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
twl
3,251 posts
 
El, bad analogy.

Cable believers don't think that they make it happen.
It's the cable disbelievers who think that the believers make it happen(via self delusion).

Essentially, for the first time on this thread, I agree with Rsbeck.
People are going to believe what they believe.

Some people will act based on what they experience, and some people will doubt their experiences, and act contrary to them, because they would rather believe what others tell them they should believe.

If we relied strictly on numbers, like is suggested by some on this thread, then we'd all be listening to old Pioneer receivers from the 70's, which had "perfect" distortion numbers, but sounded like hell. These same kinds of people who are anti-cable today, were yelling to the rooftops that we were wasting our money on audiophile equipment, because any cheap receiver "measured perfect", and spending anything more was foolish. It was only the audiophiles who persisted in pointing out that some audiophile equipment sounded better and measured worse. The "measurement people" then fell back on the same argument, about it being "all in your head". Remember that? Well, after a couple years of this same kind of argument happening today about cables, it was found that designing for ultra-low distortion into a static load ruined the sound in real life applications. I'd say that this is about the same situation.

Science eventually "caught on" to what was happening in the "distortion numbers race", and realized that their testing was flawed, and that it actually led to the reduction of performance level in real world applications. It took awhile, but some people never really accepted that science was wrong(incomplete). They still listen to that crap from the 70's, thinking it is "perfect".

I think that this is like a movie, "Revenge of the Bench Testers". Where the plot consists of disgruntled bench testers(and their minions) who were embarrassed by their failures in the late 70's, coming back to destroy the audio world by planting seeds of self-doubt into the audiophile community who embarrassed them 25 years ago. Mwuuhuuuhahahaha!!

Don't worry. We found that they are not invincible, and last time all we had to do was disconnect their feedback loops, and they went back to their benches. :^)
lugnut
1,190 posts
 
Rsbeck,

I'll give you this much after reviewing your systems. You don't spend much money on speaker cables. So, I guess you don't put your money where your mouth is. (meant as a compliment) Obviously, you believe what you say as do those that oppose you.

Enjoy your system while we enjoy ours!

Patrick
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Spectrum analyers are great. See my review of my new toy, Behringer DEQ2496. But they are not as sensitive as the human ear in some regards. The example I have heard...Imagine the Boston Symphony Orchestra going full bore, and one trombone player hits a sour note. The audience will hear this, but no spectrum analyser will reveal it. Spectrum analysers can be very effective diagnostic tools working with test signals like white noise, but should not be expected to do everything.
sdatch
204 posts
 
It looks like this thread started out talking about differences in front end components, and then veered off into cables. Here is what I think might be even more interesting than a double-blind cable test: how about a double-blind system test? I know this might be difficult to arrange, but I think it would be fascinating to take a "standard" 2 channel Japanese receiver, disc player, and speakers system from a chain like Best Buy, and run it against a relatively pompous high-end system, like an EMM Labs, Kharma, Lamm system. Both systems would have feature full-range speakers, and a means of ensuring identical SPLs between systems would be essential. I think it might be surprising how many people could not tell the difference between the 2.
lrsky OP
1,118 posts
 
I also think that it would be interesting to put someone in a Mercedes Benz, then a Hyundai Elantra, (or whatever their best is, blindfold them, and ask them to describe their experience--and then tell us if the experience is worth five to six times as much. (Don't bother to point out that the Mercedes will LAST longer, since the Hyundai has a 100,000 mile warranty and Mercedes doesn't.)
Also, let me cook a steak, (sorry vegetarians) for what I can buy it for at the store, prepare the whole meal, wine included, and have them eat it blindfolded and see if the experience is worth the several times price difference. Life is full of choices, a great deal of which our ego plays a large, and probably most significant part. Pride of ownership is a key component (no pun here) in the choices we make.
When I got my Robert Lee special speaker cables, the Shotguns, I was fascinated at the difference they made, even though I had been using Kimber Select 3035 on both the top (treble) and bottom, (bass). And when I accidentally hooked up the low pass to the top on the right speaker, a friend of mine, who happens to be blind, said, "something isn't right here." (Talk about your ultimate blindfold test.)
He and I listen like this, him not knowing, and making decisions as to what is better. Even though I am faster on the uptake, (at his admission) we always agree on the emperical difference, and how the music is affected overall, when we change tubes or use a Sistrum, and so on.
The point here is, since I listen, almost exclusively with my eyes closed, (in order to SEE Chet Baker or Nat King Cole) what is the purpose of putting pressure on people by blindfolding them. This seems to be the only industry in which people are denied one of their senses to make evaluations.
One other thing. I read, and can't remember where, so it's worthless data, that people, when blindfolded and under test conditions, are pressured, and have a hard time even tasting the difference between common items such as strawberry preserves and cherry, or grapefruit and orange juice. If that is the case, maybe there is something wrong with that approach.
If you like it, it's good, (Bose or Polk, THIEL or Vandersteen, Maggies, et al) so what. Enjoy.
PS, Thanks to the group, I am leaving my poor brother alone. He is right to think I am an **shole! HA
More to discover