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 119494 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #51 –
Quote from: Ethan Winer on
Quote from: Axon on
they scheduled your workshop to the same time as the loudness war workshop.

The "Loudness War" is boring and old news. Snore. Much better to watch middle-aged men and a nice looking lady explain why everything everybody else in the room knows about audio is wrong.


Fixed.

Seriously, Fremer got a much better time slot. (You're going to that, right?  )

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #52 –
Quote from: Canar on
As usual, you tread a clear path of rationality through my flailing fields of polemics.

Heh. To be completely honest...  if my wife saw that quote, she would probably think you were not describing me.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #53 –
Quote from: MaxSeven on
I believe that audiophiles think everything sounds different because they desire it to sound different -- nothing more. I have been an audiophile for a couple years now, but I am definitely a skeptic and a realist, and I am happy to admit the following:

  • I expect a certain level of sound quality, but beyond that, it doesn't matter to me.
  • I don't care that much about the music - it is merely incidental and I'll listen to anything (minimize country music please).
  • I spend on equipment because I love the gadgets, the looks, the status and the build quality. I don't care much about tiny sound improvements, only sound impediments.
  • I concur with the notion that a low cost system can sonically compete with ultra-high cost systems and I won't argue to the contrary.
  • I don't believe in the claims that tweaks (deadeners, isolation products, exotic cables, dampeners etc.) improve sound very much (perhaps only marginally).
  • I do buy tweaking products because they look good and it gives me another thing to do in my hobby. It's enjoyable to buy new products related to my hobby.
  • I periodically change equipment, always striving for more prestigious gear, because it adds value to my system and allows me to try new devices.
  • I do believe that a room's acoustic properties will obviously affect sound, but I only invest the bare minimum to achieve decent sound, because it's no fun -- I'd rather get new gear.
  • I love DBT and ABX experiments, and I enjoy the truths that these tests reveal.
  • I think of my system as a sculpture or fine art, and I always am looking for ways to make it more visually pleasing and precisely organized.
  • Finally, I enjoy quality things that are built to last a lifetime, and I dislike anything that is cheaply constructed, tacky-looking, or lacks originality.


Anyone else share my beliefs?

I can see some in common with my beliefs, although I have much less money to work with, and my personal preferences with music obviously differ, so that changes a lot.

I've grown to believe that high-end audio as a hobby is only really objectionable to skeptical-minded people when it collides with science, and besides that, it's very similar to many many other hobbies, and A-OK. Your description sounds similar to what I was envisioning - it's just that all the audiophiles one typically encounters require a wooectomy

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #54 –
Hmm, trying to test for a negative (that there is no difference) is very difficult if not impossible.

Maybe instead if someone would study this from the other side...

Instead of trying to detect a difference using blind listening tests, turn the question upside down and study the psychological side of it? Have sighted listening tests with extremely expensive gear hidden in horribly dull ugly or deceitful cases. With average but decent home audio gear tarted up to look expensive or like something it isn't. Then just invite a bunch of audiophiles to come for the test and record the results. Let them choose the gear to listen to using an A/B/C switch or whatever...

Might be interesting. Has anyone done a study like that before?

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #55 –
Quote from: Axon on
I can see some in common with my beliefs, although I have much less money to work with, and my personal preferences with music obviously differ, so that changes a lot.

I've grown to believe that high-end audio as a hobby is only really objectionable to skeptical-minded people when it collides with science, and besides that, it's very similar to many many other hobbies, and A-OK. Your description sounds similar to what I was envisioning - it's just that all the audiophiles one typically encounters require a wooectomy


Yep, you can probably count me in among this subset too. It's a pity there aren't more... ideally one sensible writer in the press would be good. That'll never happen though!

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #56 –
Quote from: kiit on
Hmm, trying to test for a negative (that there is no difference) is very difficult if not impossible.

Maybe instead if someone would study this from the other side...

Instead of trying to detect a difference using blind listening tests, turn the question upside down and study the psychological side of it? Have sighted listening tests with extremely expensive gear hidden in horribly dull ugly or deceitful cases. With average but decent home audio gear tarted up to look expensive or like something it isn't. Then just invite a bunch of audiophiles to come for the test and record the results. Let them choose the gear to listen to using an A/B/C switch or whatever...

