Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different (Read 117278 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #175 –
Quote from: zane9 on
Apologies for seeming rude. You edited your post twice, I believe - before and after my reply. The point of your post is rather murky, perhaps.


I think he is trying to point out that we can't prove that something is not, only that something is.

Thorbjorn

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #176 –
Quote from: knutinh on
.... We can make all kinds of clever models, but proving that one audio cable when connecting two hifi components sounds*) exactly the same as another audio cable is very difficult. Proving that they sound different, however, can be done provided that we do the right testing (using methods that may or may not have been found yet).


Indeed. Proving that two cables sound different can be done. In my experience, when two cables are shown to be different at an audible level, people who substitute faith/belief systems for proper science and engineering will often produce some whacko explanation, or resort to the old "trust your ears, science can't explain everything" cliche.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #177 –
Quote from: zane9 on
Quote from: knutinh on
.... We can make all kinds of clever models, but proving that one audio cable when connecting two hifi components sounds*) exactly the same as another audio cable is very difficult. Proving that they sound different, however, can be done provided that we do the right testing (using methods that may or may not have been found yet).


Indeed. Proving that two cables sound different can be done. In my experience, when two cables are shown to be different at an audible level, people who substitute faith/belief systems for proper science and engineering will often produce some whacko explanation, or resort to the old "trust your ears, science can't explain everything" cliche.

I should have added that proving that two given cables sounds different also of course depends on there actually being some differences to prove.

-k

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #178 –
Quote from: ShowsOn on
It requires a massive ego to assert that speaker cables effect sound because some people think speaker cables effect sound. Only a pure egotist could make such an illogical 'argument'.



It is an assertion i never made. You can burn that straw man as many times as you want but it won't change the fact that I have never said this or in any way implied it. It is not my problem if you do not understand the difference between actual sound and the perception of it.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #179 –
Quote from: analog scott on
I'm not going to take the bait for a pissing contest between objectivsts and subjectivists over who enjoys their stereo more. It is not my place to pass judgement on how well anybody enjoys their hobby.

It seems that the enjoyment of expensive cables somehow elicits a pretty strong emotional response in many who don't share that experience. Maybe you should explore what is behind that anger rather than worry about who is enjoying thier stereos more.

You've responded to my subjective observations by getting personal. Trust that I feel no anger, only a degree of pity, having perused post after foaming post of yours.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #180 –
Why is this thread still open?

It hit the level of a typical usenet group several pages ago, and a quick glance suggests that it hasn't recovered.

(My apologies if I've missed some gem that adds to the world of audio knowledge).

Cheers,
David.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #181 –
No, I think you more or less hit it. I got too tired to contribute a few pages ago - and I did my best to actually advance the conversation - but it seems like quite a few people are wishing to repeat years-old shouting matches instead.

Ironically, given the OP's tenure at AA, he's been notably silent through most of this.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #182 –
Dear audiophiles,

please stop to listen to gear & cables and start listen to music.
.halverhahn

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #183 –
Quote from: analog scott on
It seems that the enjoyment of expensive cables somehow elicits a pretty strong emotional response in many who don't share that experience. Maybe you should explore what is behind that anger rather than worry about who is enjoying thier stereos more.


Wow. someone is projecting here.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #184 –
Quote from: Six_Vicious on
Is it bad for people to spend thousands of dollars on placebo pills (assuming you guys are right and E is no better than C)?


That has never been the question that the experienced, serious contributors to this forum have been asking all along.

It is generally agreed upon by us that preference is individual, and it is what it is.

Our problem with the so-called "audiophile perspective" comes when people say strange things like

"I enjoy listening to LPs more than CDs because LPs generally sound more lifelike than CDs or any digital recordings. One reason for that is that they don't suffer from the bad effects of all that empty space between the samples". 

BTW, this is a paraphrase of things that I've seen said on real audio forums by real persons. I'm not making these "audiophile perspective" talking points up.

The part about enjoyng LPs more than CDs isn't the problem. There's no accounting for taste or the lack of it.

If people think that Mogen David 20-20 is top quality wine and like drinking it, that is a choice they get to make.

