Reliability of human senses

[Swerd]

I find it fascinating how some audiophiles are apparently immune to their cognitive biases, some are so convinced that they couldn't possibly be biased under just about any condition, whether it to related to pricing, looks, brand etc.

We get those audiophiles who scream from the mountain tops and proclaim 'I'm not easily fooled!!!", 'Not me ... ' etc etc. I think part of the issue is that some audiophiles think that bias is purely a conscious effect. But that would be a mistake, because bias can exist in the subconscious and unconscious parts of the brain.

There are biases, both personal and technical, that you may not even be cognisant of that may be affecting and/or steering your perceptions while listening to music in a sighted test. It's the biases you aren't aware of which are potentially the problem, hence the need for controls to mitigate such influences.

I think you're preaching to the choir.

People believe a lot of things in this hobby. But it's only a hobby. So perhaps it's more fun for people to believe those things that some of us don't believe. No harm done.

Just one example - some people believe that even in pure direct mode, leveled matched, same speakers, and biased removed, a Marantz AVR will sound warmer while a Denon will sound brighter. There is nothing we can do that will change their minds. But in the end, there's no harm done. They can believe it all they want. We can laugh all we want. They won't care.

ADTG – although you aren't wrong, I think I agree with Goliath on this. People are free to believe what ever floats their boat. I'll even defend their right to their beliefs no matter how misguided I think they might be.

But if they want to proclaim their perhaps misguided beliefs about audio on a public forum such as AH, I will challenge them. There are readers who are new to audio and aren't familiar with these tired old debates. I believe they should at least be exposed to all sides of the debate.

And I'm glad to read that Goliath does too .

 

[3db]

I find it fascinating how some audiophiles are apparently immune to their cognitive biases, some are so convinced that they couldn't possibly be biased under just about any condition, whether it to related to pricing, looks, brand etc.

We get those audiophiles who scream from the mountain tops and proclaim 'I'm not easily fooled!!!", 'Not me ... ' etc etc. I think part of the issue is that some audiophiles think that bias is purely a conscious effect. But that would be a mistake, because bias can exist in the subconscious and unconscious parts of the brain.

There are biases, both personal and technical, that you may not even be cognisant of that may be affecting and/or steering your perceptions while listening to music in a sighted test. It's the biases you aren't aware of which are potentially the problem, hence the need for controls to mitigate such influences.

I eluded to that in my first post in this thread. The Audiophile is able to perform the non human skill of totally isolating input from all the other senses that they posses. I'm with Swerd and you on this. People who are just getting into the hobby deserve to see both sides and hopefully make an informed decision leaning towards being human and not super human.

 

[PENG]

I eluded to that in my first post in this thread. The Audiophile is able to perform the non human skill of totally isolating input from all the other senses that they posses. I'm with Swerd and you on this. People who are just getting into the hobby deserve to see both sides and hopefully make an informed decision leaning towards being human and not super human.

And I have to agree with you and Swerd, and Goliath of course. They can say and believe anything they choose to but if they state their opinions or belief as fact then they should not (but obviouisly they could, and would) complain or upset when their opinions or belief got challenged by others.

 

[Plexmulti9]

I'm having a really hard time following the responses and ideas in this thread.

It seems as if there's quite a bit of double talk on the amplifier discussion side of things. It's as if nobody is willing to take a stand one way or the other and clearly state what side of the fence they're on. It will seem like someone makes a serious point, but then backs out of it with a vague statement or veiled sarcasm. One thing that's interesting to me is the amount of literature and research a lot of people have done, yet very little practical hands on experience is on hand to be referenced in a lot of these discussions.

I believe the term is "Arm chair quarterback"? So, what experience and testing in the real world have you guys done between receiver models, brands, amps, preamps, power ratings, different types of speakers, etc. that has lead you to your personal conclusions? Or, is a lot of this theory crafting and reading?

 

[PENG]

I'm having a really hard time following the responses and ideas in this thread.

