[bigshot]

That would be a never ending loop wouldn’t it?

The other question that is even more important… if you have to work that hard to hear a difference, does it even matter in everyday use?

 

[hakunamakaka]

For casual use it doesn’t bother me, but once I have free time to focus just on music, I enjoy when it performs at very high level.

I simply don’t choose to blindly fallow cherrypicked reviews for companies under Oashida( topping, smsl…) in ASR and ride the hype train with amir up front as I’m picky when it comes to my main setup

I rather trust folks that actually dissembles, tests and measures gear in real life scenarios. Thus are not so easy to find, but worth it for me

 

[gregorio]

So what is science? If there is one data point and one uses this data point to draw a definitive conclusion to me this is not "too scientific".

Actually, a very considerable amount of science is almost exactly that. There are several caveats to this statement though: Firstly, it depends on that “one data point”. For example, is that “one data point” an objective measurement of some physical property or is it an objective identification of some non-physical property, such as human perception for example?

If it’s the latter, then you need a dataset rather than one data point and you won’t get “a definitive conclusion”, you’ll get a conclusion with a level of confidence, which depends on the sample size and it’s composition.

If it’s the former, then it would be the process of science, though not unequivocal/accepted science. It wouldn’t be accepted until the data point had been independently verified. Also, scientists would generally be more careful of not extrapolating too far in their “definitive conclusion”, as getting it wrong could easily be a career ender.

The ABX thing is one way (of course not the only way) as an attempt to establish a more plausible, a more conclusive interpretation of the finding, in this case its the "why we hear what we hear".

ABX doesn’t answer the “why we hear what we hear”, it just falsifies the null hypothesis (there is no audible difference between two things), as castleofargh stated. Furthermore, it would be pointless and very difficult to run an ABX test on many of the measurements. Many of the measurements are at such a low level, that setting up an ABX is problematic because the test equipment is likely to influence the result and there’s no point because they are so far below audibility anyway.

Btw On record I'm not challenging or "attacking" what AMR has been doing so save your defence of AMR on his behalf.

Also on the record, I’m no fan boy of Amir. I’ve had one or two “run ins” with him in the past. However, I do applaud the fundamental principle of what he’s doing, the objective measurements, although I wouldn’t give his conclusions much more weight than any other reviewer.

Perception error is valid when there is little to no change, with significant improvements it is heard no just by me and my imagination.

A falsehood, backed up by a fallacy! Do you really believe that you are dead, or do you just not realise that’s what you’re effectively claiming? Do you have any reliable evidence to support your assertion?

The rest of your post is based on the above falsehood/fallacy and therefore isn’t worth a response, except:

L30 failed to deliver advised power output. With 2300mW x 2 @32Ω and about 40% of headroom sound totally collapsed on my Utopia's ….

You haven’t answered the question. Are you claiming the measurements themselves were wrong/false or that measurements for some other usage conditions were posted and you incorrectly assumed they were applicable to your usage?

G

 

[gregorio]

I simply don’t choose to blindly fallow cherrypicked reviews …

Off topic, this isn’t “why you can’t trust reviews”, it’s “why you can’t trust measurements”!

I rather trust folks that actually dissembles, tests and measures gear in real life scenarios.

Again, this isn’t the “why you can’t trust folks” thread!

You’ve responded to why you can’t trust any number of things, except the actual thread title; “why you can’t trust measurements”. That’s a shame for 2 reasons:

1. It’s off topic, a misdirection and indicates you don’t know what measurements are.

2. There are actually some valid potential reasons why one might not trust measurements but they’ve barely been mentioned or not mentioned at all.

You seem too focused on an audiophile crusade to discredit measurements to have a rational conversation about the facts!

G

 

[hakunamakaka]

I don't have a crusade against measurements, but many folks know that ASR & Amir is cherrypicking stuff and runs favorable tests for certain companies. I just don't blindly fallow measurement or subjective reviews. It's my brain and my ears so I choose to focus on what is pleasing me. Other stuff has no impact for my music enjoyment and in my view that is what matters most. Never took an advice from someone who doesn't actually listens to music

 

[71 dB]

I don't have a crusade against measurements, but many folks know that ASR & Amir is cherrypicking stuff and runs favorable tests for certain companies. I just don't blindly fallow measurement or subjective reviews. It's my brain and my ears so I choose to focus on what is pleasing me. Other stuff has no impact for my music enjoyment and in my view that is what matters most

If people cherrypick measurements then it is people who you can't trust, not the measurements.

 

[hakunamakaka]

If people cherrypick measurements then it is people who you can't trust, not the measurements.

But it won't tell you how it will sound and if you really enjoy it. Ear and brain connection is a key in this hobby, actually nothing else matters much. Only through time and more listening experience you will be able articulate what better fits you.

 

[gregorio]

It's my brain and my ears so I choose to focus on what is pleasing me.

But no one makes or publishes any measurements of your brain or ears.

Other stuff has no impact for my music enjoyment and in my view that is what matters most.

So the composers, musicians, engineers and all the instruments/equipment they use have no impact on your music enjoyment?

But it won't tell you how it will sound and if you really enjoy it.

Of course, because the measurements of say a DAC are the measurements of a DAC’s performance, not measurements of your perception, brain, ears, enjoyment or anything else.

Ear and brain connection is a key in this hobby, actually nothing else matters much.

