3 ms·

I asked in good faith and I think we share similar perspectives, however it seems an implicit assumption in your statements is that we know all there is to know

by JALTU 4y ago

I asked in good faith and I think we share similar perspectives, however it seems an implicit assumption in your statements is that we know all there is to know about hearing, and we can measure it precisely, thus any claims of audio qualities, for lack of a better word, are by definition psychological biases. Maybe that's not exactly what you mean, but it'll do for here. Fair enough to consider although I suspect we'll wind up agreeing to disagree. Not interested in flame wars, and thanks for obliging me.

JohnBooty 4y ago
however it seems an implicit assumption in your statements is that we know all there is to know about hearing Hearing involves the human brain and I'm absolutely sure we don't know everything there is to know about it. So at least we agree on that! However, it seems to me that the question is, "can System A reproduce sound with a 'sound quality' relative to System B that cannot currently be measured, but can be recognized by listeners?" I don't believe we need to know all there is about hearing to answer that question. thus any claims of audio qualities, for lack of a better word, are by definition psychological biases Psychological biases are huge but for the purposes of this good-faith discussion I'm assuming they're controlled for. I'd put it this way... A suite of measurements such as those produced by e.g. the Klippel NFS measurement system such as those seen here represent a rather large quantity of data. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/tad-evolution-2-speaker-review.38949/ https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/t... Do you claim that two audio playback systems could produce identical measurements on the Klippel, and yet have audibly different "sound quality" that could be discerned in a repeatable double-blind fashion by human listeners?
- iquerno 4y ago
  when I no longer have self professed audiophiles to deal with I will always possess the ability to start audiophile flame wars :)
  - JohnBooty 4y ago
    It's always fun!
    - JALTU 4y ago
      Therein lies the rub, wouldn't you say? ;-)
- JALTU 4y ago
  No, you said that, not me! ha ha ha And as you note below, if it's fun for you to trot out all this "science" then please, don't let me spoil your broth. I'll just contend that science is about testing hypotheses and leave it at that. Lastly, yes, lots still to learn about hearing and audio. Someday maybe we'll have measurements that allow for certain comparisons to be valid across human aural experience and electrical transducers.

by JALTU 4y ago

JohnBooty 4y ago

however it seems an implicit assumption in your statements is that we know all there is to know about hearing Hearing involves the human brain and I'm absolutely sure we don't know everything there is to know about it. So at least we agree on that! However, it seems to me that the question is, "can System A reproduce sound with a 'sound quality' relative to System B that cannot currently be measured, but can be recognized by listeners?" I don't believe we need to know all there is about hearing to answer that question. thus any claims of audio qualities, for lack of a better word, are by definition psychological biases Psychological biases are huge but for the purposes of this good-faith discussion I'm assuming they're controlled for. I'd put it this way... A suite of measurements such as those produced by e.g. the Klippel NFS measurement system such as those seen here represent a rather large quantity of data. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/tad-evolution-2-speaker-review.38949/ https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/t... Do you claim that two audio playback systems could produce identical measurements on the Klippel, and yet have audibly different "sound quality" that could be discerned in a repeatable double-blind fashion by human listeners?

iquerno 4y ago
when I no longer have self professed audiophiles to deal with I will always possess the ability to start audiophile flame wars :)
- JohnBooty 4y ago
  It's always fun!
  - JALTU 4y ago
    Therein lies the rub, wouldn't you say? ;-)
JALTU 4y ago
No, you said that, not me! ha ha ha And as you note below, if it's fun for you to trot out all this "science" then please, don't let me spoil your broth. I'll just contend that science is about testing hypotheses and leave it at that. Lastly, yes, lots still to learn about hearing and audio. Someday maybe we'll have measurements that allow for certain comparisons to be valid across human aural experience and electrical transducers.