It seems as if there's quite a bit of double talk on the amplifier discussion side of things. It's as if nobody is willing to take a stand one way or the other and clearly state what side of the fence they're on. It will seem like someone makes a serious point, but then backs out of it with a vague statement or veiled sarcasm. One thing that's interesting to me is the amount of literature and research a lot of people have done, yet very little practical hands on experience is on hand to be referenced in a lot of these discussions.

I believe the term is "Arm chair quarterback"? So, what experience and testing in the real world have you guys done between receiver models, brands, amps, preamps, power ratings, different types of speakers, etc. that has lead you to your personal conclusions? Or, is a lot of this theory crafting and reading?

Good points. I think lots of the claims are based on hearsay, then resulted in preconception. Then naturally and gradually they become beliefs, or at the minimum opinions are formed and could even progress to be taken as facts. In doing so, people ignore or forget the 'fact' that people do sometimes perceive the same thing differently. That sound vague too but I guess by nature it will be.

One thing puzzles me is the claims that manufacturers voice their products, even products between their own product lines. I would like to know which manfacturers do that so I can email them directly for their responses. And if they really do, by what means do they do the voicing and yet can still claim flat wide band frequency response, ultra high input impedance, ultra low output impedance, high damping factors, super fast response, negligible distortions of any kinds, accurate and transparent?

I am quite sure about one, McIntosh, that won't be telling me about their voicing technique. In fact, their FAQ seem to be saying even their SS and tube gear would sound similar, not directly but if you read between the lines.

Funny you don't hear any debates of the same about loudspeakers and only very little about exotic cables.

 

[3db]

I'm having a really hard time following the responses and ideas in this thread.

It seems as if there's quite a bit of double talk on the amplifier discussion side of things. It's as if nobody is willing to take a stand one way or the other and clearly state what side of the fence they're on. It will seem like someone makes a serious point, but then backs out of it with a vague statement or veiled sarcasm. One thing that's interesting to me is the amount of literature and research a lot of people have done, yet very little practical hands on experience is on hand to be referenced in a lot of these discussions.

I believe the term is "Arm chair quarterback"? So, what experience and testing in the real world have you guys done between receiver models, brands, amps, preamps, power ratings, different types of speakers, etc. that has lead you to your personal conclusions? Or, is a lot of this theory crafting and reading?

Here's my stand,

Amps and AVRs manufacturered by reliable companies such as Yamaha, Denon, and Onkyo, etc will sound the same from its analog inputs as long as they are driving a loudspeaker that is well within its designed load parameters and is not driven into clipping, levels matched.

 

[Goliath]

Makes you wonder ... consider all of the high end audiophile publications, the thousands or tens of thousands of pages of subjective impressions per week or month that would simply cease to exist if proper listening test protocols were used.

 

[Plexmulti9]

Good points. I think lots of the claims are based on hearsay, then resulted in preconception. Then naturally and gradually they become beliefs, or at the minimum opinions are formed and could even progress to be taken as facts. In doing so, people ignore or forget the 'fact' that people do sometimes perceive the same thing differently. That sound vague too but I guess by nature it will be.

One thing puzzles me is the claims that manufacturers voice their products, even products between their own product lines. I would like to know which manfacturers do that so I can email them directly for their responses. And if they really do, by what means do they do the voicing and yet can still claim flat wide band frequency response, ultra high input impedance, ultra low output impedance, high damping factors, super fast response, negligible distortions of any kinds, accurate and transparent?

I am quite sure about one, McIntosh, that won't be telling me about their voicing technique. In fact, their FAQ seem to be saying even their SS and tube gear would sound similar, not directly but if you read between the lines.

Funny you don't hear any debates of the same about loudspeakers and only very little about exotic cables.

It seems that with amplifiers it always comes down to the concept: Two amplifiers that are designed the same will sound the same. Well, duhhhh, right? Two of anything that are identical will be identical.

To me, where the disconnect in concepts is: Speaker quality/requirements/etc. vs. listening habits/volume vs. sources vs. room vs. individual preference/hearing quality vs. amplifier design vs. pre-amp quality. And a whole host of other variables that make up the end result: Actual perceived sound quality.

I could give many examples where to different types of amps with equal power and the same pair of speakers in the same room will sound different (better one way than the other).

