|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.131.50.71
In Reply to: Re: What do you think of the Aczel list, if anything? [nt] posted by May Belt on March 11, 2007 at 05:12:57:
When arguing about the lack of need for experimentation in audio, I've often read objectivists posting that they "don't need to bang my head against concrete to know it hurts". That argument fails on two levels.First, we all learned as young children that hitting our heads against something hard would hurt. I would wager that ALL of us learned it the hard way, if you'll pardon the pun, and NONE of us learned it via a parental lecture.
Second, after a few years of martial arts training many moons ago, I learned to break concrete bricks with my head, as well as other parts of my body. It doesn't hurt - once you are properly trained. I would suggest that hearing differences between cables, amps, etc is simply a matter of training. Anyone can learn to do so if they are motivated, just as anyone can learn to break concrete bricks.
The believers are just that - believers. Reality must be experienced.
Follow Ups:
"First, we all learned as young children that hitting our heads against something hard would hurt. I would wager that ALL of us learned it the hard way, if you'll pardon the pun, and NONE of us learned it via a parental lecture"?? Also true of
Sticking fingers in 230V socket
Jumping off high building
Leaping into lion's den
etc etc
> ?? Also true ofSticking fingers in 230V socket
Jumping off high building
Leaping into lion's den
<A matter of degree only. As a child, I was burned when I got a shock from an electric radio (I also learned that unplugged electronics can still carry voltage!), most kids have fallen off something high and many people have been bitten by dogs or scratched by cats, or know someone who has. The point is that you learn this by experience. What you learn by reading (or by other non-experiential means) is a belief. That doesn't mean much of it isn't reality - but some of it may not be.
So it is with audio. If you are an objectivist, the chances are good that you have little or no experience comparing (by listening) that which you believe can make no difference. You believe this because you believe it, not because you know it. Opening one's mind doesn't mean accepting every little claim - rather it means that you decide to experiment for yourself. Or your mind is closed, the same as my mind is closed to certain things. But it's still only a belief.
"If you are an objectivist, the chances are good that you have little or no experience comparing (by listening) that which you believe can make no difference. "How could you possibly know this about anybody, you are making a huge presumption in order support an unreasonable point. Again, cos it bears repeating, those of objective persuasion (i.e. objective evaluation of components) subscribe to comparison by listening, however for a comparison to be valid as a basis for valid opinion, it needs to satisfy certain controls, controls that address inherent listener bias.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
> How could you possibly know this about anybody, <The way I know much of what I know - experience. However, in order to satisfy your sense of fair play, I'll concede your point and start with you. What cables or amps have you compared? Any objectivist is encouraged to reply. It will only tell us about those on this board but it's a start. Also, when it comes to proper controls, how many DBT's have you participated in?
> controls that address inherent listener bias. <
Something else that bears repeating - Because my one bias when it comes to audio gear is that the best sounding item wins, unless it can be shown that I have other biases and what they are, there is no need to address them. I couldn't care less about brand names, looks, cost or any other potential biases you can name, including the bias that two items must sound different.
> The way I know much of what I know - experience. However, in order to satisfy your sense of fair play, I'll concede your point and start with you. What cables or amps have you compared? Any objectivist is encouraged to reply. It will only tell us about those on this board but it's a start. Also, when it comes to proper controls, how many DBT's have you participated in?I will not satisfy your curiosity ;-) and the original point still stands as you have made an assumption here that is invalid. That said, I look to measurements cos some of the more obvious differences between amplifiers are easily explained by measurements.
> Something else that bears repeating - Because my one bias when it comes to audio gear is that the best sounding item wins, unless it can be shown that I have other biases and what they are, there is no need to address them. I couldn't care less about brand names, looks, cost or any other potential biases you can name, including the bias that two items must sound different.
Well, in blind tests, the issues you state are so important to the outcome of the test that they are not assumed, hence the controls, at any rate "best sounding" can mean anything, the goals of most blind test are generally less ambigous.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
> I will not satisfy your curiosity ;-) and the original point still stands as you have made an assumption here that is invalid. <Show me where I got it wrong and I'll be happy to admit it. Sorry, you can't just say something is invalid - at least not 'round these here parts! :)
> I look to measurements cos some of the more obvious differences between amplifiers are easily explained by measurements. <
Yes. I would agree that any and all sonic differences between any two pieces of gear could be explained by measurements. I can't imagine anyone suggesting otherwise. We just have to find them, in some cases.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: