Do Audio Measurements Correlate With Sound Quality? - Page 7 - AVS Forum
View Poll Results: Do Audio Measurements Correlate With Sound Quality?
Yes, they are strongly correlated 102 35.66%
Yes, but they are only weakly correlated 51 17.83%
No, they are not correlated at all 13 4.55%
It depends on the type of product, testing, and environment 120 41.96%
Voters: 286. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 219 Old 12-01-2013, 10:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Have a look at this interview with Bob Stuart.

That is a very interesting article and answers many of my questions. Including how blind testing "may" trick our brains and not be totally reliable.

No listening test is totally reliable, so here we go again, another person whose apparent biases against blind tests causes them to stigmatize blind tests for doing what no test can do.
Quote:
It also goes into how there is much more to high res than just numbers

Since there is no audibility to high res, what else is there?
Quote:
,like pre ringing for instance.

Pre ringing around 22 KHz involves ulrasonic frequencies and guess what - because they are ultrasonic, they can't be heard.

You can resolve your apparfent confusion in this area with a little reading here:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/sound/usound.html
Quote:
I urge others on this thread to read this short but candid conversation. Thanks Roger.

It's not candid at all, IMO it is more like an interview of Rush Limbaugh by Pat Buchanan. ;-)
arnyk is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 219 Old 12-01-2013, 11:02 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

First and foremost, Nvidio I think that the above comment is clear evidence that you have never spent even 10 minutes following the simple advice that I gave above.
If only you knew.
Quote:
All the pieces are free, and are easy t download and install within a minute or two.
Did you even bother to read my reply? I literally agreed with you in my previous reply to you because I said yes, it's a piece of cake.
Quote:
Nividio your biases against good listening tests are so incredibly obvious as you again and again demonize DBTs for problems that afflict most listening tests.
I have no bias whatsoever against good listening tests. What I do have very strong bias against are poorly conducted listening tests and all sorts of ridiculous conclusions drawn from either poor or good listening tests. http://www.avsforum.com/t/1496541/are-blind-audio-comparisons-worthwhile/60#post_23897879
Quote:
How many times have you been ticketed for that simple infraction in just this brief thread?
Not even a single time, at least not as far as I am currently able to tell.
Quote:
You are almost perfectly predictable, every comment you make criticizes DBT for problems that in truth afflict any good listening test.
I have already given you a perfect example of a problem that in truth does NOT afflict any good listening test. [See here: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1489493/do-audio-measurements-correlate-with-sound-quality/150#post_24013290 ]
Quote:
Again I ask you since when is doing a good listening test of any kind from scratch a walk in the park if you don't have most of the legwork done for you like the test I mention above?
Since when? Since never, which is exactly what I said in my previous reply to you: "conducting DBTs properly, and interpreting their results correctly, is really very very far from easy".

Further, those few sample files from Ethan Winer alone can hardly be used to draw any statistically conclusive evidence. There need to be many more sample files of varying sources for that. On top of that, correct interpretation of the test results is still impossible except if a very large number of listeners partake in the same test in a reliably controlled environment, and, even if we can assume for just a moment that this problem has all been already perfectly taken care of for us, regardless, people without adequate knowledge about psychoacoustics will very very likely still fail to correctly interpret the combined test results anyway.
Quote:
It turns out that what I recommended above is about as easy as it gets, and is far easier to do than even the most trivial sighted evaluation. No level matching, no cable pulling or plugging, you don't even have to find any equipment but a Windows PC and a good pair of headphones or earphones which most people already have.
That's what I said, it's easy. Yet, unfortunately, it's also easy for most people to draw all sorts of ridiculous conclusions from such a test.
nvidio is offline  
post #183 of 219 Old 12-01-2013, 11:21 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Sorry about that, it was a typo on my part.
Never said it was. I said "corner frequency" which in more formal nomenclature is in or about the transition band.
Pre-ringing and post-ringing artifacts can also occur in the passband. Relaxing the steepness of the filter cutoff slope is what can easily help to reduce them.
nvidio is offline  
post #184 of 219 Old 12-01-2013, 11:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
comfynumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Northeast PA.
Posts: 4,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 407
I'll stay out of this debate, I have a feeling if God ordained the posts neither one of you would believe it wink.gif but I do not have any bias against blind testing or any other testing. I also don't blindly believe everything I hear. I buy what I can afford and make the best of it, and right now I'm adding room treatments and it seems to be the best bang for the buck that I've spent.
comfynumb is offline  
post #185 of 219 Old 12-01-2013, 11:44 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

(a) That isn't what I said.
Yeah, you said the differences are inaudible. So tell me, please, why should we believe you when you simply can't prove it!
Quote:
(b) Just another example of stigmatizing blind tests for not being able to do something that no listening test can do.
Just another one ot your incessant repetitions of item (b) making 2 in just this one post.
The reason why I keep repeating it is because you simply keep forcing me to. Stop claiming the differences are inaudible. Prove it. Or actually.. no, don't prove it. Instead, why don't you simply prove it yesterday!!!!
nvidio is offline  
post #186 of 219 Old 12-01-2013, 12:05 PM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

I'll stay out of this debate, I have a feeling if God ordained the posts neither one of you would believe it wink.gif but I do not have any bias against blind testing or any other testing. I also don't blindly believe everything I hear. I buy what I can afford and make the best of it, and right now I'm adding room treatments and it seems to be the best bang for the buck that I've spent.
You are completely right IMO, and room treatments truly are a gift from God. smile.gif
nvidio is offline  
post #187 of 219 Old 12-01-2013, 11:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
67jason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

(a) That isn't what I said.
Yeah, you said the differences are inaudible. So tell me, please, why should we believe you when you simply can't prove it!
Quote:
(b) Just another example of stigmatizing blind tests for not being able to do something that no listening test can do.
Just another one ot your incessant repetitions of item (b) making 2 in just this one post.
The reason why I keep repeating it is because you simply keep forcing me to. Stop claiming the differences are inaudible. Prove it. Or actually.. no, don't prove it. Instead, why don't you simply prove it yesterday!!!!

Please prove reliably that the differences are audible.

Also, since you have issues with ABX abx DBT tests, can you outline a better, more clear, and more reliable test?

I don't need snobs to tell me how to think, thank you!
LOL!
Why you wouldn't want to join this forum
67jason is offline  
post #188 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 04:09 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

(a) That isn't what I said.
Yeah, you said the differences are inaudible. So tell me, please, why should we believe you when you simply can't prove it!

You are not following the bouncing ball. Don't believe me, do some reliable listening tests of your own.

Your post seems to show evidence of confusion about the purpose of science. The goal of scientific investigation is the gathering of reliable, unbiased evidence, not absolute proof.
Quote:
Quote:
(b) Just another example of stigmatizing blind tests for not being able to do something that no listening test can do.
Just another one ot your incessant repetitions of item (b) making 2 in just this one post.
The reason why I keep repeating it is because you simply keep forcing me to. Stop claiming the differences are inaudible. Prove it.

I offered the people reading this thread the easy opportunity to gather your own evidence. How does it get better than that?
Quote:
Or actually.. no, don't prove it. Instead, why don't you simply prove it yesterday!!!!

Proof is an obsolete concept. All findings of science are provisional until better evidence is obtained. Why not take an activist approach to these questions rather than taking pot shots at something that you apparently have no real interest in?
arnyk is offline  
post #189 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 04:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

(a) That isn't what I said.
Yeah, you said the differences are inaudible. So tell me, please, why should we believe you when you simply can't prove it!
Quote:
(b) Just another example of stigmatizing blind tests for not being able to do something that no listening test can do.
Just another one ot your incessant repetitions of item (b) making 2 in just this one post.
The reason why I keep repeating it is because you simply keep forcing me to. Stop claiming the differences are inaudible. Prove it. Or actually.. no, don't prove it. Instead, why don't you simply prove it yesterday!!!!

Please prove reliably that the differences are audible.

I anticipate that will not be forthcoming. Clearly we are dealing with people who want to take highly biased pot-shots at modern listening test technology while glossing over and obfuscating the severe problems of traditional approaches.
Quote:
Also, since you have issues with ABX DBT tests, can you outline a better, more clear, and more reliable test?

I suspect that we are dealing with people who would prefer to complain about new technology, and live in the past, as opposed to moving forward.
arnyk is offline  
post #190 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 04:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

(a) That isn't what I said.
Yeah, you said the differences are inaudible. So tell me, please, why should we believe you when you simply can't prove it!
Quote:
(b) Just another example of stigmatizing blind tests for not being able to do something that no listening test can do.
Just another one ot your incessant repetitions of item (b) making 2 in just this one post.
The reason why I keep repeating it is because you simply keep forcing me to.

