Skip to main content

Topic: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality (Read 3115 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #75
Dude, I frigging know that THD is not sound pressure. But one of the easiest things for someone with a masters in physics (me) is to go from THD to sound pressure. 
So is 0.03% audible? Vs 0.003%? Let's see your evidence and how it was determined without those useless listening tests.
I can do the math for you,
Great, lets see your THD audibility thresholds "math". Ought to be a doozy  :))

Which leads me to ask you: why are you afraid to answer my question— what did you study?
Reading comprehension.



No science then. Ok, no problem. I understand your point of view better now.

  • jjb70
  • [*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #76
Is there not an element of subjectivity in all of us? I hate the nonsense promoted by some hifi magazines, websites and manufacturers and think that measurement and blind testing is important. However when it comes to speakers and headphones I find my buying decisions to be very subjective.

  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #77
Go easy on Ralph, he spent a year in a UMinn EE program taking electives, like 50yrs ago. You can't help but see the humor with the Dunning-Kruger audio chumplings. Can't make this stuff up.  ;)
Hmm, I don't know, I certainly hope I don't end up having a degree worth nothing in 50 years...

Them "laughing" at us "lofi" folks, with zero cognizance, makes it 10x as funny.  ;D

What's essentially happening here, is HA pointing fingers at AA, while they do the same thing. Who's right and wrong is not important at this point anymore, because both side behave like idiots, and to be honest, I'm kinda ashamed of that.

If this is a science and technology based forum, let's discuss science and technology, rather than the typical "look at them! such idots, hahaha!" It brings absolutely nothing.

Dear Sir, these disagreements about audio are not innocent. They reflect a bigger problem--war on science. I will paraphrase Trotsky, because it is very fitting in this context, "You may not be interested in war on science, but war on science is interested in you."

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #78
Dear Sir, these disagreements about audio...
Unfortunately you have no clue what the word means. It's in the website name too.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #79
Dear Sir, these disagreements about audio...
Unfortunately you have no clue what the word means. It's in the website name too.

You are grasping at straws, dear Sir.

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #80
There is subtle point here: 0.03% might not be audible

You are grasping at straws, dear Sir.
Audio
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #81
Is there not an element of subjectivity in all of us? I hate the nonsense promoted by some hifi magazines, websites and manufacturers and think that measurement and blind testing is important. However when it comes to speakers and headphones I find my buying decisions to be very subjective.

Of course we are all subjective and have likes and dislikes that have various amounts of evidence and logic behind them, including none.

However, there is something to be said for selecting higher priority judgments of value and attempting to make them as evidence-based and rational as is reasonably possible.

When it comes to things like appearance and comfort, then greater amounts of subjectivity may be in order.

I think it is possible to make decisions about the sound quality of speakers and headphones primarily based on reliable evidence and logic.  One key finding is that frequency response is very important in perceptions of sound quality and it is very easy to adjust to suit. Therefore, the details related to the frequency response of speakers and headphones may be less important that other parameters such as dynamic range, within reasonable limits.
  • Last Edit: 06 December, 2017, 02:17:10 PM by Arnold B. Krueger

  • polemon
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #82
Yikes, this reminds me of election season.  "Both sides are just as bad...."
Yeah, wenn you go down to that level of glitterbombing and turd throwing, I guess it kinda is, isn't it.
Anyway, you get to feel that way, and others get to feel that 'what's right and wrong' is still  (more) important.
Oh I still think what is and what isn't wrong is (more) important. But arguing about it on such level is meaningless, etc.

I tend to simply limit myself to: "no, this is wrong because ...". If people are unable to understand no matter how much effort I put into explaining and providing examples, etc. I usually just accept that either the other person is in fact unable to understand the subject matter, or perhaps I'm explaining it in a way the other person is unable to understand it, i.e. not well enough.

I kinda step away from then on, etc. I'm not a teacher as such, etc.
  • Last Edit: 06 December, 2017, 03:42:31 PM by polemon

  • jjb70
  • [*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #83
Is there not an element of subjectivity in all of us? I hate the nonsense promoted by some hifi magazines, websites and manufacturers and think that measurement and blind testing is important. However when it comes to speakers and headphones I find my buying decisions to be very subjective.

Of course we are all subjective and have likes and dislikes that have various amounts of evidence and logic behind them, including none.

However, there is something to be said for selecting higher priority judgments of value and attempting to make them as evidence-based and rational as is reasonably possible.

When it comes to things like appearance and comfort, then greater amounts of subjectivity may be in order.

I think it is possible to make decisions about the sound quality of speakers and headphones primarily based on reliable evidence and logic.  One key finding is that frequency response is very important in perceptions of sound quality and it is very easy to adjust to suit. Therefore, the details related to the frequency response of speakers and headphones may be less important that other parameters such as dynamic range, within reasonable limits.


