Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 10 Biggest Lies in Audio
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

10 Biggest Lies in Audio - Page 3

post #31 of 277
Thread Starter 
Then build your own stuff. That way you know exactly where the money goes
post #32 of 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdr529 View Post
It is scary to think about cable manufacturers that way, as that really is the only other outcome. Even they cannot prove their claims though.

Not sure if this applies to you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/science/25qna.html

Do you work around loud noises?
My hearing is fine and the last concert I went to I bought ear plugs as I am now concious of my age.
post #33 of 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNHchabo View Post
It could just be that you haven't been trained to listen for compression artifacts, so you can't hear them.

If you wish to train yourself to hear compression artifacts, here's a good place to do that:
Artifact Training Page

Just be warned that you may force yourself to re-rip your CDs to a lossless format if you can suddenly hear the artifacts in your music!
Which is why I dont want to do that! I have tester tracks when I audition new kit. But more and more I go for gut feeling, goosebump moments, does it feel alive or flat? Listening out for artifacts is a very small part of the music. I prefer the bigger picture.
post #34 of 277

I do

Quote:
Originally Posted by gurusan View Post
Then build your own stuff. That way you know exactly where the money goes
You say build your own stuff!! Every thing except my ClearAudio Ref, table with it's Gram2.2 arm and my Transport have been built by myself or Chris Ivan, who along with the Late Raymond Andrews of (cincy,Oh) taught me to get off the Big $$$$MERRY GO ROUND.....Ray would say, Duke, Chris "WE" can build that......And even use better parts! He was the man with the true Golden ears...So I do agree with you, BUILD EVERYTHING YOU CAN, I.C.s and Cables also...OH! I still buy my Records and CDs......Have a Great Holiday
post #35 of 277
Smirked at term "idiophiles".
Kinda agressive text, but i tend to agree with most of it.
I've had some different experiences but accept them to be placebo.
Understanding placebo, understanding facts, its only logical.
However I can only imagine how hard it can be for someone who has spent thousands on cables etc to face reality.
post #36 of 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post
Which is why I dont want to do that! I have tester tracks when I audition new kit. But more and more I go for gut feeling, goosebump moments, does it feel alive or flat? Listening out for artifacts is a very small part of the music. I prefer the bigger picture.
I believe that all of those small differences are quantifiable, at the end of the day, somewhere along the chain. It's likely that we don't have the understanding yet about what kinds of measurements are most appropriate. On one hand, spectral analyses often make assumptions such as stationarity (the assumption that the frequency doesn't change in a window of time) and completely lose information about phase.

Whether that measure ends up being something measurable in the electronics, the sound pressure waves, or the activities of cells in the brain will remain to be seen (likely a combination of all). Until then, we're left with perception as almost more of an art than a science.

PS: No. 3 in the article was written without actually explaining the Nyquist theorem. I cannot tell if that means that the author did not understand it himself!

Oh here's a question: which of these 10 do you agree with?
I agree with: 2-4, 6 (haha), 8, and 9.
I don't know enough about: 5 and 7.
I'm unsure about: 1 and 10.
post #37 of 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post
My hearing is fine and the last concert I went to I bought ear plugs as I am now concious of my age.
Earplugs wont stop you aging mind!
post #38 of 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by gurusan View Post
Not sure if this has been posted already. If it has, forgive me.
http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf

This is sure to open a can of worms here but I'm also sure it will make a great discussion

Much of what he says I totally agree with with my limited knowledge of electronics and just plain common sense.

However regarding the tubes....I thought we all knew they weren't the best choice for sound reproduction, but that we use them because their distortion is more "pleasant" and they influence the sound in a pleasing way?
From what I have read about tubes, your statement is accurate. Even though solid state amps have lower distortion, the type of distortion they cause is much more displeasing to the ear. I think (not 100% sure) that solid state produces odd order harmonic distortion, which sounds ugly.


As far as this article goes, I really like it. I find that audio/music is plagued by the older, "when I was your age, in the old days, this is how I did it, this is how my dad did it, etc" types who can barely work the computers they are posting on. This article is a big slap in the face to them. Even if the article doesn't back up its points well enough, I would hope it would at least cause some people to take a second look at things they hold to be fact.

I also think that "trust your ears" is just as stupid of an idea as it would be to buy gear based on advertised specifications. Trusting my ears would be great if I had a bunch of identical equipment, with no price tags, and no previous knowledge of other peoples decisions. Then I could actually trust my ears and not my preconceived notions, my wallet, my expectations, or the ears of others. Now don't take me the wrong way, of course the sound is the ultimate goal and is more important than boasting the THD of your setup. But "trust your ears" is NOT a response to an argument about the physics behind cable differences.

As with most things, the clear answer is a happy medium. There is no reason someone can't enjoy the hobby and love the music, but still be very rooted in scientific reasoning. To each his own, but preference is no excuse for ignorance.
post #39 of 277
Anyway, having read the article, I agree with everything except #8 (in a way).

In a computer setup, the quality of the power supply can significantly influence the sound. In a power supply with a high ripple rating, this will distort the signal resulting in sound distortion, resulting in it sounding worse. This is easily measurable via a oscilloscope. This can easily be applied to the quality of the mains power and of course quality/age of the cables carrying the mains power in your house.

Also although the blind ABX test is sound (mind the pun), the way that most people conduct it isn't at all thus there are significant flaws with blind ABX testing due to this.

e.g. you must account for all these factors:

* Position of the headphone on your head
* Amount of wax buildup in the ear
* Codec (mp3 significantly drops off after 16kHz vs. other codecs and represents treble frequencies horribly)
* The song / passage (the fact remains that most songs just don't have significant treble in quantity at all)
* The 'heard' misconception that a high amount of mids = treble
* Ambient noise (masking of particularly bass frequencies)

All these must be equal or minimised = good luck achieving that.
post #40 of 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by DayoftheGreek View Post

I also think that "trust your ears" is just as stupid of an idea as it would be to buy gear based on advertised specifications. Trusting my ears would be great if I had a bunch of identical equipment, with no price tags, and no previous knowledge of other peoples decisions. Then I could actually trust my ears and not my preconceived notions, my wallet, my expectations, or the ears of others. Now don't take me the wrong way, of course the sound is the ultimate goal and is more important than boasting the THD of your setup. But "trust your ears" is NOT a response to an argument about the physics behind cable differences.

As with most things, the clear answer is a happy medium. There is no reason someone can't enjoy the hobby and love the music, but still be very rooted in scientific reasoning. To each his own, but preference is no excuse for ignorance.
Re-quoting for truth, but particularly the bolded.
As an audiophile, you, the reader, to help yourself, should know some at least basic electrical engineering theory and psychology / psychoacoustics theory to basically not get yourself scammed by BS marketing statements.
post #41 of 277
lol... number 10 on this is saying no one hears better than anyone else. it's just untrue in any forum, especially an audio forum! what about hearing testing in grade school? some did better and some did worse. simple.
post #42 of 277
i listen to music at the same volume level as my 3 year old niece
post #43 of 277
In point 1, he refutes his own claim by saying that you have to care about the cables, but wonder cables are a sham. he should have been far more specific in saying what things are lies, not just cables are a sham.

In point 2, Vaccuum Tubes are awesome, and yes they have thier own sound, I could blind test between solid state and tube amps all day I'd wager with really good accuracy.

In point 3, digital formats are not inferior, but playback equipment however, generally is less geared towards high-fi playback.

In point 6, burn-in occurs especially with tubes. To me burnin on cans is logical, simply because of the flexing that is bound to occur, but I can't prove it.

In point 8, I agree. If you can't make equipment capable of filtering your own power needs, you're doing it wrong. However, sometimes an amazing piece of equipment will have crap power sections and will require it and the compromise may exist.

In point 10, so my LD I+ is supposed to sound just like my CMOY? LOL I routinely show my friends audio gear and they usually don't hear or aren't inclined to hear the difference. We all hear differently in fact, I don't adjust sound a bit, I plug it all in and go, no equalizer, nothing, but most people think my stuff is ear splitting. I sometimes mod the gear to make it sound better, but I do my best to play it flat, and I can hear a night and day difference between my CMOY and my LD I+, and even unamped I can hear the differences, in fact, I liken my LD I+ to having AA on in game, it smooths the edges, and unfortunately, some songs just don't like that. A great example: Everybody Loves you Now by Billy Joel. Try that from a computer headphone out, then from a tube out, and you'll hear a night and day difference. For me, it loses all it's energy when pass through a tube amp, even with the tube amp absolutely man handling the cans, it still doesn't sound as good as it does from a headphone out that can support the headphones power needs.

Sometimes, SS sounds better than Tube, sometimes it doesn't.
post #44 of 277
One of the biggest lies in audio is people making a living telling people how to think about a subjective hobby. Ignorance and a column does not equal knowledge.
post #45 of 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post
One of the biggest lies in audio is people making a living telling people how to think about a subjective hobby. Ignorance and a column does not equal knowledge.
I disagree to some extent. I think it's criminal that cable-makers can make claims about a product that are patently false. It's false advertising, in it's very essence.

That said, it IS the responsibility of a consumer to do his/her research.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 10 Biggest Lies in Audio