- One area where this came up just last night was on the topic of whole house audio. Someone wants to do BG Radia RT-6C in-ceiling speakers and mate them with a Nuvo Grand Concerto system. The Nuvo is 40 watts from a digital amp. It's crappy power for a speaker like the RT-6C, particularly when you give it some volume. Dayton Audio makes a class A/B amplifier for whole house audio that is also 40 watts, but actually gives the speaker (namely the NEO3 tweeter) quality power to perform. It sounds good. If someone wanted to switch to the higher end PD-6Ci, a Parasound ZAMP will give the speaker a lot of quality power (actually overpowering the speaker -NOT a bad thing) to perform it's best. You can hear this difference as you switch between amps and speaker models. But, there's a cutoff. Absolutely NO NEED to use the ZAMP on the RT-6C as it only needs so much to perform its best. The poly woofer will be fine with the 40 watt A/B Dayton Amp. The digital NUVO amp is very thin sounding once the speaker gets up above anything but very light back ground music.

- Another, higher end example, is that there is a dealer near me with a showroom. He used to be one of my installers (wire puller, really) and, honestly, when it comes to understanding equipment.... he struggles mightily. So, sometimes he calls me to ask for help. He has a pair of $13,000 Totem Metal in his listening room. When he first got them he hooked up the following:

Preamp: Reference Hi-Fi | Audiophile | Premium Sound | P-3000R | Onkyo USA

Amp: Reference Hi-Fi | Audiophile | Premium Sound | M-5000R | Onkyo USA

CD player: Reference Hi-Fi | Audiophile | Premium Sound | C-7000R | Onkyo USA

& a Sonos Connect.

THIS SOUNDED AWFUL. Absolutely un-listenable. He, I, and another guy who owns an A/V company thought the speakers were broken. He had another amp on hand so we plugged this in to see if it was the M-5000:

Amp 2: www.acurusav.com - A2005

Result: Sounded better, but not good. DEFINITELY not like a $13,00 pair of speakers. The sound was ok, but at least not as screamingly bright/harsh.

I then went to my design center and lugged over this integrated amp: ProLogue Premium Integrated Amplifier

MUCH MUCH better. Night and day. The sound was smooth. There was actual bass coming out of the speaker. It sounded decent. STILL not $13,000 decent. More like $2000 or $3,000, but that was my and the 3rd guys opinion. Not my showroom so I didn't really care.

That Primaluna product line is absolutely unreal. My favorite electronics line currently. We've tried it on several things and it offers great, tight bass control and real power through a wide variety of speakers. It sounds remarkably better than the Parasound New Classic 2250 we have - and I've tried 6 pair of speakers (bookshelf, tower, & higher end in-wall) between them.

NOTE: Before we were done, we hooked the Sonos Connect straight into the Acurus amp (removing the Onkyo preamp from the equation) and it sounded pretty good as a preamp. Not as good as the integrated, but definitely better than the Onkyo.

 

[Goliath]

I could give many examples where to different types of amps with equal power and the same pair of speakers in the same room will sound different (better one way than the other).

Sure, in a sighted evaluation where so few things are controlled that the outcome is practically guaranteed to result in random audible differences, Heck, even comparing the same amplifier to itself can result in audible differences.

MUCH MUCH better. Night and day. The sound was smooth. There was actual bass coming out of the speaker. It sounded decent. STILL not $13,000 decent. More like $2000 or $3,000, but that was my and the 3rd guys opinion. Not my showroom so I didn't really care.

I see. No controls in place, just a casual apples to oranges non-comparison between audio components. Moving on ...

That Primaluna product line is absolutely unreal. My favorite electronics line currently. We've tried it on several things and it offers great, tight bass control and real power through a wide variety of speakers.

Since it appears your observations aren't based on anything conclusive, I don't know what value they hold outside of your perception of them.

Before we were done, we hooked the Sonos Connect straight into the Acurus amp (removing the Onkyo preamp from the equation) and it sounded pretty good as a preamp. Not as good as the integrated, but definitely better than the Onkyo.

