Food for thought for all us audiophiles


Hello fellow Audiogon members,

I came upon this article the other day. I'm afraid the sentiments revealed in it are all too common to those on the outside of our hobby.

Cheers,

krjazz

http://phineasgage.wordpress.com/2007/10/13/audiophiles-and-the-limitations-of-human-hearing/
krooney
Well I will leave the psychology to the professionals and those with psychology degrees like my mother. Speaking of mothers, we mom and I attended RMAF on saturday. If any one can hear the difference in systems she can at 60 years of age she still has execelent hearing. She agreed this years show was much better than last, other than alot of the rooms being to loud.

This article reminds me of a scene in a movie where Robin Williams is an english teacher at a private school. The students are in the courtyard and he has them walk one at a time. He pays particular attention to how each persons stride is different. He then has them walk together they start out all walking to their own beat and it doesn't take very long for everyone to start walking in the same cadence. I for the life of me can't remember the name of the movie.

The article reminds me a pavlovs dogs (oops I said I wouldn't do that) are we all cut from the same mold, do we all conform to what others in society think we should be. Do we even conform to our social class structure.

This forum brings out the best (About Lugnut) and worst in us (The great cable debate). As a comunity do we shun others for having a less expensive system than our own. I don't think in the past 4 years I have ever read a comment bashing someone for not being able to afford the outlandish.

As for listening I noticed monster cable was chosen as the competitor. Does monster make a bad cable no they make a perfectly acceptable cable. Is it over priced IMHO yes.

I guess what I am trying to get at is, at my point in life I like to think that I now have just enough wisdom to develope my own opinions and not follow the crowd.

Happy listening

Michael
An interesting article. I suspect that much of the differences many of us hear can be explained by this. I personally have caught myself "hearing" differences based on my expectations and desires rather than what I actually hear. And I call myself an especially objective, analytical person. But there is one major problem with this article. In fact the problem is pretty the same as the problem the writer is lambasting. The article contains no information on testing "audiophiles" to determine if they actually can hear a difference. In other words, the writer made up his mind then dragged together a bunch of semi-related information to support his position, rather than running double blind tests himself. A bit hypocritical if you ask me.
Instead of suggesting the convergent effect for cases of consensus, I’d like to suggest sheer politeness. It’s better than turning to the person listening next to you and asking “Are you DEAF?!?”

"Apart from the overall lack of evidence and the sheer physical implausibility of some of the products, there is some classic research in social psychology that have implications for this topic."

‘Overall lack of evidence’ of what? Is there proof Led Zeppelin is better than Beethoven? It’s about perception (and preferences). I’m sure perceptions can be colored, but more important is simply the ability to perceive and the value placed on differences. Years ago, my brother thought I was crazy for spending money on expensive cables. He is an electrical engineer and thought there should be no audible difference in speaker wire. I sat him down one day and played the system through lamp cord then through the cable I had at the time (MIT MH-750 – yes, it was awhile ago). He said’ yea, it sounds a little better’, shrugged his shoulders and left the room. To me it was like night and day but he was just not as passionate about sound as I was. The difference meant nothing to him even though it existed. The same difference in sound can be experienced as completely different magnitudes by different listeners. It’s similar to how one person finds a painting beautiful while another sees it and walks by without giving it a second thought. Oh, and well engineered products usually test better, sound better, and cost better. :)

"While our senses are rather limited, our ability to fool ourselves is almost endless."

Speak for yourself.

"In fact, cognitive dissonance theory predicts that the more you pay for the cables, the more inclined you will be to conclude that they sound good, regardless of the actual quality of the cables."

I would argue there are more people who set up brand new expensive pieces of equipment and are disappointed at first hearing it, than those who love it, until of course it breaks in. How then would this be explained? (OK I’m sure someone will say its initial buyer’s remorse that the kids will never get braces…..until you get over that.)

I don’t think (in most cases) owning expensive equipment is simply a matter of people being able to afford it so they buy it. I used to work in an audio store and most of the audiophiles were from modest means. They bought expensive products for the sound it created, not because they were wealthy and could afford it.

"Is it really possible to tell the difference between normal high-end equipment, and equipment that veers into the audiophile range?"

Yes. I have many friends who are not into the hobby but have heard expensive systems and “get it”. They have been able to hear the differences in equipment incredibly well even though their ears are not ‘educated’. In fact one of them is a building contractor whose hearing is becoming impaired and he is an incredibly astute listener.

"In other words, it’s not really worth trusting an audio reviewer who is older than you are, because there is a range of higher frequencies that you can hear while they cannot."

How do you know a 25 year old reviewer hasn’t blown his/her eardrums out with ear buds/pyle driver subs/the new straight pipes he put on his Harley?

As a person ages, their hearing normally changes very gradually. Perception of live music, and reproduced music will change as well – but equally. This does not mean that a reviewer cannot distinguish differences in equipment it’s just their frame of reference has changed. Even with reduced sensitivity to higher frequencies acuity can be spot on. I would be more inclined to take the advice of someone with 40 years experience than rookie with ‘fresh’ ears. Therefore I would suggest extending a reviewers useful life to 62 years so they can at least collect Social Security.

Yes, those are common sentiments outside our hobby and even inside. It seems like the objectivists have such a hard time with the subjectivists. Art is subjective and fun. Is that a problem?
"Instead of suggesting the convergent effect for cases of consensus, I’d like to suggest sheer politeness. It’s better than turning to the person listening next to you and asking “Are you DEAF?!?”"
-Hifibri
Wonderful observation, and hilarious too!
Curious all this.

My wife's sister's husband is an engineer, music lover, and wire skeptic. Big amps and Ohm speakers? OK. But wire is wire. He also says old men (which he is rapidly becoming) can't hear the difference if there is any anyway because "our hearing is shot".

I am in early middle age and my eyes are going and I have to ask people to repeat themselves. But my "ears" have never been better. By that, I mean I am able to pick out subtle differences in musical performances, recordings and stereo systems that I could not detect or articulate as a younger person. I have "learned" to listen better. I would also argue that there is a lot more to "hearing" than high frequency extension, such as things like spatial cues and PRAT.

With that said, I am wondering if any of you can point me towards any published double blind tests that describe:
1) perceived differences in audio equipment - say one of the recognized "best" CD players under $500 vs the "best" under $2000 vs the "best" over $10,000
2) perceived differences in audio cables across a similarly broad price range
3) a test of a group of self-proclaimed audiophiles vs a group of non-audiophiles in terms of ability to distinguish differences between wires or equipment
4) a test of a group of older people vs a group of younger people in terms of ability to distinguish differences between wires or equipment?

Turns out the wife of the above mentioned engineer (otherwise known as my sister-in-law) is an epidemiologist who recently developed the double blind test for a successful cancer vaccine. If I can find the time and overcome inertia, I am considering trying to get the wife to design a little study to address these silly questions, and support or refute her husbands biases. And that would be either a very good or a very bad idea, or both.

Now I just need to convince a local stereo dealer to lend me several $100K worth of stuff...