Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?
It’s easy to make snide remarks like “yes- I do the opposite of what he says.” And in some respects I agree, but if you do that, this is just going to be taken down. So I’m asking a serious question. Has ASR actually changed your opinion on anything? For me, I would say 2 things. I am a conservatory-trained musician and I do trust my ears. But ASR has reminded me to double check my opinions on a piece of gear to make sure I’m not imagining improvements. Not to get into double blind testing, but just to keep in mind that the brain can be fooled and make doubly sure that I’m hearing what I think I’m hearing. The second is power conditioning. I went from an expensive box back to my wiremold and I really don’t think I can hear a difference. I think that now that I understand the engineering behind AC use in an audio component, I am not convinced that power conditioning affects the component output. I think.
So please resist the urge to pile on. I think this could be a worthwhile discussion if that’s possible anymore. I hope it is.
You explain it better than me for everyone... Thanks.. 😊
|
@mapman "technology is the key to good sound" is overreaching. Class D is innovative tech. Measures well. Not the best sound to all. Neve 1073 style microphone pre amps (transformer/class A) are very old tech, still preferred by many top music makers. Truth is there are times when a brilliant equipment designer will choose something that measures worse because it sounds better. That is taste. Listening skill. Listening always trumps measuring for the truly intelligent. How do we measure a great piece of music? A great recording ? Can't be done. Relying on measuring comes from fear of trusting ourselves. It's missing the whole point of music making and music listening. Science is one means towards an end. Not an end in itself. I love science. It's not the authority here however. |
@decooney what is the "disinformation" you speak of ? No one can dispute a well made measurement. The issue it's validity. |
You are right for sure... It is way more deeper if we speak about sounds and music though ... No measurements win the race because of its validity ALONE... The measurements must be evaluated in their CONTEXT of application and in their LIMITED bounds of application.. Thats my point discussing hearing theories and what means linear measures for a non linear Ears/brain , and what means out of the design process , measured numbers of material designs which are interpreted in a time independant way for a time dependant unrelated qualitative phenomenon .. Amir said: no need for that, trust the tools and forget your ears save for a blind test... Acuity in hearings for him is not recognizing nuances in soprano voice expression here, for him it is only hertz and decibels... Then the Amir ears are untrained by non amplified classical or persian or Indian or African or Chinese or japan music... he trained his ears with studio and computers... He call that training ears in resolution and acuity ... He dont know that even in perception the ears/brain to perceive something as meaningful and not only as audible noise in background must have the different experience of different musical contexts because without concepts we dont perceive things in a qualitative way ... We reduce them to hertz and decibels... We are then NOT EVEN WRONG... Amir is not even wrong because he miss the question to begin with... He gives an answer to a question he never ask,... What is technology in relation to science ? it is answers for question we never asked... or it is a possible new question for an answer we never imagined.. 😊 An example : Mankind discovered fire by accident... It was an answer for a question about cooking we never asked for...
|
“No one can dispute a well made measurement. The issue it’s validity.” |
