Topic: Science and Subjectivity in Audio

[rascal101]

I just wanted to share with you some thoughts regarding Audio in general. Below are
some excerpts from

http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampins/pseudo/subjectv.htm

I do not want to start a flame war or anything but I just wanted to share some ideas
before you make any purchase of audio equipments.


"1: SCIENCE AND SUBJECTIVISM.
Audio engineering is in a singular position. There can be few branches of engineering
science rent from top to bottom by such a fundamental disagreement as the Subjectivist/
rationalist dichotomy. Subjectivism is still a significant issue in the hifi section of the industry,
but has made little headway in professional audio, where intimate acquaintance with the
original sound, and the pressing need to earn a living with reliable and affordable equipment,
provide effective barriers against most irrational flights of fashion. (Note that the opposite of
Subjectivist is not "Objectivist". I understand this term refers to the followers- if any- of the
philosophies of Ayn Rand)

Most technologies have universally accepted measures of performance car makers compete to
improve MPH and MPG; computer manufacturers boast of MIPs (millions of instructions per second)
and so on. Improvement in these parameters is universally accepted as progress. In the field of hifi,
many people seem to have difficulty in deciding which direction forward is.

Working as a professional audio designer, I often encounter opinions which, while an integral part
of the Subjectivist offshoot of hifi, are treated with ridicule by practitioners of other branches of
electrical engineering. The would-be designer is not likely to be encouraged by being told that audio
is not far removed from witchcraft, and that no-one truly knows what they are doing. I have been
told by a Subjectivist that the operation of the human ear is so complex that its interaction with
measurable parameters lies forever beyond human comprehension. I hope this is an extreme position
for it was proffered as a flat statement rather a basis for discussion.

I have studied audio design from the viewpoints of electronic design, psychoacoustics, and my own
humble efforts at musical creativity. I have found complete scepticism towards Subjectivism to be the
only tenable position. Nonetheless, if hitherto unsuspected dimensions of audio quality are ever shown
to exist, then I look forward keenly to exploiting them. No doubt that most of the esoteric opinions are
held in complete sincerity.

2: THE SUBJECTIVIST POSITION.
A short definition of the Subjectivist position on power amplifiers might read as follows:

    * Objective measurements of an amplifier's performance are unimportant compared with the
       subjective  impressions received in informal listening tests. Should the two contradict the
       objective results may be dismissed out of hand.

    * Degradation effects exist in amplifiers that are unknown to engineering science, and are not
       revealed by the usual measurements.

    * Considerable latitude may be used in suggesting hypothetical mechanisms of audio impairment,
       such as mysterious capacitor shortcomings and subtle cable defects, without reference to the
       plausibility of the concept, or gathering any evidence to support it.

I believe this is a reasonable statement of the situation. Meanwhile the overwhelming majority of the
public buy conventional hifi systems, ignoring the expensive and esoteric high-end sector where the
debate is fiercest.

It may appear unique that a sizable part of a technical industry has set off in a direction that is quite
counter to the facts; it might be felt that such a loss of direction in a scientific subject would be
unprecedented. This is not so."

Cheers,

[av_phile1]

Try this one for size:

The Ten Biggest Lies in Audo
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:K2M2QxjV0lsJ:www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf+Audio+Lies&hl=en

[jerix]

is there a scientific explanation why an ISOLATOR would improve the sound quality of the amplifier or the speaker? tnx 

[av_phile1]

Before any scientific explanation can be offered, first of all you have to PROVE using statistical bias-controlled double blind testing (DBT) that there is indeed a perceptible difference.  Then you have to prove mathematically using spectral analysis that there is indeed signal differences with and without isolation in an electronic gear like amps and preamps.  This goes as well with cables and other add-on devices that make unfounded claims to improve the sonics in this hobby.  Claiming there is a difference BEFORE and AFTER using any device is NEVER accepted as scientific, especially when you are aware of what was done and have been preconditioned by advertisement or peer claims that there SHOULD be a difference.  Only a bias-absent blind comparative test will pass scientific scrutiny. 

If it's just the ears that tell you there is, then just accept it as a matter of FAITH.  There's lots of that in this hobby.  Afterall it's the ears that matter in this hobby.  But for scientific methodical purposes, the subjective human ears are rarely, if at all, used in objective scientific exploration, expect perhaps in bias-controlled DBT.  So personally, if i hear differences in this or that scenario in this hobby, and know very well there's no scientific basis for it, then I just accept it on faith. Or reject it outright as perceptual suggestion due to brand recognition or mere unfounded peer pressure.     But that's just me ofcourse. 