Might be interesting. Has anyone done a study like that before?



It''s actually been done, at least informally.  I recall a report from one of the audio gear conventions where one of the vendors made it look like he was running fat pricey cabling (i think it was power cord) , when in fact he was just running a standard hardware store cord.  And audiophiles swooned over the 'difference'.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #57 –
Quote from: Axon on
Seriously, Fremer got a much better time slot. (You're going to that, right?  )


Michael J. Fremer got a time slot? Where? Yeow!
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #58 –
Quote from: Woodinville on
Michael J. Fremer got a time slot? Where? Yeow!


http://www.aes.org/events/127/workshops/session.cfm?code=W13

OK, OK, so Mikey is "just" the chair, but if the abstract at all represents the tone of the roundtable, this is going to be a fun 90 minutes.

Quote
Saturday, October 10, 4:30 pm — 6:00 pm
W13 - 1080p and MP3: We Got the Picture. What Happened to the Sound?

Chair: Michael Fremer

Panelists:
John Atkinson, Stereophile
Steve Berkowitz, Sony/BMG
Greg Calbi, Sterling Sound
Alan Douches, West West Side Music - New Windsor, NY, USA
Randy Ezratty
Bob Ludwig, Gateway Mastering & DVD - Portland, ME, USA
EveAnna Manley, Manley Audio Labs

Abstract:
Over the past decade, video has gone from 480i 4:3 to 1080p 16:9—the bigger the screen, the better. Audio? Not so much! The bigger the audio system, the more you are mocked for hearing quality that supposedly doesn't exist. The "mainstream" audio standard has degraded from 44.1 K/16 bit (arguably insufficient to begin with) to low bit rate MP3, now considered "more than adequate" by mainstream listeners. As a consequence, people "hear" music while engaging in other activities. Actively listening to music (to the exclusion of all other activities) once commonplace, is almost unheard of (pun intended) in 21st Century life. This has had terrible consequences for both professional and consumer audio and the engineers working in both areas. Most consumers have never heard their favorite music on a good audio system and because of "big box" retailing can't even experience high quality 5.1 soundtrack sound on a good home theater system when they shop. How does the industry reconnect consumers to good sound? And why are young people snapping up vinyl records when they can download MP3s cheaply or for free?


And look at what it's up against on the schedule. And he got Saturday night as opposed to Monday night.

You two got robbed.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #59 –

Quote
What's the psychology behind the audiophile "everything sounds different belief?


Taste is something you can endlessly refine in all domains.
For instance, if you like gastronomy, you will compare each things you eat, and pay attention to most subtle change of taste. You will say for instance that chocolate X  is better than Y.
Now you might from time to time reach the limit of your perceptions,  and make erroneous comparisons . Call it placebo , or whatever.
That doesn't mean that all comparisons are always wrong, so don't make general assumptions by telling it's always placebo.

In other hand if I would spend 2000$ in better wire speaker , I would be 100% convinced
that it would sound better. You know why ? Because , it would be too hard for me to admit that I'm quite  stupid  for spending an insane amount of cash in something that make no changes.
I  think the more money you spend, the more feel forced to say "it's better".
Not a placebo effect , but kind of "psychological pressure".

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #60 –
Quote from: kiit on
Hmm, trying to test for a negative (that there is no difference) is very difficult if not impossible.

Maybe instead if someone would study this from the other side...

Instead of trying to detect a difference using blind listening tests, turn the question upside down and study the psychological side of it? Have sighted listening tests with extremely expensive gear hidden in horribly dull ugly or deceitful cases. With average but decent home audio gear tarted up to look expensive or like something it isn't. Then just invite a bunch of audiophiles to come for the test and record the results. Let them choose the gear to listen to using an A/B/C switch or whatever...

Might be interesting. Has anyone done a study like that before?


I love that idea! If I were one of the test subjects, I would for sure go with the "tarted up" gear. Although, one could argue that it needs to LOOK good outside and inside to be effective.
The Skeptical Audiophile

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #61 –
Quote
Saturday, October 10, 4:30 pm — 6:00 pm
W13 - 1080p and MP3: We Got the Picture. What Happened to the Sound?

