2. digital
  3. 1107619061

Why do intelligent people deny audio differences?

In my years of audiophilia I have crossed swords with my brother many times regarding that which is real, and not real, in terms of differeces heard and imagined.
He holds a Masters Degree in Education, self taught himself regarding computers, enough to become the MIS Director for a school system, and early in life actually self taught himself to arrange music, from existing compositions, yet he denys that any differece exists in the 'sound' of cables--to clarify, he denies that anyone can hear a difference in an ABX comparison.
Recently I mentioned that I was considering buying a new Lexicon, when a friend told me about the Exemplar, a tube modified Dennon CD player of the highest repute, video wise, which is arguably one of the finest sounding players around.
When I told him of this, here was his response:
"Happily I have never heard a CD player with "grainy sound" and, you know me, I would never buy anything that I felt might be potentially degraded by or at least made unnecessarily complex and unreliable by adding tubes."

Here is the rub, when cd players frist came out, I owned a store, and was a vinyl devotee, as that's all there was, and he saw digital as the panacea for great change; "It is perfect, it's simply a perfect transfer, ones and zero's there is no margin for error," or words to that effect.
When I heard the first digital, I was appalled by its sterility and what "I" call 'grainy' sound. Think of the difference in cd now versus circa 1984. He, as you can read above resists the notion that this is a possibility.
We are at constant loggerheads as to what is real and imagined, regarding audio, with him on the 'if it hasn't been measured, there's no difference', side of the equation.
Of course I exaggerate, but just the other day he said, and this is virtually a quote, "Amplifiers above about a thousand dollars don't have ANY qualitative sound differences." Of course at the time I had Halcro sitting in my living room and was properly offended and indignant.
Sibling rivalry? That is the obvious here, but this really 'rubs my rhubarb', as Jack Nicholson said in Batman.
Unless I am delusional, there are gargantual differences, good and bad, in audio gear. Yet he steadfastly sticks to his 'touch it, taste it, feel it' dogma.
Am I losing it or is he just hard headed, (more than me)?
What, other than, "I only buy it for myself," is the answer to people like this? (OR maybe US, me and you other audio sickies out there who spend thousands on minute differences?
Let's hear both sides, and let the mud slinging begin!
lrsky
cinematic_systems
282 posts
 
This is a funny thread, Rsbeck don't mind Lrsky's touchy feely thin skin. He just uses that "no reason to get nasty" tactic to put you on the defensive. He likes to be in charge of the thread.

Lrsky you will note name drops more than a teenage girl to somehow convey to us all that he is an expert. Something his brother clearly has latched onto this chain and jerks him continously with it.

The fact is lay people can hear important differences in sound 99% of the time. Difference between power cords etc is usually not profound except to the negative and if your equipment is that marginal get new equipment.

As for superiority, its more a function of repitition, people who play tennis will kick a non-tennis playing audiophiles ass all over the court and while the audiophile is buying drinks he/she may not be interested in the isometric stringing of the tennis players racket which really helped increase the top spin from their overhand.

The key is to recognize when you're to obtuse to win a debate and withdraw with dignity. The "joy" of competing with Larry is one I would turn down if I was his brother, well actually he turned down the chance to compete with me. But that's another matter between 2 commercial posters.

Not everyone wants to sit and listen to music, thus the term non-audiophiles. Some of the most passionate people I know with the biggest collections of music, enjoy it as a background part of their lives. So we have to leave some latitude for peoples interests beyond "lifelike" reproduction of a CD or LP.

"Audio is particularly intimidating for some reason, perhaps because it is so expensive and not easily accessible to the laymen".....

I can finally comment now that I have stopped laughing at this comment. (whiping the tears, 1 sec)

Rule #1 of audio; Every guy believes he's born with all the stereo knowledge he'll ever need.

Audio is not expensive for the layman to get a layman's system. Audio is expensive for audiophiles because they engage in this behavior...

"I never questioned the outcome with caps etc, or wiring, regardless of where it led, I only accepted the findings, as sounding either better or not as good".

