[mmerrill99]

What you state makes perfect sense but can I just outline a couple of things:

- Not just amplitude

Then I assume you believe that the accuracy of our current measurement techniques is not adequate to measure differences that could be detected within the range of human hearing ability. I seriously doubt that is correct. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It's not to do with accuracy - it's what do we not measure.

I just don't understand your point about time as a separate component of waveforms. Perhaps I am missing something, but I understand time to be inherent in frequency.

As I said before time is the third & probably the most important aspect of how our auditory perception interprets the signals, not just frequency & amplitude. The time signature of tune if changed changes the tune even though the amplitude & frequencies are "exactly" the same. Our auditory perception's role is interpreting & making sense of the moment-to-moment signals hitting our eardrum. A large part of making sense of this is got to do with the timing relationships between different aspects of the continuous waveform (it's really just compressive waves)

I agree that many "blind" tests may not be done under control conditions that are scientifically justifiable. But there is a mountain of reported information that seems to suggest that sighted tests are inherently unreliable: http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths. I am unaware of a single double blind test that has supported the validity of sighted tests or comparisons. Again, please correct me if I am wrong.

If you want to consider it as a choice between the lesser of two evils then I choose sighted listening because blind tests are too hard to control for. I'm not talking about closing your eyes & listening to two things blind - that is perfectly OK for personal checking but don't imagine for one moment that it has any scientific rigour - you have a 50/50 chance of guessing right so you need to do many trials & that introduces other factors, etc.

It is an unacceptable level of proof when it comes to audio forums where statistically significant ABX testing or some such is the bar to entry

The right side of my brain would love to learn that there is some heretofore undiscovered scientifically based reason why two different systems that measure the same using our current technology in reality are different. Somehow I guess that would justify my decades of subjective audio choices. But the pesky left side of my brain just won't keep quiet.

So what if I told you that a certain part of how we analyse & categorise sounds is based on a statistical summary of the waveform & this is based on the temporal relationships within the waveform i.e over a longer period than a second or two. And we use this analysis to determine how realistic a sound is perceived? We also use it to categorise a sound - is it the sound of running water or is it a fire crackling in the distance?

What current measurement of an audio device would you use to check this one aspect of what our auditory perception pays attention to?

Would the fact that there is no current measurement mean that we couldn't possibly hear one audio as more realistic than another? Would you deny this perception & call it "imagination" or "just preference"?

 

[mmerrill99]

 
You stated "But loudness is not in one's imagination - it is based on characteristics within the signal.". It is not, loudness is based on one's imagination. It's ONLY by applying imagination (human perception) to the signal that we can arrive at a determination of loudness. Without imagination (human perception) there is no loudness.


No it's not! Regardless of whether we hear Fa, HiFi or anything else, the fact is that we are hearing something different between two sets of soundwaves. Where does this difference come from, it's obviously nothing to do with any characteristics of the soundwaves themselves, as the characteristics of both sets of soundwaves are identical, it's the same set of soundwaves!

You seem to have mixed up the two definitions! Loudness is not based on imagination and IS based on characteristics of the sound waves. And what we hear during the McGurk Effect DOES depend on the sound waves (but also the visual stream). Only certain differences are possible; it is language dependent; and the auditory signal plays a central role. NO visual stimulus will make "ba" "fa" or "ga" sound like "elephant"

Thank you S&M - exactly correct & what I've been saying all along.

 

[pctazhp]

@mmerrill99. I may be wrong but you and I seem to be talking past each other. You keep talking about "perception" and I am talking about objective measurement of waveforms and soundwaves. And I honestly don't understand your point about time, but there is a lot I don't understand. Anyway, my headache is starting to return, so I going to get on with my day )))

 

[ralphp@optonline]

yes, we are only talking about stereo system & it's limitations do come into consideration in the "illusion" effect
Indeed, preference & perception need careful differentiation. His reporting of "more musical" & "less thin" for the Onyko Vs the iPhones "flat & thin" to me isn't just preference - he's naming perceptual qualities & not just "I like the Onyko more than the iPhone". You may be correct that there are measureable & easily explained differences in the waveform that comes out of the IEM which I would like to see.

Now excuse me for saying this but you once again falling back into old habits of obfuscation and I am also guilty of not being clear so let's backup a little.
 
First headphone/earphone load and impedance matching with a given amp is extremely important and does have an audible effect. Second, I'm not an expert on headphone/earphone load and impedance but there are many forum members who are. Third no one is going to go through the trouble of measuring the iPhone, Onyko, earphones under discussion and it's not fair to ask for that since my first point about load and impedance matching pretty much addresses the issue.
 