Curious. What caliber gun am I holding to your head from thousands of mile away? ;-)
Quote:
Stop claiming the differences are inaudible.

You are not interpreting what I said correctly. I'm simply pointing out reliable evidence that has already been gathered.I've also pointed out how you can gather more evidence of that kind for yourself with minimal effort. Got a problem with the truth?
Quote:
Prove it.

Provide reliable evidence to support your claims. So far you seem to stopped after reading some highly flawed sales blurbs from highly biased sources.

For example whgat many see to be Robert Harley's anti-scientific pandering to high end audio manufacturers is legendary. The interview with Bob Stuart is over 4 years old and contains claims that as I have pointed out, can be shown to be faulty with simple experiments you can do in your own home.
Quote:
Or actually.. no, don't prove it. Instead, why don't you simply prove it yesterday!!!!

The evidence is there for you to see. What I see from reminds me of the little girl who screams at the top of her lungs so that she doesn't have to hear the helpful information that others have presented her with.

Typical of what happens when people with a scientific interest try to present reliable scientifc information to true believers....
arnyk is offline  
post #191 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 05:00 AM
 
Cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Northwest Boonies
Posts: 5,738
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Ten years ago or so there existed a competitive variety of stores in which one could wander through rooms where speakers were able to be compared to each other by means of a switch. It was not a proper way of evaluating, I suppose, but at least one was able to determine which speaker sounded best to one's ears. That is what most of us would do when trying to find speakers we liked.

Nowadays, in the communities I am near there are no competitive stores in which to shop. The Good Guys and Circuit City are gone. Even Best Buy's Magnolia has vanished from my vicinity. In Best Buy there are no glass rooms to evaluate speakers in. The ability to select speakers by using the sonic logic of "compare and contrast" is gone. So what criteria do we use when selecting something that is made for the ears?

Even given all the extensive test data that proves the unreliability and "naivete" of the human ear I still would like to be able to choose which speakers I want by using them.

When choosing a painting I use my eyes. I do understand and see how technologically convoluted our hearing, and our present-day packaging and delivery of sound systems are (codecs et al). But I do still wish I had a place or, better yet, places to go and evaluate, to whatever limited ability, which speakers sounded best to my own ears. Even if those ears are not as objective (as many studies will undeniably prove) as I naively think they are.

But since there no longer exist any places to go to use my faulted faculty, I use reviews, measured tests, my own remembered likes and dislikes and usually whatever fits into my budget as the deciding factors.

I find that amps and receivers are more similar to each than speakers are similar to each other. Speakers do seem to have different sound characteristics, whereas receivers differ more in features, power and reliability. But maybe I am wrong. Maybe it's all just smoke and mirrors, and we should just choose the speakers according to how they look.
I still wish I could go into those long gone glass rooms and swich between (non-level balanced) speakers and choose.
comfynumb likes this.
Cyrano is offline  
post #192 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 05:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrano View Post

Ten years ago or so there existed a competitive variety of stores in which one could wander through rooms where speakers were able to be compared to each other by means of a switch. It was not a proper way of evaluating, I suppose, but at least one was able to determine which speaker sounded best to one's ears. That is what most of us would do when trying to find speakers we liked.

I sort of got bullied out ofall that by a local high end dealer. I came into his shop and was snubbed because the only salesman spent about an hour pouring sugar into the ears of a lookey-loo who was making his periodic pilgrimage to audition the speakers of his dreams which ironically I would have bought on the spot if I wanted to. I was then given an alleged demonstration of the speakers I was interested in by means of having them dragged in from another room, unceremoniously hooked up, and so on. I made an aggressive financial offer, bought them after listening to a criticism of the amp I planed to use them with, and escaped with my life and sanity only slightly and temporarily diminshed. The speakers were wonderful at home.
Quote:
Nowadays, in the communities I am near there are no competitive stores in which to shop. The Good Guys and Circuit City are gone. Even Best Buy's Magnolia has vanished from my vicinity. In Best Buy there are no glass rooms to evaluate speakers in. The ability to select speakers by using the sonic logic of "compare and contrast" is gone.

IMO no great loss. Speakers are profoundly affected by the rooms they are used in. Some say that once you start listening to speakers of even modest quality, when you listen to them you hear more of the room than the speakers.
Quote:
So what criteria do we use when selecting something that is made for the ears?

