Hearing things that can't be measured

If a sound exists, you can pick it up with a microphone. Some microphones are far more sensitive than any ear.

Same goes for electrical test equipment. It can measure things in extremely small amounts.

Further, there is a large - and growing - body of research into placebo. People really do experience things that don't exist.

That's 99 percent of it for sure, but there's also comb filtering:

 

A common-sense explanation of audiophile beliefs

 

--Ethan

Just wanted to say.  I find most of your posts to be thoughtful and insightful, not to mention backed up with facts.  Thanks!  I haven't read that whole link yet, but isnt comb filtering a non-issue when using headphones?

I know your post is addressing Ethan, but I'd like to mention: headphone-head positioning is hard to replicate exactly, and slight changes in that position is well known to drastically affect the frequency response of high frequencies perceived inside the ear canal, as has been shown by measurements and charts made available here by Tyll and others several times.

 

 

I'm confused. You seem to be asserting that comb filtering is non-measureable, and then liking to a site with measurements of a comb-filtering setup.
 

I don't see anything in his writing to suggest he was asserting comb filtering is non-measurable. Why do you think he seemed to be asserting that?

 

Here's the line of reasoning of the conversation as I see it: People experience things that don't exist, maybe 99% of the cases for sure, *BUT* there's also comb filtering, e.g. room acoustics issues + minor listening-position differences, something that does exist, that can be measured, that can be experienced, and that might explain the other 1% of the cases (of people hearing differences when changing certain components in their rig). In conclusion, in that % of cases, the perceived (and truly existing) difference is caused by comb-filtering and not by having replaced that component.

 

Because that was my best guess at what I directly stated I found confusing.

 

Even factoring in your explanation, I'm not sure I understand his point; but I suppose it's simplest for me to ignore the post and move on.
 

Yes, and sometimes I forget this is a headphones-oriented forum! 

 

But comb filtering does affect what's heard through loudspeakers, and acoustically in a room from live instruments. Since it's a frequency response change it's also easy to measure, as shown in the graphs in the article I linked. There's also this article and video for those who really care:

 

Comb Filtering Article

Comb Filtering Video

 

Again, most of the time when people believe they hear a change (always an improvement) from various tweaks, it's just imagined.

 

--Ethan

 

I think I can explain it.  If you get up out of your chair or shift your head when testing a tweak the FR changes based on comb filtering.  This change depending on the degree can be quite audible.  As such when one adds a tweak they may have shifted their listening position and actually changed what they were hearing without realizing they were doing it.  Same can be said for taking headphones on/off.

Cracking post.

hearing is measuring :/

Not in this context where there are real doubts as to whether there is anything to hear.

Agreed in principle. Though hearing could be seen as measuring if you're willing to accept variations and repeatability errors of 10 dB or so. Which discounts much of what people believe they hear.

 

--Ethan

Many of the psychoacoustic related phenomena are not measurable. For example, perceived frequency balance is level dependent, playing louder makes you hear more bass (compared to mid frequencies) but this you cannot measure with a microphone. Missing fundamental -effect is another example. If you have a harmonic series of pitches, e.g. 200Hz, 300Hz, 400Hz,.. with appropriate gains, you can actually hear the 'missing' fundamental, 100 Hz in this case. That you cannot measure either. You can google 'psychoacoustics' for more examples.