know.I am ready to take all or any.............. :licklips: (Pun intended).

 

[doors666]

the speakers are different in both the systems. all bets are off. speakers are the single most important component in the entire chain. If your intention is to show that people prefer tubes over the SS despite the distortion numbers, atleast keep the speakers the same.

 

[arj]

Huh?

[10Filler]

make it as relevant scientific measurement...Yup

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

...For all known scientifically verifiable parameters in audio, the system B will measure much better than system A.

But I am not talking about measuring better or worse, and nor am I talking about personal preference, and, I am most emphatically not talking about specifications.

There are two other considerations, which are intertwined in the current conversation.

1. The dishonesty of sighted testing (as one of the articles quoted was called)

and

2. The "audiophile" assertion, usually given in answer to some difference that people will line up to say cannot be there that audiophile ears can hear what nothing can measure.

So no, it is not really an awesome question. As Doors666 points out, a purchaser will buy the sound they like. They may even believe that it represents the music more accurately, but only a minority will have enough experience in live music listening to make that anything other than a personal opinion.

A more awesome question would be whether the same people would reach the same conclusions in a blind comparison of the kit.

As someone said earlier, this thread is going like Tendulkar's quest for his 100th century.
By the way, what was the beginning???

An article called The ten biggest lies in Audio, and... I think, we are still discussing Number One :sad: hyeah: hyeah: :lol:

 

[sbg]

....Cerumen is produced in the outer third of the cartilaginous portion of the human ear canal. It is a mixture of viscous secretions from sebaceous glands and less-viscous ones from modified apocrine sweat glands.[3] The primary components of earwax are shed layers of skin, with 60% of the earwax consisting of keratin, 1220% saturated and unsaturated long-chain fatty acids, alcohols, squalene and 69% cholesterol.[4]

Fear, stress and anxiety result in increased production of earwax from the ceruminous glands....

Guys, take a break and Clean your earwax, Enjoy what you all love on your toys.

there is a some DIY help on cleaning if needed - here at Wikipedia

 

[doors666]

Just the way people ask - if you hear a difference will you believe it. Let me ask, if science proves beyond reasonable doubt that there cant be a difference in sound quality due to two different (good build quality) cables, will you admit the differences you are listening to dont exist.

 

[square_wave]

But I am not talking about measuring better or worse, and nor am I talking about personal preference, and, I am most emphatically not talking about specifications.

There are two other considerations, which are intertwined in the current conversation.

1. The dishonesty of sighted testing (as one of the articles quoted was called)

and

2. The "audiophile" assertion, usually given in answer to some difference that people will line up to say cannot be there that audiophile ears can hear what nothing can measure.

So no, it is not really an awesome question. As Doors666 points out, a purchaser will buy the sound they like. They may even believe that it represents the music more accurately, but only a minority will have enough experience in live music listening to make that anything other than a personal opinion.

A more awesome question would be whether the same people would reach the same conclusions in a blind comparison of the kit.

An article called The ten biggest lies in Audio, and... I think, we are still discussing Number One :sad: hyeah: hyeah: :lol:

Hey Thad,

I agree with you about your concerns regarding tests. No arguments. I come from a different background. For example, if I hear a better gear (X), for me it is a better gear. I may ask the scientific community to figure out why this gear sound better. If they cannot, then ..hmmm....well....the fact remains that (X) is better gear. At some point in time, someone will figure out why.

Coming back to the question, which system will you take home ? The key word here is "gift". So keep the costs out of the equation.

 

[thatguy]

So no, it is not really an awesome question. As Doors666 points out, a purchaser will buy the sound they like. They may even believe that it represents the music more accurately, but only a minority will have enough experience in live music listening to make that anything other than a personal opinion.

Great point.

Why is this so hard to understand? A statement like "if I hear a better gear (X), for me it is a better gear. " is completely out of sync with the goal of real HiFi. But that seems to have become immaterial to the audiophiles.

And no, I didn't say it. Gordon Holt did. Excerpts from 45 Years of Stereophile | Stereophile.com :

Audio actually used to have a goal: perfect reproduction of the sound of real music performed in a real space. That was found difficult to achieve, and it was abandoned when most music lovers, who almost never heard anything except amplified music anyway, forgot what "the real thing" had sounded like. Today, "good" sound is whatever one likes. As Art Dudley so succinctly said [in his January 2004 "Listening," see "Letters," p.9], fidelity is irrelevant to music.

