There's Too Much Subjectivity in Audio

shack

97.254% of the consumers purchasing any sort of A/V equipment could give a rat's **** about specs.

Also....would all those here on the forum with "ultra high end" rigs costing "tens of thousands of dollars" please raise your hand...:rolleyes:

jakelm

Oranges are better.

hearingimpared

Yashu wrote: »

The more advances we make, the better the technology that becomes available to people like me that cannot afford the ultra high end. I want to enjoy the same things that you guys enjoy with systems that cost tens of thousands of dollars.

You are misinformed if you think any of us have gear that costs tens of thousands of dollars! You sound a little angry that you think we own this gear and you don't.

I can assure you nothing in my rig costs that much money. Most everything I have I've purchased used so I could afford a higher end product.

cfrizz

We have a WINNER! Chalk another one up for good old common sense!

Well done Troy!:)

TroyD wrote: »

Again, I repeat....if you listen to your rig and you are more obsessed with what is wrong, you are in the wrong hobby. We listen 1. to music 2. on the hifi.

Second, is everything that is audible, measurable. You are assuming that our testing equipment is perfect and that there is nothing left that science hasn't discovered. I don't buy that. However, I could be wrong....I just don't think that our technology is 'perfect'. That said, even if we COULD measure everything and we DID establish 'standards' (whatever they may be)...it still wouldn't amount to a pile of dry ****. Nobody would ever agree. That being a true statement, it's a pointless discussion.

BDT

madmax

hearingimpared wrote: »

You are misinformed if you think any of us have gear that costs tens of thousands of dollars!

Yea, its not like we have $500 record cleaners, $1500 record flatners, $3K SME V tone arms, tubes sitting all over the place and multiple pairs of amps and speakers sitting around to use depending upon our mood...
madmax

hearingimpared

madmax wrote: »

Yea, its not like we have $500 record cleaners, $1500 record flatners, $3K SME V tone arms, tubes sitting all over the place and multiple pairs of amps and speakers sitting around to use depending upon our mood...
madmax

Unless they taught addition differently in Maryland than they did Philly, that still doesn't amount to tens of thousands of dollars!!!:p Although over the years I'm sure $10,000 passed through my hobby account.:D

Yashu

There are systems in the showcase that can easily be 10k or more total. Just because you don't have it hooked up doesn't mean it don't count, and just because your bedroom system isn't used "much" doesn't mean it doesn't count either :P

I am not mad at any of these people. I want to see our money go farther, no matter how much we are able to spend. The way to do that is to actually study the science behind the music. It worked for Canada. PSB, or NAD, for instance are able to use Canada's National Research Council in Ottawa, and tada! great performance for the dollar, or loonie, or whatever... Then you have the landmark research that the BBC did with Harbeth, My point is, there is only evidence towards what I am saying, that more research is warrented. It certainly can't hurt the hobby, to have more knowledge.

heiney9

Yashu wrote: »

There are systems in the showcase that can easily be 10k or more total. Just because you don't have it hooked up doesn't mean it don't count, and just because your bedroom system isn't used "much" doesn't mean it doesn't count either :P

I am not mad at any of these people. I want to see our money go farther, no matter how much we are able to spend. The way to do that is to actually study the science behind the music. It worked for Canada. PSB, or NAD, for instance are able to use Canada's National Research Council in Ottawa, and tada! great performance for the dollar, or loonie, or whatever... Then you have the landmark research that the BBC did with Harbeth, My point is, there is only evidence towards what I am saying, that more research is warrented. It certainly can't hurt the hobby, to have more knowledge.

I've owned Canadian speakers which are byproducts of the NRC and they were no better or worse than other products in the same market segment. So whatever they are doing at the NRC to establish a consistent measuring stick doesn't seem to make a bit of difference beyond artificial piece of mind.

Early B.

Yashu wrote: »

My point is, there is only evidence towards what I am saying, that more research is warrented. It certainly can't hurt the hobby, to have more knowledge.

"Noooo, we don't need more knowledge, we need more ears!" -- thus sayeth the naysayers.


I'm sure most of us can provide numerous examples in the past where we increased our knowledge about music (and the gear it is produced on), and this knowledge has led to a heightened level of listening enjoyment (for music or HT).

