Hearing acuity, say what?

[DaveyF]

A lot of us seem to like discussing whether we have heard a certain aspect of a recording, or how this piece of gear sounds vs. that piece of gear. As an example and as many of you know, I happen to hear that the old tweeter in the Wilson speakers has a propensity to " ring". Many do not hear that aspect of these speakers. Many others do.
It would seem to be a fact that some people are able to hear different things than others, or their hearing "acuity" is superior. IS this really the case though? Clearly, in some instance wherein a person has been clinically diagnosed as having hearing loss, I think we could safely say that their "acuity" to hear certain sounds is less than the "norm". However, IF we assume that the average a'phile has "normal" hearing ability ( what's normal is another question?), can we explain why so many of us hear certain things in our systems that others ( usually non a'philes) do not. The ear/ brain has a way of learning what to listen for....BUT are these things psychological expectations or are they "real"?
Another observation that many have seen, is that our lady friends and a'philes ( not too many here, ANYONE know why? ) have traditionally superior ability in the "upper frequencies" than we men do.
What is your hearing acuity? Can we really learn to hear better?

 

[JackD201]

What I believe to be true? Learn to hear better: NO. Listen better: YES.

 

[Steve Williams]

What I believe to be true? Learn to hear better: NO. Listen better: YES.

I agree

 

[Bruce B]

What I believe to be true? Learn to hear better: NO. Listen better: YES.

+2 I've had several groups of listeners that I've played the same title in different sample rates and formats. Most say they couldn't hear a difference. I then taught them what to listen for and gave examples. Everyone in the group could easily identify which is which. My wife is a good example. She amazes me sometimes!

 

[amirm]

I think there is a difference between hearing a difference and caring about the same. My wife's hear range is way, way better than mine. I have run tests where I thought I had shut down the system only to have her ask, "what is that high-pitch sound I have been hearing?" I go and check and see that the tone is still playing!

With respect to fidelity however, it just isn't her priority. No more than it is mine to do the same with her hobbies.

 

[edorr]

The question is does learning to listen better add anything to enjoyment of the music? I would argue the opposite - If you could blissfully enjoy a 44/16 recording played over speaker with ringing tweeter before, and you now learn to divert mental energy to becoming aware of the imperfections associated with this playback system/format, your musical enjoyment diminishes.

 

[NorthStar]

...
Another observation that many have seen, is that our lady friends and a'philes ( not too many here, ANYONE know why? ) have traditionally superior ability in the "upper frequencies" than we men do.
What is your hearing acuity? Can we really learn to hear better?

Women are more receptive, in general; they are on the reception's end of the audio equation/communication. ...More sensitive.
...Men are more on the talkative side, transmission's power. ...More giving, and forgiving.

I think.

___________

My hearing is not bad, but nothing like a woman. ...I believe we can improve; by learning more about women. ...And adapt better to them.
High fidelity; it has some to do too with our women. ...And they can help us in reaching a higher degree of fidelity.

___________

Women have different set of priorities; like standing by their man for example.
...Without necessarily practicing their men's hobby; of course not (it's a man thing). ...Not just listening to music ....

 

[edorr]

...Men are more on the talkative side...

????????????????????????????

 

[NorthStar]

????????????????????????????

Regarding audio.

* I believe that's the main reason why there are less women than men in this hobby.
...Women don't like to talk about audio; they prefer listening instead, strictly.
...And just an iPad (iPod) or a Bose radio is mighty fine for the vast majority of them.
...And still, they hear better than us!

 

[JackD201]

The question is does learning to listen better add anything to enjoyment of the music? I would argue the opposite - If you could blissfully enjoy a 44/16 recording played over speaker with ringing tweeter before, and you now learn to divert mental energy to becoming aware of the imperfections associated with this playback system/format, your musical enjoyment diminishes.

Enjoyment of music is universal, learning about the music itself and how to play it back well is the hobby part. I think that learning is the main point of all hobbies.

 

[DaveyF]

+2 I've had several groups of listeners that I've played the same title in different sample rates and formats. Most say they couldn't hear a difference. I then taught them what to listen for and gave examples. Everyone in the group could easily identify which is which. My wife is a good example. She amazes me sometimes!

