In Reply to: who said anything about casual listening? posted by Analog Scott on January 11, 2007 at 20:42:42:
>>I sure didn't. I may as well start talking about bad measuements. But in the end that is what audio is made for. Listeninmg in our homes with all of it's biases and inconsistancies. So, in the end the technology must serve that.--Well, the technology is already doing that, which is the reason why certain technologies that are obsolate in respect of current thinking are still available on the market, specifically in respect of audio, turntables, tube-based computers etc. Preferences are driven by a whole host of issues, of which technology is just one of them.
>>Just because there is a higher noise to signal ratio (metaphorically speaking) with casual listening does not preclude the vfact that this is the purpose of audio, If.....If the measurements are used only to serve the listening experience there is nothing to prevent people from reducing the noise to signal ratio of simple listening by using bias controls and statistically significant samples. In the end if there is disagreement between the listening experience and the measured performance it is the measurements that have to be reconsidered.
--As said in the earlier post, there is no disagreement between the listening experience and measurements, because the measurements are not measuring the listening experience, the are measuring the performance of the component under test. And there is absolutely no requirement that preferences should conform to a 'notional' ideal measured performance, the measured performance of piece of equipment is ultimately the choice of the designer.
>>So, in the case of things like LPs v. CDs or tube amps v. SS when there is a conflict between the preferenc and the measured performance. It is the measurements that need to be reconcidered. Clearly not all the right things are being measured.
--The measurements do not need to be reconsidered, they are what they are i.e. agnostic. There is some deviation from the notional 'ideal' performance in respect of what certain individuals prefer to listen to, but that it is perfectly normal, individuals will not always prefer the same thing, For example borsendorfer, baldwin and Steinway are three different brands of acoustic piano, they sound audibly different and each has their own fans, For a closer example, look at the Yamaho electronic piano, do all its users tune it to same settings? The same logic applies to audio equipment,in the case many tubed amplifiers, it is trivial to show that their output impedance modifies the frequency response of the ancillary loudspeaker and they are have a lot more distortion, why is this problem? Nelson Pass has already designed some amplifiers that mimic this behaviour, guess what their measurement broadly mimics that of the tubed amplifiers they are seeking to emulate, why? because measurements are pretty agnostic. Beyond that what is there to stop an individual just simply preferring tubed equipment just for the sake of it and feeling dissatisfied with anything else. Preference does not even need to be logical.
>>Like I said before, may as well be measuring the size and weight and asigning merit to that if measurements are not there strictly to serve the listening experience. we can go round and round but even the well heeled objectivists will tell you I am absolutely right. Or maybe you think Floyd Toole is chasing his tail?--Measurements are not there to serve the listening experience, they are there to measure the performance of the component under test, it is job of the designer to model the performance of his products to satisfy a particular target audience to ensure market success, and that exactly what is happening, many high end designers have discovered that their target audience is not interested in 'straight wire with gain' and/or simply prefer certain obsolete technologies even if they protest to the contrary, and they are producing products to satisfy that demand. it matters little what the consumers says, it is what they actually buy that matters. As andy19191 has stated somewhere else, the same logic applies in a few other consumer product areas.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Still jumping to the wrong conclusion - theaudiohobby 02:35:06 01/12/07 (29)
- Every argument you made was wrong. - Analog Scott 22:31:18 01/13/07 (28)
- Re: The fallacy.... - theaudiohobby 07:18:06 01/14/07 (27)
- thank you for finally admitting I was right - Analog Scott 08:41:19 01/14/07 (26)
- Re: Still going round in circles.... - theaudiohobby 10:20:26 01/14/07 (25)
- I agree that you are going around in circles. - Analog Scott 00:23:47 01/15/07 (24)
- Re: Sigh.. - theaudiohobby 01:29:23 01/15/07 (0)
- Wrong again - Analog Scott 09:17:07 01/15/07 (22)
- Re: Wrong again - theaudiohobby 09:21:20 01/15/07 (21)
- You are waiting for something i already did - Analog Scott 11:46:01 01/15/07 (20)
- Re: Okay... - theaudiohobby 16:47:19 01/15/07 (9)
- Dude you would be hard pressed to find anything less relevant without going outside of audio - Analog Scott 18:49:35 01/15/07 (8)
- Re: What Floyd said - theaudiohobby 04:37:00 01/16/07 (7)
- Thank you once again for proving my point. - Analog Scott 09:30:43 01/16/07 (6)
- Re: Talk about shifting your ground... - theaudiohobby 12:52:17 01/16/07 (5)
- Yes you guys like to talk about it even though it's nonsense - Analog Scott 13:51:04 01/16/07 (0)
- Excellent analysis! - Pat D 13:21:26 01/16/07 (3)
- Putting two noncontradicting statements of mine together and claiming thee is a contradtiction is good analysis? - Analog Scott 13:59:33 01/16/07 (0)
- Re: So true and oh so funny -nt - theaudiohobby 13:37:46 01/16/07 (1)
- Yes you have convinced each other. very impressive. - Analog Scott 14:01:08 01/16/07 (0)
- If you were actually clear about what you wanted to discuss, and didn't keep changing your ground, it would be easier! - Pat D 12:41:49 01/15/07 (9)
- Re: Thanks Pat D. - theaudiohobby 16:19:07 01/15/07 (3)
- LOL you need to work in packs. - Analog Scott 16:46:22 01/15/07 (2)
- Re: Sigh, why not just respond to the posts -nt - theaudiohobby 16:49:49 01/15/07 (1)
- Because the fifth time around it is clear that you won't get it any better than you did the previous four times - Analog Scott 18:53:47 01/15/07 (0)
- But I am clear and I don't change my ground. - Analog Scott 12:49:44 01/15/07 (4)
- ROTFLOL - Pat D 13:35:40 01/16/07 (3)
- Amazing - Analog Scott 14:16:53 01/16/07 (2)
- I said you misrepresented audiohobby's views, not your own. . . - Pat D 20:28:16 01/16/07 (1)
- . Yes you do love to make things up about me. - Analog Scott 22:22:58 01/16/07 (0)