Take it on faith: A cease-and-desist letter to those who only believe in measurements


Faith is a firm belief in something for which there is no proof (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith). Faith is often considered to be distinct from and even contrary to science. I argue science is based on faith. Specifically, it is faith in the belief that measurements are always correct, and they alone can reveal the world around us. However, there is no evidence that this approach will always provide a correct and complete depiction of our environment.

I am not anti-science. In fact, I am all about science. I was a science major in college. I taught high school biology and chemistry. I employ science every day in my current career. I also use it to make decisions when it comes to audio, and I can point to a scientific basis behind my equipment decisions, speaker/listener locations and room treatment. I believe John Locke’s scientific method is a wonderful boon to mankind.  But although data may rule my life, I know that science has its limitations.

The scientific method is an empirical approach and relies on our eight senses or extensions thereof to measure phenomena, enabling us to better understand and control our environment. People who embrace this approach believe if something cannot be measured, it cannot exist. They have total faith in this approach and deny the credibility of others whose senses do not or cannot yield something in units. In essence, these disciples take it on faith that measurements are the only true way to make sense of the world. However, we just may not have developed the instrument that enables us to measure the event. Early digital is a good example of our senses superseding the limitations of our understanding of the technology and hence, our measurements. Other examples of this include our past beliefs that we could destroy mass, that the earth is flat, and the universe is not expanding. And cables and amplifiers all sound the same.

Others find their senses can reveal events that are not apparent to some and may not even be measurable. Some people can smell faint odors or feel a slight breeze that others cannot.  My wife can find a Petoskey stone on a beach out of thousands of rocks; I cannot see it even when I am standing over it. Different cables, fuses, amplifier topology, or cartridge design may or may not result in the same or even any data points and may or may not sound alike. But just because you cannot hear a difference nor measure a difference does not mean there is no difference. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, just as good sound may be in their ear.

Some of us have at least as much faith in our ears as we do in our REW software and associated hardware. I start room setup with acoustic theory and then confirm with measurements, but the final placement is always a result of what sounds most pleasing. I would not know how to determine speaker toe-in using a microphone.

While I will always have to trust my senses, I am not handicapped by relying solely on those that are associated with a number.

 “…not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.” William Bruce Cameron, 1963

tcutter

@mahgister 

A tuba (or an organ , or a guitar),  in jazz,rock,pop classical,or world music must sound like a tuba near you ....

I was a bit slow to fully appreciate this point, which is at the heart of things. Tom Martin of Absolute Sound calls this believability.

@newton_john no problem. The reason I brought up the more basic scientific understanding behind conventional measurements for audio electronics and cables is that people with limited time and money, and let’s say a lack of adventure and perhaps a lack of trust in their own perceptions can point to quantitative results for a single piece of gear and feel assured it is “good”.  This of course ignores some of more recent (getting close to 80-100 years old now) and sophisticated advancements in our scientific understanding and how related design and manufacturing techniques may be applied to achieve superior results. Relying on accepted measurements of individual items also ignores the fact that as soon as you connect more than one box together with wires in a “system” in a particular physical configuration in a particular space with a unique and fluctuating power supply, complexity can work to reduce the value of those precious specifications, and our ears and brains become the ultimate judge of success. You and @mahgister have eloquently made this point, and I agree.

i guess my point is this, if reviews on ASR or other sites based only on measurements float your boat - I can understand that.  In practice, building systems in my spaces I have found the specifications of single pieces of gear to be of only limited value.  YMMV

kn

I think the same and my experience is the same ....

Objective acoustics parameters and psycho-acoustics one paired with hearing experience is the key...

ASR is marketing enterprise, their measures can be useful but  they put the focus on the wrong side of the equation  with their  limited understanding of  the constraints implied  by the measuring tool (Fourier tool) in the context of hearing theory ... (Milind Kunchur get it in his critics) 

Audio is very complex matter ...

In practice, building systems in my spaces I have found the specifications of single pieces of gear to be of only limited value.

Didn't Goethe say: "he who possesses science and art has religion; but he who possesses neither, let him have religion", something like that.  Read that quote, I thought in Faust a long time ago in college.  And aren't there theories that propose consciousness might be a particle in a quantum state, part of matter itself?  Anyhoo, if you don't like what someone said or thinks and it doesn't personally affect you, ignore them or it.  Life's too short.

  •