[jerix]

  thnx sir av_phile1 

There are times that i think that i got an inferior set of ears because i really cant hear significant differences the way others here do when different wires or different gadgets are used.  Im happy because it seems that my ears are really not the problem after all, but the falsity of the claim 

[john5479]

sometimes the claim is not false but rather thats how one perceive's something. what is "bass shy" to some is "tight and deep bass" to others. What is "analytical" to others is "accurate" to some.  What is "too loud" to others is "just right" to others. That is why you take reviews with a grain of salt and hear it for yourself. On the cable thingy the only ic that i heard a noticeable change in my system are analysis plus oval 1s....I heard and not measured.

Dont think your ears are inferior, and not all claims are false. If you're happy with your system then well and good,  but in my my personal experience there are changes when certain things are tweaked in a system, whether the change is worth the price or actually better at all should be based on your opinion and what you hear which is where I base mine.

[synchro_01]

in my case, when i stepped up to an ultra revealing speaker model...that was the only time that I began to hear for myself that there are indeed sonic differences between associated gears. 

[av_phile1]

No one can dispute a personal subjective assessment.  It's one thing for a scenario to be perceived differently by different people. After all different people have different perceptions based on their biology, situations, experience, biases or preferences.  It's entirely another thing to claim that there is a difference, as if everyone is expected to accept the claim as fact and gospel truth.   Only a bias-controlled double blind A/B test can establish if the difference is valid. Nothing else.  If in your opinion you hear a difference going from one gear to another, that's your opinion and worth the respect of everyone.  But unless you have a statistical bias-controlled DBT to prove your opinion, let's not foist it as fact, especially if established sciences do not support the opinion.   Ofcourse people are free to agree with the opinion or not.  But let's not confuse  opinions with facts.  

[av_phile1]

sometimes the claim is not false but rather thats how one perceive's something. what is "bass shy" to some is "tight and deep bass" to others. What is "analytical" to others is "accurate" to some.  What is "too loud" to others is "just right" to others. That is why you take reviews with a grain of salt and hear it for yourself. On the cable thingy the only ic that i heard a noticeable change in my system are analysis plus oval 1s....I heard and not measured.

Dont think your ears are inferior, and not all claims are false. If you're happy with your system then well and good,  but in my my personal experience there are changes when certain things are tweaked in a system, whether the change is worth the price or actually better at all should be based on your opinion and what you hear which is where I base mine.

Any claim is a claim that is either accepted as a matter of FAITH or subjected to the disciplines of scientific verification.  Unfortunately many of the claims made in this hobby both by manufacturers and consumers do not pass the rigors of scientific tests that demand measurability and repeatablity (if there's a word like that).   Many are accepted on faith.  There's nothing wrong with that.  I accept the Catholic claim of the Holy Trinity as a matter of FAITH.  So if you believe your cables and your tweaks have done wonders to your system, congrats.  You're indulging in this hobby and reaping the rewards. Whether real or imagined, that's your personal valuation and judgement call. Often most of the things we cherish in this hobby rests on FAITH and renders the applicability of Scienctific verification unnecessary for the enjoynment and indulgences of the hobby.  So enjoy your gears with the aural faculties God has given us.  The ears are neither superior nor inferior to the measuring devices that engineers have developed using their God-given scientific skills.  Each has its purpose.  Objective Science and personal subjectivism are two worlds that can meet together in this hobby, but is not necessary.  Yup,  not necessary. There's no need to prove your faith if you already like it.  Afterall, if your ears tell you enough to give you enjoyment, why bother what the instruments tell you?  But for some people like me, knowing what the instruments say has its rewards as well.  But again, that's another personal preferrence.   

[john5479]

How i choose gears include both subjetctivism science. Thats one reason i dont see the need to buy expensive ics and speaker cables, the one i tried though has done some scientific testing which one may choose to contest but i have heard they make a difference in my system. For speaker cables as long as its the proper gauge and terminated properly, it should work as it should. Thats one reason I am choosing systems based on certain criteria....i.e.: will the preamp's output impedance be a good match to my amp's 4.7k input impedance ? etc. and then I listen...if i like what i hear then it stays on my system. Its good to understand how things work but in the end its if you like what you hear. If one would like how some amp designers intentionally introduce oscillations to the amp in order for it to produce "detailed highs" or how speaker designers design their crossovers with bass humps in order to give the illusion of "bass", then so be it, sit back, relax and enjoy 

