bifcake
bifcake's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 27 2005 - 2:27am
Art Dudley's woodies vs fuzzies
ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm

Your position that it makes no sense to be on either side of the debate is perhaps why Stereophile - in the business of offering useful reviews of equipment - has chosen to be on both sides, offering both objective and subjective information on a majority of equipment reviews.

The problem for objectivists you point to is that recorded music is the product of various interpreters of reality. Indeed, that is the case, and that is why the objective measurements provided in reviews are not derived from recorded music, but instead from simple repeatable laboratory signals.

As to the notion that if subjective evaluation is the only standard applied no system will "sound bad" since someone, somewhere would like the sound of every system, consider that equipment designers whose task it is to produce a particular sonic signature are not seeking out the rare someone somewhere but the largest number of listeners (purchasers) possible.

I think of myself as a subjectivist in that I insist that subjective evaluation is the final test. Note that I didn't say the only test. Never buy a piece of equipment solely on the basis that the graphs look the way you want them to. Use listening, in your own environment and with a variety music that you know well, as the final selection criterion. Likewise, don't bother to make comparative listening auditions of equipment that doesn't possess measurement characteristics of the sort you are looking for.

Perhaps I am the one, rather than you, who is missing something, but I think reconciling the debate is very straightforward, and that is why I give more credence to the Stereophile reviewing process than to that of other mags who pay little attention to objective measurement. Sure, I have a tendency to gig JA now and then for his penchant to measure everything he can lay his hands on, but I do keep subscribing and reading the reviews before making any equipment decisions.

Did I miss your point? If so, try to clarify it, if not, rest easy knowing that both is the answer not either or. Remember, however that if, in the end, your favorite music just doesn't sound right to you, you'll have to start over.

Cheers,

bjh
bjh's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 12 2005 - 2:33pm

"As I see it, the objectivist movement tries to establish some sort of objective criteria upon which all equipment judging is based, with the 'live' sound being the objective standard."

I believe this is the first time I've ever encountered 'live' sound being raised as the standard for objective criteria.

On the other hand I'd say you were spot on with respect to the emphasis being on using objective criteria to judge equipment. This generally covers two aspects:

1) Measurements
2) Controlled Blind Tests

Now neglecting the topic of how measurements/metrics correlate with 'good' performance (for a amp, speaker, or whatever) it is trivially obvious that live music can have no bearing here, e.g. can we *measure* the TIM of live music to compare with that of an amplifier?

As far as controlled blind tests go they are almost exclusive employed to compare two test units (2 amplifiers, 2 CDPs, etc.) under conditions that are intended to eliminate listener bias. Now neglecting the efficacy of any particular blind testing methodology it is again clear that live music as a standard doesn't even enter the equation, one does not compare an amplifier, nor even a complete system, against live music in a controlled blind test.

---

My understanding of 'live' music as standard/reference has always been in the context of establishing the paramount goal for an audio system, the goal being to replicate (at least the the greatest possible degree, perhaps a moving target) live acoustic instruments in a performance settings; the emphasis on *acoustic* instruments being obvious, e.g. an unamplified flute, double bass, etc. being in theory *pure* sounds vs. say the sound of a electronic keyboard which involves an entire chain of electronics and possibly even speakers.

bifcake
bifcake's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 27 2005 - 2:27am

BJH,

What would be your reference standard for measuring performance vis-a-vis sound if you're not going to use a live performance as your reference? Unless you have some sort of a concrete reference, all you're doing is measuring relative performance of one piece of equipment to another. In a double blind study, all you will find out is whether or not a particular person/reviewer is able to tell the two pieces of equipment apart. If they can, what do you with that data? If they can't, what do you do with that data? The way I see it, unless you have some kind of a performance bar, you're not really getting anywhere.

If you're measuring a piece of equipment and two pieces of equipment sound vastly different, but measure similarly, that means that there's something that you're not measuring. I have yet to see specs that would definitively tell me what a piece of equipment actually sounds like. Hence, it seems there's stuff that's not being measured. I don't know what it is, but it seems that way to me. Furthermore, what is the design goal? Is it to produce flat frequency response? You could, but then all you're doing is faithfully reproducing the mixing and recording engineers interpretations of the recorded sound. Is that the goal? Subjectivists will argue that they don't care about faithfully reproducing someone else's interpretation if they can't enjoy the music. Is that a valid argument? By the same token, you could argue that their enjoyment of a distortive interpretation is invalid. They will come back with: who's to judge their enjoyment? They enjoy what they enjoy and isn't that the whole point? That's why I thought that live music is the objective standard, the bar that all equipment manufacturers should try and reach.

What I'm getting to is this: You have to have some sort of an objective standard that EVERYONE down the recording and playback chain should adhere to in order for the objective judgments to make any sense. That means that there have to be recording standards and certification boards that will judge the validity and the setup of the recording equipment and technique as well as mixing and mastering equipment and techniques. Otherwise, it just makes no sense.