Chair: Michael Fremer

Panelists:
John Atkinson, Stereophile
Steve Berkowitz, Sony/BMG
Greg Calbi, Sterling Sound
Alan Douches, West West Side Music - New Windsor, NY, USA
Randy Ezratty
Bob Ludwig, Gateway Mastering & DVD - Portland, ME, USA
EveAnna Manley, Manley Audio Labs

Abstract:
Over the past decade, video has gone from 480i 4:3 to 1080p 16:9—the bigger the screen, the better. Audio? Not so much! The bigger the audio system, the more you are mocked for hearing quality that supposedly doesn't exist. The "mainstream" audio standard has degraded from 44.1 K/16 bit (arguably insufficient to begin with) to low bit rate MP3, now considered "more than adequate" by mainstream listeners. As a consequence, people "hear" music while engaging in other activities. Actively listening to music (to the exclusion of all other activities) once commonplace, is almost unheard of (pun intended) in 21st Century life. This has had terrible consequences for both professional and consumer audio and the engineers working in both areas. Most consumers have never heard their favorite music on a good audio system and because of "big box" retailing can't even experience high quality 5.1 soundtrack sound on a good home theater system when they shop. How does the industry reconnect consumers to good sound? And why are young people snapping up vinyl records when they can download MP3s cheaply or for free?




Is low bitrate mp3 really the "mainstream" audio standard?  In 2009?

And note the quick elision of 'degraded' sound with  the 'consequence' that 'people  hear music while engaging in other activities'.  This of course leaves out the middle step:  it's a reduction in SIZE, and thus the increase in PORTABILITY, that produced that consequence, not sonic degradation per se.  Indeed people aren't listening to mp3 because they sound worse, they're doing it because it's more convenient, just as they did with cassette tapes and the walkman back in the early 80s.  And they're getting considerably better sound out of their portable media now than they were back then, to say the least.

Leaving aside that a good mp3 ('high bitrate' CBR, or good VBR encoding)  can very often be perceived as transparent to source (and you can bet Fremer, Atkinson et al won't risk embarrassment by demonstrating THEIR prowess at mp3 detection in a proper test), the kids buying vinyl could get excellent sound over their setups , using lossless digital sources..if artists,  producers, and mastering engineers would give it to them in the first place.

Btw, anyone notice THIS from a session earlier the same day?


Quote
P8-7 Subjective Evaluation of mp3 Compression for Different Musical Genres—Amandine Pras, Rachel Zimmerman, Daniel Levitin, Catherine Guastavino, McGill University - Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Mp3 compression is commonly used to reduce the size of digital music files but introduces a number of artifacts, especially at low bit rates. We investigated whether listeners prefer CD quality to mp3 files at various bit rates (96 kb/s to 320 kb/s), and whether this preference is affected by musical genre. Thirteen trained listeners completed an AB comparison task judging CD quality and compressed. Listeners significantly preferred CD quality to mp3 files up to 192 kb/s for all musical genres. In addition, we observed a significant effect or expertise (sound engineers vs. musicians) and musical genres (electric vs. acoustic music).
Convention Paper 7879


and finally, one has to marvel at the curious schedule overlap between Bob Katz et al's loudness wars talk, and this one:

Quote
W21 - Pimp Your Mix

Panelists:
Bob Brockmann
Ryan West

Abstract:
Grammy winning mixers Bassy Bob Brockmann (Christina Aguilera, Babyface, Fugees) and Ryan West (Rihanna, Kanye, John Legend) bring a popular feature of their Elements of Mixing seminar, Pimp your Mix, to the AES. Ryan and Bassy take a production that has already been mixed by an upcoming producer and tear it apart and put it back together using state of the art and vintage analog gear and some of their fave plug-ins to add luster, drama, impact, and clarity to the mix. Ryan and Bassy demonstrate some of their tips on how to make the vocal shine, how to organize the bass frequencies, and how to use balancing , eq, and reverb to create a sense of space and clarity in the mix. Attendees are encouraged to ask questions during the makeover process, and Ryan and Bassy will do a Q and A about the mix after the print.


Was someone trying to be funny?



Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #62 –
Quote from: Canar on
I don't care how you cut it, spending $2000 on cables is always problem behaviour. There are a lot of untreated individuals out there...

Edit: based on the negative-consequences criterion above, there are two: inappropriate use of resources, and hallucination of things that are not there.



I'm a bit confused here. Are you saying that 2,000 dollar cables don't exist and audiophiles are just imagining them? What is the "treatment" for buying 2,000 dollar cables? (that may or may not exist???). Where exactly is the "rule book" on appropriate and inapporpraite use of any individual's personal reseources?

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #63 –
Quote from: Canar on
Quote from: Axon on
I dunno about hallucination. I'm all for psychology/psychiatry but when it comes to perceptual defects I kinda like the Szaszian viewpoint - it's not necessarily something that should get somebody involuntarily committed over.
Like often I'm just using hyperbole to make a point.  The Audio Asylumers can think what they will; as far as I'm concerned, it's still just a hallucination. There are many mental disorders that people can still function well with, and some very sane people I know enjoy inducing hallucinations in themselves from time to time. As usual, you tread a clear path of rationality through my flailing fields of polemics.



Seriously? You think bias effects are the same as hallucinations? OK...so let's talk about you. When you listen to your system under sighted conditions aka NORMAL conditions are you A. Hallucinating or B listening without the effects of bias? Or....C "oops I goofed. Bias effects are not the same thing as hallucinations and I am affected by them just as much as any other audiophile when I am listening for pleasure to my system in my home." (hint the answer is C and only C)

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #64 –
Bias effects are only distinguishable from hallucination by degree. Besides that, C) all the way.
 

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #65 –
None of the above, analog scott.

If you have something constructive to contribute to this community, I suggest you do so. I have seen nothing but poor trolling from you since you've started posting here, and I'm really starting to tire of it, as are the other moderators.

$2,000 cables are just stupid. They will not improve sound beyond the hallucinatory effects of bias.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #66 –
Quote from: Canar on
$2,000 cables are just stupid. They will not improve sound beyond the hallucinatory effects of bias.

Implicit in this is the assumption that sound is the dominant function of audiophile equipment for audiophiles. I can see little evidence to support this. People tend to purchase overly expensive luxury goods for reasons that are not directly related to their technical function. If, for example, the purchase of $2000 cables brings a sense of well being and prestige within the audiophile's peer group then, from the viewpoint of the audiophile, they would not be stupid.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #67 –
Quote from: honestguv on
Quote from: Canar on
$2,000 cables are just stupid. They will not improve sound beyond the hallucinatory effects of bias.

Implicit in this is the assumption that sound is the dominant function of audiophile equipment for audiophiles. I can see little evidence to support this. People tend to purchase overly expensive luxury goods for reasons that are not directly related to their technical function. If, for example, the purchase of $2000 cables brings a sense of well being and prestige within the audiophile's peer group then, from the viewpoint of the audiophile, they would not be stupid.


I kind of wonder if the barely-warmed-over corpse of what used to be our economies will have an effect on this? The economic downturn has caused real problems for golf clubs and yacht builders. OTOH, some luxury car manufacturers have said they are having no worries.

I'd be really surprised if the discretionary purchase of a $2,000 cable was not affected by the changes in the economy. Especially if all it offers is bragging rights.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #68 –
Quote from: Gag Halfrunt on
I kind of wonder if the barely-warmed-over corpse of what used to be our economies will have an effect on this?


Ya think>??? ;-)

Quote
The economic downturn has caused real problems for golf clubs and yacht builders. OTOH, some luxury car manufacturers have said they are having no worries.


The more basically rational a market segment is, the more likely it is to be affected by economic trends unless it is one of those non-negotiables like emergency acute health care for life-threatening situatations. The dentists are suffering.

Crazy is by definition independent of the economy.

Quote
I'd be really surprised if the discretionary purchase of a $2,000 cable was not affected by the changes in the economy. Especially if all it offers is bragging rights.


