 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.51.146.3
In Reply to: RE: I NEVER Said All Measurements Are Useless.... posted by thetubeguy1954 on December 28, 2007 at 14:04:12
"Measures the best" is a meaningless statement if the differences in A vs. B measurements are too small to be audible.Often with audio electronics, and always with audio wires, that has been the result of controlled listening experiments.
An opinion about what component sounds best is meaningless unless the person providing the opinion can really hear a difference, and the difference he hears is not just an SPL difference.
That's why reasonable audiophiles use tests -- to reduce the probability of human error (that you subjectivists deem impossible because "I know what I hear and could never be wrong".)
.
.
.Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Edits: 12/31/07Follow Ups:
Richard you've developed the bad habit of twisting what I actually said to support the topic you want to discuss as opposed to the topic I raised!
For example you replied to my post by stating: "Measures the best" is a meaningless statement if the differences in A vs B measurements are too small to be audible. Of course that statement would be true "IF" the differences in A vs B measurements are too small to be audible! However the example I gave was specifically when that wasn't the case. What I said was: Fact is many a time the amp that measures the best, sounds the worst while the amp the measures the worst, sounds the best!
Richard I believed, perhaps mistakenly, you would have understood if one amp sounded "best" and the other amp sounded "worse" as I stated the case to be. Then it quite obvious that regardless of what the differences in the measurements were, they were either audible or not the cause of the differences heard!
Everyone here knows your SPL rant almost by heart. I don't think anyone here would dispute that differences in SPLS can be a factor in what we hear, so I don't understand your constant need to bring that statement up. It's a shame that you seem to believe it's the only or main factor behind the differences we hear. You apparently cannot be open-minded enough to realise other factors, such as how the human ear/brain perceives what it hears, might also be playing as influencing a role on how and what we hear!
I for one and I believe others here as well, have particpated in listening tests where SPLs were matched and yet audible differences were still detected on the D.U.T. So it's quite obvious that other factors besides SPL differences were playing a part in what we heard. I also remember a time when we matched two different speakers SPL differences (IIRC it was Klipsch Klipshorn and Infinity RS 2.5) so they sounded quite similar, not exact, but very similar. But lo and behold, as we raised the volume the differences were once again quite apparent! This is most likely a result of the non-linear behavior of the human ear. For more on the non-linear behavior of the human ear read: http://www.silcom.com/~aludwig/Nonlinear.htm
Personally I've found matched SPLs are really ONLY an issue when a person does instant back and forth comparisions between different D.U.T. at the same volume. As I don't listen to or compare audio components that way, matched SPLs are not really the issue for me, that they apparently are for you!
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
YOU WROTE:
"What I said was: Fact is many a time the amp that measures the best, sounds the worst while the amp the measures the worst, sounds the best!"MY COMMENTS TYPED SLOW SO EVEN YOU CAN UNDERSTAND:
"measures the best" is a meaningless phrase if the difference in measurements is too small to be audible.
For electronics, and especially for wires, "sounds the best" is completely subjective ... to such an extent that people will often claim to hear differences when a component is compared with itself (differences "heard" in 62% of trials of the infamous Stereophile blind amp comparison when an amp was compared with itself)"Sounds the best" could apply to only one person in the world ... who could be biased by his feelings about the brand, the technology used, the appearance, and the fact that he just spent $10,000 for the component!
For speakers where "sounds the best" is more meaningful (differences among speakers are audible): There can be agreement among audiophiles that a specific speaker is above average in a wide variety of rooms.
-Maybe "sounds among the best I've heard" would be a useful description.
I think you'll find that most speakers rated "above average" will have "above average" measurements.
Floyd Toole's blind speakers auditions strongly suggests my prior statement is true for most listeners without hearing damage.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Richard, Richard, Richard, when will you ever learn? I think you need to join Pat D in taking some reading comprehension classes.
Let's break this down so even YOU'LL understand, ok? I originally said: Fact is many a time the amp that measures the best, sounds the worst while the amp the measures the worst, sounds the best!
To that statement you replied: "measures the best" is a meaningless phrase if the difference in measurements is too small to be audible.
Now I'm going to remember your lack of reading comprehension and state this very clearly and gently. I'm also going to follow your example and be sure MY COMMENTS ARE TYPED SLOW SO EVEN YOU CAN UNDERSTAND: Richard your statement is assinine in light of the comments I made, period!