The problems are the alleged reasons why, which are complete and total fantasies.


Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #185 –
Lol i didn't expect this to turn into a discussion of god.  I understand the point that you can't prove God or aliens or planets don't exist, but the question of whether a difference exists between sets of audio equipment, is quite different.

Soundwaves aren't subjective, only our perception of them.  If we were to compare the soundwaves emitted by high-end equipment with super cables, to a mid-grade system with the factory cables, and saw that the waves were exactly the same in each nanometer of the wave, that would be scientific proof that no semi-rational audiophile could deny.

Conversely, if we did that experiment and saw that the waves were different, then we'd have to say that the audiophiles were right (depending on what the differences were, and whether they were relevant to sound quality).

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #186 –
Quote from: 2Bdecided on
Why is this thread still open?

Closing it is just going to cause the debate to move to another thread. Ignore this one until the flames die down. The arguments seem to be iterating towards a close.
 

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #187 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
....The problems are the alleged reasons why, which are complete and total fantasies.


Without being too melodramatic, I feel like a refugee who has found an island of sanity surrounded by sea of lunacy. This forum in general, and this thread in particular, offers some relief from the idiocy that is spouted daily on many sites.

At any given moment you can witness people reassuring each other on the benefits of cd demagnetizing and deep-freezing power cords, the musical qualities of amplifiers, the directionality of speaker cables. Should you dare ask for an explanation, even in the most neutral tone possible, you can expect many reactions - - none of which ever answer the question.

The magic is in the music, not in the gear. The science and engineering was settled long ago.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #188 –
Quote from: zane9 on
The magic is in the music, not in the gear.
I think I just found myself a new signature.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #189 –
Quote from: zane9 on
Without being too melodramatic, I feel like a refugee who has found an island of sanity surrounded by sea of lunacy. This forum in general, and this thread in particular, offers some relief from the idiocy that is spouted daily on many sites.


And in many magazines and newspapers as well...

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #190 –
Quote from: Six_Vicious on
Lol i didn't expect this to turn into a discussion of god.  I understand the point that you can't prove God or aliens or planets don't exist, but the question of whether a difference exists between sets of audio equipment, is quite different.

Soundwaves aren't subjective, only our perception of them.  If we were to compare the soundwaves emitted by high-end equipment with super cables, to a mid-grade system with the factory cables, and saw that the waves were exactly the same in each nanometer of the wave, that would be scientific proof that no semi-rational audiophile could deny.

Conversely, if we did that experiment and saw that the waves were different, then we'd have to say that the audiophiles were right (depending on what the differences were, and whether they were relevant to sound quality).

I am sorry if I went too far beyond topic with my philosophical tendencies.

I believe that you cannot measure anything and conclusive say that "they are equal". You can say that "to within e.g. 1 part per million, or the accuracy of my measurement setup, these two stones have the same weight". For any "sane person", practical engineer or (probably) music-lover that will do in 99.99% of the situations. But that is not to say that those two stones are exactly identical in every aspect down to any level of detail.

Using microphones and measurement equipment, we very seldomly find "two identical waves". If we think that we do, doing one more measurement of the same phenomenon might change our minds. What we find is numbers describing certain characteristics that we think is critical, and when comparing them we might conclude that to the best of our knowledge the difference should not matter when humans are to listening to the result.

Again, practical, pragmatic approaches lets you get results. Such as shipping a product, finishing you degree or even submitting a paper. But for dealing with absolutes such as "there is no difference, period", things gets cumbersome fast.


My point was that proving the opposite, that two stones are different is a lot easier. We just need the luck/insight to measure the right characteristic, and any significant difference will disprove that they are the same (provided that we got the method and equipment right).

-k

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #191 –
Quote from: knutinh on
...But for dealing with absolutes such as "there is no difference, period", things gets cumbersome fast.

(in defense of what I took as a likely unintentional snub:)
I think it is safe to say that if and when a regular contributor to HA makes an absolute statement (such as "there is no difference, period") it can reasonably be taken as shorthand for "there is no proven (and likely no provable) audible difference."

Considering that our ability to objectively measure audio with scientific instruments is orders of magnitude finer than our ability to measure audio with our bodies also means that discussing the limits of objective truth and coarseness of measurement technique is irrelevant.  Our measurement techniques are good enough.  I will say this until someone can show me a proven audible difference which is not also a measurable difference.
Creature of habit.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #192 –
Quote from: Soap on
Quote from: knutinh on
...But for dealing with absolutes such as "there is no difference, period", things gets cumbersome fast.

(in defense of what I took as a likely unintentional snub:)
I think it is safe to say that if and when a regular contributor to HA makes an absolute statement (such as "there is no difference, period") it can reasonably be taken as shorthand for "there is no proven (and likely no provable) audible difference."

Considering that our ability to objectively measure audio with scientific instruments is orders of magnitude finer than our ability to measure audio with our bodies also means that discussing the limits of objective truth and coarseness of measurement technique is irrelevant.  Our measurement techniques are good enough.  I will say this until someone can show me a proven audible difference which is not also a measurable difference.

I guess that this topic has been thoruoughly covered now, and that everyone interested has read enough. I was referring to the quote below and it seems to me that anyone making a statement like that has a very different view from myself when it comes to measuring stuff to be used for audio reproduction. I think that in this context you simply cannot do measurements "alone" without connecting them to some implicit or explicit knowledge about human perceptions, as well as appreciating the (commonly very low level) of uncertainty in most of the observations we can make about the world around us.

If you match levels between two components to 0.1 dB instead of, say, 0.0001 dB, claiming that the levels are "equal" relies upon human perception not being able to distinguish level differences below 0.2 or 0.15 dB or whatever. If you measure an electronic component to have a flat frequency response to 100kHz, you say that it is "flat" in the context of humans not being able to hear frequencies at sensible sound levels above 20 kHz or something.

Very few things in the real world show a perfectly repeatable observed behaviour down to arbitray low levels of details, and even if they did, the instruments that we use to observe their behaviour is sure to introduce such randomness if we go low enough. And in practice, that very seldomly matters because we live in a macro-world where very many of the phenomena that affects us seems to be explained perfectly well without going into philosophical debates.


The confusion is complete when audiophiles grasp such convenient material to defend their strong beliefs without bothering to understand the whole story OR when sceptics/rationalists take shortcuts to seemingly prove what actually is quite hard to prove.

Quote from: Six_Vicious on
If we were to compare the soundwaves emitted by high-end equipment with super cables, to a mid-grade system with the factory cables, and saw that the waves were exactly the same in each nanometer of the wave, that would be scientific proof that no semi-rational audiophile could deny.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #193 –
to me the original question had little to do with being an audiophile and everything to do with an expensive addiction, which the wife needs to treat it that way, figure out why hes really spending all this money on stuff, maybe take away temptations (Sterophile etc.) theres so many more important things then wasting all your money on a stereo, even if the benefits are real.

random other thoughts:  he might be using it as an escape from something (back to the addiction hypothesis) he might be obsessive compulsive, im not sure and im not going to claim that i could even possibly know, but it sounds to me, just from the original post, that this is something a more serious then $1,000 cables, especially if its affecting his marrage
My $.02, may not be in the right currency

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #194 –
...and i find the idea of analog scott defending such destructive behavior as utterly repulsive.  if he could demonstrate that people derive tangible benefit for their extravagant purchases beyond placebo it would be one thing, but he has pretty much indicated that he won't (can't).

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #195 –
Quote from: greynol on
...and i find the idea of analog scott defending such destructive behavior as utterly repulsive.  if he could demonstrate that people derive tangible benefit for their extravagant purchases beyond placebo it would be one thing, but he has pretty much indicated that he won't (can't).

His position is an entirely logical conclusion to the premise that the tangible benefit of such purchases is 100% subjective. And such a premise, on its face, has significant merits. I disagree with it, but it's not something that can be easily dismissed.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #196 –
It really doesn't seem like you've been reading his posts, especially the last ones (or the ones that were binned); or keeping track of the questions and counterpoints that he has evaded in favor of obscuring the issue with useless sophistry.