[synchro_01]

No one can dispute a personal subjective assessment.  It's one thing for a scenario to be perceived differently by different people. After all different people have different perceptions based on their biology, situations, experience, biases or preferences.  It's entirely another thing to claim that there is a difference, as if everyone is expected to accept the claim as fact and gospel truth.   Only a bias-controlled double blind A/B test can establish if the difference is valid. Nothing else.  If in your opinion you hear a difference going from one gear to another, that's your opinion and worth the respect of everyone.  But unless you have a statistical bias-controlled DBT to prove your opinion, let's not foist it as fact, especially if established sciences do not support the opinion.   Ofcourse people are free to agree with the opinion or not.  But let's not confuse  opinions with facts.  

sir, can you please point out where exactly did I foist things as facts?  I am merely contributing only my opinion everytime I post...they are not facts..they are just my opinions.  everybody is entitled to do that in this site just the same. 
One thing that I admit is that I dont do DBT and measure the gears through expensive measuring equipment only to justify if what I have heard is indeed true. I do not have the time, the finances nor the patience to do such hardcore things but one thing I do know is that I dont post on things that I have only read about through some website posted by a scientific fact. finding group from somewhere out there.

[bumblebee]

sir, can you please point out where exactly did I foist things as facts?

synchro,

I don't think he is referring to you in particular. I think his post applies to everyone's opinions, his included.

...
I do know is that I dont post on things that I have only read about through some website posted by a scientific fact finding group from somewhere out there.

I point to audioholics.com everytime I feel I should. Nothing wrong w/ that. The point is to inform. The reader then decides for himself.

[av_phile1]

sir, can you please point out where exactly did I foist things as facts?  I am merely contributing only my opinion everytime I post...they are not facts..they are just my opinions.  everybody is entitled to do that in this site just the same. 
One thing that I admit is that I dont do DBT and measure the gears through expensive measuring equipment only to justify if what I have heard is indeed true. I do not have the time, the finances nor the patience to do such hardcore things but one thing I do know is that I dont post on things that I have only read about through some website posted by a scientific fact. finding group from somewhere out there.

I wasn't referring to you.  I just hope everyone in this forum can distinguish between opinions and facts.   Many advertisements of exotic products don't.  And many consumers easily fall for them. 

[Chito C.]

Nice write-up


http://www.chesky.com/core/body_librarydetails.cfm?newsid=160

[av_phile1]

Yup, read something similar in the past - it's the music that matters, enjoying it is what this hobby is about.  And I'm green with envy at those young punks who are quite content enjoying their mp3 portables.     Both on the road and at home.  What simple bliss.  Somebody said these people don't know what they're missing.  A blessing of sorts.   

[rascal101]

Speaker cables is a discussion of its own ... but the truth is that many of us are tempted to buy those very expensive cables because this guy said this and this guy said that. There are quoted specs eg DC resistance,
series inductance and parallel capacitance - which some do understand and some don't. Here we have subjectivity (listening) and science (specifications). Which way do we go?

For me I would go with science (90%) and subjectivity (10%). How is it possible that there are can be significant differences in a pair of wires!!! We are talking of a passive device (wire). As long as you are using a suitable wire gauge for a specified current I don't see any significant difference in performance. Can you distinguish 1mV from 0.95mV or 0.9mV for that matter???

Also, I have been seeing a lot of opinions that speaker cables with parallel capacitance in the order of a few nF  sound great. How??? If you speaker cables have specified capacitances of a few nF that means your cable is a low pass filter. You are already removing high frequency. If your espouse transparency, then obviously your cable is no longer transparent.

They say that the younger we are our ears have a tendency towards a "V" shaped sound spectrum - from low freq (DC) to high freq (20KHz). And that as we grow older the shape slowly becomes an inverted "V". As such, before we state something let us consider that:

1. As we grow older our sound system exponentially becomes worse because our preferences change
2. "He said", "they said" or specifications should always be taken with a grain of salt

[jerix]

It is my present impression that most of those whose leanings are based on science are those with academic preparations in the field. I just wonder if anybody here with such academic prepration believes otherwise.

[av_phile1]

Speaker cables is a discussion of its own ... but the truth is that many of us are tempted to buy those very expensive cables because this guy said this and this guy said that. There are quoted specs eg DC resistance,
series inductance and parallel capacitance - which some do understand and some don't. Here we have subjectivity (listening) and science (specifications). Which way do we go?