On axis frequency response can be altered dramatically by equalization as long as the speakers frequency response is relatively controlled when it comes to holes in frequency response. Nonlinear distortion and directivity can't. Automatic equalizers are a standard feature of just about every AVR above the rawest entry level. Technical tests seem to be the best way to evaluate these parameters.

Right now it appears that we need speakers that are free of serious holes in their frequency response, have good dynamic range and low nonlinear distortion, and have good controlled directivity.
Quote:
Even given all the extensive test data that proves the unreliability and "naivete" of the human ear I still would like to be able to choose which speakers I want by using them.

The way you do that reasonably is called "The in home demonstration". It probably needs to run for weeks as opposed to hours.
arnyk is offline  
post #193 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 05:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
comfynumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Northeast PA.
Posts: 4,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrano View Post

Ten years ago or so there existed a competitive variety of stores in which one could wander through rooms where speakers were able to be compared to each other by means of a switch. It was not a proper way of evaluating, I suppose, but at least one was able to determine which speaker sounded best to one's ears. That is what most of us would do when trying to find speakers we liked.

Nowadays, in the communities I am near there are no competitive stores in which to shop. The Good Guys and Circuit City are gone. Even Best Buy's Magnolia has vanished from my vicinity. In Best Buy there are no glass rooms to evaluate speakers in. The ability to select speakers by using the sonic logic of "compare and contrast" is gone. So what criteria do we use when selecting something that is made for the ears?

Even given all the extensive test data that proves the unreliability and "naivete" of the human ear I still would like to be able to choose which speakers I want by using them.

When choosing a painting I use my eyes. I do understand and see how technologically convoluted our hearing, and our present-day packaging and delivery of sound systems are (codecs et al). But I do still wish I had a place or, better yet, places to go and evaluate, to whatever limited ability, which speakers sounded best to my own ears. Even if those ears are not as objective (as many studies will undeniably prove) as I naively think they are.

But since there no longer exist any places to go to use my faulted faculty, I use reviews, measured tests, my own remembered likes and dislikes and usually whatever fits into my budget as the deciding factors.

I find that amps and receivers are more similar to each than speakers are similar to each other. Speakers do seem to have different sound characteristics, whereas receivers differ more in features, power and reliability. But maybe I am wrong. Maybe it's all just smoke and mirrors, and we should just choose the speakers according to how they look.
I still wish I could go into those long gone glass rooms and swich between (non-level balanced) speakers and choose.



+1 yes the good ol days of actually wandering from room to room and looking at and listening to the different pieces of gear available. Now that they are for the most part gone, I find pro reviews by the trusted few a great starting point to look for gear. I just made the biggest AV purchases of my life in the last year based on these reviews and with the help of fellow AVS members and their experiences. I'll tell you, I am very pleased with the results.
comfynumb is offline  
post #194 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 06:41 AM
 
Cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Northwest Boonies
Posts: 5,738
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

+1 yes the good ol days of actually wandering from room to room and looking at and listening to the different pieces of gear available. Now that they are for the most part gone, I find pro reviews by the trusted few a great starting point to look for gear. I just made the biggest AV purchases of my life in the last year based on these reviews and with the help of fellow AVS members and their experiences. I'll tell you, I am very pleased with the results.

That is one of the best things about AVS. I have gotten much of my gear from recommendations found here.
And it's often just the accumulated knowledge of well-mentioned gear that has allowed me to make a fairly "blind" purchase based on brand-name recognition when I've found something sitting on a shelf with a "too low to be ignored" price tempting me.

Still, I remember many times when I attended High Fi conventions at (I think it was) the Beverly Hilton in LA in the 80s and 90s and how much fun it was to wander through all the many rooms of sound gear (mostly speakers) and listen to somone's newest attempt to reproduce the way things really sound. Some of the speakers were not at all conventional, some were tiny and some were huge, some were beautiful and some not so much. But I sure did hear a lot of different sounding speakers. Most of them quite good. It has always seemed to me that of all the parts of a sound system the speakers are the most subjectively chosen.
comfynumb likes this.
Cyrano is offline  
post #195 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 09:20 AM
 
Cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Northwest Boonies
Posts: 5,738
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 90
After all the words one still must choose. I know that a glass-walled room is not very good, but it's the same for all the candidates. And all the caveats may not be known or satisfied. (breaking in period, et al)
Options are a good thing.

