Spectacles interfere with sound quality?

[bonzo75]

I do consider myself Golden Ear'd, as I'm sure many here do, having spent a lifetime critically listening to audio, chasing the minutiae in the sound, and so I trust them when I hear things, all the while being aware of cognitive biases.

Golden ear to me is not about hearing minutiae, it is about what to listen for. This is not necessarily about minute details, but an experienced listener hears things inexperienced listeners do not look for.

For example, whether a sound is more real or more artificial, does not require hearing to minor details, just a good realism template. It requires exposure to live and to different things possible in audio, and requires noticing artifacts that will affect realism - this requires a process, having the right type of recordings, and having good listening points so when the track is playing, you can suss out the positives and negatives quickly.

Someone listening to minute details in a Stockfish label, for example, will never have the golden ear of someone who realizes the difference between Oistrakh playing on a Decca original vs a reissue or digital, even if the Stockfish listener has better, sharper hearing. So, the audition material leads to a golden ear. The birds track played so much on auditions, or claps from MoFi's Clapton Unplugged, for example, are useless.

Another example - change cartridges upstream - if the resultant change in sound is always minor, there is something downstream coloring the upstream change. A golden ear will look for this, while an inexperienced listener will listen for a month between the carts and say hey, these are so similar and so tough to choose between. It is not about the ability to notice minute details. In fact, to choose cart A over B, differences should be major.

If different recordings lead to the same soundstage, no matter how good the bass, the details, etc, it is a poor to average system. This is something to look for, but requires good recordings and exposure to the possibility of what recordings can do to transport us to different venues. This can only be stumbled on through experience, and not by taking glasses on or off listening for more details. Same with any trials you do, the more you do, the more you will develop the golden ear.

You should, imo, go for a system where glasses on, glasses off does not change your level of enjoyment - not denying it might do in your current system.

More examples. If you can hear a soundstage bit wider with the specs off, or can hear 15hz instead of 14.5, it does not matter. Sure, if the sound collapses totally and is on the floor between the speakers with the specs on, it is another issue, but I doubt that is what you are referring to.

 

[tima]

If different recordings lead to the same soundstage, no matter how good the bass, the details, etc, it is a poor to average system. This is something to look for, but requires good recordings and exposure to the possibility of what recordings can do to transport us to different venues. This can only be stumbled on through experience, and not by taking glasses on or off listening for more details. Same with any trials you do, the more you do, the more you will develop the golden ear.

Good post. I know you are working on improving your writing and it shows.

 

[bonzo75]

Good post. I know you are working on improving your writing and it shows.

? No that just came naturally. I write like I think. I have been on transparency to recordings since 2018. You joined recently

 

[rDin]

Golden ear to me is not about hearing minutiae

We are talking about the same thing - your description was simply more thorough. Let’s avoid digression and stick to the topic at hand please.

 

[treitz3]

You're not serious, right?

Dead serious. Discussions like this make me wonder if people actually listen.

Tom

 

[tima]

? No that just came naturally. I write like I think. I have been on transparency to recordings since 2018. You joined recently

Whether you realize it or not, your post was more coherent. ... or you were more coherent when you wrote it. either way I tried to give you a compliment - if you don't want it what can I say.

Don't understand your comment on transparency - I was not commenting on anything specific. As far as I know your phrase transparency to recordings is saying component or system does not homogenize some characteristic across different recordings.

 

[rDin]

Whether you realize it or not, your post was more coherent. ... or you were more coherent when you wrote it. either way I tried to give you a compliment - if you don't want it what can I say.

Don't understand your comment on transparency - I was not commenting on anything specific. As far as I know your phrase transparency to recordings is saying component or system does not homogenize some characteristic across different recordings.

Stay on topic please.

 

[MarkusBarkus]

go for a system where glasses on, glasses off does not change your level of enjoyment

...I had a Chord DAVE for a while and then I saw a photo of Rob Watts. OMG! I immediately bought a pair of metal-framed glasses and shaved my head so that I might truly hear what he hears. I emailed him re: his optical Rx to really dial-in the sound, but he never replied, so I got rid of that stupid DAVE.

Nice post @bonzo75

Will you start the thread "Hirsute or Bald: Early Reflections Revisited" or shall I??

 

[rDin]

OK, I see the thread has run its course

Conclusions: I'm convinced of what I hear. I think @marty provided the key by focussing my attention on the ear movements with the specs in place. I own a Chord DAVE, so will take @MarkusBarkus's facetious comment re: Rob Watts and grab myself of pair of ultra thin metal framed glasses with the thinnest arms I can find that won't nudge my ears out of shape. I won't shave my head. Yet. One step at a time.

Thanks for all the input - some wheat amongst the chaff! And that's good enough.

