Our senses: Is our hearing like our taste?

[itschris]

[Long post WARNING] I've been reading some stuff lately on here that got me thinking. Is or does our sense of hearing work like our sense of taste? I'll explain where I'm going with this...

This is a quote from another thread that started discussing the quality of sound from different speakers:

Well I certainly don't want to start a debate about Def Tech's, just giving my opinion to the OP. Take it for what you think it's worth, but in my opinion the 7002's and BP10's aren't just poor at music, they're some of the worst I've ever heard. They're some of the least detailed speakers I've ever encountered, and the signal just seems smeared in all axes, including time.

I read that and being a Def Tech owner it just really puzzles me and not because I think my speakers are this or that and somenones else's are worse, better, or anything. It was more of a general puzzlement of how one person's opinion can be so dramatically different than anothers. When someone makes such bold assertions such as that, whether it's about Def Techs, Axiom, Onkyo, Emotiva... whoever... whatever... I start to scratch my head and try to understand how that can be.

So I started thinking about parallels that could help me understand and this is what I came up with. My wife and I love wine. We belong to the wine club at our country club and I find very much the same thing going on with wine. We'll have a tasting, and one person will love a wine, another will proclaim it's warm piss. That always puzzled me... but then again... my wife loves coconut and I'll blow chunks if I take one bite.

So... is our hearing the same way? Is it possible that something that sounds so pleasing to me or you can sound completely horrible to someone else? I'm talking the choice of music, but the physical sound of the speaker?

 

[j_garcia]

The same sound arrives at everyone's ears, however what they focus on and actually hear are definitely going to be different. Just like with wine, different people are tasting for specific things, with different levels of experience tasting varieties of wines, and obviously preferences for certain flavor characteristics. I completely believe that hearing and taste are both things that can be trained. A pallet can be trained to know what tastes good and what doesn't, so it stands to reason that with experience one can be taught to some extent what sounds good and what doesn't. With speakers, we always think that what we have is great, but that doesn't mean that they are, it just means that we have grown accustomed to the sound and have a preference for it (or you wouldn't still own them...). I love wine tasting because I like to try as many as I possibly can to see what I like and don't like, and I am a member of the clubs to those wineries that I have consistently enjoyed for many years.

 

[avaserfi]

There is one large aspect of your tasting/hearing comparision that makes it flawed. It has been shown that there is a large genetic component to how humans taste - for example there are certain chemical that will taste extremely bitter to some, but to others will have no taste. This difference is based on actual genetics and no amount of training will allow this person to taste this chemical structure, it just doesn't bind with their taste buds.

Audio on the other hand is vastly different as shown by credible perceptual research. Researchers such as Toole, Olive, Paisley, Moire, etc... Have used thousands of listeners from various backgrounds and training to determine thresholds for audibility of certain phenomenon as well as correlating loudspeaker measurement to speaker preference. Despite these studies differing methods and listeners as well as loudspeaker choice results with regard to loudspeaker measurement and listener preference were largely similar.

The following paragraph contains conjecture: It is more likely that these differences in listener preference are related to loudspeaker room interaction in the space of audition. Couple the fact that the room has a paramount effect on sound quality and acoustic memory is rather poor, coupled with the effects of bias it is unlikely the majority of people are unable to properly audition loudspeakers in such a way to sufficiently compare them.

If one is interested in reading more on the subject a good starting point is here:

Loudspeaker Measurements and Their Relationship to Listener Preferences: Part 1. Toole, Floyd. JAES Volume 34 Issue 4 pp. 227-235; April 1986

Loudspeaker Measurements and Their Relationship to Listener Preferences: Part 2. Toole, Floyd. JAES Volume 34 Issue 5 pp. 323-348; May 1986

 

[j_garcia]

Well, we know that certain people are sensitive to particular frequencies also, while others may not hear them well. My comments presume that you are talking about people who if we tested them, would have similar frequency range of hearing. Taste buds are different for different people, that is well known, so the same would apply.

 

[avaserfi]

Well, we know that certain people are sensitive to particular frequencies also, while others may not hear them well. My comments presume that you are talking about people who if we tested them, would have similar frequency range of hearing. Taste buds are different for different people, that is well known, so the same would apply.