IMO, of course.
Cyrano is offline  
post #196 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 11:15 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Please prove reliably that the differences are audible.
I am not the guy who has subjectively jumped to the conclusion that the differences are inaudible. You are mistaking me with somebody else. If a person wants to believe that the differences are inaudible then that is perfectly fine with me. If a person says that the differences are inaudible then if this same person cannot prove that the differences are inaudible, I raise my skepticism. However, if this same person, who cannot prove that the differences are inaudible, but who says that they are inaudible, has pretended to be someone who doesn't believe in theory without proof, I don't raise my skepticism anymore because then the problem is obvious.
Quote:
Also, since you have issues with ABX abx DBT tests, can you outline a better, more clear, and more reliable test?
Maybe I am just dense, but.. I find that the best way to determine if I can be happy for an extended period of time with the effect a certain audio product has on the sound quality of my system, is to listen to my system with this audio product placed in it for an extended period of time.
nvidio is offline  
post #197 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 11:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
67jason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Please prove reliably that the differences are audible.
I am not the guy who has subjectively jumped to the conclusion that the differences are inaudible. You are mistaking me with somebody else. If a person wants to believe that the differences are inaudible then that is perfectly fine with me. If a person says that the differences are inaudible then if this same person cannot prove that the differences are inaudible, I raise my skepticism. However, if this same person, who cannot prove that the differences are inaudible, but who says that they are inaudible, has pretended to be someone who doesn't believe in theory without proof, I don't raise my skepticism anymore because then the problem is obvious.
Quote:
Also, since you have issues with ABX abx DBT tests, can you outline a better, more clear, and more reliable test?
Maybe I am just dense, but.. I find that the best way to determine if I can be happy for an extended period of time with the effect a certain audio product has on the sound quality of my system, is to listen to my system with this audio product placed in it for an extended period of time.

Ok maybe I'm slow, but I read the first part of your reply multiple times and it didn't make any sense. Please rephrase and reference the persons who made a subjective inaudible claim. I didn't notice that sort of claim made.

The second part of your response is pure subjective with no merit what so ever. If that is how you truely make your evaluations what leg do you have to stand on to criticize the best standardardized test we have currently available to identify audible difference without bias?

I conclude by your statements in this thread that you are too emotionally involved to objectively offer any sort of opinion on the subject at hand....open your mind and you may discover a few things that can be enlightening to you, and perhaps increase your enjoyment of this hobby. Of course this is just my subjective opinion. smile.gif

I don't need snobs to tell me how to think, thank you!
LOL!
Why you wouldn't want to join this forum
67jason is offline  
post #198 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 11:32 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

The goal of scientific investigation is the gathering of reliable, unbiased evidence, not absolute proof.
Have you gathered reliable, unbiased evidence to support your claim that the differences are inaudible? If your answer is yes, the Nobel prize will be yours.
nvidio is offline  
post #199 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 01:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,442
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

The interview with Bob Stuart is over 4 years old and contains claims that as I have pointed out, can be shown to be faulty with simple experiments you can do in your own home.
You mean experiments like ABX DBT will show Mr. Stuart's claims to be false? Has that happened in the ensuing 4 years?

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I suspect that we are dealing with people who would prefer to complain about new technology, and live in the past, as opposed to moving forward.
You mean like dismissing the potential audible effects of brickwall anti-alias filters, and technological ways to mitigate them?


Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

The way you do that reasonably is called "The in home demonstration". It probably needs to run for weeks as opposed to hours.
Is long-term listening a viable alternative to ABX tests? Or does it reveal things that ABX cannot? If so, would it not be important to supplement any ABX null result with long-term listening?

Arny, could you fix the quote errors in post 188? Nvideo did not say all those things.
nvidio likes this.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #200 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 01:23 PM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Ok maybe I'm slow, but I read the first part of your reply multiple times and it didn't make any sense. Please rephrase and reference the persons who made a subjective inaudible claim. I didn't notice that sort of claim made.
Here goes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

{snip} Their common characteristic is that they are both listening tests, and neither actually has a flaw when they reveal the true facts of the matter. However, since the purpose of a listening test is to develop reliable evidence, tests that actually do that cannot be faulted. {snip}
Emphasis added by me.
To see what happened next, please navigate the link below.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1489493/do-audio-measurements-correlate-with-sound-quality/150#post_24016964
Last time I checked, a fact was either a true fact or a gasbag fact. rolleyes.gif
The gasbag facts continued as follows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

