Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: I agree - but it works both ways.

Posted by Presto on October 12, 2010 at 16:13:36:
Well, some DBT proponents are out to prove that all audio equipment sounds the same, in which case they are entitled to their labcoats and $100 best buy stereo systems. Others want to devalue sighted listening auditions in general, the reasons being for this vary.

I think objectivists are far too quick to throw away the benefits of sighted listening, aural training and attempts to listen sighted without being biased. (Then again, some say that's not possible, yet most people audition and purchase gear this way). As for subjectivists, some seem to get hung up on the "null result" hypothesis and completely dismiss DBTs and all other forms of blind testing as 'irrelevant to audio'. The extremist from both camps, IMHO, are missing the picture.

Ask any speaker designer who does a/b comparisons between crossover iterations. He'll be trying to decide whether or not an added eq or impedance compensation circuit is worth the added cost and complexity. If the sonic benefit is not there (aka there is no sonic benefit or the benefit is extremely small) he may choose not to include the addition.

The design of the addition and it's measured effect are objective.
The choice to include them or not is highly subjective.

In this example, you can't have one without the other. Without objective design there is no design. Without subjective choice, all designs which theoretically improve the sound must be used whether or not they actually make audible improvements worth doing. And that's not how audio equipment is usually designed. A lot of "theoretically best" designs are changed so they sound good instead of just being theoretically best. In other cases, "theoretically best" designs are not always selected as the best sounding either.

At the end of the day, the exact corollary between what measures good and what sounds good is not 100% established. Although we have some general ideas, the right measurement for the "perfect sound" does not yet exist. And even if it did, it would surely not please everyone.

Cheers,
Presto