 

[bonzo75]

Also put on weight like most audiophiles to absorb certain frequencies

 

[Tim Link]

This is an interesting topic. I think I've noticed subtle differences with glasses off vs. on in some stereo listening situations. Lately I haven't noticed it but I'm using a very different setup involving 3 or 5 speakers to play standard 2 channel stereo. I'm just summing the signal for the center and playing L-R on the left side channel(s) and R-L on the right side channel(s). I'm really surprised at how well this works, producing a very wide and clear sound stage that is sensitive to side to side motion as usual but in a different way (center panned images don't move!), and seems much more robust against reflections in the listening area or localized head disturbances like hats and glasses.

What I wonder is if the real world around you sounds better too without your glasses, not just the stereo. I wouldn't be surprised if the real world sounds fine but the stereo gets muddled by the glasses. My bet is mono through one speaker would be more robust against small disturbances in the wave traveling across the head. The stereo presentation is a delicate trick, with sounds only coming directly from the two locations where the speakers are. We're hoping to trick our minds into sound coming from other directions even though the HRTF doesn't match. It's kind of like the trick of apparently producing all the perceptual colors with only RGB pixels on a display. It works for most of us trichromats, but not as well for tetrachromats. Polarized glasses might present viewing problems with LCD screens but not generally with the world around you.

 

[rDin]

What I wonder is if the real world around you sounds better too without your glasses, not just the stereo. I wouldn't be surprised if the real world sounds fine but the stereo gets muddled by the glasses.

That's an interesting question, and one which occurred to me while thinking this topic through. In particular, as I mentioned, I've been wearing glasses for 48 years now - I wondered whether over that time period my brain might have adapted to them such that sounds were only "RIGHT" with them on and then "WRONG" with them off, but it seems not. Perhaps the eyes are a good analogy here - the brain doesn't adapt and correct changes in the eyes either - you just get blurrier vision (@marty?) So it seems the same with the ears - your brain has a fixed idea of what to expect and interprets the incoming data only that way - if you physically move/alter the ears, the sound changes and is not corrected.

As to real world - perhaps it's just too busy a place to notice the subtle changes? Or, in that context the changes are perhaps even welcome?

 

[Tim Link]

That's an interesting question, and one which occurred to me while thinking this topic through. In particular, as I mentioned, I've been wearing glasses for 48 years now - I wondered whether over that time period my brain might have adapted to them such that sounds were only "RIGHT" with them on and then "WRONG" with them off, but it seems not. Perhaps the eyes are a good analogy here - the brain doesn't adapt and correct changes in the eyes either - you just get blurrier vision (@marty?) So it seems the same with the ears - your brain has a fixed idea of what to expect and interprets the incoming data only that way - if you physically move/alter the ears, the sound changes and is not corrected.

As to real world - perhaps it's just too busy a place to notice the subtle changes? Or, in that context the changes are perhaps even welcome?

In real world situations I've occasionally noticed really weird effects. One occurs when I'm wearing my rain parka and riding my bike in traffic. The sound of the car wheels swishing through the water reflects off the parka, which moves rhythmically with my pedaling, producing a wha whoo wha whoo wha whoo effect. I guess we don't usually come in contact with a large nearby reflecting surface that is moving in a steady cycle, so this comes across as sounding really strange.

 

[Rt66indierock]

Glasses have never affected sound quality for me personally. But they do affect special relationships a bit sometimes in audio.

 

[Tim Link]

Glasses have never affected sound quality for me personally. But they do affect special relationships a bit sometimes in audio.

How so?

 

[Don Reid]

I've been wearing glasses for sixty-one years. When I read this thread it made perfect sense to me that removing two hard reflective surfaces from close proximity to my ears could affect what I was hearing from my stereo. The stereo was already well warmed up. I went to my listening room and played music I knew imaged well while listening with my glasses on then off several times. My eyes were closed during all serious listening. At the risk of being ridiculed by some of the respondents on this thread I have to admit that with my glasses off the image improved. This improvement was most obvious by greater coherency and solidity to the center of the image. This change was quite subtle but pleasing.

 

[Rt66indierock]

How so?

I can detect small differences in speaker placement with my eyes open and shut, with and without glasses. Small adjustments to speaker placement so all four sound the same fixes the problem

 

[treitz3]

Interaural.

This may take a bit of research but it is undeniable.

With glasses, you are deflecting the sound waves meant for the opposite ear within a stereo image.

It doesn't get any simpler than this. The end result as to what hits your ears is FUBAR.

If you do not hear it? More power to you and I wish I had your hearing.

That said? I stand by every statement I have made in this thread thusfar.

Tojm

 

[rDin]

At the risk of being ridiculed by some of the respondents on this thread I have to admit that with my glasses off the image improved.

The reason I chose this forum for the discussion is that it's one of the very few where one can actually have a good faith conversation with informed and interested people. And, on the whole, that is how it has turned out. Thanks to all who participated in that spirit.