2. tech-talk
  3. 142183-20253

The invention of measurements and perception

This is going to be pretty airy-fairy. Sorry.

Let’s talk about how measurements get invented, and how this limits us.

One of the great works of engineering, science, and data is finding signals in the noise. What matters? Why? How much?

My background is in computer science, and a little in electrical engineering. So the question of what to measure to make systems (audio and computer) "better" is always on my mind.

What’s often missing in measurements is "pleasure" or "satisfaction."

I believe in math. I believe in statistics, but I also understand the limitations. That is, we can measure an attribute, like "interrupts per second" or "inflamatory markers" or Total Harmonic Distortion plus noise (THD+N)

However, measuring them, and understanding outcome and desirability are VERY different. Those companies who can do this excel at creating business value. For instance, like it or not, Bose and Harman excel (in their own ways) at finding this out. What some one will pay for, vs. how low a distortion figure is measured is VERY different.

What is my point?

Specs are good, I like specs, I like measurements, and they keep makers from cheating (more or less) but there must be a link between measurements and listener preferences before we can attribute desirability, listener preference, or economic viability.

What is that link? That link is you. That link is you listening in a chair, free of ideas like price, reviews or buzz. That link is you listening for no one but yourself and buying what you want to listen to the most.

E
erik_squires
cleeds
2,065 posts
 
kosst_amojan
What I mean by "what’s with you" is you repeatedly come at me out of pure ignorance, such as now, or you’re just inventing a circumstance out of thin air to reframe something I’ve said, like you did the last we met on the Tekton thread with your "one complaint" silliness.
I don’t know what you’re talking about. Frankly, you sound paranoid. Your claim that, "In the strictest scientific sense, there is no such thing as music, or sound, or color, or hot or cold," is absurd. Your notion that I suffer from "pure ignorance" for noting that is equally absurd.

You have acquired a cherished religious belief, which is fine. But your fervor is proselytizing it, and insisting that your faith is an Absolute Truth, is where you run into trouble with those who think for themselves.

Beware the audio guru.
wqgq_641
27 posts
 
These discussions remind me of analagous discussion in epistemology except the study of listening is much easier than the studying of reading because a music listener doesn't have to think about the worldviews of the composer, intended audience, and players, (but maybe do for the worldviews of the HiFi manufacturers and audio engineers - <i>pace</i> Benchmark DAC).I find @khosst_amojan's arguments closest to the worldview of pessimistic realism, itself a depressing subset of modernism which has been replaced by post-modernism precisely because it collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions. My own worldview identifies most clearly  with critical realism which does allow for currently unmeasurable differences in waveforms to be audible after a critical dialog and yes I can hear the difference power cables make even though those differences are currently unmeasurable. That said I've yet to see any serious attempt to verify the Shunyata thesis that the first few feet connected to the transformer change the behaviour of the transformer?
clearthink
672 posts
 

kosst_amojan"What exactly is the numeric value of blue? What is the quantifiable value of pain? What value is a D note? There aren’t any. The quantifiable values of the phenomenon have nothing to do with the actual experience. No part of our biology is counting wavelengths to determine blue or a D note, and those values don’t even come close to describing the experience of them. This is a widely accepted truth in neuroscience"

It is apparent, demonstrated, and obvious that this posting genius is a graduate of Cheech and Chong University and it is most likely that his introductory courses in electronics were instructed by Dr. Timothy Leary and as for " widely accepted truth in neuroscience" the genius offers no data, evidence, or reference for his claim, assertion or belief. Nevertheless he is authorized, allowed, and permitted to post his beliefs here and others are free to consider, accept, or reject his claims which should probably be considered under the influence of the type of substances I have thankfully always avoided and suggest, recommend, and encourage you to do the same as these claims show, demonstrate, and reveal the consequences of polluting your mind with mind altering substances that alter, cloud, and confuse the user's sense of facts, truth, and reality.    
mapman's avatar
mapman
15,679 posts
 
Beauty is in the ear of the beholder, AND it changes all the time for countless reasons. Predicting it is futile. Good science and engineering in the gear making the sound however is the only practical means to help ever realize it. Specs and measurements done properly help educated people make good decisions but alone still guarantees nothing. Its all a puzzle that some will master and enjoy, others not so much. Knowledge is always the key. Obfuscation and disinformation inevitably encountered along the way only hurts. Gotta be able to sort through the nonsense and focus on the facts. That’s pretty much all one has to rely on.
twoleftears's avatar
twoleftears
1,457 posts
 

Aporias to the left, aporias to the right....

What is one to do?

More to discover