That we should give him props for stating what is obvious is, well, silly.

As a friendly challenge, please consider relating his distractions to the initial post.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #197 –
A fascinating, new development amongst audiophiles recently, is the claim that they have done blind tests themselves to "prove" that they can indeed "hear" what they claim to hear. I have noticed this on several forums now. I think that this is a natural reaction to the realization of how absurd they look claiming to hear things under uncontrolled conditions as well as knowing that this is the only standard that people of normal mental health/scientifically literate will accept as evidence. Some of these fabrications are quite amusing to read . That said, Scott seems genuine and not liable to just make up stuff. He has stated repeatedly that he carries out blind tests of components he has interest in, as not to be influenced by psychological biases and only by the soundfield.
Here is a description of Scotts system.
Scott, this is the perfect forum to discuss blind testing, unlike the protective cocoon of AA from which you have ventured away from. I know you won't obfuscate here or make up any excuses to avoid direct discussion, so here goes:
Please describe the blind test methods you used to pick these sonically superior soundfield components (including wires, bricks and all the other doodahs) in your system. This should be extremely enlightening to all audio reproduction lovers here. The floor is yours  .

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #198 –
Quote from: Six_Vicious on
Soundwaves aren't subjective, only our perception of them.  If we were to compare the soundwaves emitted by high-end equipment with super cables, to a mid-grade system with the factory cables, and saw that the waves were exactly the same in each nanometer of the wave, that would be scientific proof that no semi-rational audiophile could deny.

Conversely, if we did that experiment and saw that the waves were different, then we'd have to say that the audiophiles were right (depending on what the differences were, and whether they were relevant to sound quality).


No, the second paragraph above needs to be qualified with the proviso that the measured differences were of such nature and magnitude that it is indisputable that they would be audible.  We can measure easily differences we cannot hear, as shown by decades of scientific investigation.  Mere measured difference is not sufficient to establish audible differences.
Ed Seedhouse
VA7SDH

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #199 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
A fascinating, new development amongst audiophiles recently, is the claim that they have done blind tests themselves to "prove" that they can indeed "hear" what they claim to hear. I have noticed this on several forums now. I think that this is a natural reaction to the realization of how absurd they look claiming to hear things under uncontrolled conditions as well as knowing that this is the only standard that people of normal mental health/scientifically literate will accept as evidence. Some of these fabrications are quite amusing to read . That said, Scott seems genuine and not liable to just make up stuff. He has stated repeatedly that he carries out blind tests of components he has interest in, as not to be influenced by psychological biases and only by the soundfield.
Here is a description of Scotts system.
Scott, this is the perfect forum to discuss blind testing, unlike the protective cocoon of AA from which you have ventured away from. I know you won't obfuscate here or make up any excuses to avoid direct discussion, so here goes:
Please describe the blind test methods you used to pick these sonically superior soundfield components (including wires, bricks and all the other doodahs) in your system. This should be extremely enlightening to all audio reproduction lovers here. The floor is yours  .

cheers,

AJ



First the information provided by your link

Analog Scott's none System
IP Address: 207.200.116.11 Last Update: December 01, 2007 at 16:45:09
Amplifier:  Audio Research D 115 Mk II (100watts all tube)
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated):  Audio Research SP 10
Speakers:  Sound Lab A3s, Vandersteen 2W subwoofer 
Sources: 
CD Player/DAC:  Rotel
Turntable/Phono Stage:  Forsell Air Reference with flywheel, Koetsu Rosewood Signature cartridge
Other Source(s):  none
Other Accessories/Room/Misc.: 
Speaker Cables/Interconnects:  Audioquest Clear speaker cable, MIT Shotgun interconnects
Other (Power Conditioner, Racks etc.):  Equitech 1.5Q line conditioner and Bybee pro filter
Tweaks:  Aurios Pros under Subwoofer, Aurios 1.2 under 3/4 slab of acrylic under preamp, Aurios 1.0 under 2 one inch slabs of acrulic sandwiching seven home made discs of silicone elastomer with a shore hardness of 9, Tip Toes under power amp , VPI bricks over transformers on Martin Logans, 
Room Size (LxWxH):  21' x 12' x 8.5'
Room Comments/Treatments:  Speaker end of room is heavily damped with acoustic foam, listening end is difused with lots of records in shelves and collectables on display and plants. Floor is a concrete slab with carpet, ceiling is wood with beams running side to side every 3 feet.


So let's break it down.

Blind tests for the ARC equipment.
First one was a careful single blind level matched comparison done at Rogers Sound Lab. It was between the ARC SP 11 and the ARC D115 Mk II vs. My Yamaha 100 watt rack system integrated amp. speakers were Martin Logan CLS's, Sourse was a Sony CD player (don't remember the model) and a Well Tempered TT/arm. I don't remember the cartridge. It was a preference comparison using several different titles from my personal CDs and LPs. I participated in two sessions of five trials. My friend participated in the same. In a total of 20 trials the result was 20 times the ARC equipment was prefered.  I repeated the tests at home with the Martin Logans and the Vandersteen sub. We did five trials each. same results.


Speakers:  Sound Lab A3s, Vandersteen 2W subwoofer 

Couldn't find a practical method to do any comparisons blind. Although i actually did do a blind comparison between my previous speakers, the Martin Logan CLSs and the Apogee Duetta Signatures. That was a royal pain in the ass.


Sources: 
CD Player/DAC:  Rotel


Bought this without an audition because I got a great deal on it.


Turntable/Phono Stage:  Forsell Air Reference with flywheel, Koetsu Rosewood Signature cartridge


I did a series of single blind comparisons in Hong Kong between the Forsell, The Rockport Sirius III, and the Clearaudio Master reference all mounted with matching top of the line Clear Audio cartridriges. The system was The Top of the line Rockport speakers and MBL SS amplification. Over the course of about five hours four of us participated in 5 trials between the Rockport and the Forsell, five trials between the Forsell and the Clear Audio and 5 trials between the Rockport and the Clearaudio. However I was the only one who did mine blind. I picked the Forsell every time in both trials with the Forsell. I picked the Rockport 4 times in the comparison with the Clearaudio. Afterwards I did some comaprisons sighted. Same results. Interestingly the other three, under sighted conditions all picked the Rockport every time.




Other Source(s):  none
Other Accessories/Room/Misc.: 
Speaker Cables/Interconnects:  Audioquest Clear speaker cable, MIT Shotgun interconnects

Didn't do any blind comparisons for the speaker cables. Did an ambush blind test on my friend with the MITs with a positive result.


Other (Power Conditioner, Racks etc.):  Equitech 1.5Q line conditioner and Bybee pro filter

Can't say that I ever heard any difference with the Bybee under sighted conditions. sold it for more than I bought it.


Tweaks:  Aurios Pros under Subwoofer, Aurios 1.2 under 3/4 slab of acrylic under preamp, Aurios 1.0 under 2 one inch slabs of acrulic sandwiching seven home made discs of silicone elastomer with a shore hardness of 9, Tip Toes under power amp


Did five trials with the Aurios under the sub and under the TT. I quit afte five trials because the difference was just too obvious. Not so much so under the preamp. If there is a difference it is too subtle for me. sold those Aurios.

VPI bricks over transformers on Martin Logans,

This needs to be undated. I don't have the Martin Logans. Never did blind comparisons. I don't think the VPI bricks did anything that regular bricks can't do. They are now on my sub and make an obvious and meausrable difference in the vibration fo the cabinet.


Room Size (LxWxH):  21' x 12' x 8.5'
Room Comments/Treatments:  Speaker end of room is heavily damped with acoustic foam, listening end is difused with lots of records in shelves and collectables on display and plants. Floor is a concrete slab with carpet, ceiling is wood with beams running side to side every 3 feet.

all room treatment was auditioned sighted. wish I could do it blind but found no practical means.

In all cases where I did some sort of blind comparisons I often did sighted comparisons first and always did sighted comparisons after.