|
|
Post by macca on Jul 2, 2022 9:28:24 GMT
Some of my contributions to this forum are continually misunderstood so I have created this thread to try to clear this misunderstanding up a little. In this thread audioaddicts.freeforums.net/thread/2059/old-dacs-new-tricks?page=2 optical said: '' If what you have expressed above would be the case then no one would be able to express a single subjective opinion on absolutely anything unless the evaluation was carried out in a completely controlled environment as you state?
My word Martin, can you actually imagine how awful this hobby would be were something like that to become the norm?''I think we can all agree that there are two sides to this hobby, the technical (aka 'Objective'') side and the subjective side. Neither can work without the other. Most of us here occasionally buy new equipment and post about our experiences with it. Is it good? Is it bad? Do we like it? Do we not like it? We may also go on to detail what it is we do or do not like about it. 'It made cymbals sound a bit soft', 'Bass was a bit woolly', 'Mid range was exquisite', 'Vocals were life-like' and so forth. There is no problem with this and there is no need to listen with controls before we can make these statements and evaluations. We listened and we reported honestly what it was we perceived. I do these sort of reports myself ( for example see the Cranage audio show report where I give my brief impressions on a dozen or so different systems, no controls, no measurements). However problems arise when we decide to go further than that and start making technical claims and assumptions based on nothing more than our subjective impression. In the thread linked above Optical stated that the quality of transformer used in a DAC affected sound quality, and he based that technical statement on listening to a DAC that had been modified by putting in 'better' transformers. ('Better' was not qualified, but we'll go with it). He had also listened to the same DAC with stock transformers, although it is not clear if this was a side-by-side comparison or the comparison was separated in time. He stated 'I've heard the exact same DAC with those and with a larger toroidal and the latter was streets ahead.'The implication being that changing the transformer radically improved sound quality. Now this is not a subjective claim, it is a technical one. 'Better' transformers improve sound quality in DACs'. Or at least in this particular DAC it did. Now to be clear I am not suggesting for a second that he is lying about the improvement he perceived. It is 100 percent that is what he perceived. That was his perfectly valid subjective experience. But can he really draw the technical conclusion that he does i.e 'Better transformer = improved sound quality' No he cannot. Why? Because to draw a technical conclusion requires far more rigorous standards than to draw a subjective conclusion. Firstly the modded and unmodded DAC need to be compared side to side. You cannot listen to the DAC, spend a week modding it, then put it back in the system and compare to what you think you recall it sounding like a week ago. Second you have to listen without knowing which is the modded DAC and which is the unmodded DAC. Just knowing that you are listening to the modded DAC will affect your perception of its sound. That is a fact. That's why blind testing exists. Thirdly you will need to demonstrate that you can identify the modded DAC from the unmodded DAC consistently (scoring at least 19 out of 20 correctly will reduce the probability of getting it right by chance to next to nothing). If you can do that, then you can make the technical claim 'Improving/changing the transformer changed the sound of the DAC.' Otherwise the best you can state is 'The modded DAC sounded better to me, maybe that is because it has a different transformer?' Which is not a claim, it is simply speculation. In short if you want to make subjective evaluations, that's fine. If you want to make technical statements then back them up with solid evidence or don't make them. One of the most amusing dichotomies about this hobby is that die-hard subjectivists, who disregard measurements, who have no interest in how their equipment actually works, and who rely solely on 'Just listening' are still very keen to find technical reasons that justify what they perceived. Why? You want to be 100% subjective, fine, carry on doing that, but stop trying to draw technical conclusions. The technical assertion is probably wrong, and it creates misinformation that may lead to someone else wasting their money. Regrettably manufacturers make phony technical claims all the time, idiot reviewers double down on them, and us ordinary enthusiasts get hoodwinked into wasting our money. Let's not be part of that bullshit here. Let's keep it subjective, unless we can produce the evidence. Thanks for reading. |
|
|
|
Post by rexton on Jul 2, 2022 14:46:59 GMT
Great post, I need a cup of coffee to go through this!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Jul 2, 2022 15:00:26 GMT
Hi Martin Very reasoned post 
I'm stuck with amp repairs today so a qualified reply isn't going to happend yet.
I will leave you with this for now.
How we evaluate sonic improvents on ANY piece of audio equipment: We have a set system which we stick to.
