Home Propeller Head Plaza

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

Addressing One Point

Jim,

I'm only going to address one point of this discussion, ok?

May stated: This dismissing of people's experiences denies them their intelligence - intelligence to be able to think about and then make a judgement as to whether what they had heard could be "Suggestion etc. Etc. Etc."

To which you responded: I think this is exactly wrong--and this difference of interpretation probably lies at the root of our disagreement. To me there is nothing demeaning about the notion that our perceptions are fallible. It is a scientific fact that has been demonstrated repeatedly in the most rigorous way. It's true of me and it's true of you. I do not understand this reverence for (what amounts to subjective) perception. I do not know why you (and, certainly, others) would put what we perceive, or believe we perceive, on such a high pedestal.

I have a problem with your position. As a subjective listener I readily admit that our perceptions are fallible. After all illusionist play on that fallibility all the time. Why then should I or any other subjective listener take acception to your assertation that we're perhaps being fooled by our fallibilites? The problem lies when you and those who agree with your beliefs automatically assume we are being fooled. As much as you wish to claim this fallibility is a scientific fact that has been demonstrated repeatedly in the most rigorous way. It's also equally true that I nor anyone I know NEVER mistakes live music for recorded or visa versa! In the area of music, the human ear/brain combo is remarkably adept at recognizing the traits that make live music live music. It also equally adept at recognizing when those traits are missing and thus is listening to recorded music too!

Why then would it be so difficult to believe that some people might be more adept than others recognizing when more or less of these traits are present? Even Peter Aczel readily admits: "Thus, if a loudspeaker (and I add any other audio componenet) has a huge dip at 3 kHz, it will not sound like one with flat response to any ear, golden or tin, but only the experienced ear will quickly identify the problem. It’s like an automobile mechanic listening to engine sounds and knowing almost instantly what’s wrong. His hearing is no keener than yours; he just knows what to listen for.
You could do it too if you had dealt with as many engines as he has."

That's all we're claiming too, Jim! We don't have "super" hearing abilities nor are we being decieved. We're just doing what any other rational music lover/audiophile knows ANYONE without any hearing disability can do. The difference between what subject listeners and those who want to proclaim subject listeners have "super" hearing abilities or are being decieved, is that subject listeners have just taken the time to train their ears. Thus it's through this training that they have developed the experience to know what to make of what they hear and then how to interpret it. Even Peter Aczel agrees with that! So whereas it's true that we are all falliable we're not as quite as falliable as many would like to claim we are. What I and I believe May and others take acception to is your quickness to believe we're automatically being decieved by our fallible perceptions, when we claim we hear something you might not believe we can hear, when it's equally possible that some of these people just have better trained ears...

Thetubeguy1954

"If you thought that science was certain - well, that is just an error on your part.” Richard Feynman theoretical physicist, 1918-1988


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.