|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: Re: How do you measure connoiseurship? posted by e-stat on February 20, 2001 at 08:19:51:
e-stat wrote:My intention was not to state that current manufacturers do not employ more exotic kinds of measurements, but rather that I think it is fair to say that observational listening ultimately plays a big role in the voicing of high end components. Do you believe that any designer worth his/her salt solely relies on the numbers for the performance of their products?
You didn't make any specific mention of manufacturers in your original post. The closest you got to any specific mention was "the white coats" which seems to imply you were referring to those who are involved in the pure research of things audio. I just don't associate "white coats" with manufacturers (save for Matthew Polk, but even he's traded in his white coat for Yuppie attire).
But my underlying point was that too often those who spout the line "there's so much we don't know" have hardly an inkling of what we do know which leads to oversimplified, gross generalizations.
What measurements, for example, do you find directly equate to the ability of a component to reproduce natural timbres of brass or woodwinds?
That's sort of putting the cart before the horse. I think a better way of putting it would be to ask what measurements equate to the INability of a component to reproduce natural timbres of brass or woodwinds. And the simple answer to that is that any nonlinearity would contribute to a component's inability to reproduce natural timbres of brass or woodwinds.
But there are a number of other elements that complicate things just a bit. For example, how does one really know whether or not those natural timbres were even accurately captured during the recording process? Perhaps they weren't. So how do you know whether to blame the component or the recording? Is it a good recording because it's a good recording or is it because nonlinearities in the reproduction chain are accentuating certin things or masking other things which produce a final result which might falsely lead us to believe that the recording is closer to perfect than it really is?
The fact is that no one can listen to JUST the recording. Or JUST the turntable or CD player. Or JUST the preamplifier. Or JUST the amplifier. Or JUST the speakers. We can only listen to the result of the entire reproduction chain. Yet reviews would have one believe it's the sound of a particular component that's being described. And while the review may be qualified with a "this is how this component sounds in my system" I think that's rather backward and should read "this is how my SYSTEM sounds with this component in the chain."
Anyway, I'm going off on a bit of a tangent.
How do you explain the fact that there are large numbers of excellent high end products designed by talented engineers that all sound different?
There are any number of reasons that can explain that. But among those reasons is because perceived differences are not always inherently due to actual audible differences. How would you explain the fact that three different products, identical but for the name on the faceplate can all "sound different"?
There may eventually come a time when the science catches up and is able to quantify what as yet it cannot.
And there may eventually come a time when the high-end catches up and realizes that there's not necessarily always something there to quantify.
I would hope that those in the industry would continue to refine such testing methodologies to meet that eventual goal. Just don't rely on them solely until then.
Well at the end of the day all that matters is one's own perceptions of the end result and that wholly transcends any tests or measurements.
But with respect to basic research and expanding our knowledge and understanding, such subjective perceptions have limited use in determining the presence or absence of actual audible differences.
se
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: How do you measure connoiseurship? - Steve Eddy 02/20/0115:21:16 02/20/01 (3)
- Re: How do you measure connoiseurship? - e-stat 19:17:21 02/20/01 (2)
- Re: How do you measure connoiseurship? - Steve Eddy 22:58:40 02/20/01 (1)
- Re: How do you measure connoiseurship? - e-stat 20:04:49 02/21/01 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