I wouldn't disagree that you can make many decisions on speakers and headphones using objective data and analysis, but I still think that speakers and headphones are probably the two items where subjective assessment has real value. In the case of headphones they are fundamentally different to other audio equipment in that you wear them so they need to be comfortable. I believe that the sound quality of headphones is second to comfort as it doesn't matter how great they sound if you hate wearing them. Maybe I'm tone death, but I find that most CD players, amplifiers, DACs etc sound pretty transparent and I generally struggle to identify much of a difference, whereas even my ears can readily discern differences between speakers and headphones.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #84
I'm pretty well convinced our number chasing friend(s) couldn't find a single piece of commercial content that would sound better with 0.003% THD than it would with 0.05% THD.

PS: Is it time I bring my old signature back?  Seems apropos to this Case.
  • Last Edit: 07 December, 2017, 12:15:32 AM by greynol
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

  • krabapple
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #85

Oh I still think what is and what isn't wrong is (more) important. But arguing about it on such level is meaningless, etc.

I tend to simply limit myself to: "no, this is wrong because ...". If people are unable to understand no matter how much effort I put into explaining and providing examples, etc. I usually just accept that either the other person is in fact unable to understand the subject matter, or perhaps I'm explaining it in a way the other person is unable to understand it, i.e. not well enough.

I kinda step away from then on, etc. I'm not a teacher as such, etc.

Fair enough.

FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement...neither being anywhere near an 'audiophool'.    

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #86
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement
Umm, no.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #87
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement
Umm, no.

This is the only agreement we have—we don’t agree. :)

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #88
This is the only agreement we have—we don’t agree. :)
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the importance of listening tests.
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the audibility of THD
You disagree with science and common sense regarding the "accuracy" of your loudspeakers.
Etc, etc, etc.
Those are your disagreements, not with "me". Several others have pointed this out in these threads.
Start here, read all responses slowly, including links
  • Last Edit: 07 December, 2017, 08:45:46 AM by ajinfla
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • polemon
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #89
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement...neither being anywhere near an 'audiophool'.   

Ah well, whether they are agreeing or disagreeing violently is kinda meh' either way. It doesn't take an audiophool to have an aggressive demeanor.

If you have your arguments right, you can be blunt, but there's no reason to resort to unnecessary aggressive, passive or otherwise.

  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #90
This is the only agreement we have—we don’t agree. :)
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the importance of listening tests.
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the audibility of THD
You disagree with science and common sense regarding the "accuracy" of your loudspeakers.
Etc, etc, etc.
Those are your disagreements, not with "me". Several others have pointed this out in these threads.
Start here, read all responses slowly, including links

I admire your chutzpah. For someone who apparently never made a sustained effort to study science in depth, you are surprisingly confident in your judgment of scientific validity.

Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir? Hoisted by your own petard?


  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #91
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement...neither being anywhere near an 'audiophool'.   

Ah well, whether they are agreeing or disagreeing violently is kinda meh' either way. It doesn't take an audiophool to have an aggressive demeanor.

If you have your arguments right, you can be blunt, but there's no reason to resort to unnecessary aggressive, passive or otherwise.

Allow me to answer a direct question—how should we interact with people who wage the war on science?

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #92
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #93
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.

How droll.

Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked, you never bothered to make an effort to gain deeper understanding of electrical engineering, physics and statistics, and yet, totally oblivious of these limitations, you confidently spew a lot of nonsense on this forum. So, would you say that you are a DK case?

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #94
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.
Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
Yes, obviously.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #95
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.
Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
Yes, obviously.


Wow, such decisive proof — of your functional illiteracy, that is. You did not get it when I explained the Benchmark paper, 0.03% THD and the guarantee of absolute inaudible distortion to you. And despite such glaring inadequacy, you see yourself as a great thinker, who, for example rubbished the Benchmark paper, without understanding the simple math in it.

But the really funny thing is that I feel sorry for you, since you are trying so hard and yet, your debating performance is so weak, that I keep defeating you with tedious regularity.
  • Last Edit: 07 December, 2017, 08:15:49 PM by mmrkaic

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #96

Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.
you don't need a listening test
The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
functional illiteracy, that is.

Yes, obviously.
  • Last Edit: 07 December, 2017, 08:30:10 PM by ajinfla
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • mmrkaic
  • [*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #97

Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.
you don't need a listening test
The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
functional illiteracy, that is.

Yes, obviously.


I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
  • Last Edit: 07 December, 2017, 10:44:58 PM by mmrkaic

  • pdq
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #98

I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
And yet, oddly enough, I don't see anyone else taking your side.

Your response to my question (evidence that 0.03% THD is audible) was totally inadequate.

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Reply #99
Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.
you don't need a listening test
The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.

More luck to you
You're going to need a lot more than luck around here, with the D/K stuff above - all your words.
Loudspeaker manufacturer