Home Propeller Head Plaza

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

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Good argument ! (long)

Hi.

But it sounds pretty academic. It seems cited from a textbook which lays down the rules of systematic analysis.

But we are talking about aural perception, a human involutary behaviour which we are yet to learn more & more as we so far know so little. You want to endorse some manmade objectivel test methods so called repeatability to evaluate a human nature as such?

We got to ensure such man-designed testing methology is valid at all to do such test in the first place.

In AA, specially here PHP, where DBTs are permitted to discuss: a popularly employed so called objective test of sonic perception.
Please tell me how successful so far DBTs have been carried out to
test cables, & the like.

As Rodney Morris once posted, it is effective but it is very very difficult to carry out right. It's because we are using our ears to detect the difference repeatability, not by objective measurement.

One basic issue which fails DBTs: it sems, IMO, to have disregarded one weakness of human brain: failure to differentiate audible difference on monotonous repetition.

This is a similar prinicple how accupucture has been employed for thousands years in oriental medical practices, to release or cure human body pains monentarily by stimulating the related nerve ends in the skin with silver needles continuously.

Other than this well used methodology, like DBT, what other tests of repeatability you can suggest what have done better??

IMO, total blind tests, like the CDs sonic test in question, could be an more impartial test as the CDs were made in a totally unrelated manner & location from where the audition was carried out.
Accuracy of the test is another issue. But an audition panel comprising listeners of different backgrounds & both sexes can do a good job.

Theory is one thing, but realworld practicality is something else.

How relevant are those repeatable measurements on audio amps since day one, e.g. THD, IMD etc etc, to what we hear? None whatsover.

A 45SE tube power amp without NFB measures over 5% THD, but sounds so much better than a SS power amp which measured thousand times better. Why? We have been measuring the wrong data since day one.

I never dispute the usefulness of objective measurements & repeatability tests. But what we have now is not even close to tell what we are listening.

So, why not be open minded & give the benefits of doubts to whose who care to tell their subjective sonic observation. Take it or leave it is up to you. But why jump the gun to challenge them when you can't come up with a better alternative methology to prove or disprove such findings ?

Music is to listen not to measure.

Enough said.

c-J

PS: sorry to put you in the spot. Just that I get sick & tired to read all those negative sentiments from those subjectivity naysayers who apparently fail to come up with constructive solutions but only unfounded attacks. Who needs criticisms. We want positive sugggestions instead of citing textbooks, which are written by men & are therefore fallible.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  VH Audio  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]