Throughout the perceptual studies listeners with abnormal hearing were used. Overall, they had the same preferences as the listeners with normal hearing, but their results were significantly more likely to contain higher variability than those with normal hearing. This is also discussed in the articles I cited.

 

[jcPanny]

The room

The room is also plays an important part in the audio performance of the system. Certain types of speakers integrate differently with the room making them more difficult to setup properly. This may be the case for some of the full range def tech speakers.

 

[Tomorrow]

One interesting (to me) issue of the hearing-tasting sense comparison is that of the flavor of the food/music. Let's look at the flavoring of foods. I'm particularly fond of savory and highly spiced foods. My wife prefers lighter and sweeter faire. In hearing, the listener's brain, for whatever reason, also has a preference for audio/sound/music "flavoring". I like rock and roll...my wife prefers pop or classical. Furthermore, some speakers are better suited to those styles of music. I wouldn't hesitate to put a dynamic JBL or Cerwin-Vega into a rock setting. But they wouldn't do much for me on quiet jazz.

Now I haven't read those articles listed by Andrew, so I'm not familiar with Toole's testing methodology. But I'd guess that the "flavor" of the music/sounds used by Toole et al was not controlled for listener preference. (Andrew or someone please verify this.) As an example of possible result skewing...if I was in the controlled study, was asked to listen to loudspeakers presenting rock music...speakers that played well with rock, I'd probably like them. If they were quite reserved speakers more appropriate for that breathy Diana Krall stuff, I may not like them at all on the rock music. OTOH, I may prefer the more laid-back ones with a Krall style of music.

Does this make any sense to anyone? Probably not. I'm just blowin' old guy smoke here.

 

[avaserfi]

One interesting (to me) issue of the hearing-tasting sense comparison is that of the flavor of the food/music. Let's look at the flavoring of foods. I'm particularly fond of savory and highly spiced foods. My wife prefers lighter and sweeter faire. In hearing, the listener's brain, for whatever reason, also has a preference for audio/sound/music "flavoring". I like rock and roll...my wife prefers pop or classical. Furthermore, some speakers are better suited to those styles of music. I wouldn't hesitate to put a dynamic JBL or Cerwin-Vega into a rock setting. But they wouldn't do much for me on quiet jazz.

Now I haven't read those articles listed by Andrew, so I'm not familiar with Toole's testing methodology. But I'd guess that the "flavor" of the music/sounds used by Toole et al was not controlled for listener preference. (Andrew or someone please verify this.) As an example of possible result skewing...if I was in the controlled study, was asked to listen to loudspeakers presenting rock...speakers that played well with rock, I'd probably like them. If they were quite reserved speakers more appropriate for that breathy Diana Krall stuff, I may not like them at all on the rock speakers, but prefer the more laid-back ones.

You are correct listener's genre preference was not directly controlled for, but this is actually a non-issue.

This credible perceptual research shows that regardless of genre a loudspeaker with certain characteristics will be rated higher than others without these characteristics [or with relatively less ideal, but similar characteristics]. Secondly, the cited research, for example, used nearly 40 loudspeakers, multiple groups of listeners and multiple test tracks during the study. These large sample sizes would have likely inadvertently controlled for listener genre preference if it was an issue. Also, the large degree of agreement between studies which used different listeners, source material and loudspeakers would also show that listener genre preference is a non-issue.

As far as not needed a dynamic speaker to reproduce softer music I just don't follow. A speaker must be dynamic [irregardless of genre] if one wants accurate reproduction of source material.

Loudspeaker preference being based on genre and loudspeaker preference being based on subjectivity are long lasting myths that have been disproved by credible perceptual research. A quality speaker is a quality speaker irregardless of genre.

 

[jamie2112]

I love music and I love food. I like to eat food and listen to music.
I have to say these are 2 of my favorite senses.....yes mine are a lot alike...

