Why HiFi Gear Measurements Are Misleading (yes ASR talking to you…)


About 25 years ago I was inside a large room with an A-frame ceiling and large skylights, during the Perseid Meteor Shower that happens every August. This one time was like no other, for two reasons: 1) There were large, red, fragmenting streaks multiple times a minute with illuminated smoke trails, and 2) I could hear them.

Yes, each meteor produced a sizzling sound, like the sound of a frying pan.

Amazed, I Googled this phenomena and found that many people reported hearing this same sizzling sound associated with meteors streaking across the sky. In response, scientists and astrophysicists said it was all in our heads. That, it was totally impossible. Why? Because of the distance between the meteor and the observer. Physics does not allow sound to travel fast enough to hear the sound at the same time that the meteor streaks across the sky. Case closed.

ASR would have agreed with this sound reasoning based in elementary science.

Fast forward a few decades. The scientists were wrong. Turns out, the sound was caused by radiation emitted by the meteors, traveling at the speed of light, and interacting with metallic objects near the observer, even if the observer is indoors. Producing a sizzling sound. This was actually recorded audibly by researchers along with the recording of the radiation. You can look this up easily and listen to the recordings.

Takeaway - trust your senses! Science doesn’t always measure the right things, in the right ways, to fully explain what we are sensing. Therefore your sensory input comes first. You can try to figure out the science later.

I’m not trying to start an argument or make people upset. Just sharing an experience that reinforces my personal way of thinking. Others of course are free to trust the science over their senses. I know this bothers some but I really couldn’t be bothered by that. The folks at ASR are smart people too.

nyev

For those of you who may not have read the discussion about Viv Labs Rigid Float tonearms, some of the posts made by people who insisted that you should only take notice of measurements and theories are quite unbelievable.

Many years ago I was blind auditioned 2 amplifiers, I could definitely hear the difference and the one I bought was an Audiolab and the other was Naim. What makes this to this discussion is that before I did this my heart was set on buying the Naim, and I genuinely believe that if I knew what I was listening to because of my preconception I would have convinced myself the Naim was better.

My spouse is a PhD that works with brains (while they are still in people's heads mind you) We all create neural pathways within our brains that affect our perceptions. Each one of us is therefore unique. We simply will never perceive something, visual, auditory etc. the same way. That is why we cannot agree on "what's best" or what is the best method for determining "best". Measuring audio equipment performance is a scientific analysis but becomes irrelevant when introduced to our unique brains while listening.

As far as hearing the difference between amplifiers, I can definitely hear a difference. In my main system I owned an SS amp from a particular manufacturer that was pure class A. It sounded great but at higher SPL's would go into clipping. I decided to sell it and purchased a class A/B amp from the same manufacturer. It offers a bit more power but also offers a much deeper dynamic range than the pure class A unit. Likewise in my second system I sometimes switch between a low power tube amp and a SS integrated. I can tell the difference immediately. 

By the way, I can't state this for fact because I am certainly not a scientist but genetics may play a role as well. Think about the unique situation with cilantro. Some people love it while others that have a particular gene perceive it as having a soapy taste. This is my situation. While my spouse loves it I find it completely terrible! Can genetics also affect our hearing? I can't say for sure but I would bet that it can.

 

All of our sensory capabilities are not to be trusted. That is why our brain is so large...to better interpret what we sense. The foundation of science is proof and repeatability. Subjective experience is just that...subjective. Not proof of anything. Millions of people talk to their God everyday. Does not prove existence of a God. And there are so many other variables; cost, peer opinion, opponents' opinion, politics, origin, age, bias......

Discussion is valuable however, now what did I do with my blindfold? Must have misplaced it after my last duel. 

@nyev 

You aren’t going to find many ASR lovers here. Most of us see him for what he is and move on.

@snilf 

Thanks for your insightful remarks. I really enjoyed reading them.

In particular, the anecdote about umami, and the various factors which enter into how we hear music (including circumstances and mood). Not only is it notoriously hard to describe what we're hearing at any given time, it's also quite difficult to control our attention so that when we listen a second (or third) time, we attend to the same particulars very closely. The mind wanders even when we try to stop it — and when we do try to stop it (e.g. fix it on, say, "that cymbal crash") we are effectively in a different state of mind (we're in a controlling state of mind, not a relaxed one).

This comment bears out for me, as well:

The most important element: quality of the original recording. Number 2: room acoustics. Number 3: speakers. After that, it’s all marginal effects. The debates about power cords, interconnects, even fuses is, well....

The way I understand the situation with many (not all) audiophiles is as follows: They're into the hobby. They want to hear changes and make improvements. But they cannot or will not listen to only well-recorded material (who can blame them) or deal with their room acoustics (practical obstacles or laziness). They also want to gear shop. So, in order to pursue the hobby, they have to exaggerate the differences made in what they can actually change. And that leads to debate of what (most will not admit) are marginal differences — compared to the ones which will really change things.

@falconquest   -- 

Each one of us is therefore unique. We simply will never perceive something, visual, auditory etc. the same way. That is why we cannot agree on "what's best" or what is the best method for determining "best".

I suppose the question becomes how we can ever agree on anything or even converse. My guess is that we are not only brains but creatures sharing a language and a culture. Thus, despite our manifold differences, we find ways to agree and disagree. 

@nyev 

Our subjective sensory experience IS flawed.

I know what you mean. I would use the word "fallible" and "subject to reconsideration when used as the basis for judgments."

Like you, I've made many mistakes in characterizing and evaluating what I was hearing. Talking to others and also just taking more time before judging has been the key for me. But your point is well taken.