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
pabelson
344 posts
 
Your brother is exaggerating a bit for effect, but his general point is correct. He's clearly done a good bit to educate himself about the field of audio reproduction. Perhaps you could learn from him.

And no, you are not delusional. But that doesn't mean that every difference you think you hear has a physical cause.
lkdog
417 posts
 
I agree that intelligence,per se, may not be the issue.
There are allegedly 16 types of intelligence, anyway.

If your brother can't hear the difference between sources or amps, he simply may not be very discerning at this time.
That is why in college they make you take Art Appreciation.
It is like any endeavor-he doesn't know what he doesn't know at this point. But if he is content-what can you say.
Hey, 61 million people voted for Bush. The world has all kinds.

I just replaced my source with a different one.
It sounds so much different (and better) it is not even funny.
By the way (as you are probably wondering) I replaced a $1500 cd player with a $700 cd player. Price sometimes is not relevant.
rja's avatar
rja
2,371 posts
 
Just think how happy we would be if we thought an $89 CD player sounded great! Is ignorance bliss? I don't know the answer, but I think it's cheaper!
84audio
175 posts
 
Good advice from several people on this thread. Forget it! You will never change his mind, but mor than that, he's having too much fun yanking your chain. Arguing just encourages him.

I don't try to explain why a cd player might be worth $3000 to people who don't understand. If you don't hear a difference, you shouldn't buy it. The last thing I want to discuss with my friends who are not in to audio is the price of components in my system. They think I'm crazy, and maybe they're right.

How much of this chase is about ego? It's sometimes difficult to admit that things that cost less are better. We have so much time, money and ego invested in a product, that if something cheaper and better comes along, we resist it. I just sold my amp and preamp in favor of an integrated that is about 30% of the price. It absolutely sounds better to me! I didn't want to admit it at first, but I heard what I heard. Frankly, I miss the bragging rights, but the music sounds better with the integrated, and that's most important to me.

Your brother is at one extreme, and it's easy for us to be at the other. Things aren't always better because they cost more, but it's silly to think they all sound the same. Chip sets, power supplys, and transports are just a few of the things that can make one disc player sound different from another. Ego and price justification can cloud our objectivity, but if your brother really doesn't hear the differences, he should keep what he has. If you hear a difference, enjoy it! and don't let your brother rain on your parade.
lrsky OP
1,118 posts
 
I certainly recognize that intelligence insures nothing as it relates to this topic, just to get that out of the way; from an art perspective, Andy Warhol, like him or not, was wildly successful, and had an estimated I.Q. of 85, which places him in the mildly slow category, as average uis between 90 and 110, average being established by the largest portion of scores i.e. the most will score 100 with others falling at the extremes. I only point out that someone who is a thinking person, will take an issue, and treat it with such a closed minded approach, disallowing even the remotest possibility that cables, and power cords for example, can make a difference.
I am on the side of the ledger that states, 'just because I don't understand or can't rationally condlude why this IS the way it is, doesn't make it untrue, and doesn't mean it isn't happening.
In Psych 101 the professor asked the old chestnut, "if a tree falls in a forrest and no one is there to hear it, is there any sound?" Someone in the front row said no, and he agreed. I raised MY hand and said, "well if there's no noise, there's also no tree, and no forrest."
The professor immediately told me I was being disruptive, and I pointed out that I had simply taken his logic one step further, for illustrative purposes. The answer being, if it takes human interaction for reality to have occurred, (an event such as gathered sound waves) it also takes eyes to behold the tree, and or the forrest.
The point here is, I don't need to understand why, to appreciate differences, whereas, emperically, he does.
Someone said, 'there is a tendency for teachers to talk down to both adults and students, so I chose to get out of the field." I think that that is the real hook here, the smugness of the response.
Thanks for responding.
More to discover