 

[krabapple]

The two senses are alike in one important regard: preferences in both can be easily and strongly influenced by 'sighted bias'. This was shown amusingly for wines in a recent report, where quality report by the tasters went up, as the price went up (even though the wines were actually the same). For audio,
Olive and Toole corrected for it by doing the loudspeaker preference trials blind.


THe two senses are different in latency -- it's longer for taste. The effect or 'memory' of the first taste affects the perception of the second for a longer interval, than for sounds. We 'forget' sound details pretty rapidly, which is why ABX identifications are best done using quick-switching mechanism, to minimize the interval between the end of the first sample and the start of the next.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Another point of view.

This may not be 100% relevant, but when they do drug studies, they look at thousands of subjects over a period of 5-10 years. They find adverse effects (toxicity) that affect most people. But there will always be people who will have totally different reactions to the same drug. Just because a drug is safe for 1,000,000 people does not mean that it is safe for everyone. There may be 10,000 other people who will have adverse effects to this same drug.

I don't think anyone of us is qualified to be the definitive expert of human physiology of audible perception because none of us are God. Statistics provide some clues, but nothing is carved in stone.

Some people like a lot of treble. Some people like a lot of bass. Some like a lot of midrange.

And as Andrew says, room acoustics, speaker placement, and personal bias play a factor.

There are so many factors, both personal and environmental, that could affect our preference.

The first thing I look for in speakers is the sound clarity of the voice and instruments and bass. I don't like muddy or "bloated" bass or any unclear sound. In my experience, DSPs and Tone controls have always caused this "muddy" unclear sound. That's why I always use Pure Direct/Source Direct. So sound clarity is the first thing.

Then I look for strong, clean, powerful bass.

 

[fmw]

Sound is interpreted by our brains and our brains carry all of our preferences and biases. Those preferences and biases affect how we react to sound. Some people will like the sound of your speakers and other people won't. Preference.

Same is true of taste. Personally, I can't eat celery. I hate it. I'm in a minority, though, since most people don't hate celery. My problem with celery is just a preference or a bias. The celery I taste isn't any different than the celery other people taste. The difference is my reaction to it.

 

[Tomorrow]

You are correct listener's genre preference was not directly controlled for, but this is actually a non-issue.

This credible perceptual research shows that regardless of genre a loudspeaker with certain characteristics will be rated higher than others without these characteristics [or with relatively less ideal, but similar characteristics]. Secondly, the cited research, for example, used nearly 40 loudspeakers, multiple groups of listeners and multiple test tracks during the study. These large sample sizes would have likely inadvertently controlled for listener genre preference if it was an issue. Also, the large degree of agreement between studies which used different listeners, source material and loudspeakers would also show that listener genre preference is a non-issue.

As far as not needed a dynamic speaker to reproduce softer music I just don't follow. A speaker must be dynamic [irregardless of genre] if one wants accurate reproduction of source material.

Loudspeaker preference being based on genre and loudspeaker preference being based on subjectivity are long lasting myths that have been disproved by credible perceptual research. A quality speaker is a quality speaker irregardless of genre.

Thanks for the input, Andrew.

I have to take an unusual position and disagree with a couple of your statements, though. Unless one sees a companion credible study that disproves any affective link of music genre bias toward loudspeaker preference, one cannot assume that it does not exist. Even in the face of many research efforts that have been conducted on loudspeaker preference, the mere fact of large tested populations, numerous speaker types, various musical genres used, and consensus of findings, if genre preference hasn't been controlled for or tested for it is not proven. It can only be assumed or worse, unconsidered. And in fact, the larger the sample size of the tested population, the more entropic the results will be for uncontrolled variables such as this. That's just the nature of the scientific model.

Lastly, some loudspeakers are more dynamic than others, just as some foods are spicier than others. Wouldn't you agree? Then at what level of "dynamic" does a loudspeaker become "accurate" (or "inaccurate")? (Careful...traps abound in this question. )

 

[itschris]

From what I'm gathering, the general consensus is that preference pays the major role. But why does fmw literally hate celery while I can chomp on it all day long. Is my sense of taste better in some way?