The type of output amp in the iPhone may measure well but that doesn't mean that it can drive all headphones and earphones with equal ability since many of the 'phones that will present a load to the iPhone that causes the iPhone's amp to produce audible distortion.
 
And this us back to why so many posters find your posts so annoying - I've clearly stated something that is well known, .i.e. that improper load and impedance matching can have a clearly audible effect, and yet you refuse to accept this rather simple answer. Now why is that?

 

[mmerrill99]

yes, we are only talking about stereo system

Now excuse me for saying this but you once again falling back into old habits of obfuscation and I am also guilty of not being clear so let's backup a little.

First headphone/earphone load and impedance matching with a given amp is extremely important and does have an audible effect. Second, I'm not an expert on headphone/earphone load and impedance but there are many forum members who are. Third no one is going to go through the trouble of measuring the iPhone, Onyko, earphones under discussion and it's not fair to ask for that since my first point about load and impedance matching pretty much addresses the issue.

The type of output amp in the iPhone may measure well but that doesn't mean that it can drive all headphones and earphones with equal ability since many of the 'phones that will present a load to the iPhone that causes the iPhone's amp to produce audible distortion.

And this us back to why so many posters find your posts so annoying - I've clearly stated something that is well known, .i.e. that improper load and impedance matching can have a clearly audible effect, and yet you refuse to accept this rather simple answer. Now why is that?

as you say, let's back up a bit. Where do I say that I don't accept impedance & drive issues have an audible effect - I believe I even explicitly said I agree but although it's a plausible explanation is it the correct one for this scenario? So far I haven't seen any thing presented that shows the iPhone has a particular impedance out drive issues with these phones - that's really all I was asking, is there anything which will show us that what you say actually applies in this case?

 

[gregorio]

  Loudness is not based on imagination and IS based on characteristics of the sound waves. And what we hear during the McGurk Effect DOES depend on the sound waves (but also the visual stream).

 
1. Those of us who have to work with loudness will continue to do so the way that science and the Law dictates. You can believe that loudness is based on whatever characteristics you choose, magic, a flat earth or whatever.
 
2. The only elephant in this discussion is the elephant in the room! Presumably you heard a difference in the McGurk Effect, the difference between Ba and Fa. Please explain where this difference comes from!
 
Quote:

I don't think there's anything to be gained by discussing this further - I still maintain that what we hear is directed by the signals arriving via the tympanic membrane.

 
No, there is nothing further to be gained because you are immune to any facts which are inconvenient to your flawed understanding. You dismiss the McGurk effect as an aural illusion, a rare exception, unrelated to how we actually perceive sound all the time. That's your prerogative of course but science takes the completely opposite view, so please stop trying to couch your view as a scientific one!
 
G

 

[ralphp@optonline]

as you say, let's back up a bit. Where do I say that I don't accept impedance & drive issues have an audible effect - I believe I even explicitly said I agree but although it's a plausible explanation is it the correct one for this scenario? So far I haven't seen any thing presented that shows the iPhone has a particular impedance out drive issues with these phones - that's really all I was asking, is there anything which will show us that what you say actually applies in this case?

Now I have to ask what is that you are trying to accomplish with this line of reasoning? Low powered mobile device amps, like the one in the iPhone, are known to have audible effects when used with many headphones and earphones. Changing to a higer powered amp, such as the one in the Onyko amp/DAC is known to have remove some of these load and impedance issues. Why is this simple answer so unacceptable to you?
 
And more to your point, the initial question was posed as a comparison between the sound of the iPhone->earphones versus the sound of the iPhone->Onyko amp/DAC->earphones. Perhaps the Onyko has a slight treble bump. I don't know for sure but that answer is much more plausible and simple than anything else and so this area should be fully investigated before looking for more complicated solutions.

 

[mmerrill99]

 
Loudness is not based on imagination and IS based on characteristics of the sound waves. And what we hear during the McGurk Effect DOES depend on the sound waves (but also the visual stream).

1. Those of us who have to work with loudness will continue to do so the way that science and the Law dictates. You can believe that loudness is based on whatever characteristics you choose, magic, a flat earth or whatever.

2. The only elephant in this discussion is the elephant in the room! Presumably you heard a difference in the McGurk Effect, the difference between Ba and Fa. Please explain where this difference comes from!

Quote:

I don't think there's anything to be gained by discussing this further - I still maintain that what we hear is directed by the signals arriving via the tympanic membrane.

No, there is nothing further to be gained because you are immune to any facts which are inconvenient to your flawed understanding. You dismiss the McGurk effect as an aural illusion, a rare exception, unrelated to how we actually perceive sound all the time. That's your prerogative of course but science takes the completely opposite view, so please stop trying to couch your view as a scientific one!

G

I'll ask again - please stop the personal attacks!!!
The McGurk effect, like any illusion, is a good way to see inside some of the workings of the perception because, like all illusions, it exposes an anomaly & helps to understand where that anomaly comes from. As S&M said - it is a specific case of auditory processing in relation to understanding speech - "Only certain differences are possible; it is language dependent; and the auditory signal plays a central role. NO visual stimulus will make "ba" "fa" or "ga" sound like "elephant" For you to generalise from this specific into "how we actually perceive sound all the time" is erroneous. Don't just take my word or S&M's word for this - read the science (not audio forum opinion) & if you find that we are wrong by all means quote it back here.

 

[ralphp@optonline]

I'll ask again - please stop the personal attacks!!!
The McGurk effect, like any illusion, is a good way to see inside some of the workings of the perception because, like all illusions, it exposes an anomaly & helps to understand where that anomaly comes from. As S&M said - it is a specific case of auditory processing in relation to understanding speech - "Only certain differences are possible; it is language dependent; and the auditory signal plays a central role. NO visual stimulus will make "ba" "fa" or "ga" sound like "elephant" For you to generalise from this specific into "how we actually perceive sound all the time" is erroneous. Don't just take my word or S&M's word for this - read the science (not audio forum opinion) & if you find that we are wrong by all means quote it back here.

I like this line of reasoning since if each specific experiment or test cannot be used to create a generalized theory then there are many, many additional Noble prizes to be awarded to those individuals clever enough to change one or more parameters in an existing experiment and therefore get a new award.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

1. Those of us who have to work with loudness will continue to do so the way that science and the Law dictates. You can believe that loudness is based on whatever characteristics you choose, magic, a flat earth or whatever.

2. The only elephant in this discussion is the elephant in the room! Presumably you heard a difference in the McGurk Effect, the difference between Ba and Fa. Please explain where this difference comes from!

Science and the law... AND you work with loudness. Quite formidable!

How about if we cut to the chase and provide legal or scientific references to back up what we say? I have to beg forgiveness that I don't have access to my reference manager here. But in about 14 hours, I'm happy to back up what I say with references from the primary refereed literature. No rush for you, since I'm creating a delay, but I DO expect you to back up what you say with more than "I work with loudness".

Your allusions to magic and flat earth are so weak as to be offensive. But your attempting to "school me" on loudness or any aspect of perception does make me smile.

Looking forward to comparing scientific references tomorrow!

 

[gregorio]

I'll ask again - please stop the personal attacks!!!
The McGurk effect, like any illusion, is a good way to see inside some of the workings of the perception because, like all illusions, it exposes an anomaly & helps to understand where that anomaly comes from. As S&M said - it is a specific case of auditory processing in relation to understanding speech - "Only certain differences are possible; it is language dependent; and the auditory signal plays a central role. NO visual stimulus will make "ba" "fa" or "ga" sound like "elephant" For you to generalise from this specific into "how we actually perceive sound all the time" is erroneous. Don't just take my word or S&M's word for this - read the science (not audio forum opinion) & if you find that we are wrong by all means quote it back here.

And I'll ask again, please stop couching your flawed understanding as a scientific view!!!!
 

the auditory signal plays a central role.

Another obfuscation. Please answer the question, where does the difference between Ba and Fa come from! What "central" or any other sort of role is the signal playing in this difference?
 

For you to generalise from this specific into "how we actually perceive sound all the time" is erroneous.

I am not generalising or erroneous, this is what I do for a living. I apply the principles underlying the McGurk Effect virtually every single day, as do the thousands of others engaged in my same line of work. These principles are effective on the hundreds of millions of people who experience our work daily. It's not in the least bit rare or an exception! Of course you must be correct though, me and all my colleagues over many decades are all obviously "erroneous". There is one area where we can agree, there's no point in continuing, may you and your magic be very happy together!
 
G

 

[mmerrill99]

as you say, let's back up a bit. Where do I say that I don't accept impedance

Now I have to ask what is that you are trying to accomplish with this line of reasoning? Low powered mobile device amps, like the one in the iPhone, are known to have audible effects when used with many headphones and earphones.

Sure, agreed. Do the K10's fall into this category?

Changing to a higer powered amp, such as the one in the Onyko amp/DAC is known to have remove some of these load and impedance issues. Why is this simple answer so unacceptable to you?

You mean why do I not accept this as unquestionably the reason why Krismusic perceives a more musical sound with the Onyko? Maybe, it's just that apart from statements you really haven't shown that there is any issue with the Noble K10s running off an iPhone. Yes there can be known issues with impedances between amp output & load but as I have asked you before - is this the case here? It seems that you just want me to accept your statement without any analysis as to its applicability to this case & at the same time you are accusing me of obfuscating. I'm not - I'm looking for anything objective, scientific that we can say "yes, that's the reason for Krismusic's perception"

And more to your point, the initial question was posed as a comparison between the sound of the iPhone->earphones versus the sound of the iPhone->Onyko amp/DAC->earphones. Perhaps the Onyko has a slight treble bump. I don't know for sure but that answer is much more plausible and simple than anything else and so this area should be fully investigated before looking for more complicated solutions.

OK, so you do accept that there are other possible reasons for the difference in sound besides the one above? In essence you are agreeing with me - analysis/investigation are required, rather than stock answers

 

[gregorio]

How about if we cut to the chase and provide legal or scientific references to back up what we say?

 
Go and do your own homework, if you don't already know the law or scientific references!
 

But your attempting to "school me" on loudness or any aspect of perception does make me smile.

 
I can only take that as being the inane smile of a simple buffoon! As I stated to mmerrill, assuming you're not one and the same person, believe what you wish and may you and your magic be very happy together. Me and those like me will continue to manipulate and fool you daily and you can continue to pay us to do so and as a bonus, you can also remain perfectly happy in your blissful ignorance!
 
G

 

[SoundAndMotion]

I apply the principles underlying the McGurk Effect virtually every single day,

That's really cool! HOW do you apply the principles underlying the McGurk Effect virtually every single day? I'm really quite interested!

Go and do your own homework, if you don't already know the law or scientific references!

Sorry, you don't get off so easily. I WILL do my homework and cite references to PROVE you wrong. If you make no attempt to back up what you say, we'll all know you're just making stuff up.

As I said in my previous post, no rush, I can't 'til tomorrow.

 

[mmerrill99]

1. Those of us who have to work with loudness will continue to do so the way that science and the Law dictates. You can believe that loudness is based on whatever characteristics you choose, magic, a flat earth or whatever.

2. The only elephant in this discussion is the elephant in the room! Presumably you heard a difference in the McGurk Effect, the difference between Ba and Fa. Please explain where this difference comes from!

Science and the law... AND you work with loudness. Quite formidable!

How about if we cut to the chase and provide legal or scientific references to back up what we say? I have to beg forgiveness that I don't have access to my reference manager here. But in about 14 hours, I'm happy to back up what I say with references from the primary refereed literature. No rush for you, since I'm creating a delay, but I DO expect you to back up what you say with more than "I work with loudness".

Your allusions to magic and flat earth are so weak as to be offensive. But your attempting to "school me" on loudness or any aspect of perception does make me smile.

Looking forward to comparing scientific references tomorrow!

Maybe I can provide some papers but nowhere will there be any scientific paper which says that the McGurk effect applies outside of speech processing or "how we actually perceive sound all the time"

"STUDIES OF THE MCGURK EFFECT: IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORIES OF SPEECH PERCEPTION" from Applied Sceince & Engineering laboratories

"What is the McGurk effect?"

But just to put this to rest (that it is specific to speech processing) - here's an extract from a 2013 paper
And a summary of it here
"These four test subjects were then asked to watch and listen to videos focused on a person’s mouth as they said the syllables “ba,” “va,” “ga” and “tha.” Depending on which of three different videos were being watched, the patients had one of three possible experiences as they watched the syllables being mouthed:

— The motion of the mouth matched the sound. For example, the video showed “ba” and the audio sound also was “ba,” so the patients saw and heard “ba.”

— The motion of the mouth obviously did not match the corresponding sound, like a badly dubbed movie. For example, the video showed “ga” but the audio was “tha,” so the patients perceived this disconnect and correctly heard “tha.”

— The motion of the mouth only was mismatched slightly with the corresponding sound. For example, the video showed “ba” but the audio was “va,” and patients heard “ba” even though the sound really was “va.” This demonstrates the McGurk effect – vision overriding hearing.

Note the bolded text