Why? Because if one amp measures the best while it sounds the worst and another amp measures the worst while it sounds the best then it painfully obvious that there's an audible difference between the two amps in question. If that wasn't the case how could one amp sound better and the other amp sound worse? Furthermore the difference in measurements, no matter how small the differences may be between the two, are apparently in this case audible! --- Richard unless you're going to attempt to argue that two amps that measure the same or extremely close to the same, can sound different. You’ll have to agree I’m correct in my comments as stated.
So please regale us with your opinion of how your comment of "measures the best" is a meaningless phrase if the difference in measurements is too small to be audible applies to an example wherein it's blatantly obvious that the differences are indeed audible!
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
"Measures the best" is meaningless in many ways:
(1) What you measure may not be important
(2) What you measure may be important (i.e.; THD using an 8 ohm resistor), but could be overwhelmed by another factor
(i.e.; intermittent clipping distortion while listening to real music using low efficiency speakers)
(3) What you measure may not correlate to what people really hear
(4) The difference in measurements may be smaller than
human ears can hear
(5) "measures best" could mean nothing more than ONE measurement
that ONE listener claims is better than the same measurement made
on ONE other component
(6) "sounds the worst" is completely subjective among
golden ears, who won't even submit to a brief test to prove
they can hear any A-B difference at all, before pontificating
endlessly about any component.
That means the brand name and/or different A-B SPL's
and/or the appearance of the component, may be THE cause,
or a cause, of the golden ear's "better"/"worse" opinion.
We'll never know what causes a golden ear opinion,
because golden ears believe they could never be mistaken
about what they hear -- which is almost certainly wrong.
No human is perfect.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Richard it's good to see you're actually learning and appear to have increased your reading comprehension! I see doing this has allowed you to finally comprehend YOUR original statement of: "measures the best" is a meaningless phrase if the difference in measurements is too small to be audible. actually makes no sense in light of the fact that it was painfully obvious that there was an audible difference between the two amps in question, in the example I originally gave! If you remember I stated explicitly that one amp measured the best while it sounded the worst and the other amp measured the worst while it sounded the best! It's too bad that along with your increased reading comprehension, you've didn't also increase your humility as well. That would have allowed you to be able to simply admit you were wrong in this one particular case, when replying to the example as stated, like you were!
Instead of simply admitting your statement was incorrect for the example given I see you'd rather justify why your statement is still a correct statement. However to do that you've now taken your comment out of the context of my statement, where I stated clearly that one amp measured the best while it sounded the worst and the other amp measured the worst while it sounded the best! and now you've applied it to YOUR own different set of circumstances of 1-6, where your comment appears correct. This little twisting of events by you Richard needs to be qualified with my remark that almost any comment can be made to appear as correct when viewed under the right circumstances, like you're now doing. Geez Richard even a broken clock is correct twice a day!
As you're now making the arguement completely different than the one I originally stated and given that you've also skewed it so you'll appear to be correct ---even when you were 100% incorrect in the example I stated, I'll respond to your comment of: "Measures the best" is meaningless in many ways by stating what I've said numerous times before. The measurements manufacturers take to provide the specs they do with their various audio components don't correlate very well with what I hear. This is why many tubed amps can measure in such as way as their specs appear poor --when compared to a solid state amp--- yet at the very same time these same tubed amps often sound a lot more like live, unamplified, music --hence better--- than the solid state amp does that measured in such a way as it had better specs! Which strangely enough brings me back to my original comment where one amp measured the best while it sounded the worst and the other amp measured the worst while it sounded the best!
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
An amp might average 1 watt output playing music at home
The THD measurements will be made at maximum rated output per channel
using an 8 ohm resistor.
So the measurement may have little in common with actual listening conditions with real speakers
Therefore which measurement is "better" or "worse"
(you use the incorrect terms "best" and "worst"),
would be irrelevant for real speakers (efficiant enough
to be driven without clipping).
This is especially true if the sole determinant
of "better" or "worse" was your ONE opinion based
on a sighted audition (as a Tube lover you are probably
so biased against solid state amplifiers that you
would get a migraine headache
before they were turned on!)
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Richard,
I now believe I was mistaken about your increased reading comprehension. What part of The measurements manufacturers take to provide the specs they do with their various audio components don't correlate very well with what I hear didn't you understand? Apparently quite a bit of it if you feel the need to tell me The THD measurements will be made at maximum rated output per channel using an 8 ohm resistor. to support your arguement.
In addition I've noticed you're back to twisting the arguement to fit your beliefs once again! I was speaking about amps, not speakers. Yet once again you've brought the topic around to better fit your beliefs by applying what I said to speakers with your statement of: Therefore which measurement is "better" or "worse" (you use the incorrect terms "best" and "worst"), would be irrelevant for real speakers (efficient enough to be driven without clipping) Oh and FYI if there's only two amps then better amp is also the best of the two and the worse amp is the worst of the two, so no my use of the terms "best" and "worst" wasn't incorrect! Better understanding of basic english would help you in this area, along with some increased reading comprehension.
Finally FYI for the vast majority of my time as an audiophile I actually:
1) Prefered solidstate amps.
2) Believed wires (IC's powercords & speaker wire) sounded the same.
3) Believed tubed components were inferior.
The difference between you and I Richard is a remained and still remain open-minded! But more importantly I trust my ears. I was "converted" to tubes when I went to visit one of my friend's (Rick Carpenteri) friend. This guy (Rich Mayu) had an Aronov 960I integrated tubed amp, Platinum solo speakers and a CAL basic CD player. Yet the sound was so life like I was shocked. It easily bested my solid state OCM 88 preamp, OCM 200 poweramp (both designed by Dave Belles) my original Carver Amazings and my top of the line Nakamichi CD Player! This guy's system cost less than half what my system cost and I would have traded systems on the spot! His sounded that much better. That's what introduced me to tubes (if my memory serves me correctly)
Richard I have no vested interest in prefering tubed equipment. It's just that most of the time tubed equipment sounds more like live, unamplified music to me. Still I'd love to hear ASR's new Emitter II solidstate amp or some of the other highend solidstate stuff. I also loved (and still do) Mike Elliott's Counterpoint, and Llano's Hybrid equipment! I know you believe you have a firm grasp on what I believe, but you honestly don't as evidenced with your statement of: as a Tube lover you are probably so biased against solid state amplifiers that you would get a migraine headache before they were turned on! Trust me Richard whether you believe it or not, NOTHING could be further from the truth...
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
If the moniker "TubeGuy" isn't evidence of your pro-tube bias,
then the sentence that immediately follows your "I'm not biased"
sentence that I pasted into the subject box (grammar corrected by me)
sure sets a new record for a poster contradicting his claim
(with the first five words of the VERY NEXT sentence:
"I was "converted" to tubes ... ")
So you call yourself TubeGuy, and were "converted to tubes",
but have absolutely no bias in favor of tubes = malarkey!
You don't need me when you contradict yourself within your own post!
Well you do need me to correct your grammar.
I am edumacated and right English real good.
I think the choice of amplifier will only make a small difference,
assuming any difference is audible at all,
in the overall sound quality of a stereo system
(when compared to differences of recording quality,
speakers, speaker position, listener position and room acoustics).
The output measurements of a tube amp could tell the buyer
that using it with inefficient speakers at high volumes
is likely to result in intermittent clipping,
so would help in the choice of speakers.
You can't talk about amps and ignore speakers because clipping
distortion is one factor affecting subjective amp sound quality.
Just remember that the "amp" you are auditioning outside your home
is in a different room and driving different speakers
than you have at home ... so what you hear, and like,
can be many things besides the amp itself.
Please do not allow this post
to raise your blood pressure
... more than usual!
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Richard,
I've noticed you've picked up two of the very worst objectivist's traits:
#1) You've converted a post that was originally about how the human brain reacts to music to being about my particular preferences in audio components.
#2) You've began ignoring anything you've previously stated that's been proven incorrect. In your previous post you made the statement of: Therefore which measurement is "better" or "worse" (you use the incorrect terms "best" and "worst") , would be irrelevant for real speakers (efficient enough to be driven without clipping) I then corrected you and explained that if there's only two amps then the better amp is also the best of the two and the worse amp is the worst of the two , so no my use of the terms "best" and "worst" wasn't incorrect! But you completely ignored that didn't you?
Now I apparently need to explain why your thought process below is a quite flawed one. Yes my moniker "TubeGuy" is evidence of a preference for tubed audio components. As I explained quite clearly before the reason for that is not because I jsut want to own tubed equipment, but rather it's because I was shown that more often than not, tubed audio components excel over solid-state ones in their ability to sound more like live, unamplified music does, period! I'd love for you to show me where I stated "I'm not biased" as you suggest I did. Fact is it was you who spoke about bias when you stated: as a Tube lover you are probably so biased against solid state amplifiers that you would get a migraine headache before they were turned on! You can check this entire post if you choose to: http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/4/42354.html You'll see I'm correct in that ONLY YOU spoke about being biased. Richard you want so desperately to appear correct ---even when you aren't--- that you decided that: So you call yourself TubeGuy, and were "converted to tubes", but have absolutely no bias in favor of tubes = malarkey!
Sadly you chose to just ignore that facts that I've stated:
#1) I have no vested interest in prefering tubed equipment.
#2) For the vast majority of my time as an audiophile I actually prefered solidstate amps.
#3) I'd love to hear ASR's new Emitter II solidstate amp or some of the other highend solidstate stuff.
In your closed mind you've created a strawman arguement wherein the fact that most tubed amps I've heard sounded more like live, unamplified music does (to me), means I cannot tell, appreciate, or prefer it if or when a solid-state audio component should excel in this area! Once again I'll tell you Richard whether you believe it or not, NOTHING could be further from the truth. If and when someone designs a $500 or $1000 solid-state amp that sounds as much like live unamplified music as my Mastersound Reference 845 does, I'll sell the Mastersound and buy that solid-state amp! Why? Because as I've clearly stated before ---I have no vested interest in prefering tubed audio components! My vested interest is in owning the audio component that sounds the most like live, unamplified music does to me! So no Richard I haven't contradicted myself within my own post!
The problem is you cannot fathom someone who prefers something only because it meets their needs best ---like I prefer tubed audio components because they sound most like live, unamplified music to me! In your mind you equate this action on my part as a bias and desire to own tubed equipment. When the reality is I don't care if the amp is a B&O ICE amp, a solidstate bipolar amp, a hybrid amp, or any other type of amp you could possibly imagine. I just want the amp that sounds the most like live, unamplified, music does to me. As it happens IMHO these days tubed equipment does that best. When the day comes that I hear an ICE amp that does it better, I'll buy the ICE amp! So tell me Richard just how biased and close-minded does that make me in your opinion? Please regale us further with your "unbiased" opinions.
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
Calling yourself Tube Guy and writing that you were "converted" to tubes
can't be completely offset by stating you are not biased in favor of tubes ...
that's just like stating in print that you have no particular
preference for blondes or brunettes ... when every woman you ever
dated or married was a brunette.
What you need to find is a solid state amp with some non-functional glowing tubes peaking through the top of the case (the tubes would be your audiophile "blankie" to make you feel secure and comfortable when auditioning one of those new fangled solid-state low distortion high-power minimal-clipping voltage multipliers).
Bias is not something you can wish away by declaring you are not biased.
Many audio measurements of different audio components are too close to be audible (so "best" and "worst" are just meaningless technical terms) -- and that might explain the difficulty of hearing A-B differences among components when the brand names are hidden and SPL's are closely matched.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Richard,
As I previously stated, the problem is YOURS! You simply cannot fathom the idea of someone who prefers something only because it meets their needs best at that time! Sadly to your closed-mind way of thinking, my present name and present preference renders me incapable of realizing if and when a solid-state, or digital amp succeeds a tubed amps capability in sounding more like live unamplified music.
As you really don't know me that's a very unlogical assumption to make. I've been an audiophile/music lover 39 years now (since I was 15) and I've owned tubed components for only the last 6 years or so. As I know me a whole lot better than you do Richard you can take it to the bank that when the days arrives that I discover a B&O ICE amp, a solidstate bipolar amp, a hybrid amp, or any other type of amp out there that sounds as much like live, unamplified music as my Mastersound does, I'll sell the Mastersound as fast as I can! Should it turn out that the amp I then prefer uses ICE technology I'll be changing my name to theICEguy1954.
What you don't understand Richard is I don't enjoy moving a 135LB amp, I don't enjoy biasing tubes, I don't enjoy my amp getting as hot as a heater. What I do enjoy is an amp that sounds as close to live, unamplifed music as possible. So yes Richard I can believe in the fantasy land of your closed-mind that means I'm biased. But as that's ONLY your opinion and it's incorrect as usual, I can certainly live with that.
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
Are his statements contradictory to yours? If not, then why are you complaining?
-
"It pertains to all men to know themselves and to be temperate."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
Consider it an honor :-).
BTW, anyone sitting in front of a computer tomorrow, posting here instead of partying, is a serious dork/loser.
Happy New Years.
cheers,
AJ
This post will last approximately 2 minutes. 120,119,118,117...
nt
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Richard "IF" you're on the LIARS LIST it would have to be the troll from Fla who put you there! After all he's the one claiming you're on that list, and I know I haven't said you've deliberately lied about anything as of late --although I may have in the past.
In all honestly although we disagree I enjoy talking with you and I believe you feel the same way about me. What the Fla troll doesn't realize is we also communicate outside of A.A. As much as I could possibly consider anyone from here I haven't actually met to be a friend, I consider you one. As you already know you have a standing invite to visit my home anytime you're in Fla.
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
... or stop drinkingSo what do I have to do to get back on THE LIST?
If I ever get back to Florida, I just might pay you a visit,
assuming you promise not to set your bomb-sniffing pack of
vicious Doberman's on me ... but you may have to
widen your doorways first:
I'm 5' 2" and 395lbs. My wife is slim however,
only 275lbs.Glad to hear you enjoy these tedious "debates"
in spite of being wrong EVERY time.
My posts could never be wrong.
(They are as perfect as a golden ear's hearing ability!)
.
.
.
R. (tiny) BassNut Greene
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
Even at your crappy jokes... jokes that are almost as bad as mine!
... not as soon as I enter the room.
Oh well 5' 2" and 395lbs
might be a little funny
to horizontally challenged folks
R. (tiny) BassNut Greene
.
.
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
.
-
"It pertains to all men to know themselves and to be temperate."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
.
Thin man, in a powder blue suit, with eyes that slice you right through. The cut of his clothes are strange indeed, a hundred years too soon.
--
This post will last approximately 2 minutes. 120,119,118,117...
I've posted similar point of view here for many years before I became a dealer......
I was referring to a point of view, not the person. Why are you assuming something about me and my motivations that are and have been, clearly untrue?
Quite lazy of you to attack the person instead of the idea and the evidence, - probably because you have none. In RBNG's case, he has a long history of over exaggerating the logical fallacy of "some" to mean "all."
My praise and criticism of a wide variety of products over a history of years on these boards is only one small indicator that my comments bare no relation to my status as a dealer or of a salesman. I'm a musician, athlete, student, and IT Manager....
Thin man, in a powder blue suit, with eyes that slice you right through. The cut of his clothes are strange indeed, a hundred years too soon.
Sordidman,
You mentioned that besides your status as a dealer or of a salesman. You're also a musician, athlete, student, and IT Manager.... But you left out your most important defining definition, you're a gentleman. Although I disagree with some (not all) of your audio opinions, you've always posted as a gentleman.
It's actually a pleasure to communicate with you even when we disagree.
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
Well, I do endeavor to be a gentleman.... I still feel like I have a long way to go..... :-)
And for FWIW, I don't think that our opinions differ that significantly, - now that I think about it.
(Especially in light of your most recent series of posts)
Cheers,
Thin man, in a powder blue suit, with eyes that slice you right through. The cut of his clothes are strange indeed, a hundred years too soon.
Hello Sordidman,
That's the trouble with this place. People read a few of your posts and they believe they know you, when in all reality they really don't!
I am one of the most skeptical subjectivists you'll probably ever meet. With audio I believe science needs to delve a lot deeper into what areas of the brain are activated when we listen to music. I believe once this is understood better, we'll make great advancements in highend audio. Sadly this opinion is meerly mocked by the "supposedly" science embracing objectivists.
Oh well in the end I only have to make me happy when I listen to my stereo in my home.
Thetubeguy1954
A Rational Subjectivist
> In RBNG's case, he has a long history of over exaggerating the logical fallacy of "some" to mean "all."
Is this statement meant to be hyperbole?
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
but the evidence is there, if you haven't read enough of his posts, you can always search, or even take a poll...
Thin man, in a powder blue suit, with eyes that slice you right through. The cut of his clothes are strange indeed, a hundred years too soon.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
