A Scientific Case For Subjectivism In Audio

[highfigh]

For instance, I would like the ASR cheeseheads to put an identical speaker with identical gear in 2 rooms that have identical dimensions and furnishing. However, one room should have 90+ % glass surfaces and another with 90+ % wood surfaces. They can do their EQ and Dirac all day till both rooms measure really really flat. Now, the ASR cheeseheads will claim both setups should sound the same when they saw those 2 flat curves, but, in reality one setup will sound horrible and the other room will sound a whole lot better. He couldn't come up with a cheeseheaded curve to explain that, I think.

In-room response and test response are two very different things and the correction software isn't designed to handle room acoustical flaws WRT surfaces (reflective, diffusive and absorptive), just those caused by speaker placement, room dimensions and the relationship to the listening positions. They're trying to create a larger 'bubble' where the sound is relatively consistent from seat to seat, not a totally flat response. Besides- totally flat is for testing and comparing the input with the output to/from the equipment, not for listening. For that, smooth response is needed, preferably with a 'house curve'.

What do you mean by 'cheesehead'?

 

[Am_P]

Oh wait, another thing....I would like to play some string quartets on a speaker and have 2 listeners/test subjects.
Test Subject A: ASR's naked emperor
Test Subject B: A professional violinist who's sunk his life into it for 40 years.

Before the ASR emperor's mouth opened and the word salad came out, I would rather very quickly ducttape his yapper and listen to the pro musician on what he heard instead. Every lil dweeb with a DAQ and some measurement software is somehow an expert these days on how instruments and music should sound...

 

[PENG]

For instance, I would like the ASR cheeseheads to put an identical speaker with identical gear in 2 rooms that have identical dimensions and furnishing. However, one room should have 90+ % glass surfaces and another with 90+ % wood surfaces. They can do their EQ and Dirac all day till both rooms measure really really flat. Now, the ASR cheeseheads will claim both setups should sound the same when they saw those 2 flat curves, but, in reality one setup will sound horrible and the other room will sound a whole lot better. He couldn't come up with a cheeseheaded curve to explain that, I think.

I doubt you will find more than a few such ASR "cheer leaders". I would think their regular members know well enough the effects of the rooms. Not all ASR nor AH goers deserved to be labelled like that as a whole don't you think?

 

[Pogre]

What do you mean by 'cheesehead'?

I doubt you will find more than a few such ASR cheer leaders. I would think their regular members know well enough the effects of the rooms. Not all ASR nor AH goers deserved to be labelled as a whole don't you think?

I read it as derisive hyperbole. Discrediting those who don't agree with you by name calling makes it easier to dismiss them.

 

[Golfx]

Oh wait, another thing....I would like to play some string quartets on a speaker and have 2 listeners/test subjects.
Test Subject A: ASR's naked emperor
Test Subject B: A professional violinist who's sunk his life into it for 40 years.

Before the ASR emperor's mouth opened and the word salad came out, I would rather very quickly ducttape his yapper and listen to the pro musician on what he heard instead. Every lil dweeb with a DAQ and some measurement software is somehow an expert these days on how instruments and music should sound...

Ah well there is some truth to be found in your last sentence. I can’t keep up with all the new YouTube reviewers. But Amir at ASR has started something that grew and grew because it satisfied a niche that wasn’t always explored or properly understood by audio customers. I like having bench measurements to help narrow my choices to, as Amir says, those companies with “good engineering hygiene.”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[PENG]

I read it as derisive hyperbole. Discrediting those who don't agree with you by name calling makes it easier to dismiss them.

Probably just a tongue and cheek thing, I hope..

 

[highfigh]

Another thing to consider- many people don't know how to listen for sound quality or what to listen for. That's not about snobbery, it's about knowing that the details of certain characteristics of the music/sound can be hidden by the rest of the sound. This doesn't mean they're inaudible, but they can be a bit difficult to hear. If someone could isolate each instrument, it would be much easier to hear these.

 

[Pogre]

Probably just a tongue and cheek thing, I hope..

I s'pose, if one is being charitable.

 

[highfigh]

Oh wait, another thing....I would like to play some string quartets on a speaker and have 2 listeners/test subjects.
Test Subject A: ASR's naked emperor
Test Subject B: A professional violinist who's sunk his life into it for 40 years.

