Measured Improvement or Non-measured Improvement?

[dallasjustice]

That's why I used the word confirm. My hypothetical doesn't concern itself with inconclusive measurement. Either there's a confirmatory measurement or there's no measurement. Which is you preference?

I said negative or positive measurement not no measurement. The problem with measurements and DSP, you can take a measurement that shows a peak or a dip and get the DSP to fix it and get the better measurements. Many times the better measurement can sound worse. You can also start with great, flat measurements but you have a dull sound and you might need to introduce peak somewhere to bring life to the room, in this case the worse measurement will sound better. Then there's the situation with electricity, you can get better measurements in certain parameters with a high quality transformer installed but sonically there are penalties. We've gone over this in another thread where I find the noisier, worse measuring mains preferable to the cleaner, quieter sound of the transformer.There's value in the measurements but at the same time you can't measure perception and very important things like tone, tonal range, timbre, solidity and naturalness. IMO both have their place.

david

 

[rbbert]

More than 10x as many comments as votes. I'd say the formulation of the poll is defective...

 

[microstrip]

It's a messy question.

Perhaps because it is too vague. Does it mean that all audiophiles that do not have measuring setups and do not have a high quality distortion meter to test their amplifiers should select the Non-measured improvement?

 

[microstrip]

LOL.

Are you aware of the research Sean Olive from Harmon did? He found that listeners universally prefer speakers that measure flat:

Listeners prefer loudspeakers that are flat (...)

--Ethan

Sorry he did not. Universally without any explanations means : by everyone; in every case. He did not find such think.

He found that using his ranking system in Harman established listening conditions MORE people preferred loudspeakers hat had the flattest measured frequency response maintained uniformly off axis.

BTW, I know why you used the word universally, as I have read the article. But those that did not read it will understand you are just qualifying the type of listeners.

We should remember that in these studies preference is established statistically - it does not mean all people preferred it.

 

[JackD201]

Statistics is not one of his strong points.

 

[Robh3606]

I am not sure where any of you guys are but as a DIY speaker builder it's both under ideal circumstances. You want to hear something subjectively and have measurements that confirm what you heard. There are are problems though as you can clearly hear differences that are not easy to measure with the tools available to the amateur builder. A good example are issues in the time domain such as diaphragm dampening or material differences. You can hear differences between Titanium and Beryllium or differences between damped and un-damped diaphragms. Have fun measuring them using gated measurements outside a good anechoic chamber.

Rob

 

[JackD201]

I am not sure where any of you guys are but as a DIY speaker builder it's both under ideal circumstances. You want to hear something subjectively and have measurements that confirm what you heard. There are are problems though as you can clearly hear differences that are not easy to measure with the tools available to the amateur builder. A good example are issues in the time domain such as diaphragm dampening or material differences. You can hear differences between Titanium and Beryllium or differences between damped and un-damped diaphragms. Have fun measuring them using gated measurements outside a good anechoic chamber.

Rob

Excellent point Rob. It's not like we have infinite tools at our disposal.

 

[Atmasphere]

If you feel that measurements are totally meaningless and can never be used to demonstrate any audible improvement, this may not be your favorite poll.

Given that we can measure things we can't hear and hear things we can't measure, I go with its real if it is measurable and audible both at the same time. If not, its pointless. Without the knowledge of human hearing/perceptual rules, many measurements amount to the Emperor's New Clothes.

For example I can hear differences in power cables and confirm what I hear with simple measurements. When I can get better sine wave response in our amps and confirm that they sound smoother and are more detailed (less distortion, less masking) as a result, that lets me know its real and I'm not making it up. Stuff like that.

To ask the questions of the poll without understanding the rules of human hearing is more or less useless. I accidentally clicked the 'measurement' answer, now the poll is even, but my intention was not to vote since there really is no good answer.

 

[hifikontoen]

Are you aware of the research Sean Olive from Harmon did? He found that listeners universally prefer speakers that measure flat:

Listeners prefer loudspeakers that are flat

So I think it's a mistake to discount measurements. Another problem with assessing stuff by ear alone is the key of the music interacts with peaks and nulls in the room. So going by ear alone to position speakers, for example, might sound great with one piece of music but terrible with another. Versus measuring the room which shows all frequencies at once.

--Ethan

Thanks for giving us this link (which I had heard of before), Ethan.
The link (research by Harman) contributes to turning this debate into a more scientific basis.

I found the publication in full, by the way. Here it is:
http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20140503/12206.pdf

 

[dallasjustice]

I don't understand the resistance to measurements. FR plot isn't perfect. Nobody claims measurements are always perfect. Measurements are always followed with listening.

This is a simple commonsense question and yet few can even bring themselves to accept the question without any further reflection. What is the harm in using a microphone to measure whether there is a change? What's the worst thing that will happen? If there's no change in measurement but you hear a change, feel free to disregard the measurement. I think some folks here think this poll is just me trying to push my perspective on someone else. This is not a push poll. I often don't rely on measurements in evaluating system changes. But if a valid measurement can be made, why would you ignore a tool that can improve your system's performance?

