That is much more complex than you make it out to be. Only a very foolish scientist would claim that they understand everything about their field, especially concerning complex interactions of multiple parts. The best an audio engineer can accomplish is to put together a device that performs to the best specifications. How it will actually perform is beyond their control (not completely, obviously, but with regard to micro performances – and it is those we’re actually talking about here). I love Richard Feynman for saying that anyone who claims to understand quantum physics thereby demonstrates that they don’t. (Quantum physics being the most extensively validated theory in the history of science – but how it works, well …)
Then we have the actual performance of the device – in a particular environment, at a particular temperature, at a particular time of day, with a listener with their specific expectations, musical education, sensitivity and ear shape (hardly something an audio engineer can influence) … The sound will change, for instance, by just moving your head – not dramatically, but again: we’re talking here about small changes, which, however, may cumulatively add up to a more significant modification of the sound picture. All that is beyond clear measurement!
All of which makes me draw the conclusion that we should remain humble about the extent of our knowledge, and never ever dismiss personal testimonies out of hand simply because they can’t be (objectively) measured.
All we can do is try out something – see whether it makes a difference or not. That strikes me as eminently reasonable, if not scientific, but then again: I hope that science is not taken to be the sole arbiter of what is deemed reasonable. Were that so, out with the arts, philosophy, history, religion, literature, …
Philosophically speaking, science falls under the heading of instrumental reason/ rationality. There are others.
Found myself thinking of Heisenberg, and then an earlier quote of Coleridge, who captured the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle/Observer Effect better than any scientist…
“The chameleon darkens in the shade of him who bends over it to ascertain its colour”
Scientists are not science, have biases, attitudes, tribes, mother countries, personalities and imperfect minds. I guess the best ones know that.
But they also listen to what they make, they don’t just go with specs and measurements. Naim I know do not. Every firmware change to their product lines goes through audio listening testing by their engineers and this is pure listening to make sure it matches what they expect their kit to sound like. They tweak their DSP each time to compensate for the difference the new software makes on their systems any change to the code can and does often change it. The last firmware they released was delayed to wait for the engineers to sign it off.
Some people ‘maximize their pleasure quotient’ by excoriating others on internet forums. They’re the ones who need to stop obsessing about (other people’s) gear and just ‘listen to the music’ as they’re so fond of repeating.
Thanks ROON for this accidentally better sound quality!!
I’ve been amazed all day now.
I’m at work and I always have music on in the background.
The music comes along all day and it just sounds better!!
Whether someone believes me or not.
I’m enjoying!! Thanks again ROON!!
Science is about reason, arts are not. Yes, you can use machines to make art, but that doesn’t mean you can tell the engineers who built them that they don’t understand their own creation.
That the arts are not about reason exclusively, true. But not all? Would be interesting to hear your definition of reason.
And science is all about reason? Hm… Lysenko? Climate change?
They understand part of their creation. But never entirely. Ask any scientist, or better those that don’t just blindly follow certain scientific protocols but take an interest in reflecting upon their practice (meta-science, also known as philosophy of science)…
Science isn’t only a body of knowledge, but it’s a process above all – and that process, of a highly formalised nature, conforms to the laws and ways of the complex interplay of certain neural modules in the brain, an interplay that makes up and produces what we commonly consider reason. The latter comprises of course much more than science. The reason many seem to conflate science and reason has to do with 1) the fact that science has indeed had a highly influential role in shaping the modern world, and 2) seems to deal in certitudes. 2) is of course highly unscientific (as one of the glories of the scientific attitude is the acknowledgment of its provisional character).
I watched a documentary on making a Steinway the other day. Takes a year. Many master craftsmen have to give their approval. And then, actual professional pianists pick their Steinway – they all sound different. A Steinway is not a Steinway, it seems. With mass produced hifi gear, differences will be minimal (perhaps non-existent), but when something gets handcrafted, all bets are off. And then there’s still the individual listener …
Bill_Janssen
(Wigwam wool socks now on asymmetrical isolation feet!)
75
To be clear, I’m also easily tricked… My vision affects what I’m hearing, we are all extremely easy to manipulate - hence it is important to be aware of this. Your brain tells you there is a difference based on other senses than your hearing, even though there are none It’s magic; I have failed this test multiple times (I can clearly hear difference between A and B; but when doing a real blind test I’m lost even though I were extremely sure I could hear the difference up front).
This got nothing to do with people are smarter or got better hearing; this is human nature and how we work. So don’t let your mind trick you into alternative realties (and massive pointless investments), trust in your ears alone (can they tell the difference?).
I do however believe in measurements to point me in the right direction, then control by listening (it is hard to say something is off at 55Hz bases on ears alone as an example).
It is not about A/B testing here.
We are (more or less) pretty familiar with sound signature of our audio systems and then brain simply registers/detects something is being changed.
Wrong, your sound signature memory is extremely short
Yes, we do remember if it is bass heavy or “thin”, but on details we forget very fast.
Besides, when you are listening for change you might focus on a different part of the sound than before…
Edit:
I actually ran a test switching between two Roon Cores (running on same hardware, I have 2 licenses) after one of these statements that Roon had better SQ after a release. Impossible to heard the difference if I did not already knew which version were currently playing. Of course, each Roon Core on a different version.
I’m not so sure. Developmental psychology research has suggested that young infants quickly learn to respond to it’s mother’s voice, with considerable accuracy. Experiments have to be set up in a manner that is congruent with what infants respond to. Piaget drew the wrong conclusions by thinking infants couldn’t follow a ball…but they are attuned to faces not balls.
I remember making some poor purchases with Hifi in a store (remember that?) when I ignored what I was hearing and went with recommended options. A/B testing can be hair raising, when issues like differing from the norm/reviewers/your dealer loom. It’s probably why measurements appeal because there appears to be something incorruptible about a measurement. But that is no help if you end with something everyone else seems to think is good, but you don’t.
This is why you need to remove people with financial interest when doing AXB, and you can not know - your brain will trick you.
Background for this discussion, does B880 got better SQ than B831 ? My statement is no, I have done this round before with multiple high quality headphones with my back to the equipment. Leaving someone else to do the switching. I could not get it right, outside pure guess (50/50). I could not identity which Roon Core were playing. I’m however not stating everything sounds the same (of course not!), but Roon Core B880 (or B882) sound exactly the same as B831
Here’s a pretty good article that expands on that point. The key take away is that A/B testing needs to be done quickly, i.e. switching from one source to another needs to be done in seconds if the comparison is to be considered valid.
It’s magic; I have failed this test multiple times (I can clearly hear difference between A and B; but when doing a real blind test I’m lost even though I were extremely sure I could hear the difference up front).