Test Equipment vs The Ear

tls49
Test Equipment vs The Ear

It all starts with designers doing prototypes using the laws of electronics and measuring, getting the best they can, then it’s listened to if they’re audiophiles.
Then if needs be, to make changes to the sound, they make changes to measurements or even the circuit, design, and then it’s re-measured to see if nothings wrong and if it sounds better, good, if not do more of the same.
But no designer in their right mind would change anything from the original and not re-measure to see if all is still fine.

Cheers George

How does one measure soundstage height? Bass slam? Inner dynamics? Warmth? Presence? Musicality? Liquid-ness? Separation of instruments? Realism? The noise contribution of RFI/EMI? How do you determine that the "information" you’re hearing is all (rpt all) of the "information" on the recording?

I'd go with the EAR every time.

Often measurements are inversely proportional to sound quality.  Great measurements can be achieved by usage of deep negative feedback, that will introduce unpleasant TIM distortions, that we don't even measure.  TIM distortions were unknown until 70's.   Do we know everything today?  Shall we allow some TIM distortions to dramatically reduce THD and IMD?  

THD stands for "Total Harmonic Distortions".  What if "Total" is the same, but made of different sets of harmonics?  Do we know which "set" sounds better.  Some people like euphonic harmonics and without them gear might sound clinical/analytic. Warm sounding even harmonics can be wonderful with voice or guitar but might sound horrible with the piano recordings.

Everything at the end always comes to "How does it sound to you?"

@eoffkait - I immediately thought sound-stage (or image) also - but the others you mention are equally immeasurable - except perhaps for dynamics?

At present, dynamics can be observed on an oscilloscope and if plotted against X-Y coordinates and factor in time, one could come up with some sort of measurement - e.g. slope/micro-second perhaps?

If anyone out there is aware of a measurement for dynamic performance I’d love to hear/read about it - thanks :-)

But I still ask - why bother - when the ear is so much more convenient and adept at discerning so many sound quality "improvements"..

I think it’s just "human nature" to want to qualify everything as proof of superiority - especially when our hearing starts to fail us.

Like you - I trust my ears every time - I stopped reading specs back in the 80’s.

Regards - Steve