Read above. If you compare audio gear like most people do, ie - non level-matched, slow-switched and sighted, then you'll hear different things because the evaluation was non level-matched, slow-switched and sighted. So there is nothing conclusive we can take away from your observations, other than the usual typical observations that people experience in sighted conditions.

 

[Plexmulti9]

Sure, in a sighted evaluation where so few things are controlled that the outcome is practically guaranteed to result in random audible differences, Heck, even comparing the same amplifier to itself can result in audible differences.



I see. No controls in place, just a casual apples to oranges non-comparison between audio components. Moving on ...



Since it appears your observations aren't based on anything conclusive, I don't know what value they hold outside of your perception of them.



Read above. If you compare audio gear like most people do, ie - non level-matched, slow-switched and sighted, then you'll hear different things because the evaluation was non level-matched, slow-switched and sighted. So there is nothing conclusive we can take away from your observations, other than the usual typical observations that people experience in sighted conditions.

While I understand the enjoyment of the science side of the hobby, the end game for any of this equipment is using and actually listening to it in the real world. No one's perception of what would be taking place in switching and changing this equipment out would be different than mine or the many other people that have come in and listened. Things are what they are. To pretend someone need a microphone, a curtain to blind, and a lab coat to validate results on paper shows a lack of real world experience. Point being: No one sensible should need a microphone & recorder in the woods to know that a tree falls when it makes a sound. Arm chair quarterbacking is fun, but it's no replacement for actually doing it in real life.

What controls need be in place for real world use and comparison other than same room, same volume, same source equipment, and same speaker in the same position listening? THOSE ARE THE CONTROLS. Now, if someone is looking for scientific data to go off of from an improvement, engineering & development, or understanding perspective - I get that. I find it disturbing that in an A/B comparison between different products you would refer to the results as "random". Ummm, no. It's not like flipping a coin. These are two similar, but different products being used in a like manner, not a roll of dice. Verbiage like this shows a real predisposition and bias on your behalf.

Also, sighted or not, I have ZERO bias. Seeing the equipment and getting bias from it is a novice trait. We're talking about LISTENING, not owning or having in the home. Unless we're evaluating fit & finish, aesthetics, etc. I don't care one way or the other what something looks like when we're actually using it because the equipment isn't for me. It's for our clients. We do real world demoing to find what works best and, since humans listen with their ears and not microphones, there's no better way to test equipment AND FULLY UNDERSTAND THE RESULTS than to use it. Period.

 

[PENG]

Talking about dealers, I was once in a high end dealer's show room auditioning speakers including a pair of intoxicating 802D. There were several of us at the time. We all thought the B&W sounded great but at one point the friendly sales associate told us to wait and he went to the other room to haul out a big Bryston (a 14B SST if I remember right). He told us to be prepared to hear the night and day difference with that amp, i.e. those 802D will sound even better yet. He quickly swapped out the smaller amp and we listened to the same CDs again. Well as hard as we tried to agree with him, we just couldn't tell him we heard any difference. That was the first and only time when we experience something that extreme, that is, one person heard something so significant better yet none of us potential customers did. Was it because as a sales person he was predisposed to believe that sound quality is proportional to the muscle sizes and dollar signs of their amps? I really don't know, but we did learning something that day.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Also, sighted or not, I have ZERO bias.

Hi, I'm Irv. What planet are you from, and what species are you? Clearly not human...

 

[Swerd]

We get those audiophiles who scream from the mountain tops and proclaim 'I'm not easily fooled!!!", 'Not me ... ' etc etc.

Also, sighted or not, I have ZERO bias. Seeing the equipment and getting bias from it is a novice trait.

Is this an example of what Goliath was talking about? Or maybe Plexmulti9 has read this thread and is pulling our leg? Just wondering out loud…

 

[Adam]

I don't have any bias, either. I just know what I like.

 

[mtrycrafts]

While I understand the enjoyment of the science side of the hobby, the end game for any of this equipment is using and actually listening to it in the real world.

You mean some listen in an imaginary world? Who would that be? As to the end game, that is up for debate, no?

