2. misc-audio
  3. 174426-96572

True or False?

The following is a common sentiment from some who claim to be audiophiles.

If you hear something but can’t measure it, you only think you heard a difference.

 

This notion is also common among people who claim to possess an accomplished understanding of audio, especially when achieving a high level of performance for a minimal investment.

So who’s right? On the one hand we have Objectivists who claim if you can’t measure it, you can’t possibly hear it or if you do, its expectation bias and self delusion. Are these people correct? Do they get as good as a sound, or better for far less money by ignoring cables, power cords, mechanical isolation, basically any accessory that many have found to dramatically improve performance despite a lack measurements? Do those who dismiss expensive digital to analog converters as being no better than rather common digital components with decent measurements get just as high a performance level as those of us with MSB and DCS? Do people who claim it’s all about finding perfect speaker placement, do these people outperform those of us with systems that cost multiples more than what they pay (Who also pay close attention to speaker placement as well as everything else)? Or do those of us who pay attention to cables— digital, analog, and power, what we set our components on top of, how we place our speakers, acoustics, and tweaks, expensive DACs and the like, do we get better sound? Who’s right? And how do we ultimately determine sound quality?

 

 

 

128x128ted_denney
astolfor's avatar
astolfor
317 posts
 

@tubebuffer you are assuming, which is not the equivalent of knowledge. You have absolutely no idea what I have listened or not. I am lucky to be able to buy anything I want at any price and I do, but first my partner and I have to like how it sounds.

@ted_denney 

What am I wrong about, 25 years of electrical engineering for one of the largest tech companies in the world, contributing to multiple IEEE protocol working groups for different protocols including IB, Ethernet, FC, AMBA, contributing to PCI-SIG, knowing the signaling path in simple bus adapter like a NIC, over 35 years of listening all kinds audio equipment, or that if something sounds better for you, then good for you?

When emotions and absolutes get added to a discussion is where I stop engaging, not worth the time.

 

 

ted_denney's avatar
ted_denney OP
286 posts
 

Astroturf, I noticed you don’t have a picture of your stereo, why am I not surprised? And your 25 years as an electrical engineer, does not disapprove the fact it’s clear as day to hear the effect of digital cables, and other things you fail to grasp. High End audio is subjective at the end of the day.

holmz's avatar
holmz
2,328 posts
 

High End audio is subjective at the end of the day.

But at the beginning of the day it is mostly objective, with designers and engineers using theories and measurements to work through the design phase of a variety of gear.

They are not sprinkling cables, nano particles, (etc.) into a witch’s vat like an alchemy class or magic potion.

In fact we have moved from alchemy to chemistry and physics over few millennia.

The magicalness seems like a bit too much foo for many. If you can show that it makes a difference, then it is easier to consider using it, and whether that difference will be sonically better or sonically worse in a specific person’s particular room.

If you can show any of it, then it should be easier for us to grasp it.

tubebuffer
417 posts
 

I have Maggie and rockport and Wilson and bw and Cessaro. I to have speaker I want in desire room. Zu in potting shed and I have Tannoy in polishing garage they not high desire room. Wilson in poolhouse and cessaro in office but rockport in perfect treat room.

Post removed 
More to discover