Before the ASR emperor's mouth opened and the word salad came out, I would rather very quickly ducttape his yapper and listen to the pro musician on what he heard instead. Every lil dweeb with a DAQ and some measurement software is somehow an expert these days on how instruments and music should sound...

How many musicians do you know and if you know a large number, how many DON'T have hearing damage? Even violinists have damaged hearing- have you ever been within inches of a real violin or Piccolo?

 

[Pogre]

How many musicians do you know and if you know a large number, how many DON'T have hearing damage? Even violinists have damaged hearing- have you ever been within inches of a real violin or Piccolo?

I grew up surrounded by musicians and live music. My parents were both in a band, and I'm a musician myself.

I still don't think that somehow gives me some sort of superior insight on what makes something sound good tho, and I can still learn more. There's more to it than simply being a musician. It doesn't automatically make someone more of an authority in my opinion.

 

[highfigh]

I read it as derisive hyperbole. Discrediting those who don't agree with you by name calling makes it easier to dismiss them.

I was just wondering because 'Cheesehead' is a name used for people from Wisconsin since this state produces so much cheese. And foam hats in the shape of a wedge of it.

 

[Am_P]

In-room response and test response are two very different things and the correction software isn't designed to handle room acoustical flaws WRT surfaces (reflective, diffusive and absorptive), just those caused by speaker placement, room dimensions and the relationship to the listening positions. They're trying to create a larger 'bubble' where the sound is relatively consistent from seat to seat, not a totally flat response. Besides- totally flat is for testing and comparing the input with the output to/from the equipment, not for listening. For that, smooth response is needed, preferably with a 'house curve'.

What do you mean by 'cheesehead'?

Let me reel you in a bit here...identical speakers, identical gear, identical room dimensions, identical positioning....no fancy schmancy diffuser, abosrber nothing ...one room has flat wood panel coverage, one has glass everywhere..Your software has produced identical curves in each room Give me a measurement/some numbers/a curve anything that explains why one room sounds horrid and the other sounds ok.

Replace "cheese head" with "enlightened seer", "audio emperor" whatever the fk... if the usage of the word "cheese head" to describe some of the ASR emperors hurt the fine refined sensibilities of this separate forum. Do let me know if audioholics and the emperors of ASR are one intertwined entity though (it could help refine my vocabulary better in the future).

 

[PENG]

Looks like you meant to say that audibility correlates to measurements and that Dr. Toole proved this. Toole/Olive proved that audibility correlates to measurements when biases could be reduced. They also proved that the correlation between audibility and measurements goes out the window when biases were in play, such as the simple act of seeing the speaker. The problem is, how often do we listen to sound systems in an unbiased state? The answer is, of course, almost never. The big takeaway from Olive/Toole's research shouldn't be how audio performance can be made to be audible but rather how little audio performance really matters in everyday situations.

That, I would agree 100% but in the video I thought you might have left people with the impression that you were biased against what you called the objectivist. If you follow the definition of "objectivism" by Merriam-Webster, you seemed to have defined objectivism and objectivist in your own way.

Definition of objectivism

1: any of various theories asserting the validity of objective phenomena over subjective experience especially : REALISM sense 2a

Essential Meaning of objective
1: based on facts rather than feelings or opinions

Definition of realism

1: concern for fact or reality and rejection of the impractical and visionary
2a: a doctrine that universals exist outside the minds specifically : the conception that an abstract term names an independent and unitary reality
b: a theory that objects of sense perception or cognition exist independently of the mind

There are multiple examples in at least two slides I would take exception to:

Example1: You are right about what you were saying in the first screenshot, but what is your definition of die-hard objectivist? I would think if the die-hard objectivist is truly an objectivist, he/she will tell you his/her subsequent perception of the sound system's performance will be a subjective one.

Example2: In the 2nd screenshot, if the so called objectivist falter, for the reasons you listed, then as Pogre said before, they are actually subjectivist.

Other than that, I thoroughly enjoy your video, and I always respect your knowledge in loudspeakers, thank you very much.

 

[PENG]

Exactly! That's what I'm getting at. Many of them may fancy themselves as objectivists but I'm arguing they're being subjectivists and allowing their biases affect their conclusions, and that bias is toward how flat that line is or how low those numbers are.

Exactly my point too, the funny thing is, just because someone claims to be an objectivist, does not make him/her one. A subjectivist, if self proclaimed would more likely be more honest about oneself.