First we ask many questions to owners on why they wish to upgrade piece 'x or y', they purchased that piece because they liked the sound usually (other reasons can be in place , functionality, flexibility etc)
The once we have established the bottom line so to speak, we listen to the EXACT unit for a couple of days to fully obtain its potential. There occassions nothing of any real improvements can be wrought from what the customer is looking for) we also measure the unit with a full suite to assertain its base line performance after say 15 years its not always going to make its specs.
We have a series of ready made 'strap on'  solutions which we can splice into the unit.
From a single rail to multiple programmable start upultra quiet power rails we can impliment straight into the board.
Fully discrete i/v stages which can be retro mounted and spliced in
Clock modules as well.
So in a releatively short space of time we can accurately determine which is the best coarse of action for that product.
Listening and measuring go hand in hand.
We have of coarse built up a significant repository of knowledge on this subject streching back 20 years all fully documented. So experiance also comes in to play.
Yes sometimes the circuit is just so restrictive or well thought out that very little has any impact at all either way!
|
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Jul 2, 2022 16:15:34 GMT
macca See what you can do with your time when not working 
|
|
|
|
Post by rexton on Jul 2, 2022 17:11:08 GMT
Martin, I'm not sure where you've trained in but it sounds like you have a fairly decent understanding of science evaluation. Firstly you are going to need some very sensitive maths to assess multiple variables, there interactions, and the probability of said interactions to define an outcome. Simple student t-tests aint going to cut it! Secondly you will never ever be able to compare one hifi setup against another no matter how carefully you try and replicate things, there are always going to be variables that are out of your control, a good example being an individuals ability to hear volume levels, everyone is different, so your stuffed there and this another good example of using a subjective variable to try and define a objective outcome. Thirdly, you can never be completely objective if you are going to use several people in a controlled population whilst evaluating as everyone will have there own subjective assessment of what they've heard, the two are intertwined, interlinked, and interconnected (sorry for that pun). Fourthly, you need a reference, and this is what Tony is pointing towards. It is possible to measure how some electronic components effect a piece of kit simply by measuring the before and after measurements of your defined variable that your wanting to test, and this is easily replicated by put old components back in and then remeasuring. This is only done against a referenced value for specific variables. I could go on, but I hope this points to some of the difficulties.
Incidently this is not meant as a macca basing post!  I fully agree with what your getting across in your post as I've had very similar thoughts for years but now I filter out all the noise from other peoples opinions and make my own judgement according to what I hear, which is probably going against your grain! I'm not really bothered about measurements, altough I appreciate they are very important, for me, it;s more about enjoying music in my own environment and not reallty worrying about anyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Jul 2, 2022 18:59:08 GMT
If people just said, " knowing that this item has been modded and during sighted none level matched listening I developed a preference for how it now sounded to me" us objectivist wouldn't have anything to object to. Its when people staye non rigoured opinion as fact that we get pissy.  |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,088
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jul 2, 2022 22:33:12 GMT
SO, what happens if someone follows the rules, buys two DACs. Upgrades one, then identifies it 19 times out of 20, and then declares it better due to the change? Would that be enough? I doubt it.
It is still based on the opinion of the listener as to whether it is better or not. It may not be the better one to someone else...it is still a subjective conclusion. If that happened, people would be calling for a full suite of measurements, and if the measurements don't show anything, they will be declared lucky or full of Sh#t.
I don't subscribe to this one bit. I never have. There is absolutely no way to satisfy the scepticism of the objectivist that doesn't involve proof via measurements. "If it cannot be measured, it cannot exist" Go read ASR for about 5 million pages of proof of this mentality.
Obviously, i agree that there has to be immediate A/B testing, in the same environment, same system etc, but if that happens and a result is declared, i think enough has been done to verify the outcome. *But* it's the outcome for that person only, and the responsibility to understand that is on the reader.
This forum has, and always will have, the approach that user experience is equally valid, and should be taken at face value. The onus is on the reader to decide for themselves IF what they read is of any benefit to them, or not.
What i don't want to see is this "burden of proof" approach that is being used to destroy the credibility of people's experiences. It seems common on the extreme Objectivists forum, and I don't want that here.
"Burden of proof" works both ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jul 3, 2022 6:36:21 GMT
I recall a certain sq something or other mocking me on pfm because I liked a CD player that had a DAC chip that was also commonly used in a ghetto blaster. He posted a big picture of a ridiculous looking Californian dude carrying a huge ghetto blaster next to the side of his head.