We all know that music is both art (subjective) and science (objective). We can handle the subjective part of music because we know what we like when we hear it. Here's the rub -- most of us could learn a lot more about the science of music. If we did, we could potentially increase our enjoyment of music even more.

Unfortunately, if you're crystallized in the belief that science in music, i.e., specs and measurements, would not be more beneficial to you and others, then such notions stem from either arrogance or ignorance.

I agree with Yashu -- what harm is there in learning more about the science of music? Now, those of you who parrot, "What's important is the music, not the gear" are not taking your own words to heart if you refuse to study music more than you study the gear it's played on.

Let's be real about it -- most audiophiles are just a bunch a damn hypocrites. If it were all about the music like we say it is, then we'd be talking a helluva lot more about music, not the gear. And many of you even become indignant when someone simply broaches the subject of music from a scientific perspective. This makes no sense at all. None.

Talk to folks on the forum about their experiences with bass optimization software and ask them how it improved their listening enjoyment. Talk to folks on the forum about their use of automated calibration systems in their A/V receivers. These are just two small examples of how modern science is being used in the audio world. Yes, let your ears decide, but use your brains, as well.

cfrizz

You damn geeks can do whatever you want. I'm just going to sit back and ENJOY the music & movies!

Early B.

cfrizz wrote: »

You damn geeks can do whatever you want. I'm just going to sit back and ENJOY the music & movies!

Do you know what the fellas call you behind your back? --- "Miss 200 WPC"

You're among the geekiest of us all because you spawn the newbs into audio geeks. :D

cfrizz

LOL! I can live with that title.:D If anything I spawn smart shoppers who get exactly what they need the first time around so that they too can just sit back & enjoy the results.

You all take an already semi complicated hobby & make it even more complicated!

I already have a full time job, I don't need to give myself a 2nd one.:D

Gaara

shack wrote: »

97.254% of the consumers purchasing any sort of A/V equipment could give a rat's **** about specs.

Also....would all those here on the forum with "ultra high end" rigs costing "tens of thousands of dollars" please raise your hand...:rolleyes:

I think just the opposite, all consumers care about specs and only specs, at least from 3 yrs selling A/V equipment.

Look at TVs 1080p is all the rage and people who go shopping look for "1080p". They don't look for a specific brand or picture quality or features...all they seem to want is 1080p. Sometimes they want the 65in because their neighbor has a 60in.

When it comes to receivers people only cared about power, I rarely could sell a better receiver because it had better features or sounded better, but if I said it was 120wpc instead of 100wpc people would go nuts. Most customers if you wanted to step them up that is all you had to say, more power.

F1nut

Gaara wrote: »

I think just the opposite, all consumers care about specs and only specs, at least from 3 yrs selling A/V equipment.

Look at TVs 1080p is all the rage and people who go shopping look for "1080p". They don't look for a specific brand or picture quality or features...all they seem to want is 1080p. Sometimes they want the 65in because their neighbor has a 60in.

When it comes to receivers people only cared about power, I rarely could sell a better receiver because it had better features or sounded better, but if I said it was 120wpc instead of 100wpc people would go nuts. Most customers if you wanted to step them up that is all you had to say, more power.

Thank you, you've proven that with all the specs in the world today, they still aren't understood by the general public and are therefore entirely meaningless when it comes to good sound or video.

treitz3

....and I am PROUD to say that I am not "most customers"

I prefer "educated consumer".

dkg999

OMG, this is all getting too complicated! I'm even starting to agree with Cfrizz on some of her points! If we had quantifiable and consistent measurements it would lead to a convergence that would result in one "best" class of gear, and no diversity. Becaude audio is all subjective, we have a great diversity in gear, manufacturers, types of sound reproduction, etc. I think that's what we want, and we should be glad it's all subjective and measurements are pretty much meaningless. I have to go shower now, I feel slimy

shack

Gaara wrote:

When it comes to receivers people only cared about power, I rarely could sell a better receiver because it had better features or sounded better, but if I said it was 120wpc instead of 100wpc people would go nuts. Most customers if you wanted to step them up that is all you had to say, more power.

F1nut wrote:

Thank you, you've proven that with all the specs in the world today, they still aren't understood by the general public and are therefore entirely meaningless when it comes to good sound or video.

Jesse "GOT IT"....Gaara "DIDN'T". (I was being a bit facetious with the % thing)

It's not the "specs" they are concerned about...it's the marketing. They wouldn't know the difference in wpc or kHz or ohm. Buying because of specs means they understand what they mean and making an informed decision because of what those specs tell them. Not because this # is bigger than that #.

shack

You know...IT JUST CAME TO ME...LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTNING!

Several folks want a standard with which to compare their gear. A standard by which the gear is tested against specific criteria and then the results made public.

YOU ALREADY HAVE IT!



But wait....don't most here make light of the THX testing as a meaningless exercise? Something not necessary nor worthy for the audiophile.

I'm so confused.

Yashu

Monster cable is THX certified!!! We need a better standard

TroyD

Lemme also through this out there. Does anyone think that speaker companies NOT in Canada don't do research and testing?? That's patently ABSURD. Companies spend millions in R&D for crying out loud. Anyone that's been on the Polk tour can attest to how much effort and time Polk puts into it.....as do other serious speaker companies (and electronics companies). To think otherwise is ridiculous.

BDT

Yashu

You really don't like to read do you?

Going to quote myself here:

Then you have the landmark research that the BBC did with Harbeth,

Last time I checked, the BBC was not from Canada... also, Don't forget the work that JBL/Altec Lansing put into speaker technology. I would venture to guess that 75% of the music that is in your collection has been mastered with JBL monitors. JBL pushed the limits before it was in vogue, and their research was just one seed that was planted in the science of sound engineering.

You want to know a Canadian company that began using the NRC, but used the knowledge gained there to start their own labs? Totem. I don't think there are many people here that are going to say totem makes **** speakers.

Research is very important to the advancement of audio... it doesn't matter so much WHO is doing the research, but what comes of it and how we can learn from our past mistakes and build on our past successes. The hobby will stagnate without this forward evolution. Imagine if JBL, the BBC research, The NRC of Canada, Phillips, all of it, every R&D department out there... just never happened. Have fun with your giant paper cone mono speakers that barely can play an AM dynamic range, flawed amp designs, and basically no recorded media to play. I will enjoy my hifi that has been built on the foundations of decades of research, thankyou. Standards build solid foundations, why is this even questioned?

I told you this in another thread, and yes, it is ironic that I am having to write it again... please read before posting stuff!

TroyD

The way to do that is to actually study the science behind the music. It worked for Canada. PSB, or NAD, for instance are able to use Canada's National Research Council in Ottawa, and tada! great performance for the dollar, or loonie, or whatever... Then you have the landmark research that the BBC did with Harbeth, My point is, there is only evidence towards what I am saying, that more research is warrented.

The obvious implication is that in general, research is only being done by few and that it's being done at outside labs. It's a reasonable conclusion to draw from what you posted and it's horseshit. Perhaps you should read YOUR posts and if they aren't conveying what you mean, perhaps you might try to clarify.

Polk, IIRC, has done extensive research, albeit not at a public facility. B&W has thier own facilities as does, I'm sure, all serious audio companies. Which begs the question, what is your point? That the way to go is independent labs? If that's the case, it's still horseshit because NOBODY WILL EVER AGREE on how to interpret the data.

I'm done with this and I'm done with you.

BDT

reeltrouble1

Yazoo is just blowing on his kazoo again. Yea, your JBL are the end all, enjoy your hifi, perhaps some Avodart would be of help with your constant dribbling.

of course we will get a clarifying disertation with more quotes from the Yazoo about the Yazoo which are up the Yazoo.

wonder how we ever got along before all the Yazooism's to straighten us out and let us know about the lousy Polk speakers.

RT1

heiney9

Yas, when are you going to stop re-stataing and re-re-stating and re-re-re-stating the same thing. We get it, so stop already. Everytime I read your post I feel like I'm in the twilight zone. You aren't going to change anyone's mind here about the particular subject you keep beating us over the head about...............time to let it go and move on to your next novel.

H9

reeltrouble1

shack wrote: »

I'm so confused.

That is because under that gray your a blonde.........;)

Yashu

woo woo

treitz3

Excuse me gentlemen, I'm going to talk to the thread for a second.....

Die mother f&%$er, die mother f&%$er, die mother f&%$er, DIE!

OK, I'm done.