Truth and Tonality: can they co-exist?

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
Can I state the obvious . If the ear can't hear it then what is the relevance.
'cause there is no one ear! I can play tracks for you where I can hear compression artifacts and you might not. By measuring, we know what exists as a difference absolutely.

Further, if an instrument shows there is no difference, you cannot use your ear and says there isn't. If I play two tracks and I difference them and it shows zero, you cannot tell me your ear says otherwise. Unfortunately it is entirely possible for your ears to mistakenly say there is a difference.

So the notion that the ear is better than an instrument is false on multiple grounds. So is the assertion that if we measure it, it is audible.

Where this leaves us is that both extremes of this discussion are wrong. You cannot stick 100% to one side or the other without being subject to challenge.

Measuring it is but an academic exercise. Hence the point -totality of the circumstances.
It absolutely is not academic. Measurements can be ultra fast and ultra reliable. Such is not the case with listening tests. I can do 1000 measurements overnight to figure an optimum design for something. You can't possibly conduct the same number of listening tests even if you decided to not sleep overnight :).

Everything in audio needs to start with a measurement. Listening tests is confidence builder. Anyone who is designing equipment by ear alone is not someone I will give a penny to. Thankfully, hardly anyone does that, even though their marketing material scuffs at the idea of measurements having value.
 

Old Listener

New Member
Jul 18, 2010
371
0
0
SF Bay area
naturelover.smugmug.com
Bill-what did I say that wasn't true? If you can find an example of where I put words in someone's mouth, do tell.

I wrote two detailed posts giving examples of what you said and other people's objections to your mis-characterizing their posts.. Amir just told you that you were mis-characterizing what he said.

As for measurements, I'm reminded of the preacher that was trying to explain to his congregation the difference between things you know and things you believe. ..You won't know until you hear something.

You and I live in a world transformed by science and technology, reasoning, experiment and measurement. When you get in a car, you'd better hope that the people who designed, built and tested the components in that car and the car as a whole did their job well. When you get on a plane, you'd better pray that the people who fly the plane and those who maintain it, believe in measurement and do their jobs. When a pharmacist fills a prescription for you, your life might just depend on his doing measurements accurately.

Be happy in your high-end audio world where only hearing counts. However, you'd better hope that the people who manufactured the components in your system did some QA measurements to be sure that the unit you bought performed just like the prototype.

I'd say that measurements count in the real world.

Bill
 

fas42

Addicted To Best
Jan 8, 2011
3,973
3
0
NSW Australia
I'd say that measurements count in the real world.
Yes, as a first step. The quibble then is are they sufficient to guarantee performance, satisfaction, etc, etc.. Going back to the car analogy, it is very easy to obtain all sorts of measurements, metrics as to how well they perform. But, would YOU ( referring to everyone :)) be prepared to buy a car purely based on measurements?

Yes, metrics as Tim has stated must be part of the equation. Don, elsewhere, suggested there are plenty more of those that don't get mentioned normally, because it might overload our poor little brains :D:D. I wonder if he could be persuaded to list them here ...

Frank
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Assuming you put on a recording with a noise floor above that caused by the arc welder, would you be prepared to say that a DBT would not distinguish between the two situations, in other words, spurious distortions and colourations were not being engendered by the interference?

Frank

No, I wouldn't be prepared to say that at all. I don't know enough about arc welders.

Tim
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,308
1,425
1,820
Manila, Philippines
Wow, a non-dialectical exchange on what a dialectic should be. Is this hilariously ironic or what? ;) ;) ;) ;)
 

fas42

Addicted To Best
Jan 8, 2011
3,973
3
0
NSW Australia
I don't know enough about arc welders.
Arc welders are about as bad as it gets in terms of power line interference and radio frequency noise. The point being that the reason for one person not being happy with a component, versus somebody else, may be as simple as the fact that the neighbour was a DIY enthusiast using, or leaving some gear on. The manufacturer's spec's give you no indication of the component's ability to always convey the truth, in this regard.

Frank
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,517
1,774
1,850
Metro DC
'cause there is no one ear! I can play tracks for you where I can hear compression artifacts and you might not. By measuring, we know what exists as a difference absolutely.
I don't think that I ever argued that we all hear the same. My point is that ultimately what is important if I (Meaning the human race) can't hear it, it does not matter. We don't design products for the hard of hearing, old guys like me, nor that that thirteen year old girl with hearing like a bat. So measurements are important to the designers but not to me(end user). All that is important is what I can hear,
Further, if an instrument shows there is no difference, you cannot use your ear and says there (is?) isn't. If I play two tracks and I difference them and it shows zero, you cannot tell me your ear says otherwise. Unfortunately it is entirely possible for your ears to mistakenly say there is a difference.
I'm not going to fall into the null test argument. If I can paraphrase; if I'm hearing something inconsistent with the measurement then you must be measuring the wrong thing.:):) If I hear something that's not there. it's not my ear that is mistaken. It's my brains perception that is wrong.