I hadn't made any claims about technical superiority, just that I liked the way it sounded. (And it did sound good).
Unpleasant individual. I wish I could remember who it was.....
So technical objectivity can work the other way around. Just because something may be a way off the state of the art, or is used in non hifi gear, there's an assumption that it must sound bad.
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,560 
|
Post by optical on Jul 3, 2022 6:40:01 GMT
Quite frankly I don't have time to satisfy the rigourous requirements outlined to satisfy other members requirements of "proof" (or whatever form that takes).
What I do just about have time for is to put a few of my thoughts into a few lines and a few impressions of kit I've bought/am using etc. Which overall I think most people seem to enjoy/appreciate.
If people can't fathom whether these words are written in a subjective context or not is not really my problem nor responsibility. Im certainly not writing them to cause controversy nor encourage anyone to buy anything as a result.
I'm certainly not going to be dictated to regarding "how" I should go about enjoying this hobby, and neither should anyone else, this isn't a scientific journal/publication and as such there is no need to qualify any listening impressions, subjective or not.
There are places for that, we know where they are.
If this results in a few people being less than satisfied with my posts I won't lose any sleep, in fact I suggest you ignore them if they cause you that much issue.
That said I will try and qualify things as best I can, when I can, but the nature of my posts will remain. To change that would be disrespectful to my own beliefs, so no chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by wackjob on Jul 3, 2022 7:00:11 GMT
I recall a certain sq something or other mocking me on pfm because I liked a CD player that had a DAC chip that was also commonly used in a ghetto blaster. He posted a big picture of a ridiculous looking Californian dude carrying a huge ghetto blaster next to the side of his head. I hadn't made any claims about technical superiority, just that I liked the way it sounded. (And it did sound good). Unpleasant individual. I wish I could remember who it was..... So technical objectivity can work the other way around. Just because something may be a way off the state of the art, or is used in non hifi gear, there's an assumption that it must sound bad. Don't take any notice of that *****ADMIN EDIT******* You are quite correct, he is a very unpleasant in fact a complete tosser who you could enjoy punching. I suspect mummy didn't love him and daddy loved him too much. |
|
|
|
Post by karma67 on Jul 3, 2022 7:22:50 GMT
I recall a certain sq something or other mocking me on pfm because I liked a CD player that had a DAC chip that was also commonly used in a ghetto blaster. He posted a big picture of a ridiculous looking Californian dude carrying a huge ghetto blaster next to the side of his head. I hadn't made any claims about technical superiority, just that I liked the way it sounded. (And it did sound good). Unpleasant individual. I wish I could remember who it was..... So technical objectivity can work the other way around. Just because something may be a way off the state of the art, or is used in non hifi gear, there's an assumption that it must sound bad. Don't take any notice of that SQ numbers individual, . You are quite correct, he is a very unpleasant in fact a complete tosser who you could enjoy punching. I suspect mummy didn't love him and daddy loved him too much. well thank god you two can take criticism and are not bitter or hold a grudge eh! lol |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jul 3, 2022 7:32:01 GMT
SO, what happens if someone follows the rules, buys two DACs. Upgrades one, then identifies it 19 times out of 20, and then declares it better due to the change? Would that be enough? I doubt it. It is still based on the opinion of the listener as to whether it is better or not. It may not be the better one to someone else...it is still a subjective conclusion. If that happened, people would be calling for a full suite of measurements, and if the measurements don't show anything, they will be declared lucky or full of Sh#t. I don't subscribe to this one bit. I never have. There is absolutely no way to satisfy the scepticism of the objectivist that doesn't involve proof via measurements. "If it cannot be measured, it cannot exist" Go read ASR for about 5 million pages of proof of this mentality. Obviously, i agree that there has to be immediate A/B testing, in the same environment, same system etc, but if that happens and a result is declared, i think enough has been done to verify the outcome. *But* it's the outcome for that person only, and the responsibility to understand that is on the reader. This forum has, and always will have, the approach that user experience is equally valid, and should be taken at face value. The onus is on the reader to decide for themselves IF what they read is of any benefit to them, or not. What i don't want to see is this "burden of proof" approach that is being used to destroy the credibility of people's experiences. It seems common on the extreme Objectivists forum, and I don't want that here. "Burden of proof" works both ways. well I'm surprised, I didn't expect to get any replies to this thread. Regrettably it seems that at least some of you have not understood. Possibly that is my fault although I have noticed in the past that there seems to be some sort of communication break between enthusiasts of different mindsets. I will tackle a couple of Oli's comments first. SO, what happens if someone follows the rules, buys two DACs. Upgrades one, then identifies it 19 times out of 20, and then declares it better due to the change? Would that be enough? I doubt it.
