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

My new forum posted as: 

Nearly all manufacturers do not advertise/exhibit their product measurements? Why?

@crymeanaudioriver

in audio we are well beyond the observation and hypothesis stage. However you are wrong or at least simplifying. The hypothethis may be as simple as you are hearing things. The scientific side of audio has already stated that and tested it often. ...

In terms of general audio theory theory, much is established—I doubt we’ll be discovering parallel universes there—in terms of psycho-acoustics a great deal also. But sonic observations of new speakers happen all the time. And "you are hearing things" is an inadequately worded hypothesis, we have to be more specific.

@mikepowellaudio 

RE I had to weigh in as this is too hard to resist....

Excellent post!

fleschler,

Here is my own approach to these questions:

Nobody is being force to become engineers or do scientific or blind tests when evaluating equipment. Nor should they be.

But it’s still the case that many of us want to know what is true...or LIKELY...or not in regard to claims about audio gear, because there are so many different claims, and we care about how we spend our money and time.

So if I’m voicing skepticism about your results, you don’t have to do a thing. Just carry on. But I am giving my reasons for why I find the claims uncompelling.

So when you say if you hear dramatic results it suggests you must be hearing something real, unfortunately that’s not true. We really can imagine "dramatic" results. Just consider the astounding number of experiences people believe they’ve had, everything from alien abductions to becoming convinced they were part of satanic rituals when they were a child to utterly implausible alternative-medicine treatments that "worked" etc. If someone can imagine they were probed by an alien, you think an audiophile can’t imagine "less midrange glare or better dynamics?"

So I approach another audiophile’s claims not on the strength of his personal conviction, but on the plausibility of the claim. If someone is describing to me the differences he heard between Devore and Magico speakers...hey...TOTALLY plausible given that we know very well speakers differ in very audible ways. Could there be some bias infecting the claim? Of course. But as a practical matter, it’s reasonable to conditionally accept the claims of the sonic differences.

But if someone is declaring their new $1,000 USB cable has dramatically improved his system, deeper bass, bigger soundstage, more dynamics and all that...well that is a more implausible claim based on how digital signals work. I’m not going to demand THAT person make his decisions based on MY criteria, but I am going to explain why I would want stronger evidence than that person’s say-so, before I accept the claim. And I will defend why that is rational for me to do so.

So don’t mix up what I’m saying as a declaration you have to do anything different at all in your pursuit of gear. I am simply defending the reasons for skepticism. If you think those reasons are poor ones, then yeah that becomes central to the debate.

@mattw73

Do I make all my purchases because of high SINAD rating? No, but it helps as a starting point for certain types of gear I may be looking for. I have my own brain and I’m able to make my own decision on what sounds good to me without asking a hundred different people about what they thought about something I purchased.

Can you give an example of what that gear (you may be looking for) is that ASR helps you as a starting point in. It’s a bit confusing really. And where does the science come in, in measuring?