Jeff Wong
Jeff Wong's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 years 3 days ago
Joined: Sep 6 2005 - 3:28am

AlexO - I think several of us have touched on what you're asking in the thread below:

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...part=1&vc=1

By my way of thinking, I'd prefer the oft cited "straight wire with gain" approach. If we can reproduce what is encoded accurately, with little or no distortion, then the last hurdle is to record with the same goals in mind. Until then, I'll try to enjoy the music, distortive interpretations and all.

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm

"That means that there have to be recording standards and certification boards that will judge the validity and the setup of the recording equipment and technique as well as mixing and mastering equipment and techniques. Otherwise, it just makes no sense"

Surely you jest!! And just what Big Brother will establish these standards and enforce their application? Will the standards be biased in favor of the work of the "boy band" record producers who cater to their buyers equipment and tastes or toward those few of us who buy orchestral releases or live jazz? You're just toying with us, right?

Jim Tavegia
Jim Tavegia's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 4:27pm

You have some issues to deal with here. Live vs recorded.

What is the definition of "live" as in a true "acoustic" performance or attending a "live" concert listening through some PA system of questionable quality. Although some "PA" amplifiers sound decent, not many if any would grace the Stereophile Class A product category. Speakers forgeddaboudit. Although I have heard some Bag End that I have enjoyed listening to, but I tried to get their rep to help us with speaker issues and I could not even get a demo for our $5+ million Sanctuary. I wanted to use Bryston amps there as well, but the sound contractor was "not familar with them"! Geez.

Without trying to elect John Atkinson for President that it might seem I often do, how he records and what he tries to capture and deliver to us in recreating THAT experience should not go unnoticed. It is also why I re-read most of his reviews, and others of course, in trying to quantify what he measures and hears. Trying to capture the "birth" of the performance carries much weight for me. Does John Marks know what a great violin sound like? Absolutement!!!!!

As an acoustic guitarist, AD's comments also carry much weight, as does John Marks, and others like Wes Phillips who has made a career in making product we listen to. All things turntable...who else but MF would you talk to? If he got $5 for every turntable and cartridge he has listen to in his lifetime his Continuum would be paid for by now. But, I digress.

This debate will go on, but I trust recording engineers with a strong background in audio engineering to spill the beans on "Is it live or is it Memorex?" With Ed Meitner and DSD that question almost seems comical now.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 years 5 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am

Well, I must have lost track of what objectivists and subjectivists have been arguing about!

I thought that subjectivists and objectivists (in audio) both use "live music" as an ideal, it's just that subjectivists say that they are able toaccurately delineate the differences between gear in open, unblinded, listening conditions; while objectivists postulate that much of the so called 'differences' between pieces of gear are placebo, and that the only way to accurately judge gear is with controlled double blind listening 'challenges.'

Where did I veer off the road of truth?

bjh
bjh's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 12 2005 - 2:33pm

AlexO,

I was merely articulating the objectivist position as I personally understand it for the purpose of indicating how IMHO that posiition is divorced from utilization of a 'live' reference in any meaningful manner.

However to be frank those views are completely discordant with my own. I rate myself a firm subjectivist, one who believes that accuracy in a reproduction system correlates positively with its capability to emulate a live performance of acoustic instruments. Futher I believe that only listening is the judge of how well, i.e. to what degree, the system meets this goal. To complete the disclosure I personally think that objective measurements, to say nothing of things such as DBTs, are for the most part useless in this regard. If there is anything objectivist about my views it would be merely the faint hope that some day useful measurement will be developed/discovered ... but I'm hardly turning blue waiting!

I must add however that while that pretty much sums up my philosophical stance, belief in *the absolute sound* if you like, yet I'm more pragmatic in practice. I do think a system can be judged without constant comparison to a live reference. I want a system that can belt out classic rock when I'm so inclined and I can swap components and judge for myself if I'm pleased that say A is better that B at accomplishing a desirable result ... all without ever having heard the band in a live setting!

Likewise with chamber works, etc. Superior performance for me is all about the creation of the *illusion* in a pleasing manner, the in-room event possessing its own perfectly sufficient reality, and if a component improves this reality, removes annoyances such as grit, glare, dynamic compression, whatever ... then it's better! The live reference never completely dissapears, e.g. I *know* how a reed instrument can create a poignant yearning effect and I know when a system fails to bring this out, that it can veil such nuance and in doing so rob the performance of emotional content. One need only swap a component or cable and easily judge by simple listening if the change (assuming one) is better or worst at reproducing such detail ... simply put I'm not hamstrung just because I'm not listening to live performances of same every day of the week!

clarkjohnsen
clarkjohnsen's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 8 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:02am

I have no objection to the discipline of DBTs. Only problem is, they take time and they take rigor. Dozens of manhours will be consumed in any single comparison of, say, CD fluid treatments -- and there at least twenty such I can name offhand!