If the test controls are rigorous enough then the difference is unquestionably real. There is no fundamental reason why you could not improve the sound quality of a DAC by modifying it, assuming that there is 'room for improvement.' If the blind test was passed then it is also massively likely that the improvement would also be measurable. If the blind test was passed but no improvement was measurable, then apply for your Nobel Prize as you will have made a new breakthrough in Physics. Obviously, i agree that there has to be immediate A/B testing, in the same environment, same system etc, but if that happens and a result is declared, i think enough has been done to verify the outcome. *But* it's the outcome for that person only, and the responsibility to understand that is on the reader.Absolutely and no-one has any issue with someone doing a comparison and declaring one thing to be better than another. The only issue is when they then go on to cite a technical reason for their reference, without offering any evidence. For example take the Mutec device. You put one in your system, you perceived an improvement. All fine and dandy. Then someone (I can't recall who) claimed this was due to jitter being reduced. Technical claim. Tony C provided measurements that showed that jitter was reduced, however jitter was already massively below audibility and the amount of jitter reduction with the Mutec was infinitesimal. So no problem with 'I perceived an improvement' - big problem with the technical statement 'This was due to jitter being reduced'. What i don't want to see is this "burden of proof" approach that is being used to destroy the credibility of people's experiences. It seems common on the extreme Objectivists forum, and I don't want that here.That's fine by me. The only thing I take issue with is people extrapolating their own subjective experience to some sort of technical claim. Their experience is 100% valid, the technical claim is not. If they want to make the technical claim as well then they should be required to produce hard evidence of it. Speculating as to the technical reason for the subjective experience is fine. "Burden of proof" works both ways.No, not really. If someone wants to make a technical claim that is not backed up by any known evidence then they should provide their evidence. If I claim that there is a teapot orbiting the sun it is up to me to provide evidence that that is true if I want anyone to take the claim seriously, since it is so massively unlikely to be true. I can't just respond ''Well, you prove that there isn't a teapot orbiting the sun.' |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jul 3, 2022 7:39:25 GMT
Incidently this is not meant as a macca basing post! I fully agree with what your getting across in your post as I've had very similar thoughts for years but now I filter out all the noise from other peoples opinions and make my own judgement according to what I hear, which is probably going against your grain! I'm not really bothered about measurements, altough I appreciate they are very important, for me, it;s more about enjoying music in my own environment and not reallty worrying about anyone else. Absolutely. I have never done any measurements of my system. I have no idea what the in-room response curve is, what the SNR is, what the THD is. For all I know all those parameters may be terrible. But it sounds good to me and that's all that matters. I am fine with the subjective approach. My only issue is with people making unsubstantiated technical claims. They mislead people and are in any case totally unnecessary if one is adopting a wholly subjective approach. |
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jul 3, 2022 7:42:59 GMT
There are millions of teapots orbiting the sun. I have several in my kitchen and can provide photographic proof if you require it
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jul 3, 2022 7:46:16 GMT
There are millions of teapots orbiting the sun. I have several in my kitchen and can provide photographic proof if you require it very good  |
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jul 3, 2022 7:49:44 GMT
Perhaps a teapot orbiting Alpha Centauri would have been a better example. Although with planets already discovered there, maybe that would be a good example of something that is possible but not yet proveable.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jul 3, 2022 7:55:04 GMT
I hope I've now made it petty clear where I stand. Of course there's nothing to stop anyone ignoring me and making technical claims that are not substantiated by anything more than casual, sighted evaluation.
Just don't act all angsty if your technical claim gets challenged. No-one is calling you a liar, no-one is saying that you did not perceive what you said you did. They are just challenging the technical assertion that you derived from your experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jul 3, 2022 7:56:16 GMT
Perhaps a teapot orbiting Alpha Centauri would have been a better example. Although with planets already discovered there, maybe that would be a good example of something that is possible but not yet proveable. I will get you to proof-read my posts in future. For free, obviously. |
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jul 3, 2022 8:00:10 GMT
karma67 - "well thank god you two can take criticism and are not bitter or hold a grudge eh! lol" Haha. Yes, you're right. As a long time hifi forum person, I've received a fair amount of stick over the years, and I'm sure I can't remember most of it in any detail. But that particular piece of mockery, supported as it was by sneering written comments, has remained green and festering in my memory. It was unnecessarily unpleasant, as well as being based on zero experience of the actual item in question. The unacceptable face of technical objectivity.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jul 3, 2022 8:03:14 GMT
Perhaps a teapot orbiting Alpha Centauri would have been a better example. Although with planets already discovered there, maybe that would be a good example of something that is possible but not yet proveable. I will get you to proof-read my posts in future. For free, obviously. Fair do's. It will be a pleasure. But only the astronomy related ones. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jul 3, 2022 8:33:38 GMT
I will get you to proof-read my posts in future. For free, obviously. Fair do's. It will be a pleasure. But only the astronomy related ones. That's fine. It had slipped my memory but Russell was careful to stipulate that his teapot was orbiting between Earth and Mars. Although it has been pointed out '' that this implies that the teapot is physically located between Mars and Earth at all times. Which if true would be a highly irregular orbit requiring constant velocity changes, which is an impossible feat to achieve with current teapot technology.''So he was smarter than me but not by that much. |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,560
|
Post by optical on Jul 3, 2022 9:02:31 GMT
Don't take any notice of that SQ numbers individual, . You are quite correct, he is a very unpleasant in fact a complete tosser who you could enjoy punching. I suspect mummy didn't love him and daddy loved him too much. well thank god you two can take criticism and are not bitter or hold a grudge eh! lol "You two"  Read the posts, not even comparable really are they. I've done my best to answer in a conservative manner, as I always do. If you think otherwise, you think otherwise. (Sorry just realised that may not have been aimed at me, I hope not anyway as I've tried to remain polite and tolerant at all times .... |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,088
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jul 3, 2022 9:08:55 GMT
I recall a certain sq something or other mocking me on pfm because I liked a CD player that had a DAC chip that was also commonly used in a ghetto blaster. He posted a big picture of a ridiculous looking Californian dude carrying a huge ghetto blaster next to the side of his head. I hadn't made any claims about technical superiority, just that I liked the way it sounded. (And it did sound good). Unpleasant individual. I wish I could remember who it was..... So technical objectivity can work the other way around. Just because something may be a way off the state of the art, or is used in non hifi gear, there's an assumption that it must sound bad. Don't take any notice of that *****ADMIN EDIT******* You are quite correct, he is a very unpleasant in fact a complete tosser who you could enjoy punching. I suspect mummy didn't love him and daddy loved him too much. As you're new to the forum, I'll be gentle: We don't do that here. If there has been an issue with a member of another forum, please deal with it there. If it's a member here, deal with it in private. Thanks. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,088
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jul 3, 2022 9:09:20 GMT
well thank god you two can take criticism and are not bitter or hold a grudge eh! lol "You two" Read the posts, not even comparable really are they. I've done my best to answer in a conservative manner, as I always do. If you think otherwise, you think otherwise. (Sorry just realised that may not have been aimed at me, I hope not anyway as I've tried to remain polite and tolerant at all times .... Not talking about you, I think. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,088
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jul 3, 2022 9:10:50 GMT
There are millions of teapots orbiting the sun. I have several in my kitchen and can provide photographic proof if you require it Brilliant as always, Jerry. |
|
|
|
Post by rexton on Jul 3, 2022 9:11:16 GMT
Dyed in the blood subjectivist and Objectionist will never get on, you need individuals who are prepared to accept and evaluate both sides of the scientific argument and give meaningful feedback. It's then upto the individual to see if this helps their sonic journey. They say you can't beat the laws of physics, but then again I prefer to trust my ears (ooooohhhhh the irony and sarcasm of that last statement).
