I'm ready glad that audio precision doesn't think like the objectivists on this forum, they actually think there is more or better measurements that can be performed in the future to better understand what we are hearing.
Amir and Blind Testing
Let me start by saying I like watching Amir from ASR, so please let’s not get harsh or the thread will be deleted. Many times, Amir has noted that when we’re inserting a new component in our system, our brains go into (to paraphrase) “analytical mode” and we start hearing imaginary improvements. He has reiterated this many times, saying that when he switched to an expensive cable he heard improvements, but when he switched back to the cheap one, he also heard improvements because the brain switches from “music enjoyment mode” to “analytical mode.” Following this logic, which I agree with, wouldn’t blind testing, or any A/B testing be compromised because our brains are always in analytical mode and therefore feeding us inaccurate data? Seems to me you need to relax for a few hours at least and listen to a variety of music before your brain can accurately assess whether something is an actual improvement. Perhaps A/B testing is a strawman argument, because the human brain is not a spectrum analyzer. We are too affected by our biases to come up with any valid data. Maybe.
- ...
- 355 posts total
This is the problem I mentioned earlier. I do not believe that either Amir or the folks at PS Audio know exactly how all possible distortions (and time delays, phase changes, noise patterns, filter slopes, audible effects that change with frequency, etc.) interact to affect the sound quality the human brain hears and interprets. Thus, SQ cannot be assessed using measurements alone. Listening must be part of the assessment. My summary of the P12 review on ASR is that Amir agrees that the P12 cleans up the waveform, as PS Audio intended, but that he can't measure any changes that he believes could improve the SQ when an amp is hooked up to the P12. Of course, Amir doesn't think listening is needed because he thinks his measurements tell the whole story. In contrast, PS Audio has measured and listened to the P12 during development of the product, and most users report hearing major improvements in SQ when using the P12, especially when there are significant problems with the power being supplied to the P12. I do not believe that the folks at ASR are omniscient, and I also do not believe that the folks at PS Audio are trying to rip-off their customers. |
Great post indeed! thanks very much.... And particularly these 2 lines...
|
So you are against the idea of searching for a better and more reliable understanding of what we are hearing? That sounds like flat-out anti-science. I'm glad there are people out there trying to investigate these things, rather than being happy with our current state of understanding. |
Someone can be anti-science using some scientific tools at his disposal...science is also about conceptual tools linking some field to another field... Especially in audio where acoustic and his relation to psycho-acoustic is no less a science than electronical technology when we try to UNDERSTODD listening experience... Audio science is no more fetichism of the tool than fetichism of the gear...... Objective measure are not only around the gear they can be around the speakers/ears/room serving the subjective perception of the timbre experience for example .... This possibility seems to escape "our si called scientists" here.... 😁😊
|
- 355 posts total