No one's perception of what would be taking place in switching and changing this equipment out would be different than mine or the many other people that have come in and listened.

How do you know this?

Things are what they are.

Are they? Imagination checked at the door?? And bias too?

To pretend someone need a microphone, a curtain to blind, and a lab coat to validate results on paper shows a lack of real world experience.

On the contrary. Real world experience taught us that for real, credible answers one must do that. If you are not after reality, don't need that.

Point being: No one sensible should need a microphone & recorder in the woods to know that a tree falls when it makes a sound.

Don't be so sure.

Arm chair quarterbacking is fun, but it's no replacement for actually doing it in real life.

I think someone is confused about real life.

What controls need be in place for real world use and comparison other than same room, same volume, same source equipment, and same speaker in the same position listening? THOSE ARE THE CONTROLS. Now, if someone is looking for scientific data to go off of from an improvement, engineering & development, or understanding perspective - I get that. I find it disturbing that in an A/B comparison between different products you would refer to the results as "random". Ummm, no. It's not like flipping a coin. These are two similar, but different products being used in a like manner, not a roll of dice. Verbiage like this shows a real predisposition and bias on your behalf.

Now you are really confused unless you are not after real, tangible results.
How do you know if the volume is the same? Why do you even care? You are not biased, your words.
As to random, that too you just don't understand.
Of course two different product are used but why do they have to sound different?

Also, sighted or not, I have ZERO bias.

Wow, now you don't understand human psychology and bias. That explains much.

Seeing the equipment and getting bias from it is a novice trait. We're talking about LISTENING, not owning or having in the home.

Exactly. So, why do you need to see? Can you not hear without seeing or knowing which component is playing?

We do real world demoing to find what works best and, since humans listen with their ears and not microphones, there's no better way to test equipment AND FULLY UNDERSTAND THE RESULTS than to use it. Period.

Yes indeed, no need for a mic but why do you need to see if this is about listening?

 

[mtrycrafts]

I'm having a really hard time following the responses and ideas in this thread.

It seems as if there's quite a bit of double talk on the amplifier discussion side of things. It's as if nobody is willing to take a stand one way or the other and clearly state what side of the fence they're on. It will seem like someone makes a serious point, but then backs out of it with a vague statement or veiled sarcasm. One thing that's interesting to me is the amount of literature and research a lot of people have done, yet very little practical hands on experience is on hand to be referenced in a lot of these discussions.

I believe the term is "Arm chair quarterback"? So, what experience and testing in the real world have you guys done between receiver models, brands, amps, preamps, power ratings, different types of speakers, etc. that has lead you to your personal conclusions? Or, is a lot of this theory crafting and reading?

Hard to reply. Research is fundamental. Real world experience supports the research. How much hands on one must do if it doesn't lead to a different outcome?
And, why must all those components sound different in the first place? Oh, try not to use the car analogy, just doesn't cut the mustard.

On the other hand, you can certainly follow your past protocols to arrive at answers you are seeking; no one will stop you.

 

[mtrycrafts]

.... My speakers are dark, (black), therefore I need a smart amp....


!

No, no, no, you need a white amp

 

[mtrycrafts]

...
I could give many examples where to different types of amps with equal power and the same pair of speakers in the same room will sound different (better one way than the other).
...

I am sure you could but these are just unqualified anecdotes, no real credibility behind it. Zero meaning. Singular reality.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Hi, I'm Irv. What planet are you from, and what species are you? Clearly not human...

Good question. Hope you get a good answer

 

[shadyJ]

At an audio show, I was in a room recently for a vendor for high end power cables. The played a song, it was a female vocal cover for Sting's "Fields of Gold" song, on a system that was Focal 918s and Marantz Reference Prepro and amp I believe. They gave a demonstration on how much of a difference the power cables make by quickly switching the power cable from the stock power cable to their Shunyata power cable and playing back the same tune. I couldn't detect a difference, but then again I wasn't expecting to hear any. They switched from Shunyata to the generic cable and back to Shunyata cable, and then they said to the audience in that room "see what a difference the power cable makes", a bunch of the guys there were nodding there heads, like it was incredible difference.