{snip} there is no audibility to high res {snip}
rolleyes.gif
Quote:
The second part of your response is pure subjective with no merit what so ever. If that is how you truely make your evaluations what leg do you have to stand on to criticize the best standardardized test we have currently available to identify audible difference without bias?
Yes, the second part of my response was purely subjective. However, the first part wasn't! :hint: :hint:
Quote:
I conclude by your statements in this thread that you are too emotionally involved to objectively offer any sort of opinion on the subject at hand....open your mind and you may discover a few things that can be enlightening to you, and perhaps increase your enjoyment of this hobby. Of course this is just my subjective opinion. smile.gif
Nah.. if I open my mind any farther than I have already opened it the way I did in the first part of my response, the guaranteed fact will be my brain will fall out.
nvidio is offline  
post #201 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 02:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
comfynumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Northeast PA.
Posts: 4,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 407
The question is... If our rooms/setups measure well does it mean it will sound good? Would most of us know a properly setup HT or music room if we heard one? Would we like it, or would we be so used to what "we" have that it would sound "off" to us? I've seen the most perfect graph I've ever seen right here on an AVS thread and although I've never measured my setup I know I'm nowhere close to that. I would really like to hear that system to compare.
comfynumb is offline  
post #202 of 219 Old 12-02-2013, 04:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 8,697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

The question is... If our rooms/setups measure well does it mean it will sound good? Would most of us know a properly setup HT or music room if we heard one? Would we like it, or would we be so used to what "we" have that it would sound "off" to us? I've seen the most perfect graph I've ever seen right here on an AVS thread and although I've never measured my setup I know I'm nowhere close to that. I would really like to hear that system to compare.

It might.
However, a sweep is not going to tell the story about distortion and other issues that influence what may sound good to you. Some may want more bass than is flat, so your preference comes into play.

I do not use Audyssey for 2 channel LPCM because the analog outputs from the BDP-105 sound better to me, providing more detail, bass extension, and more natural sounding instruments. From what I can tell, using the HDMI inputs first loses something that equalization does not return. YMMV.

Id much rather have a BDP-105 hooked directly to good amps than a receiver use HDMI with a receiver with Audyssey.

Audio measurements, reviews, and auditions helped my select the Revel Salons.
OmniMic measurements showed that their are some room issues but they are not gross.
Also, that measurements can vary significantly throughout the room.

- Rich

Oppo Beta Group

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A51 | Revel Salon, Voice, Studio | Velodyne HGS-15
RichB is offline  
post #203 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 03:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
67jason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Ok maybe I'm slow, but I read the first part of your reply multiple times and it didn't make any sense. Please rephrase and reference the persons who made a subjective inaudible claim. I didn't notice that sort of claim made.
Here goes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

{snip} Their common characteristic is that they are both listening tests, and neither actually has a flaw when they reveal the true facts of the matter. However, since the purpose of a listening test is to develop reliable evidence, tests that actually do that cannot be faulted. {snip}
Emphasis added by me.
To see what happened next, please navigate the link below.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1489493/do-audio-measurements-correlate-with-sound-quality/150#post_24016964
Last time I checked, a fact was either a true fact or a gasbag fact. rolleyes.gif
The gasbag facts continued as follows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

{snip} there is no audibility to high res {snip}
rolleyes.gif
Quote:
The second part of your response is pure subjective with no merit what so ever. If that is how you truely make your evaluations what leg do you have to stand on to criticize the best standardardized test we have currently available to identify audible difference without bias?
Yes, the second part of my response was purely subjective. However, the first part wasn't! :hint: :hint:
Quote:
I conclude by your statements in this thread that you are too emotionally involved to objectively offer any sort of opinion on the subject at hand....open your mind and you may discover a few things that can be enlightening to you, and perhaps increase your enjoyment of this hobby. Of course this is just my subjective opinion. smile.gif
Nah.. if I open my mind any farther than I have already opened it the way I did in the first part of my response, the guaranteed fact will be my brain will fall out.

sorry i just dont see it your way. you are building to what amounts to a straw man argument.

how can something (outside of clipping and the like) not be audible in a dbt but be audible in a non test evaluation?

that question is drawn from a statement you made. please explain and provide reliable non subjective evidence in your answer.

and is still like to know what leg you have to stand on to criticize scientific method testing protocols when you stated that is not how you ever evaluate gear. (for what its worth i have put forth my best effort with the resources i have available in order to conduct my own personal tests as well as studied on the topic extensively....and yes i have gear that i chose subjectively, but at least i know why i choose it rather then believing in magic or audio voodoo)

if the currently best available method for testing audio gear with out bias is so wrong or flawed or what have you, please tell me what is better for controlling bias in a controlled test in order to determine real audible differences vs only biased reinforced perceived differences.