 

[highfigh]

Let me reel you in a bit here...identical speakers, identical gear, identical room dimensions, identical positioning....no fancy schmancy diffuser, abosrber nothing ...one room has flat wood panel coverage, one has glass everywhere..Your software has produced identical curves in each room Give me a measurement/some numbers/a curve anything that explains why one room sounds horrid and the other sounds ok.

Replace "cheese head" with "enlightened seer", "audio emperor" whatever the fk... if the usage of the word "cheese head" to describe some of the ASR emperors hurt the fine refined sensibilities of this separate forum. Do let me know if audioholics and the emperors of ASR are one intertwined entity though (it could help refine my vocabulary better in the future).

FFS- get a grip.

No software can control the acoustical characteristics of the building materials, so an undefined wooden surface will reflect somewhat differently from a glass wall, even if the wooden panel is basically flat, partially because the densities aren't the same. Another reason the sound can be different is because of how the surfaces resonate with various frequencies and correction software can't do anything about that, either.

Making two rooms with so many details that are identical in the other respects should sound very similar but the materials and construction would need to be defined in order to be totally sure and most windows don't have some kind of support or fastening at 16" centers, as typical stud walls do.

 

[PENG]

Then, there are two camps of objectivists.

Exactly, one is objectivist by definition (conventional), the other is one where people think they are objectivists but don't necessarily hesitate to give their subjective opinions as though the opinions were based on "facts" when they may not be. I think, and hope I am right, that most self proclaim objectivist in fact practice objectivism.

 

[Am_P]

I grew up surrounded by musicians and live music. My parents were both in a band, and I'm a musician myself.

I still don't think that somehow gives me some sort of superior insight on what makes something sound good tho, and I can still learn more. There's more to it than simply being a musician. It doesn't automatically make someone more of an authority in my opinion.

Yeah? I suppose you would have no problems then linking everybody to a very quick video that showcases your expertise/prowess with such an instrument.... Some quick audiovisual proof that mitigates suspicion of embellishment...

 

[Am_P]

FFS- get a grip.

No software can control the acoustical characteristics of the building materials, so an undefined wooden surface will reflect somewhat differently from a glass wall, even if the wooden panel is basically flat, partially because the densities aren't the same. Another reason the sound can be different is because of how the surfaces resonate with various frequencies and correction software can't do anything about that, either.

Making two rooms with so many details that are identical in the other respects should sound very similar but the materials and construction would need to be defined in order to be totally sure and most windows don't have some kind of support or fastening at 16" centers, as typical stud walls do.

I see...so it seems that are many limitations to this whole measurement paradigm w.r.t capturing the full listening experience when the room is an inherent part of it.

Hang on a second...the listener's physicality is going through going through subtle psychosomatic changes through the entirety of a listening session as well. Oh fk..this measurement paradigm is starting to get real fked up and compicated now

But, I guess the ASR emperor figures it all out measuring one speaker in his garage. Strangely, the Revels are the immaculate thing of the day anyday and he happens to be a Revel dealer....wow

 

[Pogre]

Yeah? I suppose you would have no problems then linking everybody to a very quick video that showcases your expertise/prowess with such an instrument.... Some quick audiovisual proof that mitigates suspicion of embellishment...

Not that you really deserve a response, but this is my kit...

Me practicing...

This is my dad when I went back for a visit a few years back...

I don't have anything from when he was in a band with my mom because it's been over 30 years since I lived back home.

So what experience do you have? Or are you just gonna call me a cheesehead and insinuate that I'm a liar so you can make more bald assertions and dismiss me without having to think about other perspectives?

 

[highfigh]

Yeah? I suppose you would have no problems then linking everybody to a very quick video that showcases your expertise/prowess with such an instrument.... Some quick audiovisual proof that mitigates suspicion of embellishment...

Someone may be an incredible musician, yet their idea of good sound may be totally different from the majority of others, whether musicians, or not. I know musicians who wouldn't know good sound if it bit them on the a$$ and I know others who have won Grammy awards for their music production- it's up to the person and their training WRT sound analysis, not the profession. Hearing music and listening to it are two very different things- many don't care about the level of musicianship, sound quality, production, etc- they just like the music while some care almost exclusively about the sound quality. I worked with someone who claimed to be an audiophile and said that he listened mostly to Enya because of the sound quality.