When the goal is to reproduce the real thing, I will call a scientist. When the goal is to produce sound that satisfies some person's tastes/preferences, you hand over control to the stuffed shirt in marketing. So in a way, the scientist (at least the electronics/acoustics experts, the neuros might take some interest) may not have answers to the person with "if I hear a better gear (X), for me it is a better gear. ". The marketing man will love him though.

 

[square_wave]

Great point.

Why is this so hard to understand? A statement like "if I hear a better gear (X), for me it is a better gear. " is completely out of sync with the goal of real HiFi. But that seems to have become immaterial to the audiophiles.

Hey,

With all due respects, you completely missed the point.

When I said what sounds good to me, I meant what sounds like live music to me. Live music of the acoustic variety is the benchmark.

By the way, I attend live music concerts often. Mostly the acoustic variety

 

[square_wave]

Stereophile.com[/url] :

When the goal is to reproduce the real thing, I will call a scientist. When the goal is to produce sound that satisfies some person's tastes/preferences, you hand over control to the stuffed shirt in marketing. So in a way, the scientist (at least the electronics/acoustics experts, the neuros might take some interest) may not have answers to the person with "if I hear a better gear (X), for me it is a better gear. ". The marketing man will love him though.

Completely agree with your point here.

But I would go one step further. If I want fidelity, I would look for a scientist who knows how to marry science with art. Someone who is passionate about high fidelity gear and has years of extensive experience under his belt. Someone who will take the endeavor beyond the basic hygiene factor called specs.

A college pass out masquerading as a scientist wielding a check list cannot make high fidelity gear. The best they can make are gear which rides the spec bandwagon. Most of the websites who promote these theories also have an ulterior business motive. They have something to sell too.

The key point is the figure out what is the correct qualification There are many folks who say Bose is the most qualified :sad:

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

So, does that mean that a college pass-out engineer could make flat-response studio-monitoring gear? I doubt it: of course there is art involved!

It seems that Bose decided on something that would sell in large quantities, designed, manufactured and sold it ...in large quantities. :lol: Not the only household name in which marketing took the front seat and won. That's the domestic stuff. In the pro world, their PA equipment gets spoken of rather more highly. The sound quality at the Madras Music Academy leaves most other sabhas way behind. Of course, the guy at the mixing desk is the most vital component in a PA system.

By the way, I attend live music concerts often. Mostly the acoustic variety

You are a lucky man, square_wave. I attend concerts regularly, and they (Carnatic classical) are supposed to be of the acoustic variety, as there are no electronic instruments involved (excepting veena, which has become inseparable from its pickups and amplifier, which now define its sound, and one-or two others) but almost never are, because there is a PA system between the musicians and the audience, and it is usually not very good.

I am, currently, attending a twice-a-month series of genuinely acoustic, unamplified carnatic concerts. Real music! It's challenging, though, especially to one with less-than-perfect hearing. If my hifi, or my PC setup, sounded like this, I'd probably throw it away!

Coming back to the question, which system will you take home ? The key word here is "gift". So keep the costs out of the equation.

We are all victims of some sort of idea, ideology, or perhaps pure marketing, and I am just as much a victim as anyone else. Consequently, the idea of just-as-it-really-is music is what I would buy into, and I'd go for the Genelec system. That choice really is largely based on an ideology, but hey, a lot of stereo purchases depend on the colour of the box. Hard for to escape the limitations of ideology here, as I have not heard components from both your choice systems.

I have, briefly, heard Genelec speakers. Oh, sure, leaving the ideology behind, I know I could live with them! Very happily. Especially with the DSP technology (No other amplifier or DAC needed) which is sensitive enough to measure the music you are listening to and adjust it for the imperfections in your room

 

[square_wave]

You are a lucky man, square_wave. I attend concerts regularly, and they (Carnatic classical) are supposed to be of the acoustic variety, as there are no electronic instruments involved (excepting veena, which has become inseparable from its pickups and amplifier, which now define its sound, and one-or two others) but almost never are, because there is a PA system between the musicians and the audience, and it is usually not very good.

