Objectivity vs Subjectivity

[Analogous]

You bought this blind recently no ? Based on other FMs feedback and not evidently on the poor measurements in Stereophile which are countered as well.
So , would you still have bought it if it measured poorly across many sites but vouched for by FMs whose opinions you value ?

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

View attachment 66080

Nobody says you should listen to best measured equipment. It only means you can look at the measurement and know how it sounds, and everyone is free to choose their sound according to their preference.

 

[Analogous]

Bias

It's difficult to have an unbiased subjective assessment. Also there is something called as conformity bias.

So to base everything subjectively cannnot be prudent parameter. I mean we all know how our mood can effect our music to sound to us.


In the above example, how can it be assured that Art Dudley, Stephen Meijas and Sam Tellig heard same musicality? How can John Atkins measurements be disprove of poor musicality?


What have audioresearch shown over years?

Have we ever ask how the golden ears audiophiles are mostly 50+ old men when they are probably suffering age related hearing loss? How can their subjective assessments be a better parameter from a 18 year old listener whose auditory spectrum can reach upto 20kz?

When someone claim that ultrasonic waves spectrum contribute to sonic quality, how do you assess the truth of his statement, when humans can hear only 20hz to 20kz at their peak of listening power around youngish age of 20years?

Hi,
I feel you have asked several rhetorical questions here.
Could you try to answer the questions you have asked?

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

“Good sound” is a preference, it varies from person to person. If I say Bose lifestyle sounds good, it only means it confirms with my preference. (Extreme example, but I like it for what it does, not as a hifi speaker). I do not expect anyone else to agree to me. My brother loves his spendor s3/5 much.. I didn’t like it’s sound much. We both are not wrong.

 

[raghupb]

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

Don't try to. It takes a lot of time and patience and a whole lot of reading and understanding stuff outside of one's interest.
Just use that time and effort to listen to music.
"Don't Worry Be Happy"

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[Analogous]

I was at an audio show where one high end companies, with a group of older men were having a demo of Some speakers. I was 32 back then and to my ears that demo was way too bright. But I could see the happy faces there and they are not wrong. I clearly know in some ears I will be doing the same. So to their ears a neutral speaker will be flawed as it doesn’t habe enough highs. Most popular reviewers would now be in this category

And Your signature says “Great numbers takes you close to the actual music”

“Good sound” is a preference, it varies from person to person. If I say Bose lifestyle sounds good, it only means it confirms with my preference. (Extreme example, but I like it for what it does, not as a hifi speaker). I do not expect anyone else to agree to me. My brother loves his spendor s3/5 much.. I didn’t like it’s sound much. We both are not wrong.

I fully agree

Don't try to. It takes a lot of time and patience and a whole lot of reading and understanding stuff outside of one's interest.
Just use that time and effort to listen to music.
"Don't Worry Be Happy"

Cheers,
Raghu

Raghu,
Are you gently reminding me this horse is dead and just to enjoy the music?

 

[firearm12]

Brother, you are missing what I am trying to understand. (It’s not about my decision making and choices).

I want to try and understand the phenomenon of good sounding gear that measure poorly.

Tube amps mostly measure poorly yet many people like the sound over any of better measuring ss amps. I feel the numbers are like counting my cat's hair, doesn't matter if it's 2 million or 2.1 million my cat is furry enough. I only care when it goes below a certain threshold, then it will be considered a bald cat, neither me nor my neighbour would want it, who wants a bald cat.

 

[Bloom@83]

If a good sounding gear (by which I mean an amp or speaker that’s certified good across different user demographics ) measures poorly , well then , you are measuring the wrong things , brother.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

And Your signature says “Great numbers takes you close to the actual music”

I Standby that statement still. it only means to hear exactly the recording you need good numbers. Doesn’t matter if a persons goal from his hifi is not accuracy. It’s possible to enjoy a system which is not accurate.

If a good sounding gear (by which I mean an amp or speaker that’s certified good across different user demographics ) measures poorly , well then , you are measuring the wrong things , brother.

Not everyone needs accurate sound. Accuracy can be confirmed with good measurements. It’s possible to enjoy an inaccurate sound.

 

[firearm12]

I Standby that statement still. it only means to hear exactly the recording you need good numbers. Doesn’t matter if a persons goal from his hifi is not accuracy. It’s possible to enjoy a system which is not accurate.

What's accurate? If there is one definable accuracy, then why do two products with same measurements sound entirely different?

 

[Bloom@83]

Not everyone needs accurate sound. Accuracy can be confirmed with good measurements. It’s possible to enjoy an inaccurate sound.

To flog a dead horse , accurate sound is a myth.
What’s measured as accurate in a certain laboratory will not be reproduced exactly as it is because of room acoustics of a buyer.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

To flog a dead horse , accurate sound is a myth.
What’s measured as accurate in a certain laboratory will not be reproduced exactly as it is because of room acoustics of a buyer.

You are right on the room part. Even the best measuring devices won’t sound the same if it’s kept in a poor room.

But there are some speakers which are less affected by the rooms than others due to their directivity patterns. There are some speakers which has very low distortion figures to handle a heavy room eq. Say for example, the KEFR11 has a extremely low distortion figures. You can apply any amount of room correction EQs than other speakers and they would handle it without any audible distortion. This guarantees a flat response at the listening spot.