It’s not a hobby, it’s an industry, in fact more than one industry. You think Abbey Road studios make music recordings for a hobby, that EMI pay for, distribute and market those recordings for a hobby and that Apple makes DAPs, host music services and make IEMs/headphones for a hobby? If Nordost make cables for a hobby, why don’t they charge the few bucks they cost to make, instead of thousands?

Unbelievable!

G

 

[hakunamakaka]

I didn't mention musician I've stated what's fed to consumers..All the reviews and rave with charts doesn't impact what's important to me. You quote cut sentences just to spark a heated discussion and arguments.

Feel better now ? No ? Go to some cable threads and start insulting everyone on how stupid they are. It seems like your favorite hobby

 

[71 dB]

But it won't tell you how it will sound and if you really enjoy it. Ear and brain connection is a key in this hobby, actually nothing else matters much. Only through time and more listening experience you will be able articulate what better fits you.

Yeah, nobody is going to do the work for me. I have spent thousands of hours listening to music to figure out what I enjoy.

 

[gregorio]

I didn't mention musician I've stated what's fed to consumers.

No, that’s NOT what you stated! What you stated was that “other stuff has no impact on my music enjoyment”, which firstly is off topic (again!) and secondly: If you are going to keep mentioning your music enjoyment then what you’ve stated is false anyway because obviously, other stuff such as composers/musicians and recording equipment does impact your music enjoyment.

All the reviews and rave with charts doesn't impact what's important to me.

Again this thread is NOT about “reviews and rave” or what’s important to you, it’s about measurements. How many times?

You quote cut sentences just to spark a heated discussion and arguments.

No, I quote cut sentences when a post contains several/many falsehoods and I wish to refute them individually.

Feel better now ? No ?

Yes. I don’t feel better when falsehoods are just left sitting there for anyone to read, without also a refutation. The inference of a falsehood without a refutation, is that it’s not a falsehood. Which obviously is the opposite of the whole point of having a science discussion forum in the first place!

Go to some cable threads and start insulting everyone on how stupid they are.

If you feel insulted or stupid from me (and others) refuting your falsehoods, what do you think should be done about that?

You think we should not refute your falsehoods and this subforum should become the “hakunamakaka sound falsehood” forum? If you want to stop feeling insulted or stupid from refutations of your falsehoods, the rational solution would be to stop posting falsehoods to the “sound science” subforum in the first place! Isn’t that obvious?

G

 

[71 dB]

Yes. I don’t feel better when falsehoods are just left sitting there for anyone to read, without also a refutation. The inference of a falsehood without a refutation, is that it’s not a falsehood. Which obviously is the opposite of the whole point of having a science discussion forum in the first place!

G

A big problem with falsehoods is that often people who have internalized them won't unlearn them easily. If it was easy to correct these falsehoods, these discussions would be much much sorter than 8 pages long! Sure, sometimes we have humble people making false statements, but also willing to learn more, but more often than not this is not the case and refuting falsehoods can be quite a task that can lead to the moderators of the discussion board interfering due to language not allowed.

 

[bigshot]

Sometimes it’s obvious that no amount of evidence is going to make someone change their mind.

 

[71 dB]

Go to some cable threads and start insulting everyone on how stupid they are.

Most of the time opinions/false statements are attacked rather than people behind them. We all have stupid opinions about something, because nobody can be an expert on everything. It takes effort to be an expert on a narrow field alone. Our opinions will be attacked the rest of our lives because people disagree. That's just how it is. How to cope with it?

1) Strong self-confidence helps. It gives "thicker skin", but good self-confidence can be problematic me included.
2) Separate your opinions from yourself. Which one is attacked?
3) Be humble and be ready to learn more. It is not a weakness to do so. It takes strength to do so!
4) People are less polite online than in person. Don't expect people online to be super-nice all the time.
5) Try to frame your thoughts in a different way and monitor the reactions of others.
6) Learn to defend your opinions and have better opinions.
7) If you feel bad online, get offline. Go out in the nature or something like that. Be happy.

I have had to learn these things myself, because I was a stupid fool. I hope today I am a less stupid fool. At least I feel better online.

 

[71 dB]

Sometimes it’s obvious that no amount of evidence is going to make someone change their mind.

Some people tend to think backwards from the conclusions and for them "evidence" is simply wrong if you can't get to it walking backwards from the conclusions. I guess one has to be able to show the conclusions wrong somehow without evidence and logic leading to it.

I am an intuitive myself. It means all information I get with my senses gets analysed for deeper meaning, possible logical contradictions etc. The downside of this is that the amount of information my brain has to process is "bigger" and learning new things can be overhelming and slow, but when I finally learn something I learn it deeply with all the logical implications involved.

Sensors take the information in as it is. They can learn a lot of new things fast, but only on surface level, because the deeper logical connections aren't analysed. Sensors are easier to fool, because they don't detect logical contradictions so easily. This is especially true, if they are also feelers rather than thinkers.

There are pros and cons of being intuitive/sensor/feeler/thinker and nobody is better than anybody else for being something, but these differences explain why people are different. People who listen to vinyl in bad acoustics using 4 watts/channel tube amps and snake oil cables are probably just sensors and feelers. For them it all makes perfect sense while for me it doesn't because I am an intuitive and thinker. I may not agree with those people, but at least I understand them better...