I am, currently, attending a twice-a-month series of genuinely acoustic, unamplified carnatic concerts. Real music! It's challenging, though, especially to one with less-than-perfect hearing. If my hifi, or my PC setup, sounded like this, I'd probably throw it away!

I agree about the music concerts. Exposure to live unamplified music is the key and the only basis of my ideology.

Consequently, the idea of just-as-it-really-is music is what I would buy into, and I'd go for the Genelec system. That choice really is largely based on an ideology, but hey, a lot of stereo purchases depend on the colour of the box. Hard for to escape the limitations of ideology here, as I have not heard components from both your choice systems.

Thank you had for the forthright admission. So you believe the system B will be able to resemble live music better. Man, I really want to hear these genelecs. Do they have a representation in Bangalore ? I am serious about this.
Have a great day.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Do please see the threads about the Genelec demos, if you haven't done so already.

We had a brief demo at the Chennai hfv meet a few weeks ago. The Mumbai crowd have been lucky enough to have a complete presentation of the concepts, components (literally: they even saw a speaker taken apart!) and performance over the range, from titch-laptop to big studio monitors and multi-channel home theatre. Of course, Clifford Pereira is passionate about his own company's products, but he is also a man that knows sound, from instruments in the studio right through to ears in the listening room: quite a guy to talk audio to!

So you believe the system B will be able to resemble live music better

We must be very careful with words like believe in a thread like this :lol:

I understand that studio monitors, especially the high-end stuff that competes for a place in pro studios, not just home-studio setups, is designed to present the sound that reaches it uncoloured and with a flat frequency response, because that is its job. The sound that reaches it, of course, may have been influenced by the sound signatures of many things, from the relatively undisputed, such as the analogue side of the DAC, the pre-amp, etc, through the disputed, such as the interconnects and cables, to the contentious...


A couple of HiFiVision Genelec links...

HFV Mini Meet for Genelec Studio Monitors Demo @ Mahim, Mumbai

Workshop on Genelec Speakers & Loudspeaker-Room Interaction



.

 

[kumarab]

Just for kicks, heres a question!

System A:

Shindo Latour field coil speakers
Audionote ongaku amplifier
An audionote NOS tube dac

System B

Dynaudio or Genelec speakers
Rotel pre and power amplifier
Benchmark DAC1

Lets assume the source equipment (transport) is common. For all known scientifically verifiable parameters in audio, the system B will measure much better than system A.

Now if someone were to gift you one of these systems, which one will you pick ?

Interesting. I'll pick system A, sell it off to someone who's into such things, buy 2 or 3 of system B for every room and keep the change(??) in my pocket.

 

[square_wave]

I have very much started to believe in music systems which evoke the same feelings which I get when listening to live music rather than a system which ascribes to some standards parameters but do not evoke those feelings in me.

If a system evokes the feelings and measures right, wellthat would be ideal. But the feelings come first..then comes everything else. Otherwise the whole purpose of this hobby turns futile.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

buy 2 or 3 of system B for every room and keep the change(??)

The Genelec DSP pair that were demonstrated in Chennai came at Rs.3.5 Lakh.

Whilst some system buyers might move that decimal point one, two or more places to the right, and would consider the Genelecs "cheap," especially as power amplification and DAC is built in, they are still a long way from affordable to many of us --- which is why I'm not trying out even their smaller desktop monitors right now

(square_wave... we were treated to a demo of Acoustic Portrait equipment, too, at the Chennai meet. Beautiful sound. I'd love to try horn speakers, too. Heck, I'd love to have a room I could try them in )

 

[kumarab]

The Genelec DSP pair that were demonstrated in Chennai came at Rs.3.5 Lakh.

Whilst some system buyers might move that decimal point one, two or more places to the right, and would consider the Genelecs "cheap," especially as power amplification and DAC is built in, they are still a long way

You didn't get my point..none of those are cheap. Heck, I'll probably never spend that kind of money on audio electronics while I'm still living in apartments with minimal room for treatment and high ambient/background noise levels.

The question stated "if someone were to gift you". Since I am getting it for free in the first place, it makes sense to pick the expensive one. The Ongaku in itself would pay for multiple B systems with a healthy amount of change left.