I don't need snobs to tell me how to think, thank you!
LOL!
Why you wouldn't want to join this forum
67jason is offline  
post #204 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 03:52 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

I do not use Audyssey for 2 channel LPCM because the analog outputs from the BDP-105 sound better to me, providing more detail, bass extension, and more natural sounding instruments. From what I can tell, using the HDMI inputs first loses something that equalization does not return. YMMV.

Id much rather have a BDP-105 hooked directly to good amps than a receiver use HDMI with a receiver with Audyssey.
I also do not use the Emo-Q Gen 2 of my Emotiva UMC-200 for 2 channel LPCM because the analog outputs from the Eastern Electric MiniMax DAC Plus sound better to me.

My UMC-200 is hooked up directly to good amps (i.e., an Emotiva XPA-2 for the front mains, and a pair of Emotiva Pro Airmotiv 5 powered studio monitors as surrounds). For HT listening, the analog outs of the UMC-200 via HDMI sound better to me than the analog outs of the Oppo BDP-105, mainly because the latter does not have a built-in digital room EQ. The UMC-200 also serves as an all-analog preamp for my MiniMax DAC Plus, and, although the preamp section of the UMC-200 measures pretty excellent IMO, it sounds even better to me than any of the measurements were capable to suggest.
RichB likes this.
nvidio is offline  
post #205 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 03:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
comfynumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Northeast PA.
Posts: 4,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

It might.
However, a sweep is not going to tell the story about distortion and other issues that influence what may sound good to you. Some may want more bass than is flat, so your preference comes into play.

I do not use Audyssey for 2 channel LPCM because the analog outputs from the BDP-105 sound better to me, providing more detail, bass extension, and more natural sounding instruments. From what I can tell, using the HDMI inputs first loses something that equalization does not return. YMMV.

Id much rather have a BDP-105 hooked directly to good amps than a receiver use HDMI with a receiver with Audyssey.

Audio measurements, reviews, and auditions helped my select the Revel Salons.
OmniMic measurements showed that their are some room issues but they are not gross.
Also, that measurements can vary significantly throughout the room.

- Rich



Exactly Rich smile.gif I understand the measurement idea but I do not like my bass flat and I'm used to the midrange that my Revel's are known for. But how will everything measure? I really want to find out and after I'm done with my room I might check into REW.
comfynumb is offline  
post #206 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 04:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 8,697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Exactly Rich smile.gif I understand the measurement idea but I do not like my bass flat and I'm used to the midrange that my Revel's are known for. But how will everything measure? I really want to find out and after I'm done with my room I might check into REW.

You can check out the REW thread that have MIC recommendations and the software is free.
I bought the OmniMic2 that includes its software and came with a free MIC stand.
The stand is required because the Salons play the house tongue.gif

- Rich
comfynumb likes this.

Oppo Beta Group

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A51 | Revel Salon, Voice, Studio | Velodyne HGS-15
RichB is offline  
post #207 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 06:33 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

sorry i just dont see it your way. you are building to what amounts to a straw man argument.

how can something (outside of clipping and the like) not be audible in a dbt but be audible in a non test evaluation?

that question is drawn from a statement you made. please explain and provide reliable non subjective evidence in your answer.

and is still like to know what leg you have to stand on to criticize scientific method testing protocols when you stated that is not how you ever evaluate gear. (for what its worth i have put forth my best effort with the resources i have available in order to conduct my own personal tests as well as studied on the topic extensively....and yes i have gear that i chose subjectively, but at least i know why i choose it rather then believing in magic or audio voodoo)

if the currently best available method for testing audio gear with out bias is so wrong or flawed or what have you, please tell me what is better for controlling bias in a controlled test in order to determine real audible differences vs only biased reinforced perceived differences.

No, it's definately NOT a strawman argument. In the first part of my response, I have merely demonstrated truth. A difference is either audible or it's not. As long as there is no proof that a difference is audible, we don't know if it's audible. Similarly, as long as there is no proof that a difference is inaudible, we don't know if it's inaudible, and the only thing that we can do is take a wild guess. Guessing whether a claim is true or false does not magically, and again I quote, "reveal the true fact of the matter". Get it? Good. You have now learned something about how pure science works. Bravo!