So thinking about it, my assumption would be that given the same love a song, played in the same room... a very well setup one... the individual I quote in my post would probably still hate the Def Techs while I would probably enjoy them even more. I still just find that odd. One response to my wine analogy said that your taste becomes better with experience, but we could be talking about two different things. One individual in my club cannot stand any red. He finds just about every red to be harsh and foul tasting. However, he's probably one of the best white wine experts I've ever seen who can tpically nail vintage and region about 75% of the time in a blind tasting. So why do red not taste good to him?

Do we hear or taste the same things the same and process it differently, or do physically hear and taste things diferently and process it the same. Maybe that the bottom line question I'm getting at. Also, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the person I quoted in that I'm assuming he really can distinguish the quality of a speaker to that degree that easily. Whether or not that's the case isn't really important for my purposes of the post. It more of general desire to understand things.

 

[Tomorrow]

But why does fmw literally hate celery while I can chomp on it all day long. Is my sense of taste better in some way?

No! FMW's taste is much better.

Celery...phhttthhhhhuuutttttt

 

[no. 5]

[Long post WARNING] I've been reading some stuff lately on here that got me thinking. Is or does our sense of hearing work like our sense of taste? I'll explain where I'm going with this...

This is a quote from another thread that started discussing the quality of sound from different speakers:

Well I certainly don't want to start a debate about Def Tech's, just giving my opinion to the OP. Take it for what you think it's worth, but in my opinion the 7002's and BP10's aren't just poor at music, they're some of the worst I've ever heard. They're some of the least detailed speakers I've ever encountered, and the signal just seems smeared in all axes, including time.

I read that and being a Def Tech owner it just really puzzles me and not because I think my speakers are this or that and somenones else's are worse, better, or anything. It was more of a general puzzlement of how one person's opinion can be so dramatically different than anothers. When someone makes such bold assertions such as that, whether it's about Def Techs, Axiom, Onkyo, Emotiva... whoever... whatever... I start to scratch my head and try to understand how that can be.

So I started thinking about parallels that could help me understand and this is what I came up with. My wife and I love wine. We belong to the wine club at our country club and I find very much the same thing going on with wine. We'll have a tasting, and one person will love a wine, another will proclaim it's warm piss. That always puzzled me... but then again... my wife loves coconut and I'll blow chunks if I take one bite.

So... is our hearing the same way? Is it possible that something that sounds so pleasing to me or you can sound completely horrible to someone else? I'm talking the choice of music, but the physical sound of the speaker?

This is interesting, I'm a bit hazy today so I haven't really thought about this real deep, but in sound there seems to be a difference between production and reproduction, as Avaserfi brought out, for reproduction it is seen that most people most of the time like the same thing, and listener preference can even be predicted, however, between bad to really awful and good to outstanding, it would seem that difference in preference has much to do with what the individual finds annoying, and what the source material is revealing.

So for sound reproduction I would say that for middle of the road stuff, yes, it is possible for me to like something you hate.

Now contrast that with sound production; all guitars would likely sound about the same (awful) if they were made the way a high quality speaker is, guitar amps would sound pretty dull if they were made to imitate HiFi amplifiers. A resonant guitar body and amplifier distortion adds to the richness and interest of music being produced by the artist, in fact, artists even look for resonances and distortions they like, it is only good or bad if the sound is or is not what the artist wants.

To coarsely put the analogy of sound to wine, there are many ways to produce sound, just as there are many kinds of wine, but each bottle of the same kind should taste similar, just as a produced sound should sound about the same when it is reproduced.

 

[j_garcia]

You can take the same grapes and make completely different wines depending on how it the fermenation and aging take place (type of yeast, natural or manufactured yeast, type of oak used to age [no stainless ], length of age, etc...) but the end result of that is still a distinct flavor. That flavor can be perceived differently by different people because each has a different reference as to what they like and don't like. For a particular varietal of wine, I look for specific things from them, just as when auditioning speakers, I listen for particular things. I have learned what I am listening for by comparing various characteristics and while the absolute capability of a speaker is influenced by the environment, it isn't difficult to grasp general characteristics of a given speaker regardless of environment rather quickly (with reference material hopefully). Some core characteristics will stand out right away without having to have compared them in the same room. From there, one would determine if they want to bring them home to test in one's own environment as the final decision stage.

