Quote:
Originally Posted by smoth /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Current scientific instruments can measure sound waves and electrical signals with far more precision than even the most trained listener, yet, we continue on this often ridiculous quest to achieve higher quality audio. This has lead me to speculate that even though audio technology is very well understood from a scientific/mathematical point of view, that we may never get to the point that video displays have achieved. I have yet to see any debate on the quality of the images produced as the instruments can read colors and refresh rates so many orders of magnitude beyond any practical viewing purpose and people believe them. Most videophiles would not even trust themselves to calibrate their own display trusting that work to a colorimeter. Although the same ability exists in the audio world, the amount of subjective reasoning seems to cloud any attempt for scientific fact to drive the market and the definition of high quality audio.
Any thoughts?
|
Yeah, a few thoughts. First, I never understand why people join a site like this -- which is dedicated to the pursuit of high fidelity sound through headphones, and basically involves a sharing of subjective listening experiences to a significant extent -- and then use phrases like "the ridiculous quest to achieve higher quality audio." It's like going on a site for gourmet cooks and saying the quest is to make food test better is ridiculous.
I understand why the quest might not be something that you or others are interested in (and that's fine), but why do you have to knock (at least implicitly) other people's hobby or pursuit of enjoyment in a particular area?
Second, and most important, music is a subjective experience. Most of us listen to music for enjoyment, and our enjoyment is based on what the music sounds like to our ears, not on what some test data or oscilloscope says it
should sound like. I've listened to music and thought, "Ooh, that sounds nice." I've never looked at a frequency response graph and said "Ooh, that sounds nice."
Third, audio technology may be well understood, but there is still some disagreement on what people hear from various components (or what their brains perceive) and how scientific measurements correlate with what people hear (or at least think they hear.)
Fourth, I don't understand the connection between the fact that various types of audio parameters are subject to measurement and whether people should pursue higher quality sound. Are you saying that one can get high quality sound for, say, under $500 (or some other amount that anybody could easily afford), and that any additional expenditures will yield no improvement in fidelity? With all due respect, that's ridiculous.
Fifth, there is a certain amount of disagreement in the video world also. Not everything is settled there. Aren't there different standards adopted by different bodies as to what constitutes correct color? And don't some people in fact prefer color gamuts that are different than what some board decided is the "standard," based on their
subjective preferences? (They clearly do.)
Humans are not machines (thank God) so I don't think subjective preferences in the audio arena are going away, or should go away.