Audio Science Review = "The better the measurement, the better the sound" philosophy

@axo1989 very thoughtful post

@prof i think we basically agree - when push comes to shove, the one view i've expressed in this thread that i will 100% 'go to the mat' for is that listening to music is the only way to really know whether a piece of equipment is going to work for you. and i do think there are aspects of the experience of listening which vary by individual and affect enjoyment. testing is fine, and extremely valuable for a designer, but it does not tell you how something is going to affect you on an emotional level. and from my perspective, the whole point of this hobby is to deepen our love and appreciation of music - the emotional response. how we get there - by graphs and charts and spec sheets, by trial and error, even by wasting a ton of money following some reviewer's hype - is ultimately a pretty low stakes conversation. as long as music and enjoyment are front and center, that's what is important (to me)

When someone cannot effectively convey how something sounds in a descriptive and meaningful way without citing graph results at you first, I stop right there.  

Except we as humans can’t integrate all of that meaningfully to get all the way there in terms of predictive sonics, so often we have surprises when we listen....and use both measurements and subjective listening to assemble gear that gives us enjoyable sound.

At least somebody is honest about consuming all that data. I've been looking at that data for many decades, it's useful to a point, then it gets too much to process. 

@amir_asr

Once more: listening tests are the gold standard in audio research. No one is telling you to substitute measurements for it.

What we say is that don’t go believing marketing claims that have no verification with controlled testing, or make sense at engineering level. We prove the latter with measurements. Company claims the power conditioner lowers your audio system noise? Well, we measure that. If the result is that noise has not changed one bit, then you know the claim was wrong.

Why is this so odd for the few of you to accept?
You say your local water is making you sick? Folks come out and measure to see what is in it. If it is pure and clean, then that is very important information.

Importantly, don’t confuse creation of art with replay of it. Our business is the latter. The two are completely different universes. Audio equipment should NOT be in the business of creating or modifying art. If it is, then it is not high fidelity. And will impart the same signature on every music you play -- something I dislike dearly.

As to what you think you are hearing, that is NOT in doubt. What is in doubt is what you say it means when you did not block all other senses than your ear.

 

Wouldn’t it be great if these words could be accepted as a starting point for all further discussions?

Unfortunately, it appears that some people do not, can not, will not agree with the above and subsequently any further discussions are a waste of time.

 

"Audio equipment should NOT be in the business of creating or modifying art. If it is, then it is not high fidelity. And will impart the same signature on every music you play -- something I dislike dearly."

 

A very good argument for the importance of the playback system to be as neutral and as uncoloured as possible.

 

"Why is this so odd for the few of you to accept?"

 

Now there’s a question that must have been asked countless times around various negotiating tables worldwide.

Some foible of human nature?

Lack of cognitive ability to focus or listen?

Contrariness?

Vested conflicting financial/emotional interests?

Or just plain pig headedness?

"I don’t like you, so I’m not agreeing to anything you say."

 

Whatever it is, it’s something that’s eluded mankind since forever and I doubt we’ll find any solution here.

I'm not sure what is yours and what is quoted text. Use the quote function. 

"Once more: listening tests are the gold standard in audio research."

Amir repeated this a few times but he means controlled statistically valid listening tests, that are well beyond the individual listener (Since one reference point has no statistical validity).

"Importantly, don’t confuse creation of art with replay of it."

We don't have the science that will create a perfect playback system so there is some art in creating a pleasing system. It may not please you or your measurements but at long as it pleases the end user, the goal is accomplished.