Interesting. However, how can we absolutely sure that we are not creating expectation bias.

Jack, +1.

 

[Bruce B]

Interesting. However, how can we absolutely sure that we are not creating expectation bias.

Jack, +1.

Which file would they have expectation bias if they didn't know which is which?

 

[rockitman]

As an example and as many of you know, I happen to hear that the old tweeter in the Wilson speakers has a propensity to " ring". Many do not hear that aspect of these speakers. Many others do.

From a trusted expert who shall remain nameless. Can can back up your criticism, based on this ?

Soft domes are far from perfect and suffer from intermodulation distortion at low frequencies which is far more audible that ultrasonic ringing. As a design principle any non-linearity that is excited by a musical fundamental frequency is going to be audible. The focal dome rings at 15K , there are no musical fundamentals up that high thus only overtones from cymbals etc and those are typically 20 db below music program.

The transient response of a titanium dome is far superior to a cloth dome and the “sound” of focals is typically the sound of poor amplification.

 

[DaveyF]

Which file would they have expectation bias if they didn't know which is which?

I guess that would depend on the example that you gave to the group. OTOH, If you did NOT tell the group which example belonged to which file, then I would agree. ( BTW, you did NOT say that in your prior post)

 

[DaveyF]

Christian, I used to own titanium domes, like you, I used to defend their abilities. However, it is only since I have done away with them and heard where their failings are in comparison to silk domes ( BTW, I am referring to silk domes here and not just any soft dome tweeter. The small polypropylene domes have a whole other set of issues, IMO).The simple fact is ( and according to your "expert" as well; that the Focal domes rings at 15K, the silk dome simply does NOT do that). I asked you to listen to the new silk dome that Wilson now uses in his newer designs, I doubt VERY seriously that you have done that. As I said before, go and take a listen to that and then get back to us.

 

[rockitman]

Christian, I used to own titanium domes, like you, I used to defend their abilities. However, it is only since I have done away with them and heard where their failings are in comparison to silk domes ( BTW, I am referring to silk domes here and not just any soft dome tweeter. The small polypropylene domes have a whole other set of issues, IMO).The simple fact is ( and according to your "expert" as well; that the Focal domes rings at 15K, the silk dome simply does NOT do that). I asked you to listen to the new silk dome that Wilson now uses in his newer designs, I doubt VERY seriously that you have done that. As I said before, go and take a listen to that and then get back to us.

Davey,

The point of my post was only to suggest that I think you are full of crap and just enjoy sitting in the Wilson bash chorus. Fair enough. The ringing at 15k you talk about is really irrelevant.

 

[mep]

 

[JackD201]

Let's avoid the need for a clean up gentlemen

 

[DaveyF]

Davey,

The point of my post was only to suggest that I think you are full of crap and just enjoy sitting in the Wilson bash chorus. Fair enough. The ringing at 15k you talk about is really irrelevant.

Christian, I have NEVER bashed Wilson speakers. I actually like most of them with the possible exception of the early Watt/Puppies. I am very sorry that your delicate feelings are hurt when we discuss
the fact that the old tweeters ring. Maybe if I had a considerable investment in the Alex 2s like you do, I would be as defensive as you are in your posts. However, to say I am full of crap and enjoy sitting in
the Wilson bash chorus is churlish and frankly I think beneath you. Perhaps, you may want to rethink and retract that comment.

 

[rockitman]

Christian, I have NEVER bashed Wilson speakers. I actually like most of them with the possible exception of the early Watt/Puppies. I am very sorry that your delicate feelings are hurt when we discuss
the fact that the old tweeters ring. Maybe if I had a considerable investment in the Alex 2s like you do, I would be as defensive as you are in your posts. However, to say I am full of crap and enjoy sitting in
the Wilson bash chorus is churlish and frankly I think beneath you. Perhaps, you may want to rethink and retract that comment.

My feelings aren't hurt. The tweeters sound great to me. I am providing a public service to disclose and discredit your misinformation....such as this ultrasonic ring at 15K makes a real audible difference in the sound with regard to the context of real music. Do you have a bit of tinnitus possibly ? another form of ringing ?
I wish I could count how many different threads here you go out of your to ring Wilson's bell. It's almost obsessive. I'm done. you get the last gasp. Cheerio !