Further, the reason why DBT is not necessarily always more reliable than sighted listening when trying to detect differences by hearing, is because DBT itself can create a set of circumstances that prevents the listener from being able to tell certain differences, i.e. just like Bob Stuart has explained to Robert Harley in the interview. If you don't want to believe that's true, all you have to do to start questioning your firm belief is decide to study psychoacoustics just a little bit.

Now, let's take an unbiased look at how "reliable" the socalled "evidence" obtained from blind listening experiments can be if you know very little about psychoacoustics. Please watch the blind listening experiment that was conducted by psychoacoustician Poppy Crum at the AES Show in 2009 held in New York, it starts 8:10 into this video from Ethan Winer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ
The conclusion is that we are programmed to hear speech. Most of us grew up with music, so it is only logical that most of us are also programmed to hear music. (Music that contains vocal lyrics would definitely fall in that category). Either way, this blind listening experiment very clearly demonstrates the fact we are programmed to hear certain things, including certain things that we are not supposed to hear because they have literally been erased from the recording before listening blindedly, as was demonstrated by this experiment shown in the video above. However, obviously, listening while sighted does not magically stop us from being programmed. Rather, the set of circumstances that is created by partaking in a DBT is what can create a certain bias that affects the final outcome of the way we are programmed. Bias can shape our perception of sound.

DBT eliminates expectation bias. This expectation bias is created as soon as we somehow get informed about the sound and / or about what generates this sound. The crux of the matter there is DBT requires human test subjects to listen, and, when we listen we get informed about the sound, obviously. So if we want to eliminate bias, we should never perform the same test more than once. As a result, the way simple ABX tests are conducted by hobbyists and enthusiasts at home using the ABX comparator component for foobar2000 or similar technique, these simple tests are a practical invitation to let bias creep back in through the back door. Because various proponents of these kinds of simple tests have been encouraging people to perform these tests while allowing these people to freely decide for themselves if they want to listen to each test sample more than once, we have yet another major clusterfeck of a problem on our hands here.

Now, also obviously, sighted listening does not magically stop us from getting informed about the sound. During DBT, generally, we just focus more on those characteristics of the sound that our brain is telling us to focus on, which causes our perception to be shaped, and the exact same thing also happens during sighted listening. Only difference, the characteristics our brain tells us to focus on during DBT, are not the same characteristics as the ones it tells us to focus on during a normal listening session the goal of which is not the same as that of DBT. You see, the specific goal that is (or that we think is) the reason why we perform a certain task, is what affects how efficiently we can perform this task. (Even, if we are programmed to perform this task). The fact there is a logical relationship between the goal of performing a task and the efficiency with which we perform said task, was first discovered some years ago by a number of field researchers, and has since been confirmed by psychologists. Neurologists have also managed to undisputedly visualize the resulting differences in brain activity, using modern-advanced brain wave scanning techniques. There is a fairly recent documentary by the BBC that covers this subject. (I forgot what the documentary was called).

Finally, if the most reliable food you had was poo, would you eat poo? Because that is basically what you are suggesting by consistently ignoring that we are not only interested in proving that you can hear a difference, but also that it is more musically satisfying.
nvidio is offline  
post #208 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 08:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
67jason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 789
^^^^^sorry you are a lost cause.
your sources are far from credible too btw. a better effort would reveal that to you. unfortuatly this is probably the best im gonna get. you have exhibited a lot of backwards thinking.

enjoy your sighted evals..and all the magic and voodoo that potentially goes along with them.

I don't need snobs to tell me how to think, thank you!
LOL!
Why you wouldn't want to join this forum
67jason is offline  
post #209 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 08:12 AM
Member
 
nvidio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: beer city (aka Belgium)
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

^^^^^sorry you are a lost cause.
your sources are far from credible too btw. a better effort would reveal that to you. unfortuatly this is probably the best im gonna get. you have exhibited a lot of backwards thinking.

enjoy your sighted evals..and all the magic and voodoo that potentially goes along with them.
Fine. Enjoy your poorly conducted blind listening tests, the magic and voodoo that definitely goes along with both them and with your ridiculous conclusions drawn from them, and, above all.. your persistent ignorance toward specific types of qualities that affect musical satisfaction.
nvidio is offline  
post #210 of 219 Old 12-03-2013, 09:07 AM
 
Cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Northwest Boonies
Posts: 5,738
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 90
What an entertaining thread.
nvidio likes this.
Cyrano is offline  
Reply Community News & Polls

Tags
Polls

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off