So the notion that the ear is better than an instrument is false on multiple grounds. So is the assertion that if we measure it, it is audible.

Unfortunately for you science guys human perception is the most important thing. The reason for that is you are trying to create the illusion inside my head. Measurements are only useful to create a machine to try and create that illusion. That is why the ear is best. You can take a machine and make a gazillion colors. My eyes have the last word. Yeah you can trick my eyes. But that's an aberration. Any true test has to assume the ear is working properly. If the ear is malfunctioning (being tricked) the test is invalid
Where this leaves us is that both extremes of this discussion are wrong. You cannot stick 100% to one side or the other without being subject to challenge.

Most absolutes are wrong

I don't see saying the "ear is best under the totality of circumstances" as an extreme. I see that as a moderate statement leaving open the notion that machines do many things better when not acting under the totality of the circumstances. The ear does not have to be perfect because whatever the ear does is right. (It's kinda like a woman.) It is what as it is. The machines have to be perfect. We humans are subjective by nature. Whatever the ear hears is what we have to deal with. That's right the ear wags the machines. The machines don't wag the ears.
It absolutely is not academic. Measurements can be ultra fast and ultra reliable. Such is not the case with listening tests. I can do 1000 measurements overnight to figure an optimum design for something. You can't possibly conduct the same number of listening tests even if you decided to not sleep overnight :).

Machines are notoriously bad at measuring real world performance. They do excel at repetitive tasks and computations. most measurements require human interpretation. Additionally applying those measurements to real world situation require some "artistic ability. Trying cooking from a recipe. What I can do is take my time and see if the effect wears off because of listening fatigue.Again our machines have to make hear music. The measurements assist the machine not the ear.

Everything in audio needs to start with a measurement. Listening tests is confidence builder. Anyone who is designing equipment by ear alone is not someone I will give a penny to. Thankfully, hardly anyone does that, even though their marketing material scuffs at the idea of measurements having value.
Yes but it finishes with listening. The only thing that matters to the listener is what happens when he drops that needle in the grove or that laser in the pits. Or whatever the format will be tommorrow.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
I don't know what to make of what you just wrote :). Here is the order of how you can measure performance with highest reliability to lowest:

1. Instrument measurement.

2. Blind listening tests.

3. Sighted subjective listening tests.

Without putting value on each, do you agree with this order?
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,517
1,774
1,850
Metro DC
Let's assume that I have all the necessary skills to properly audition and measure audio equipment.
1. Sighted test frist.
2. Measuremte to try and verify what I heard
3. Sighted test agian.
4.Possibly informal blind tests if the efects were subtle.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
You are not answering the question I asked. I didn't ask which way you evaluate a system. I asked which method has the highest and which one has lowest accuracy. Your list repeats steps and such which by definition can't be the answer to this question.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,517
1,774
1,850
Metro DC
You are not answering the question I asked. I didn't ask which way you evaluate a system. I asked which method has the highest and which one has lowest accuracy. Your list repeats steps and such which by definition can't be the answer to this question.

I can't answer that question. NMI
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,308
1,425
1,820
Manila, Philippines
What's NMI?
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Non maskable interrupt?

No more inkspots?
Never mind Irene?
Not my iguana?

Truth and tonality: Any tonality added to or subtracted from the tonality represented by the recorded signal takes us further from the truth. I can't see how this dialectic, or argument, can honestly conclude anything else.

Tim
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,517
1,774
1,850
Metro DC
I need more information.

For example ask what do I think is more reliable -my senses or a smoke alarm. If I am awake and in the room, I'll take my senses. If I' m asleep or not in the room. I'll take my the smoke alarm. When the alarm goes off and I see there is no smoke or fire I ignore the alarm. Conversely, when the alarm is silent and I smell smoke or see fire, I'm not going to ignore that.

In certain situations then instrumental measurements are superior.
In some situations sensory perception is paramount. That is especially true if the product is designed to affect the senses. So if I make air freshener the ultimate test is to ask the person if the room smells fresh. Notwithstanding the fact I may have used an impressive array of scientific equipment to create the scent.
Smoke detection readily lends itself to sensory perception. Humans are very good at detecting heat, fire, and smoke.
Now if I installed a Carbon monoxide detector in my house then I would rank the machine as paramount, The human sensory system is very poor at detecting Carbon monoxide. The principal symptom of excessive amounts of Carbon Monoxide is loss of consciousness or death. If that alarm goes off I'm not going to ignore it. I'll vacate or ventilate the area and seek professional help.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing