In Reply to: Please don't speak for me, May. posted by Enophile on November 3, 2008 at 08:17:39:
My reply to Geoff was an attempt to illustrate different people's approaches to how they 'think about audio'.
I would suggest that you have made your approach quite clear a few times. You will obviously correct me if I am wrong !! But here is my assessment from what you have posted in the past.
You believe that most Hi Fi equipment presents a wealth of information into the room.
That YOU can hear that wealth of information, quite naturally, without much additional assistance.
But that other people who describe hearing that particular 'tweak', that particular 'tweak', that particular 'tweak' and that particular 'tweak' must NEED those 'props'., those 'talismen'., those 'rituals' in order for THEM to be enabled to 'get into that wealth of information which is already there', but that you, Enophile, don't need such 'props'., such 'talismen'., such 'rituals' because you are already 'into' that wealth of information - naturally, without help !!
That you don't need them (those particular 'tweaks'), but other people do need those 'aids' - to get the same effect !!!
In my reply to Geoff's question I was attempting to position your outlook within the 'strata' of the way people 'think about audio'. That you are in the strata somewhere in between the outlook of HiOnFi and the outlook of Unclestu !!
I saw your latest 'link' as continuing that same theme. I.e That the people 'hearing' improvements from various 'tweaks' are, in your opinion, really only experiencing the human variations which occur naturally - but are not aware that such natural variations actually take place. I feel sure that was your point in referring to the 'link'- i.e pointing to a study which had given some measurements that human beings vary !!
That you, Enophile, KNOW that "we are not as 'consistent' as we sometimes claim to be" but that many other people do not know that !! So, you wanted to make those people aware !!
The implications of that is that you must believe that the changes in their sound which some people 'hear' after trying certain particular 'tweaks' are really only the normal variations of human beings - day in, day out. Some days a good day, some days an 'off' day. So, by implication, some 'tweaks' will work some days and not work other days !!
Now, Enophile. What about the people who ARE as completely aware of the fact that human beings vary constantly as you are but who can ALSO 'hear' actual changes in the sound from trying various 'tweaks' ? And know that it is NOT just because of human beings varying constantly, therefore creating variations in the sound
That is why I then introduced Unclestu's experiences. As an illustration of how he (and by definition others), ALSO having the understanding that human beings vary constantly, can still make (with various 'tweaks') changes in their sound completely at will, completely under their control. And can repeat those changes completely at will - again and again. In other words, however much the human being might vary, some changes in the sound CAN BE completely under a person's control !!! They can do certain 'tweaks' and have their sound better or worse completely under their control !! Irrespective of the fact that human beings are varying constantly.
THAT, to me, is the crux of the continuing controversies surrounding 'tweaks'.
Let me now take one of Unclestu's quotes.
>>> "Individual sensitivities differ, and so does perception." <<<
Of course that is true. If it is the human being who is 'doing the reacting' to changes in their environment, then yes, individual sensitivities WILL differ. Say, for example, Unclestu finds ten different things which had improved HIS sound for HIM. He explains what he has done to ten different people and they try those same things. Five of the people might find Nos 2, 3, 6 and 9 worked equally as well for them as they did for Unclestu. Five of the people might find that only No 9 worked for them.
THAT, in my opinion, is why there is such a controversy surrounding so many of the different and unusual devices and techniques and the many reports of these devices and techniques 'changing the sound'. Some people try them and find no improvements (even when expecting improvements), some people try them and find equal improvements as have been described (sometimes when expecting no improvements) and yet others find only some of them give improvements when they fully expected all of them to work for them !!!!
It is when one knows (is fully aware) that human beings vary constantly and YET one can make changes in the sound which can be repeated again and again - at will - that forces one to do a 'rethink' of what actually constitutes 'sound' and the perception of sound !!
I understand what Uncelstu has heard - the changes he has heard over these past years - the point where I challenge him is where he is constantly pushing, pulling, bending, squeezing, stretching conventional electronic and acoustic theories, attempting to fit his experiences (ALL the various 'tweaks') into them (somehow) altering RF interference, electro-magnetic interference, static, resonances, and therefore affecting the audio signal !!!!!
Some of the tweaks he has done MAY have had an effect on the audio signal but, quite equally, may not - but yet had changed the 'sound' !! Then what ? Surely one then has an observation (a change in the sound) with NO explanation ?
THAT is the point where a 'professional in audio' starts (or should start) investigating !!!!!!
Regarding your reference to measurements.
People who have to wear hearing aids and find the sound of them 'harsh, aggressive and shouty' do not need measurements to know if the 'sound' from their hearing aids has changed to being 'clearer, more natural, a lot better' !!
In exactly the same way that if people who suffer from Tinnitus hear other sufferers describe how their Tinnitus has been 'eased' by (say) doing yoga, they don't need measurement proof before trying the technique for themselves !!! If they find that doing yoga also 'eases' THEIR Tinnitus, then any measurements would be superfluous - they would already know whether the yoga technique worked for them or not !!
Regards,
May Belt.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Please don't speak for me, May. - May Belt 05:41:12 11/05/08 (56)
- The hearing aid example you mention is apt! - Enophile 14:15:46 11/06/08 (55)
- RE: The hearing aid example you mention is apt! - May Belt 02:58:17 11/07/08 (54)
- Some good questions. - Enophile 10:57:05 11/07/08 (53)
- RE: Some good questions. - anthonyh 11:04:56 12/11/08 (0)
- "the placebo effect wore off." - dave c 04:57:00 11/11/08 (1)
- The placebo effect is a real effect, as well. - Enophile 09:50:34 11/11/08 (0)
- So, prepaid gym memberships are placebos. - rick_m 10:55:17 11/09/08 (42)
- "As far as reviewers using tweaks, that's the last thing in the world they should do." - geoffkait 11:34:54 11/09/08 (41)
- RE: "As far as reviewers using tweaks, that's the last thing in the world they should do." - rick_m 19:04:44 11/09/08 (40)
- RE: "But I do feel that gear should be able to work well in the real world without band-aids." - geoffkait 06:33:51 11/10/08 (39)
- RE: "But I do feel that gear should be able to work well in the real world without band-aids." - rick_m 08:27:09 11/10/08 (38)
- RE: "But I do feel that gear should be able to work well in the real world without band-aids." - May Belt 12:05:40 11/10/08 (32)
- RE: "But I do feel that gear should be able to work well in the real world without band-aids." - rick_m 13:28:11 11/10/08 (31)
- RE: "But I do feel that gear should be able to work well in the real world without band-aids." - May Belt 04:25:00 11/12/08 (30)
- RE: "But I do feel that gear should be able to work well in the real world without band-aids." - rick_m 09:21:50 11/12/08 (29)
- It is a well known - unclestu52 10:47:33 11/12/08 (28)
- RE: It is a well known - rick_m 19:33:09 11/12/08 (18)
- RE: "Schumann generators I'm thinking of generate about a 10Hz magnetic field from an internal loop antenna." - geoffkait 11:08:37 11/13/08 (17)
- A magnetic thought. - rick_m 12:24:54 11/13/08 (15)
- Sally Fields - geoffkait 13:05:36 11/13/08 (14)
- And yet - unclestu52 11:44:11 11/14/08 (13)
- I wish I could agree - geoffkait 12:50:20 11/14/08 (12)
- RE: I wish I could agree - unclestu52 23:50:55 11/15/08 (11)
- Loops and radiation. - rick_m 13:01:11 11/16/08 (9)
- Ahhh...... - unclestu52 21:20:08 11/16/08 (3)
- RE: Ahhh...... - rick_m 09:17:03 11/17/08 (2)
- RE: Ahhh...... - unclestu52 11:54:29 11/17/08 (1)
- RE: Ahhh...... - rick_m 17:58:09 11/17/08 (0)
- Innocent Q - geoffkait 16:22:49 11/16/08 (4)
- Equivocating A - rick_m 18:37:16 11/16/08 (3)
- RE: Equivocating A - geoffkait 06:40:39 11/17/08 (2)
- RE: Equivocating A - rick_m 09:19:04 11/17/08 (1)
- RE: Equivocating A - geoffkait 09:57:50 11/17/08 (0)
- Puzzling - geoffkait 11:02:29 11/16/08 (0)
- RE: "Schumann generators I'm thinking of generate about a 10Hz magnetic field from an internal loop antenna." - rick_m 11:57:01 11/13/08 (0)
- Q for Stu - geoffkait 17:56:03 11/12/08 (8)
- RE: Q for Stu - unclestu52 11:25:58 11/13/08 (7)
- RE: "the Schuman is 7.83 Hz a very long frequency." - geoffkait 12:54:12 11/13/08 (6)
- RE: Sally Fields - rick_m 13:13:34 11/13/08 (5)
- W.C. Fields - geoffkait 14:06:21 11/13/08 (4)
- Oh I wish I had thought of that! - rick_m 18:33:05 11/13/08 (3)
- Strawberry Fields - geoffkait 05:33:31 11/14/08 (2)
- Schumann generators - unclestu52 11:16:46 11/10/08 (2)
- RE: Schumann generators - rick_m 12:38:07 11/10/08 (0)
- RE: Schumann generators - May Belt 12:06:33 11/10/08 (0)
- RE: " Others, you for instance, are much less forthright about the putative mechanism of your offerings. " - geoffkait 10:25:57 11/10/08 (1)
- RE: " Proprietary," - rick_m 11:14:10 11/10/08 (0)
- RE: Some good questions. - May Belt 06:17:32 11/09/08 (5)
- Taking a Tice Clock out of a reference system is equivalent to skipping kabob marination one time? - Enophile 15:16:59 11/10/08 (4)
- RE: Taking a Tice Clock out of a reference system is equivalent to skipping kabob marination one time? - May Belt 04:26:54 11/12/08 (0)
- Ya gotta ask yourself - geoffkait 16:05:06 11/10/08 (2)
- Not me. I guess you'll have to ask Fremer why it fell out of his system. - Enophile 17:03:45 11/10/08 (1)
- RE: Not me. I guess you'll have to ask Fremer why it fell out of his system. - geoffkait 17:19:28 11/10/08 (0)
- Gotta say dude... - musetap 14:50:30 11/07/08 (0)