[pgawan2b]

Is there a correlation between one's audiogram results and one's preferred sound?

I recently had my hearing checked by an audiologist. To my surprise, it was better than I expected. In fact, the audiogram results for both ears were quite flat suggesting that I hear tones across most all audible frequencies at the same audible levels.

So, I started thinking. All this talk of warm and bright sounding equipment, is this really a factor of the limits of our own hearing abilities? Do you know of any high end equipment reviewers that publish their audiograms in combination with their reviews?

[JerryM]

Good question. 

What does cinnamon taste like?

Being a reviewer can be a tough job.

In any case; in order, here is how I would answer your questions:

No.
Probably not.
No.

YMMV, JMHO, etc.,

Jerry

[Photon46]

This old cavil gets raised constantly and I thinks its a fallacious assumption that there's a one to one correlation between an audiogram plot and one's preference in sound or one's acuity as a listener. There are more aspects to accurate sound than mere frequency response; dynamics, phase coherence, driver integration, low level detail, the list goes on and on. I've heard many stories of elderly conductors whose hearing was miserable as plotted on the audiogram but yet still amazed their more youthful colleagues with their ability to discern the finest nuances of how the orchestra was performing. Over the years, my wife has had to deal with severe hearing loss from progressive otosclerosis but she still retains her ability to discern the character of a audio system quite well to my amazement. As I've gotten older, I certainly can't hear the dog whistle frequencies above 12,500 hz. as well as I used to, but my basic preferences in sound haven't changed. Each of us hears differently when young  and we  all age differently, we can never know with certainty how someone else perceives a stimulus. Look at the VAST difference in preferred sounds of audio systems and speakers among audiophiles, we evidently have quite a few differences as to what we affix most importance to. Aging ears rate way down the list in factors that influence reproduction preferences IMO.

[jtwrace]

Most reviewers do not even post room measurements from their setup.  So, it's all pretty much useless before they even listen.  Every speaker reacts differently in the same room...it requires proper setup to get the full potential of that speaker in that room.  Rarely do I ever see this done. 

[pgawan2b]

I wouldn't expect a one to one correlation, especially given all the variables; however I would expect our ability to hear frequencies to have some correlation even if not statistically significant.  Then again, maybe there are too many variables for any of them to have a correlation.

Also, I agree that when one sense begins to fail, our other senses can heighten leaving us the ability to maintain our level of awareness.  This is good news too.  Hopefully I can continue to enjoy music for many years to come.

Not so sure I buy into the idea that being a reviewer is a tough job...

[Photon46]

I think being a GOOD reviewer of any subjective matter is very tough, one of the more difficult things on the planet. All of us have opinions, but that is not the same thing as being an informed and knowledgeable reviewer. A reviewer of substance needs a knowledge base of historical comparative precedents and informed understanding of how the reviewed article fits into the current historical context of products, art, or performance. If they are reviewing audio, hopefully they can provide a sense of how it will integrate into more than one system or category of partnered products. Conveying subtle nuances of musical performance in written language is not easy to do without quickly repeating yourself ad nauseum, our language isn't exactly running over with meaningful adjectives  pertaining to musical expression. We have to borrow half of what terms we use from other tongues like Italian Admittedly, by my standards, there are a lot of less than stellar reviewers that fail on one or more counts. However, excellence in any category of endeavor is rare, isn't it?

[geowak]

For evaluating audio equipment as to whether I like it or not, I would rate several factors as ones I have learned are very important. All are factors that I can work with, they are within my control.

1. Reputation of the company, fine sound, great service, reasonable warranty, quality parts, innovative engineering and helpful reps available for your concerns and questions. ( I had a problem with a company in the past that I could almost never get a hold of, when I had a problem with their gear. I think they were more interested in selling gear than repairing their broken gear)
2. Self audition of sound equipment rather than taking advice from Hi-Fi Mags.
3. Take into consideration your room and acoustics. Some companies will allow a home trial. That is great!
4. Self education of audio and it's principles. That is where AC really shines. People who love audio helping others.
5. A real effort to NOT be influenced by the HYPE around a product. The hype is generated in audio forums, audio mags/journals, advertisement and fans.
6. A real understanding of the limitations on one's own hearing and tastes. Also the extent of one's own obstinacy.

As for audiograms or other technical info, although it's educational, it does not steer me one way or another. Although I do find the audio critic webpages very entertaining and somewhat useful.

[JRace]

Most reviewers do not even post room measurements from their setup.  So, it's all pretty much useless before they even listen.  Every speaker reacts differently in the same room...it requires proper setup to get the full potential of that speaker in that room.  Rarely do I ever see this done.

I, and my fellow reviews at Secrets, do adjust the room and speakers everytime we change components. We just don't always write down the process (as most find it tedious and boring).

My day job is testing hearing and fitting hearing aids, and my night job is reviewing stereo gear.

I can tell you with 100% confidence that an Audiogram has ZERO corolation to a persons ability to review and or creictally listen to stereo gear.

1) Audiometric testing is done only in the speech band (250 Hz - 8 kHz)
2) Audiometric testing is done to determine thresholds (how soft can you hear the tone) and word recognition.
3) The music processing centers are not the same as the language processing centers.

I would in fact defer to a 70 year old audiphile who has spent 50+ years listening to gear over a 25 year old with 5 years experience. Becoming a good listener is about experience and product understaning, not hearing thresholds.

As for anyone who thinks it is not a tough job, trust me it is.
One of the toughest days of my life was boxing up the Bryston 28BSST2 monoblocks to send the back.
Emotionally and physiclly painful 

For the record, my audiogram:
           LT / RT
250   5/5
500   10/5
1000 -5/0
2000 0/0
3000 5/10
4000 5/5
6000 10/10
8000 0/-5

[pgawan2b]

Thanks for your comments JRace.  Yeah, I guess if I had to part with any Bryston gear, it would be a rough day.