FWIW, I rencently pocketed nearly a $grand obtained by liquidating some high end cable and a high end power amp that fell into my hands and the hands of some associates. The prices we obtained for the used equipment were not diminished by the economy, but we may have found more people in the used equipment market because of the economy.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #69 –
Quote from: analog scott on
Quote from: Canar on
I don't care how you cut it, spending $2000 on cables is always problem behaviour. There are a lot of untreated individuals out there...

Edit: based on the negative-consequences criterion above, there are two: inappropriate use of resources, and hallucination of things that are not there.



I'm a bit confused here.



Yeah, right.

Quote
Are you saying that 2,000 dollar cables don't exist and audiophiles are just imagining them? What is the "treatment" for buying 2,000 dollar cables? (that may or may not exist???). Where exactly is the "rule book" on appropriate and inapporpraite use of any individual's personal reseources?



The 'treatment' for a belief in an unlikely audible difference is a good bias-controlled listening test.  But that's bitter medicine to the sort of audiophile who actually buys $2000 cables.


Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #71 –
Quote from: Canar on
$2,000 cables are just stupid. They will not improve sound beyond the hallucinatory effects of bias.


I got to get you guys trained. Sighted bias is an illusion, not a delusion or hallucination.  ;-)

Sighted bias is a very common experience among people who are normal by any reasonable standard. If buying $2,000 cables is pathological, the pathology is not in the perception, but rather the pathology is in the *response* to the perception.

Smelling smoke and perceiving the threat of a fire is not pathological. Running blindly headlong into a crowd of people and seriously injuring people by trampling on them to escape the perceived threat is pathological.

It is normal to experience sighted bias - which is one reason why we are willing to work to hard to avoid sighted bias when the deciion really matters.

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #72 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
I got to get you guys trained. Sighted bias is an illusion, not a delusion or hallucination.  ;-)
We're kind of splitting hairs. I agree that "illusion" is also a fine term for what we're describing, but the connotations of "hallucination" are why I use it!

Quote
  • Main Entry:   hal·lu·ci·na·tion
  • Pronunciation: \h?-?lü-s?-?n?-sh?n\
  • Function:  noun
  • Date: 1629
1 a : perception of objects with no reality usually arising from disorder of the nervous system or in response to drugs (as LSD) b : the object so perceived
2 : an unfounded or mistaken impression or notion : delusion
[/url]

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #73 –
Quote from: Canar on
$2,000 cables are just stupid. They will not improve sound beyond the hallucinatory effects of bias.


This depends on who is purchasing the cables, yes? If a person is buying them because they really and truly believe they "are a huge improvement in sound accuracy", then I'd gather that they are indeed hallucinating (or have come to believe in an illusion). However, if another person (such as me), confesses that he or she is buying the cables because they are prestigious, have awe-inspiring looks, and add value to their hi-fi system, then I'd say they are being true to themselves and care not what other's think about their decision.

The luxury automobile, a fine wristwatch, exotic building materials selected in one's home, a $2K bottle of Bordeaux or cognac are all good examples of this. It follows, if I buy a $6K Rolex watch which actually has poor time-keeping accuracy, but has remarkable build quality, adds prestige and strokes my ego, have I been stupid? I could have bought a $50 Casio which keeps superior time.

Therein lies the magic of luxury goods and services -- consumers obtain/use these things because of how it makes them feel  . I think they should state this as the reason for buying though.

So perhaps it is only the person's reason for buying the item that is being scrutinized, not the purchase itself?

 


The Skeptical Audiophile

Why do so many audiophiles think everything sounds different

Reply #74 –
Quote from: Canar on
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
I got to get you guys trained. Sighted bias is an illusion, not a delusion or hallucination.  ;-)
We're kind of splitting hairs. I agree that "illusion" is also a fine term for what we're describing, but the connotations of "hallucination" are why I use it!


Well, call it what you like, but don't forget that stereo sound is only possible at all because of what you are calling a "hallucination".  When you hear that nicely centered image of your favourite singer hanging in space between your two front speakers you are, under your definition, hallucinating.  There is no singer and no sound at that location.  The sound is coming from  two entirely separate speakers.  Even if you have a center speaker there is still normally sound coming from the side front speakers anyway, and the fact that you hear only one singer is, again, what you call a hallucination.  Dammed useful hallucination, though.

Ed Seedhouse
VA7SDH