This is exactly how to build a one year of experience twenty times over resume, instead of twenty years of experience.

BTW KUDOS; to RsBeck and Tympani for their comments and insights and those who chimed in supporting their statements.
lrsky OP
1,118 posts
 
I debated 'outing' a personal experience, ie my brother, until I (probably) rationalized, that this is an issue many of us audio crazies have, with friends and acquataintences. But as I read some of the great posts here I realize that I have forgotten one of my first pieces of advice to my new audiophile customers: "Don't expect your friends to like or even understand your enthusiasm over this, You'll put on Sarah Vaughn recorded at Tivoli Gardens in 1962 live, and it will sound wonderful, and they will yawn and ask, 'you got any beer?' You can't transfer enthusiasm, or in my case fanaticism to others.The one post here, talking about the 'smug' attitude was almost a perfect balm, as it captured the exact feeling and moment.
Thanks for the posts, this is great.
donbellphd
205 posts
 
The above thread shows why market pickings for the latest, greatest gizmo and twist remains good. There is so much hype and hand waving in consumer audio that it is difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. And many of the customers are relatively ignorant, but very committed. And there is bit of anti-scientific method bias: How dare anyone try to measure their artistic sensibility -- one even suggested it's like trying to measure god. I love it; reminds me of the character in the BBC "Keeping Up Appeareances" who wants assurance that used electricity is not being distributed to her house.

I remain convinced that what I can hear can be measured in terms of power bandwidth, transcient response, acoustic dispersion, and so forth, and that there are many measureable differences that I cannot hear.

Now I know that exactly 25 billion and three angels can dance on the head of a pin, and I feel sorry for you if can't see that.

db
Who assumes Lrsky is rich
lrsky OP
1,118 posts
 
Rsbek,
You are right about the 'ignorance is bliss' comment on me.
But to clarify; since I rarely read, other than people talk about using 'hospital grade' plugs, on power cords, as to why they are different--what I am saying here is that I personally, that is just me, not you or the other posters here, don't have to know why something is as it is--and I can still enjoy it.
As I mentioned, when some products were sent to me, with great reputations, yet failed to 'sound' better than others of lesser credentials, (and it may have had to do with the overall synergism, like so many things in audio) I picked, for my design, the one that sounded better to make the LSA. That is one area where many designers and I disagree. To me it's all about the end result and sound, not the reputation of a given product. I guess you could say that's niiave (sp), but for me its just, making a decision, (my taste again) of what sounds better.
Ultimately the market will decide if my decisions are correct. But, regardless of the 'why's' better sounding is better. I don't need a white paper for confirmation. Maybe I am completely out to lunch there, but it's how I personally evaluate.
All of you are right here, forget what your brother says, he is no more right or wrong, just has a different opinion, and I guess I am so arrogant, that if he doesn't agree with me, he's being obstenant.Who' more hard headed, him or me? HA!
All of us audiophiles push the proverbial rock up the hill, when it comes to disinterested friends, it's just that with him, I guess I'd like to share my enthusiasm, rather than explain or fight over it.
Thanks again.
nrchy's avatar
nrchy
2,124 posts
 
I don't know that this is an arguement worth persuing. If a battle cannot be won, and there is nothing to gain by engaging in it, what is the point?

I have an IQ in the low double digits, actually the high teens, but that does not affect my ability to hear. That inability arises from another issue. It is not uncommon for people to be educated beyond their intelligence, not that this is the case with your brother, but someone coming from the perspective of a self-proclaimed knowledgable person is not going to be dissuaded by facts.

Claiming to hear a difference, or claiming not to hear a difference, are not proofs. Truth is not subjective, but perception is, and it is impossible to alter a persons perception of an event that by definition must be past.

Your brother could post the question: Why go people claim to hear differences. His experience is his own, to have and to interpret, and from which to draw a conclusion. Having done so does not garauntee the correct outcome.

Unfortuantely the only person who is always right is me, but that doesn't do anything to alleviate your situation.
More to discover