If we buy a speaker with just flat frequency with bad distortion figures, it’s a bad idea. It will not handle room correction EQs.

Again it depends on room, if it’s a decent room where this speaker doesn’t need so much correction or if we are listening near field, it won’t matter that much.

See this figures:

KEF R11 quick measurements single vs bi-amp

Just wanted to share some measurements I got from my new KEF R11s. mic at 1 meter in room with all reflections active. REW measurements, MacBook to Mytek DAC+ to McIntosh MC462 vs. to Wyred4Sound (W4S) ST1000 (ICE 1000ASP) low (RCA) + MC462 HF (XLR) bi-amp. Using XLR out to the Mc and single...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[raghupb]

What's accurate? If there is one definable accuracy, then why do two products with same measurements sound entirely different?

That's the million dollar question
Cheers,
Raghu

 

[Analogous]

I Standby that statement still. it only means to hear exactly the recording you need good numbers. Doesn’t matter if a persons goal from his hifi is not accuracy. It’s possible to enjoy a system which is not accurate.

+1 to that

What's accurate? If there is one definable accuracy, then why do two products with same measurements sound entirely different?

It’s a bit like Heisenbergs uncertainty principle.
If you can measure it, it’s already inaccurate?

 

[raghupb]

That's quantum theory. Thank God there is no quantum amp or quantum DAC.
If there were, all forums would be very "noisy".
Cheers,
Raghu

 

[firearm12]

It’s a bit like Heisenbergs uncertainty principle.
If you can measure it, it’s already inaccurate?

or maybe we are measuring wrong things. The things we measure might not relate exactly to what we hear.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

or maybe we are measuring wrong things. The things we measure might not relate exactly to what we hear.

Yeah, if there is no room correction, it will not translate to what we see on measurement. If that’s corrected, hearing deficiencies play another role. Other than that it’s the same parameters manufactures use to design their devices.

 

[Analogous]

or maybe we are measuring wrong things. The things we measure might not relate exactly to what we hear.

Or trying to measure subjective opinions, perceptions is impossible because there are no universal standards or machines to objectively measure these?

 

[Vineethkumar01]

Not everyone needs accurate sound. Accuracy can be confirmed with good measurements. It’s possible to enjoy an inaccurate sound.

I don't think we should get hung up on this accuracy argument. Simply because it doesn't have a reference. The moment we record a 3D sound field using less than a certain number of mics, accuracy of the captured sound field is thrown out of the window. So for a recording of a live event, we are hearing everything from the perspective of a few recording mics. Also accuracy means different things to different people simply because of the hearing system that has differences between different people and the different audio reproduction chains. For some people accuracy is relative position and placement of instruments in the reproduced sound field. For some, it is just the feeling of musical instruments sounding like in a live event/how they perceive a certain instrument(s) and vocals should sound like. For some others, it is a combination of above and other things.

What the klippel NFS does while measuring speakers is it tries to estimate the anechoic response of the speaker and its characteristics in reproducing a sound field. It does this through a sound field separation technique. Even klippel say that variations of the order of 1.5dB is expected with the measurement system. There goes one arguement about accuracy given that humans can hear variations as low as 0.2 dB under right conditions. Ideally one would want a speaker to just reproduce the sound field captured in the signal that is fed to it. That is just my opinion. It speaks nothing about the preferences of other people. Let us say we have two speakers both having flat ON axis frequency response and smooth power response and directicity. Let us say both have coincident, coaxial drivers, exceptionally good transient response, and very low distortion. which one do we call as the more accurate speaker.
Some people prefer narrow directivity. Some people prefer wider directivity. What slope of the directivity plot or power response do we call as "accurate"?

There are only guidelines like if a speaker measures like this, it may sound like this. What we chose ultimately is what we like. I prefer good measuring equipment. Simply because i like tweaking it and tuning it to play according to my preferences. Some others prefer what sounds good to their ears right from the start without worrying about the measurement part.

Even if we argue that tonally "uncoloured" sound is the accurate one, it will vary with your position in the listening space depending upon the power response and directivity.

I support and respect Amir and Erin and other like them who try to educate others about all these different aspects for free. It is not necessary that everyone should have the same opinion. Measurements have a purpose. It shows the technical capabilities of a system. It doesn't tell with 100% confidence that this is how it will sound. It is upto us what we eventually choose to buy to hear music and there is no right or wrong in it.

 

[Bloom@83]

Or trying to measure subjective opinions, perceptions is impossible because there are no universal standards or machines to objectively measure these?

There are none and even if there were such hypothetical instruments, no one would use them apart from the ones actually building the amps / speakers as a guideline , before the final tuning is done by ears. Which is the current practise everywhere.

Consider , when Steinway and Sons tunes a piano costing thousands of dollars , they do that not by charts , but by their ears (they have dedicated employee just for that ).

When a studio engineer records a song , he adjusts its frequency curve , pitch and myriad other things going by what sounds good to his ears alone (and that’s why some mastering engineers are better than others ).

There is no such thing as perfect / neutral / flat sound. Everything from the source is already colourised by subjective perceptions and experience, unless we are talking test tones , which I suspect a lot of people listen to to measure their instruments to get a good night’s sleep.