For me I would go with science (90%) and subjectivity (10%). How is it possible that there are can be significant differences in a pair of wires!!! We are talking of a passive device (wire). As long as you are using a suitable wire gauge for a specified current I don't see any significant difference in performance. Can you distinguish 1mV from 0.95mV or 0.9mV for that matter???

Also, I have been seeing a lot of opinions that speaker cables with parallel capacitance in the order of a few nF  sound great. How??? If you speaker cables have specified capacitances of a few nF that means your cable is a low pass filter. You are already removing high frequency. If your espouse transparency, then obviously your cable is no longer transparent.

As hobbyists, we should learn to distinguish between facts and personal opinions.  Between serious scienctific truths and laughable hearsay.  If you are influenced on the say so of friends and bogus advertising materials that claim figures in what are called "pseudo-science,' that's your call.  Manufacturers of exotic expensive cables do cite terms like "skin effect,"  "strand jumping,"   "dielectric absorption effects,"  "transmission line effect," and even the very mundane capacitance, inductance and resistance figures in their wares to impress even techno geeks.  In many ways, most of these effects have a bearing on cable design, like those used in industrial applications that carry mega and gigahertz frequencies.   But NOTHING AUDIBLE WHATSOVER when applied to frequencies in the audio spectrum that matters to human beings. 

Human hearing already has difficulty discerning a 1 db difference for PURE tone signals. How much more for 0.1db differences above 16khz?    That's often the region where some of the effects of high inductance and capacitance in cables can be attained.  And when MASKED by other frequencies in a complex musical signal,  you begin to wonder if audible differences can be correctly identified.   While it is true that differenet cable qualities can affect the carriage of frequencies, so far, no bias-controlled Double Blind Testing has ever affirmed to any statistical degree of confidence and accuracy that audible differences exists between cables to justify spending 100 times on exotic cables. 

They say that the younger we are our ears have a tendency towards a "V" shaped sound spectrum - from low freq (DC) to high freq (20KHz). And that as we grow older the shape slowly becomes an inverted "V". As such, before we state something let us consider that:

1. As we grow older our sound system exponentially becomes worse because our preferences change
2. "He said", "they said" or specifications should always be taken with a grain of salt

There is great irony here.  People who finally can afford a Bryston or a Theta have often achieved some social status in life  to afford these gears.  They're often in their  30s and 40s - right about that time when their ears can't hear above 17khz.  I must say these people are often the ones who can afford to buy expensives cables and claim to hear differences. Ironically, they really can't hear anything above 17khz where the effects of different cables should be more manifest.      So there's probably some wisdom to the argument that the perceived differences are really more psychological than anything.  Knowledge about the price and brand can and do influence human perceptions.  Obviously, the power of suggestion works on the side of exotic cable manufacturers so they can laugh all the way to the bank at our expense.  Just my thoughts.

[odyopayl]

In my opinion, your ears & personal satisfaction is the most important things in this hobby. Just like SCIENCE & RELIGION they never have the same point of view. If we always applied our Engineering point of view in this hobby maybe we dont have audiophile grade accessories (hehehehe). As av_phile1 said have FAITH in your ears!

[JT]

Something interesting ...  Ten Biggest Lies in Audio.

http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf

[ATJr.]

As hobbyists, we should learn to distinguish between facts and personal opinions.  Between serious scienctific truths and laughable hearsay.  If you are influenced on the say so of friends and bogus advertising materials that claim figures in what are called "pseudo-science,' that's your call.  Manufacturers of exotic expensive cables do cite terms like "skin effect,"  "strand jumping,"   "dielectric absorption effects,"  "transmission line effect," and even the very mundane capacitance, inductance and resistance figures in their wares to impress even techno geeks.  In many ways, most of these effects have a bearing on cable design, like those used in industrial applications that carry mega and gigahertz frequencies.   But NOTHING AUDIBLE WHATSOVER when applied to frequencies in the audio spectrum that matters to human beings. 

The more people try to spin webs around a product for supposedly good sounding values, the more i tend to be cynical!

just look at the "for sale section" and you will know what i am trying to say!

[ATJr.]

It is my present impression that most of those whose leanings are based on science are those with academic preparations in the field. I just wonder if anybody here with such academic prepration believes otherwise.

you may be surprised, but some of those selling snake oils, can very well be engineers also! because they know that there are many out there who do not know any better and those will be the ones who are the easy targets of these money making ventures!

[rascal101]

Binuhay ko lang iyung thread na ito ...