Objectivity vs Subjectivity

[raghupb]

@Enkay78
You are back after "ending" the discussion

No one here claimed ultrasonic waves contribute to sonic quality. In fact many of us here don't believe in such or similar myths.
On your claim that 50+ year old men suffer from hearing loss. Yes it's true. I am one of them.
When I plug in my hearing aids that are calibrated to enhance my lossy ears some components sound harsh.
They measure extremely well, but sound unbearable. Should I buy and listen to them or look elsewhere for a different component?
Or should I take a perfectly measuring SOTA component that "accurately" reproduces sound and add tweaks to it to make it inaccurate?

A large majority of us in this hobby are not binary.
Measurements are relevant, but not the last word.
Subjective listening and opinions are also relevant, again not the last word.
A hobbyist takes both in some ratio and bases his/her decision whether a particular component is a good fit for enjoying music.

If you feel, measurements are the only right way, good for you.
Just don't insist that this method must be followed by everyone else.

And going off tangent, bringing in money/ego/what-not serves no purpose.
People (even hardliners from both camps) will buy what they want as per their budget and preference. I respect that.
People (even hardliners from both camps) may even claim that theirs is the best ever they've heard. I respect that.

Everything in an audio chain can be measured to a reasonable accuracy, even the room.
Even when perfect as per science, our dirty little brains trick us and say "No I don't like this"
Hearing is a sensory perception. Perception being the operative word.

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Bias

It's difficult to have an unbiased subjective assessment. Also there is something called as conformity bias.

So to base everything subjectively cannnot be prudent parameter. I mean we all know how our mood can effect our music to sound to us.


In the above example, how can it be assured that Art Dudley, Stephen Meijas and Sam Tellig heard same musicality? How can John Atkins measurements be disprove of poor musicality?


What have audioresearch shown over years?

Have we ever ask how the golden ears audiophiles are mostly 50+ old men when they are probably suffering age related hearing loss? How can their subjective assessments be a better parameter from a 18 year old listener whose auditory spectrum can reach upto 20kz?

When someone claim that ultrasonic waves spectrum contribute to sonic quality, how do you assess the truth of his statement, when humans can hear only 20hz to 20kz at their peak of listening power around youngish age of 20years?

I was at an audio show where one high end companies, with a group of older men were having a demo of Some speakers. I was 32 back then and to my ears that demo was way too bright. But I could see the happy faces there and they are not wrong. I clearly know in some ears I will be doing the same. So to their ears a neutral speaker will be flawed as it doesn’t habe enough highs. Most popular reviewers would now be in this category

 

[firearm12]

 

[Analogous]

You bought this blind recently no ? Based on other FMs feedback and not evidently on the poor measurements in Stereophile which are countered as well.
So , would you still have bought it if it measured poorly across many sites but vouched for by FMs whose opinions you value ?

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

View attachment 66080

Nobody says you should listen to best measured equipment. It only means you can look at the measurement and know how it sounds, and everyone is free to choose their sound according to their preference.

 

[Analogous]

Bias

It's difficult to have an unbiased subjective assessment. Also there is something called as conformity bias.

So to base everything subjectively cannnot be prudent parameter. I mean we all know how our mood can effect our music to sound to us.


In the above example, how can it be assured that Art Dudley, Stephen Meijas and Sam Tellig heard same musicality? How can John Atkins measurements be disprove of poor musicality?


What have audioresearch shown over years?

Have we ever ask how the golden ears audiophiles are mostly 50+ old men when they are probably suffering age related hearing loss? How can their subjective assessments be a better parameter from a 18 year old listener whose auditory spectrum can reach upto 20kz?

When someone claim that ultrasonic waves spectrum contribute to sonic quality, how do you assess the truth of his statement, when humans can hear only 20hz to 20kz at their peak of listening power around youngish age of 20years?

Hi,
I feel you have asked several rhetorical questions here.
Could you try to answer the questions you have asked?

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

“Good sound” is a preference, it varies from person to person. If I say Bose lifestyle sounds good, it only means it confirms with my preference. (Extreme example, but I like it for what it does, not as a hifi speaker). I do not expect anyone else to agree to me. My brother loves his spendor s3/5 much.. I didn’t like it’s sound much. We both are not wrong.

