Not that this whole thing is particularly important, but I think it's kind of interesting. This is *not* from the original paper by Heyser, but the idea might be related to what Heyser meant, I think:
"Today we do admit, when challenged, that the natural phenomena happen without regard to the mathematics that we use to describe them. In other words we accept the fact that nature does not solve equations. But we are less comfortable when challenged to explain how the phenomena actually happen."
(From: http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie96/papers/253.pdf)
Next time I'm in a library will try to find the original paper written by Heyser in the Acoustics Eng. Society proceedings.
good thread. You've definitely put some research into it. I don't think anyone with ears would say that measurements tell the whole story. It is good that this idea has sparked people into coming up with better measurements though.
For a good laugh take a look through Crutchfield. All those head units and amps post up some very impressive numbers. But (A) there is no accepted standard way of measuring things like THD, SNR, etc and (B) they don't guarantee good performance. You can have great specs and plots and sound worthless and on the flip you can have some appaling specs and sound amazing (although this is a bit rarer.)
Regarding ppl's statement concerning how most would differentiate between the sound of OPA-627 and AD-8610, I wonder how many would manage to tell the difference in a properly conducted blind test :veryevil: :veryevil: :veryevil:
[edit]
Natually, I'm assuming that both would be used in a circuit where the output measurements are similar and sufficient, such as distortion below what are considered audible levels, etc.
Originally posted by Prune Regarding ppl's statement concerning how most would differentiate between the sound of OPA-627 and AD-8610, I wonder how many would manage to tell the difference in a properly conducted blind test :veryevil: :veryevil: :veryevil:
People don't typically listen to their equipment under the conditions of a formal blind or double-blind test, so does it really matter? You set up an artificial context for a test that doesn't mimic the way people listen in real life, will that test say anything of real importance? Maybe, maybe not...
BTW (and FWIW) I'm neither an objectivist nor a subjectivist... I like to think in terms of looking at things as a given situation calls for it, rather than holding beliefs that may be true under a certain set of conditions and false under another. Sometimes objectivity and objective measurements come in handy (and when they do they make great tools), but in other situations it's like trying to fit square pegs into round holes. I've found that measurements can be a big help to ears in areas where they're weak, and ears are important in areas where measurements don't seem to give the whole picture.
IMO, "measurements only" (the map is the territory) tends toward bad sound, and "ears only" (maps are never helpful) tends toward superstition and wasting money. Just my 2 cents...
The hell with test conditions: my point is, can you tell the difference when you don't know which one is in? Because if you can't, then they indeed sound the same as measurements would suggest, and your psychological bias is the only thing that makes a difference.
Here's a simple way to check if you have two amps: very carefully match levels with a multimeter, then get a friend and turning your back to him, ask him to unplug the amp and then randomly either swap it or plug the same one back in, and then see if you can tell if it was changed or not. Or, if you want fast switching, then use a rotary selector. Do this ten times or so and then see if your guesses were right sufficiently more than 50% of the time, else it was random guessing. How much is sufficiently more depends on the number of trials.
Some things indeed sound different, but also a lot of differences simply disappear in a proper blind test. And if you can't hear the difference between two things in a system where the rest of components have really high resolution so the maximum differences should be clear, then why not save money and use the cheaper one? Otherwise, it's just a fetishism for fancier gear, simple as that!
Originally posted by Prune Regarding ppl's statement concerning how most would differentiate between the sound of OPA-627 and AD-8610, I wonder how many would manage to tell the difference in a properly conducted blind test :veryevil: :veryevil: :veryevil:
Sure, I think I'd be able to pretty easily. Might even be able to do it with interconnects. No, I'm not shy about my fantastic ears. :veryevil:
Oh, and explain me this: I had my girlfriend listen to a couple interconnects (she's a violinist too), and asked her what differences she could hear. I didn't tell her which one was supposed to sound better, I didn't tell her which one was supposed to sound warmer or brighter or whatever. Someone with very little knowledge about audio, but with very good ears. She made similar observations as my own, and this was just after a quick listen (comparing a couple 1 minute clips). These were two cables that should have sounded the same according to measurements. I.e., neither were bad enough to have capacitive HF roll-off in the audible range, etc. etc...
It's just like the Stradivarius mystery, nobody really understands why it sounds better-- people have attempted to make exact replicas, and they just don't sound nearly as good! Maybe it's the age, maybe it's the wood, the varnish, nobody knows.
__________________ "Ah! How sweet coffee tastes! Lovelier than a thousand kisses, sweeter than muscatel wine! I must have my coffee..." - J.S.Bach
Originally posted by Prune
Uh, the way I read this is that violinists have superhuman hearing. I guess mere pianists like myself must be completely tone deaf...
I'm glad you're learning! :veryevil:
()
__________________ "Ah! How sweet coffee tastes! Lovelier than a thousand kisses, sweeter than muscatel wine! I must have my coffee..." - J.S.Bach
Originally posted by Prune I guess mere pianists like myself must be completely tone deaf...
i believe it. my old roommate was a bachelors of music piano performance major at usc. i taught him guitar and watching him change tunings was just frustrating. couldn't find, name or match a pitch to save his life.
he was a ridiculously talented piano player though.
edit: rolling ad8620 vs opa637 in my meta42 is not too subtle a difference at all to my ears either. i was originally trained as a singer. (also guitar, piano, bass, drums, and very very ugly trumpet)
__________________
Team Useless Poster : Team Cyclist : Team Just Trying to Survive Med School
I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in the mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is, as far as I can tell...
-Richard Feynman
)
Linear Mode
