+1
"Night and day" .. "Blew out of the water" and other audiophile hyperbole, seem to be missing from the Amir's OP..
To those who have trained ears and know what to listen for, differences can be more pronounced.
+1
"Night and day" .. "Blew out of the water" and other audiophile hyperbole, seem to be missing from the Amir's OP..
(...)
"Night and day" .. "Blew out of the water" and other audiophile hyperbole, seem to be missing from the Amir's OP. For the record,
For the record I am of the advice that Hi-Rez and Redbook can sound different ...
To those who have trained ears and know what to listen for, differences can be more pronounced.
I suspect Bruce is using music...Agreed. Audible, even with training, extensive experience and concentration to the point of listening for artifacts, not to music, is more pronounced than inaudible.
Tim
I suspect Bruce is using music...
The process is no different from tuning your guitar Tim. When you have a reference you know what is "off".
"Night/day" hyperbole is not confined to the audio forums - it's a characteristic of most hobby forums that involve tweaks & technology & personal enjoyment i.e cars. Any others people can nominate?
To those who have trained ears and know what to listen for, differences can be more pronounced.
Bruce and how many of us do have those trained ears? Research shows that we, audiophiles do not fare well. Of course you could be one of the few who do fare extremely well...
The "Night and Day"differences are also greatly helped by knowledge of the product under evaluation .... I am just saying
Bruce and how many of us do have those trained ears? Research shows that we, audiophiles do not fare well. Of course you could be one of the few who do fare extremely well...
The "Night and Day"differences are also greatly helped by knowledge of the product under evaluation .... I am just saying
It's not just limited to technology, John. On the guitar forums, my only other hobby, the difference between basic models and premium models, between premium models and vintage repros, between vintage repros and custom shop, between the best factory custom shop models and the "hand-built" luthier guitars...are all presented by some in dramatic, hyperbolic terms. I've owned every level. I have the reference points. I've owned the normal and the "abby-normal." And can I still recognize exaggeration when I see it. There's not nearly as much of it, though. It's there, but it doesn't seem to dominate the dialogue the way it does in the audiophile world.
Tim
I dunno about that Tim. I look at hyperbole differently when it comes to a new, hopefully happy, owner. The guy is just expressing his happiness. I don't think we have to be so literal about everything. I look at marketing hyperbole differently. I know what the purpose of that is as well so the BS detector gets turned on. At the end of the day, the question that needs to be answered is if the product lives up to the hype. That is a personal call.
The problem with audio is that communicating feelings is so friggin' hard. Take it from somebody that sells the stuff. Personally, I gave up. I'm like, "here I'll take it to your place and you tell me" or "take along some of your favourite tracks and come over". Demo-ing is so much easier. Once in a while I'll write a review but to be honest, I do it more for myself than anything else. They are like diary entries, something I can look back on in the future to help keep me honest.
Well knowing the trait it's easy to adjust one's scale when reading forum posts. That's why it's useful to get to know posters & their style.It's not just limited to technology, John. On the guitar forums, my only other hobby, the difference between basic models and premium models, between premium models and vintage repros, between vintage repros and custom shop, between the best factory custom shop models and the "hand-built" luthier guitars...are all presented by some in dramatic, hyperbolic terms. I've owned every level. I have the reference points. I've owned the normal and the "abby-normal." And can I still recognize exaggeration when I see it. There's not nearly as much of it, though. It's there, but it doesn't seem to dominate the dialogue the way it does in the audiophile world.
Tim
Yes, agreed & this is where the personal preference aspect comes in - people value different aspects differently/focus on different aspects - it's not that we "all hear differently",it's that we value & focus on different aspects of the soundfield. The soundfield & our reception of it is by-and-large the same for all people of average hearing, I believe, - too much is made of HF loss as we age - how important do we really think this is based on Amir's test results? There's more to it than just HF acuity.Yeah, it is also compounded that music is about enjoyment-satisfaction and critically communicating the emotional context and connection the writer/composer intended.
These are usually beyond "normal" objective and quantifiable variables in the context of say this thread and various other audio related subjects and topics, especially as the emotional context and musical connection can be a combination of or on its own based upon rythm-instrument and how played-harmonics-tone/key/etc-etc.
I also believe that latest research shows that the visual cortex has a role in hearingFrom what I remember for recent scientific research, music does use both mathematical (mathematical beauty) and linguistic aspect of the brain - ok that is putting it very simplistic I know
Thanks, Orb, your thoughts & learning on blind testing is valuable & much appreciatedAll we can say for sure IMO is; blind ABX IS tough and in many ways artificial requiring a specific approach-scope and methodology for both the tester and critically the listener to have any meaning.
If there is a successful test then it comes down to there is a difference and investigating why and the potential implications and scope, anything else is speculation.
Cheers
Orb
Yes, agreed & this is where the personal preference aspect comes in - people value different aspects differently/focus on different aspects - it's not that we "all hear differently",it's that we value & focus on different aspects of the soundfield. The soundfield & our reception of it is by-and-large the same for all people of average hearing, I believe, - too much is made of HF loss as we age - how important do we really think this is based on Amir's test results? There's more to it than just HF acuity.
I also believe that latest research shows that the visual cortex has a role in hearing
Thanks, Orb, your thoughts & learning on blind testing is valuable & much appreciated
Read The Brain that Changes Itself, the science of neuroplasticity or sensory substitution. The long held theory that specific areas in the brain control defined functions eg. localization, is no longer valid. In fact, look at the chapter where the researchers use sound to retrain blind people to see. Some amazing work being done by Bach-Y-Rita and researchers in Germany and Israel as well as around the world.
Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |