Validity of Claims

[PointyFox]

Continuing a conversation from a different thread in Head-fi's "Thought Jail" because it's getting too "sciency":

IMO if you’re looking for Raal’s airy signature out of the Stealth, definitely try the A90 D or Chrod TT2. If you want the stealth to sound more full in the lower regions, the Burson or the GSX mini would do it

When someone tells you how amplifiers sound, especially on Head-fi, and especially if it conforms to the Head-fi beliefs that things that are cool or look cool sound cold (like amplifiers that run cool or silver wires) or things that are hot or look warm sound warm (like amplifiers that run warm or copper wires), you should ask yourself a few things before you consider their opinion valid.

Major factors for validity are:

• If they've heard the equipment or not.
• Whether or not they (correctly) volume matched with a meter.
• If they benefit in a major way from reaching a particular conclusion.
• How quickly they were able to switch back and forth for comparison. This type of testing requires rapid switching (within a few seconds due to acoustic memory limitations).

Minor factors for validity are:

• How experienced they are listening for differences.
• How well their hearing works. (Unless they're deaf, but odds are most of us aren't).
• Ambient noise level when they did the comparison.
• Music or noise selection for comparison.
• If they benefit in minor way from reaching a particular conclusion.
• If the meter is calibrated or not.

Most people on here are trying to do science while not having the slightest clue how.
The method is just as important as the observations themselves.
The method should be both repeatable and reproduceable.

E.g. if you give someone a room full of equipment and tell them that you think amp A had more bass impact than amp B, they may not hear it unless they are given some details such as what volume level, what music, and with what headphones the observation was made.

But it's absurd to post all this information for a simple comparison between amps, right?

Yes, but there are a few basic things we can include pretty easily, such as "I heard (observation) after volume matching to (sound pressure level) with a (headphone type) in (location) using an A/B switch". That checks off 3/4 of the major factors in one sentence and it's much more likely to be valid than a statement like "If you want more full sound a ___ would do it".

 

[old tech]

A more basic question, do the claims make sense from basic science or physics (eg copper v silver wire in audio)?

 

[chezzer]

Use your ears, for instance the Focal clears have great reviews across the board but I think they are pretty awful but that's to my ears because they sound different to me, I love the Beyer T1 and most people hate them because they don't conform to their graphs, it really just points to the fact that most people are losing sight of the one thing that really matters and that is the music.

 

[bigshot]

I don’t think there’s a lot of faulty testing. I think people claim to base their opinions on not doing listening tests at all. They think the anonymity of an Internet forum gives them permission to lie.

“I’m an audio professional and in my testing I’ve found…” is often an intro to a lie. Some people don’t lie. They’re pretty easy to pick out from the crowd. They’re usually the most disliked.

 

[gregorio]

Most people on here are trying to do science while not having the slightest clue how.

If you’re talking about head-fi in general rather than this sub-forum, then I don’t think that’s true. I think most people here are just doing tests to validate an opinion based on brand name, price, etc. More along the lines of what are the audible differences rather than are there actually any audible differences. It’s obviously not science but in most cases they’re not trying to do science and in quite a few cases, they’re actively anti-science.

Also, I would add to your list of Major factors the requirement for blind/double blind testing and in some/many cases you could remove the requirement for actually having heard the equipment.

G

 

[DarginMahkum]

Moved to here...

 

[gregorio]

Audiophiles often define "this" as hobby, and it makes me wonder what hobby is.

Just one of countless falsehoods the audiophile community seems to rely on. This isn’t just a hobby for those who professionally create the content they’re listening to, neither is it just a hobby for all those who make the audio equipment audiophiles listen with nor for those who market it.

In any other subforum on head-fi, your post would receive at least one or two fairly upset rebuttals. If you were to stick to your assertions, more upset audiophiles would quickly join in, a flame war with insults would probably ensue and your posts would most likely all be deleted on the grounds that they are science and don’t belong in that subforum.

In this subforum though, you won’t get any angry rebuttals because everything you stated agrees with the facts and accepted/demonstrated science! Unless of course some deluded audiophile visits from another forum to troll!

G

 

[DarginMahkum]

Just one of countless falsehoods the audiophile community seems to rely on. This isn’t just a hobby for those who professionally create the content they’re listening to, neither is it just a hobby for all those who make the audio equipment audiophiles listen with nor for those who market it.

In any other subforum on head-fi, your post would receive at least one or two fairly upset rebuttals. If you were to stick to your assertions, more upset audiophiles would quickly join in, a flame war with insults would probably ensue and your posts would most likely all be deleted on the grounds that they are science and don’t belong in that subforum.

In this subforum though, you won’t get any angry rebuttals because everything you stated agrees with the facts and accepted/demonstrated science! Unless of course some deluded audiophile visits from another forum to troll!

G

My favorite is "don't force your ideas on us". There's always this first person plural "us" rather than "me" to pull more people into the discussion. And how do I force my ideas with a post? How does it literally work? There is also never a counterargument other than "just listen" spiced up with some words about how he tried a good measuring device and how he hated it.

Anyway... I just tried to gather some background about why I choose the way I choose, explaining to a person who is not very familiar with the concept. I hope it is useful.

 

[bigshot]

It isn’t complicated. Fidelity is audible transparency. That is the baseline. Signal in = signal out. Everything you can hear is perfect. From there you can filter with EQ or DSPs to your personal preference.

When you are evaluating headphones, you want to focus on the quality of the sound being produced by the headphones. You don’t want your evaluation to be skewed by subjective bias or perceptual error. That’s why you apply controls to your listening test and don’t just accept first impressions.

Bias is the biggest problem. The whole audio industry is built around creating an image of blind confidence and an aura of status around their products. The more a person interacts with the audiophile press, the more advertorial and deliberate snake oil they absorb. This is a huge barrier to achieving optimal sound at a reasonable price. No one can break through that barrier if the person refuses to reconsider and bypass their bias.

Often the bias is so strong, it seeks out and attacks anything that challenges it. People go out of their way to come to this group to loudly assert that cables all sound different and LPs sound better than CDs. It’s a quest, like that guy who is tilting at hot mastering windmills here all the time. They see things as black and white, good and evil. Their mind is made up and nothing will ever change it. We see that here all the time. We can argue, but honestly, when the bias is that deeply entrenched, arguing doesn’t help.

I think personality disorders, the temptation to use anonymity in Internet forums to hide behind, and general gullibility have more to do with it than science sometimes.

 

[gregorio]

I just tried to gather some background about why I choose the way I choose, explaining to a person who is not very familiar with the concept. I hope it is useful.

It’s always useful to have facts based on reliable evidence! There’s precious little of that on head-fi, it’s nearly all based on audiophile marketing and the myths which evolve from it and the fact that it’s often complete irrational and defies even simple logic just doesn’t seem to bother many.

Anyway, what you stated is “preaching to the converted” in this subforum. Hope you contribute to other threads here.

G

 

[castleofargh]

Without accountability, people will confidently claim anything.

 

[bigshot]

There’s no accountability on anonymous Internet forums. You can claim anything you want.