|
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: "Real science has no agenda" posted by Todd Krieger on September 26, 2021 at 05:03:18:
"You're mistaking hearing sensitivity with ear training......"
This is really kind of ironic. In the field of psychoacoustics they use actual trained listeners for their studies. What training do audiophiles go through?
"Ear training is what makes not only a good audiophile, but a good musician, a good conductor......"
That is a conflation fo skills that is simply not applicable. Musicians do actually go through training. Even self taught ones go through self training. A good conductor actually possesses a substantial body of objective knowledge about the music they conduct as does any musician. But the real problem with your conflation is the idea of a "good" conductor. *That* is also highly subjective and there are no consensuses on subjective quality when it comes to musical interpretations. You simply can not conflate training for objective listening with musical talent and musical taste. There is no objective good or bad interpretations.There are objective realities as to what humans can and can not hear.
"You can take a great Furtwangler Beethoven recording, and then take a recording of the same piece by a high school orchestra..... They certainly sound different..... The ear training is what makes one appreciate the Furtwangler......"
Well, first off trained musicians and conductors can easily pick apart technical differences in the performance because they actually do have the training and objective knowledge to do so. Most fans don't and can't. They can just tell you what they like. It doesn't take any training to determine what someone likes.
"Being able to pick up the nuances in music is what often makes the difference between a good audio component or cable to a great one."
Here is the million dollar question. What is it about blind protocols that make these "trained listeners" AKA audiophiles turn deaf and unable to identify differences in sound that under sighted conditions are "night and day"? But actual trained listeners used in psychoacoustc studies have tremendous skill at identifying differences consistantly under blind conditions up to the established thresholds of human hearing? What is the scientific explination for that phenomenon that has eluded all the scientists in the field of psychoacoustics?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Part 2 of my response - Analog Scott 09/26/2109:29:57 09/26/21 (2)
- RE: Part 2 of my response - Todd Krieger 05:56:28 09/27/21 (1)
- RE: Part 2 of my response - Analog Scott 06:50:20 09/27/21 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