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,088
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jul 3, 2022 9:12:30 GMT
Perhaps a teapot orbiting Alpha Centauri would have been a better example. Although with planets already discovered there, maybe that would be a good example of something that is possible but not yet proveable. Possible, but not yet provable. Describes my approach to HiFi |
|
|
|
Post by karma67 on Jul 3, 2022 11:40:40 GMT
"You two"  Read the posts, not even comparable really are they. I've done my best to answer in a conservative manner, as I always do. If you think otherwise, you think otherwise. (Sorry just realised that may not have been aimed at me, I hope not anyway as I've tried to remain polite and tolerant at all times .... Not talking about you, I think. not at all. |
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Jul 3, 2022 11:46:00 GMT
Perhaps a teapot orbiting Alpha Centauri would have been a better example. Although with planets already discovered there, maybe that would be a good example of something that is possible but not yet proveable. Possible, but not yet provable. Describes my approach to HiFi I suspect a great many well reasoned and intelligent individuals use thiis premise, quite a lot of the respected EE comunity we deal (Both audio & non audio) with use various methods of eliminations to boil away until either the result is obatined or a couple more 'discovered issues' have arisen due to being 'hidden' by another problem. Only until that issue is resolved can they dig deeper into that particular problem or experiment.
One of the reasons we do invest heavily in T&M equipment iis purely so we can remove a great deal of the bullshit which surrounds a lot of the 'audio mystical propaganda'
When I first started playing about with auduo internally Whoo Matron no! (some 30 years ago now) a lot of the results that really were very obvious a good step in the right direction, I initally struggled to really grasp that concept and why i treally should make that positive benefit. While other changes when made in other equipment resulted in a a sideways step at the very best 
Yes they are many factors that can influenece the results, expectation bias, psychoacoustics, power of suggestion, peer pressure etc. Even before you are actually ready to make an assement.
You can shoot me for this one (lord knows It's happen a few times lol) A very well respected, intelligent and incredibily well reasoned gent who I admire a great deal (He was my mentor while I was learning my craft all those years ago) he is still with us and I do chat to him now and again has a very calm and methodical manner he approached what to us as wee whipper snappers were impossible tasks, yet the forman would 'ask' this gent if wouldn't mind machining this piece (in those days you were summonded to the office and given the job for the rest of us) He would smile and say just leave leave it on the end of the bench I'll attend to it when I have finished this project.
What that chap couldn't achieve with all forms of metals wasn't human. My point is this even he was stumped sometimes, so he would go away and make a list of everything that he had tried , what was left to try and lastly what's method could he come up with to make it happen.
I spent 12 months working under 'Don' I took in more information in that short space of time (and it stuck) up to my uni days and beyond.
His mantra was very simple think 'Conan Doyle' he would say. If you have ruled out all possible logical & rational, then only the irrational is left.
Its one I live by, have done ever since!
Audio is just audio, to fully investigate every single aspect of its properties from start to finish, would take a well funded team of post Ph.D doctorates a long time coupled with a seriously well equipped lab (not just EE) and lets be absolutely reasonable here, There are far more pressing matters that the human race needs to attend to right now.
Sorry I missed the premise, its straightforward IF you hear a difference there is a difference to you. Trust your instincts otherwise life is full of self doubts and what if's
|
|
edward
Regular
Still prospecting?
Posts: 194
|
Post by edward on Jul 3, 2022 20:06:29 GMT
When buying stuff I would love to do double blind tests etc to narrow things down. However that is, for the most part, impractical.
I'm acutely aware of confirmation bias throwing me down cul-de-sacs so I try avoid that by a combination of trying to understand the theory behind a particular item, its measurements and opinions given by people I trust (many on the fora we all inhabit). And then, subject to budget, taking a chance.
Usually it works out in that the 'improvement' is satisfying with a greater sense of musical enjoyment and engagement (that is to my taste which may not be the same for someone else). But even then I'm still aware that it may simply be my bias (my subjectivity) that is confirming my purchase. So for stuff that only provides a subtle change I recognise it is easy for my subjective opinion to lean towards a positive opinion. I'll just have to live with that uncertainty. I partly mitigate that at times by removing for a while the new item.
But occasionally the change is so dramatic that I can discard the fear of confirmation bias playing a part.
Above is a bit of a ramble but that is how I try to balance technical and subjective conclusions.
|
|
I fully agree with what your getting across in your post as I've had very similar thoughts for years but now I filter out all the noise from other peoples opinions and make my own judgement according to what I hear, which is probably going against your grain! I'm not really bothered about measurements, altough I appreciate they are very important, for me, it;s more about enjoying music in my own environment and not reallty worrying about anyone else. 