 

[mtrycrafts]

One interesting (to me) issue of the hearing-tasting sense comparison is that of the flavor of the food/music. Let's look at the flavoring of foods. I'm particularly fond of savory and highly spiced foods. My wife prefers lighter and sweeter faire. In hearing, the listener's brain, for whatever reason, also has a preference for audio/sound/music "flavoring". I like rock and roll...my wife prefers pop or classical. Furthermore, some speakers are better suited to those styles of music. I wouldn't hesitate to put a dynamic JBL or Cerwin-Vega into a rock setting. But they wouldn't do much for me on quiet jazz.

Now I haven't read those articles listed by Andrew, so I'm not familiar with Toole's testing methodology. But I'd guess that the "flavor" of the music/sounds used by Toole et al was not controlled for listener preference. (Andrew or someone please verify this.) As an example of possible result skewing...if I was in the controlled study, was asked to listen to loudspeakers presenting rock music...speakers that played well with rock, I'd probably like them. If they were quite reserved speakers more appropriate for that breathy Diana Krall stuff, I may not like them at all on the rock music. OTOH, I may prefer the more laid-back ones with a Krall style of music.

Does this make any sense to anyone? Probably not. I'm just blowin' old guy smoke here.

In a nut shell Toole et al used controlled DBT testing to rate speakers as to certain aspects. No control for music preference by people just how they would rate the speaker's performance. I doubt their preference mad a difference in their score sheet but then, I didn't dissect any of the results to specifics.
I have no reason to question their outcomes, but then, others can do their replications and account for your area of concern and see what happens

Speakers, have no idea what kind of music signals are passed to them; they are just electrical signals.
No reason why a good speaker would not play different genre music properly, if bias is controlled for

 

[mtrycrafts]

There is one large aspect of your tasting/hearing comparision that makes it flawed. It has been shown that there is a large genetic component to how humans taste - for example there are certain chemical that will taste extremely bitter to some, but to others will have no taste. This difference is based on actual genetics and no amount of training will allow this person to taste this chemical structure, it just doesn't bind with their taste buds.

Audio on the other hand is vastly different as shown by credible perceptual research. Researchers such as Toole, Olive, Paisley, Moire, etc... Have used thousands of listeners from various backgrounds and training to determine thresholds for audibility of certain phenomenon as well as correlating loudspeaker measurement to speaker preference. Despite these studies differing methods and listeners as well as loudspeaker choice results with regard to loudspeaker measurement and listener preference were largely similar.

The following paragraph contains conjecture: It is more likely that these differences in listener preference are related to loudspeaker room interaction in the space of audition. Couple the fact that the room has a paramount effect on sound quality and acoustic memory is rather poor, coupled with the effects of bias it is unlikely the majority of people are unable to properly audition loudspeakers in such a way to sufficiently compare them.

If one is interested in reading more on the subject a good starting point is here:

Loudspeaker Measurements and Their Relationship to Listener Preferences: Part 1. Toole, Floyd. JAES Volume 34 Issue 4 pp. 227-235; April 1986

Loudspeaker Measurements and Their Relationship to Listener Preferences: Part 2. Toole, Floyd. JAES Volume 34 Issue 5 pp. 323-348; May 1986

I would agree with this I remember doing such chemical testing in school how some have different reaction to chemicals; most interesting.
On the other hand, hearing if rather uniform, unless one is deaf
Even with a hearing loss in some frequency bands, one would not confuse a piano for another instrument as that would correlate better with the chemical difference which is totally give a different outcome.

 

[Rickster71]

It's interesting, reading other threads, about talk of what speaker, what wire, etc?
When was the last time any of us had our hearing checked?
What if we're spending all this money, on great speakers, and our hearing isn't 100%?

As far as taste; I was watching one of the science shows, they said, some people have more taste buds, than average. They were called super tasters.
I recall as a child hating the taste of lime; I thought it tasted soapy.
Now, I have a lime in my gin and tonic all the time.
It seems our hearing gets worse over time, and our tastes get better.
What do you guys think?

Rick