Audio Science Review = "The better the measurement, the better the sound" philosophy

If you get sick, you can go to a doctor...

Just wanted to mention a Doctor of Medicine is an Arts degree, not a science degree.  

This is not adult banter @nonoise , this is an out and out attempted character assassination. It is not done in jest.

Make that very thin skinned.

All the best,
Nonoise

Medical Doctor is not an arts or science degree, it is a medical degree. In almost all jurisdictions in the world, the Faculty of Medicine will be fully independent from other Faculties. The general consensus in the medical community is that M.D. is an applied science degree. Due to the highly competitive nature, many doctors today also have a PhD in some aspect of medical science. The strongest links between medical faculties and other faculties is of course science.

@amir_asr

How do you know this take away is true? Better yet, how can you prove this take away is true? Where is the proof point? At no time did you perform a controlled test like I mentioned in the video, correct? Without it, your conclusions are only yours. They present no value on the topic at hand. Indeed, they go against the consensus of audio research community which has tested these theories.

I don’t know. That’s why I called it "my takeaway" and not "my evidence" or "my proof". I was quite clear that they were sighted, subjective observations. And that I made limited tests for some possible confounding factors. I also used the word "speculation". I don’t know why you often appear to argue with straw men, and labour your talking points when they are already accounted for, but I don’t want to criticise tone, style or even comprehension as that’s counter-productive.

If you care to address what I’ve said, feel free to tell me which of these have zero bearing on the topic at hand and/or go against the consensus of audio (or psycho-acoustic) research, and why: 1) long term audio memory is a more complex story, 2) bass is pretty straightforward, or 3) stereo image is the complex product of many factors (which the amp-speaker-room system contributes to). Those are the words you responded to.

Please remember that all of us also exist in your shoes as well as ours. I like you hear things that later realize where not there. Have this happen to you enough times and you get sober and realize your perception is not what you think it is. That your intuition can be so wrong in audio.

I agree, and I’ve certainly had those experiences working with sound. Many times. But what about things we hear, that we later hear again, and again, accounting as best we can for the limitations of our perception and judgement? Now of course it’s possible that unconscious factors rather than actual sonics caused the difference I perceived between those devices (for example) but that’s also speculative. We can also differentiate to some degree between perception and intuition, especially with training and experience. The working hypothesis that every time we hear something unexpected, we are drunk, neurotic or hypnotised by marketing is an over-simplification. I’m happy to leave you with that.

Terrible of them, I know. Why let them have common sense and expect more performance when you pay more?

You twist posts per your liking. Anyways, I took quite some time to arrive at the speakers I have. There were some that were about $7k more than my current ones. But I did not really like their presentation. So if I had to go with your statement, I should have paid more and bought that other speaker expecting more performance because I paid more?

I think you have a very wrong assumptions about folks here. When I take the pains to audition loudspeakers, I did not go in with the intention to buy the most expensive speaker I can buy. In fact go back to my initial posts from 2005. I used to have the Quad 21L before these current ones. They were not even there in the list of "to be auditioned" speakers. I just happened to see them at a dealers and asked for a demo. So probably that was a mistake and I should have gone for the more expensive ones? I suggest that you don’t assume things.

Ah, you want me to be uninformed when I do my listening tests. As if not seeing the measurements somehow eliminate bias?

Like I said before - you will not digest the truth. According to you, folks here can be biased, but you are always correct and never biased. You are an ordinary human being. Nothing more nothing less. You have biases too, but not ready to accept.

I listen to tons of music. I am retired so I have all the time in the world.

Good for you. And completely understand now how you can afford so much time to measure and respond.

Well, we darn well know how to measure noise even if they don’t. They say this and that lowers jitter? Well, we measure that every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

And yet you did not respond to my post on why different people hear the same sound differently. Like I said before, far too many variables to measure.

When you get sick, you don’t want your doctor to take your temperature and blood pressure on the fear that "he thinks measurements are everything."

Again, you are ASSUMING here. Your problem is you ASSUME too many things. Why do you assume that I would not go to a doctor if I were sick? These statements are showing your frustrations. Is it because you cannot ban me on this forum? We are plainly debating on what each of us believes in.

I managed the signal processing group at Microsoft which relies hugely on psychoacoustics.

So you are telling me that the Microsoft from a few years back was the best they can do and if further discoveries happen in the field of science, they will not adapt/accept them? Electronics in 1950s was much different than what humans have achieved today. New discoveries happen all the time - at a much faster rate. Just saying.

I know what I need to know about perception of audio. No knowledge of "neural science" is needed, nor do any of you have any.

See that first statement? That is what is putting off many folks here and elsewhere. It seems like you are not ready to accept any more NEW knowledge and have a closed view. I humbly accept that I do not have the knowledge of neural sciences or any other related fields in that space.

As for visiting ASR - I have done so occasionally in the past and have moved on, since that is something which does not interest me. I know what I like and I choose what I want. I do read mags, sites and user reviews. If you looks closely at my system, there is not a component that was highly recommended on many site. A couple of sites and user reviews - maybe. Of course the Oppo was an exception. But then many mags, site (including yours), folks recommended it and love it.

I was not trying to mischaracterize you. All I wanted to point out that you do not know everything about everything. Like everyone else, you know something about something. There are many things that humans do not know - yet.

@amir_asr

Looks like a lot of frustration, when you are responding to my posts. You had to go back to my post 6 times and read them carefully and come up with 6 responses after picking and choosing what you wanted. I would have thought that a person who has all the time in the world would take time to go through the entire post, and think carefully about how to respond to it. But again - that is none of my business.