Now, I have offered several times to perform these tests for the people who *demand* them (and by the way, I have been responsible for testing real astronauts, so I have the chops) IF they will put some money where their mouths are. Otherwise I see no hope of ever satisfying their appetites.

A profound silence has always greeted my offers.

In government, when the feds tell the states they must do something, such laws are known as "unfunded mandates" and that's exactly the game the DBTers are playing with the subjectivists.

clark

jazzfan
jazzfan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:55am

You're point about DBTs is very well taken. Mine main objection with the folks over in the DBT camp, not the entire objectivist camp, mind you, but just the DBT wing, is that they tend to leave no room for those individuals who can hear the difference during a DBT. These "golden eared" individuals are dismissed as mere statistical anomalies and therefore the tests remain valid and all amps, CD players, compressed files, etc sound alike.

Monty has that Left Wing / Right Wing poll going on the forum but I'm beginning to think that based on the fact that most of the members around here don't seem to believe much in DBTs and coupled with today's political climate, I'm afraid to say that that would tend to make us all a pack of liberals. Now before you all start to go nuts, let me explain how I came to that conclusion.

First:

"most of the members around here don't seem to believe much in DBTs" - not believing in DBT's would mean someone having a strong enough faith in their own ability to make judgements and not just follow the crowd. As in, this Bose Wave Radio is good as a $5000 component stereo system and we have the Double Blind Test results from last week at the mall of America to prove it!

Second:

"today's political climate" - take a stand, any stand, that differs even slightly the norm, center or middle of the road and you're called a radical by the right if your stand was slightly to the left or a facist by the left if you've stand was slightly to the right. Case in point, Joe Lieberman just lost the Senate Democratic primary in Connecticut to businessman Ned Lamont. Mr. Lamont, as anyone with a brain in their head can plainly see, is not a flaming liberal but because of his anti-Iraq war stance is now being painted as such.

Okay, so in our case we have a group of individuals who steadfastly refuse to listen to reason when it comes to audio equipment, ignoring the best efforts of many researchers within the field and more importantly, the opinions of hundred, if not thousands, of their peers as expressed in form of double blind test results. At this point in time the only people I see out there crazy enough to swim against the tide of public opinion are the liberals, so I think that makes us all liberals.

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm

I never thought I'd see the day, Jazzfan. Here you are, with a bunch of knowlege and opinions about music and gear, a penchant for finding and introducing to the forum folks, new groups or new recordings you've found, and yet you let yourself be sucked into a discussion of "politics". In that area, you start a logical string, and then you fall flat - to wit:

You say, "At this point in time the only people I see out there crazy enough to swim against the tide of public opinion are the liberals, so I think that makes us all liberals."

Liberals, my friend, set the standard for adherance to the tide of public opinion - government policy set by poll taking, the notion that the Constitution is a "living document", "it takes a village...", political correctness, etc. etc.

Your case in point also falls flat. The popular press tells us that the tide of public opinion is against the war in Iraq. The Democrat party has abandoned Joe Lieberman - a dedicated and sensible Liberal - on the basis of the single issue of the war. No matter who opposed him, so long as he was anti-war, he'd have the party's support despite all the support Lieberman has given to liberal policies over many years. Liberals simply can't go against the current polls.

Where important stuff, like music systems are concerned I've taken a stand for the right of the individual audiophile to decide for himself on the basis of what he is able to hear. Individual Liberty for as much and as many of us and as long as possible despite the tide of public opinion and government policy.
That's pretty much my position on any issue. Would you say that makes me right or left? Should I care what you might think? Are labels necessary?

Over on another thread, there's a guy who wants some advice regarding an upgrade of his analog rig. So far, I'm the only one who has taken a shot at helping him. The rest of you guys, many of whom are more capable than I to offer suggestions, are too busy arguing politics. What a drag!

Perhaps I've fallen into your old trap of stirring the pot, but I couldn't resist responding to such a specious argument. Next time you feel like holding forth on political issues, maybe you should go out instead and have a drink in a nice bar with live jazz.

bifcake
bifcake's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 27 2005 - 2:27am

What does American politics, political correctness and all of the other nonsense have to do with the subject at hand? My original question pertained to things audio and the establishment of a reviewing criteria that everyone can agree to. What does that have to do with the price of bacon?

If you guys don't mind, can we please stick to the subject at hand? It's not even pertinent to discuss the DBTs vs subjectivists, rather, how would you go about establishing a reviewing criteria given that the prevailing objectivist and subjectivist viewpoints are flawed?

Thanks

Log in or register to post comments
-->
  • X