 

[raghupb]

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

Don't try to. It takes a lot of time and patience and a whole lot of reading and understanding stuff outside of one's interest.
Just use that time and effort to listen to music.
"Don't Worry Be Happy"

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[Analogous]

I was at an audio show where one high end companies, with a group of older men were having a demo of Some speakers. I was 32 back then and to my ears that demo was way too bright. But I could see the happy faces there and they are not wrong. I clearly know in some ears I will be doing the same. So to their ears a neutral speaker will be flawed as it doesn’t habe enough highs. Most popular reviewers would now be in this category

And Your signature says “Great numbers takes you close to the actual music”

 

[Analogous]

“Good sound” is a preference, it varies from person to person. If I say Bose lifestyle sounds good, it only means it confirms with my preference. (Extreme example, but I like it for what it does, not as a hifi speaker). I do not expect anyone else to agree to me. My brother loves his spendor s3/5 much.. I didn’t like it’s sound much. We both are not wrong.

I fully agree

 

[Analogous]

Don't try to. It takes a lot of time and patience and a whole lot of reading and understanding stuff outside of one's interest.
Just use that time and effort to listen to music.
"Don't Worry Be Happy"

Cheers,
Raghu

Raghu,
Are you gently reminding me this horse is dead and just to enjoy the music?

 

[firearm12]

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

Tube amps mostly measure poorly yet many people like the sound over any of better measuring ss amps. I feel the numbers are like counting my cat's hair, doesn't matter if it's 2 million or 2.1 million my cat is furry enough. I only care when it goes below a certain threshold, then it will be considered a bald cat, neither me nor my neighbour would want it, who wants a bald cat.

 

[Bloom@83]

If a good sounding gear (by which I mean an amp or speaker that’s certified good across different user demographics ) measures poorly , well then , you are measuring the wrong things , brother.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

And Your signature says “Great numbers takes you close to the actual music”

I Standby that statement still. it only means to hear exactly the recording you need good numbers. Doesn’t matter if a persons goal from his hifi is not accuracy. It’s possible to enjoy a system which is not accurate.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

If a good sounding gear (by which I mean an amp or speaker that’s certified good across different user demographics ) measures poorly , well then , you are measuring the wrong things , brother.

Not everyone needs accurate sound. Accuracy can be confirmed with good measurements. It’s possible to enjoy an inaccurate sound.

 

[firearm12]

I Standby that statement still. it only means to hear exactly the recording you need good numbers. Doesn’t matter if a persons goal from his hifi is not accuracy. It’s possible to enjoy a system which is not accurate.

What's accurate? If there is one definable accuracy, then why do two products with same measurements sound entirely different?

 

[Bloom@83]

Not everyone needs accurate sound. Accuracy can be confirmed with good measurements. It’s possible to enjoy an inaccurate sound.

To flog a dead horse , accurate sound is a myth.
What’s measured as accurate in a certain laboratory will not be reproduced exactly as it is because of room acoustics of a buyer.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

To flog a dead horse , accurate sound is a myth.
What’s measured as accurate in a certain laboratory will not be reproduced exactly as it is because of room acoustics of a buyer.

You are right on the room part. Even the best measuring devices won’t sound the same if it’s kept in a poor room.

But there are some speakers which are less affected by the rooms than others due to their directivity patterns. There are some speakers which has very low distortion figures to handle a heavy room eq. Say for example, the KEFR11 has a extremely low distortion figures. You can apply any amount of room correction EQs than other speakers and they would handle it without any audible distortion. This guarantees a flat response at the listening spot.

If we buy a speaker with just flat frequency with bad distortion figures, it’s a bad idea. It will not handle room correction EQs.

Again it depends on room, if it’s a decent room where this speaker doesn’t need so much correction or if we are listening near field, it won’t matter that much.

See this figures:

KEF R11 quick measurements single vs bi-amp

Just wanted to share some measurements I got from my new KEF R11s. mic at 1 meter in room with all reflections active. REW measurements, MacBook to Mytek DAC+ to McIntosh MC462 vs. to Wyred4Sound (W4S) ST1000 (ICE 1000ASP) low (RCA) + MC462 HF (XLR) bi-amp. Using XLR out to the Mc and single...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[raghupb]

What's accurate? If there is one definable accuracy, then why do two products with same measurements sound entirely different?

That's the million dollar question
Cheers,
Raghu

 

[Analogous]

I Standby that statement still. it only means to hear exactly the recording you need good numbers. Doesn’t matter if a persons goal from his hifi is not accuracy. It’s possible to enjoy a system which is not accurate.

+1 to that