 

[hifikontoen]

I don't understand the resistance to measurements.

An academic like you, I guess have respect for science (scientific methods) and objectivity (such people are sometimes called objectivists).
I am not a lawyer and I even do not know you, but maybe your education and job experience have contributed to this.

Many people (at least based on what is written by some of them in hi-fi forums) have very little education and/or are narrow-minded.
They do not understand the need for an objective and scientific approach (they are sometimes called subjectivists as they generalize their own subjective experience).

 

[MylesBAstor]

An academic like you, I guess have respect for science (scientific methods) and objectivity (such people are sometimes called objectivists).
I am not a lawyer and I even do not know you, but maybe your education and job experience have contributed to this.

Many people (at least based on what is written by some of them in hi-fi forums) have very little education and/or are narrow-minded.
They do not understand the need for an objective and scientific approach (they are sometimes called subjectivists as they generalize their own subjective experience).

Or perhaps as any good academician or scientist knows, the more you know, the less you know.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Thanks for giving us this link (which I had heard of before), Ethan.
The link (research by Harman) contributes to turning this debate into a more scientific basis.

I found the publication in full, by the way. Here it is:
http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20140503/12206.pdf

It's amazing how those who claim to use science actually know so little about it.

If you accept the testing methodology. That's science and non-scientists don't appreciate it. The most important part of any scientific paper isn't the introduction, results or discussion but the Materials and Methods section. And we're not even talking about the repeatabilty of the original authors results. Who has confirmed his findings? So you are just blindly accepting the results of one study???

Not only that but the bigger issue is that people have less and less time to read the original work and instead rely on reviews and the personal biases, etc. of the author.

 

[mep]

Or perhaps as any good academician or scientist knows, the more you know, the less you know.

Also, being narrow-minded is hardly a trait that solely belongs to those who would be labeled as subjectivists. Once people become rooted into a belief system, it's hard to dig out of that rut.

 

[hifikontoen]

It's amazing how those who claim to use science actually know so little about it.

If you accept the testing methodology. That's science and non-scientists don't appreciate it. The most important part of any scientific paper isn't the introduction, results or discussion but the Materials and Methods section. And we're not even talking about the repeatabilty of the original authors results. Who has confirmed his findings? So you are just blindly accepting the results of one study???

Not only that but the bigger issue is that people have less and less time to read the original work and instead rely on reviews and the personal biases, etc. of the author.

I am fully aware of the importance of repeatability in general confirming (or not conforming) results.
There is nothing in the setup preventing others to do so.
When it comes to the methodology, a good journal should of course be the independent part securing the quality of the publication.
I encourage others to inform us on the quality of AES regarding this.

It should be noted that the standard hi-fi reviews found in typical hi-fi magazines are really of microscopic value as they typically are subjectivists' torrent of words.
Things must be set in a perspective.

 

[hifikontoen]

Or perhaps as any good academician or scientist knows, the more you know, the less you know.

Perhaps this: The more you know, the more you know that you do not know.

 

[Ethan Winer]

I don't understand the resistance to measurements.

Because measurements (and null tests, and blind tests) can refute what people think they hear. They'd rather believe they heard a difference after paying $1,000 for a power wire than accept the measurements that prove they were mistaken.

--Ethan

 

[mep]

How many non-believers in cables have the skills and the test equipment necessary to make measurements that prove there are no electrical differences between different cables? Damn few. And if you claim such skills and claim you have the test equipment, please tell us what your qualifications are, the test gear used including brand and model number, and then give us your test procedure that you used to test the cables. If the answer to the above is that you are unwilling or unable to do that, it's time to clam up and quit running your mouth.

 

[amirm]

How many non-believers in cables have the skills and the test equipment necessary to make measurements that prove there are no electrical differences between different cables? Damn few. And if you claim such skills and claim you have the test equipment, please tell us what your qualifications are, the test gear used including brand and model number, and then give us your test procedure that you used to test the cables. If the answer to the above is that you are unwilling or unable to do that, it's time to clam up and quit running your mouth.

Please don't get personal Mark. It is just a cable. Does not merit insulting other members over it.

As to your question, I have the equipment. And think have the qualifications to use them. What is it that you want me to do with them?

 

[Ron Party]

Amir, I enjoyed, learned from, and appreciated your efforts and what I know to be considerable time and personal expense on your part in regards to your study of the assorted cables undertaken as a result of that Monoprice thread over at AVS. Very few on either side of these repetitive debates ever take the time and effort to actually go beyond their keyboards and endeavor to do something constructive and reliable from which all of us mere mortals can actually learn something. Actual data, so simple as a concept, is almost always absent from these debates.