[Rob Babcock]

Just curious about this.  I'm a mod at another forum where the prevailing attitude is "if I can't measure it it doesn't exist."  Extremely objectivist with little emphasis placed on subjective listening or opinion.  This site really tends the other way, but with some common sense.  So I figured to poll to see just where we stand.  Please pick the closest to your opinion, and post your reasoning if you like.

[DVV]

Just curious about this.  I'm a mod at another forum where the prevailing attitude is "if I can't measure it it doesn't exist."  Extremely objectivist with little emphasis placed on subjective listening or opinion.  This site really tends the other way, but with some common sense.  So I figured to poll to see just where we stand.  Please pick the closest to your opinion, and post your reasoning if you like.

Just a hint, Rob - some of us, like Dan Banquer, Hugh Dean, myself and a few others, who are into designing, naturally tend to have a different view on specs, derived by measurement. To us, measurements are essential in the process of engineering, so we'll be somewhere between your categories.

But in terms of how I evaluate a ready made unit, my answer under 3) is what I actually think.

Cheers,
DVV

[Rob Babcock]

I've "talked" (in the online sense) to other designers:  I can assure you their opinions run the gamut, too.  I also voted "#3".  No one can convince me we can describe sound adequately with just the measurements we use now.  However, I do think one day we will be able to.  That's just the optimistic scientist in me, I guess.  Everying that's not flatly in violation of the laws of physics, is inevitable.

Actually, the way you describe it falls under #3 almost word for word.

[brucegel]

I cast my vote in category four because I won't allow my mind to fool me intellectually into giving the green light to a vanishingly low noise floor or a smooth frequency plot of a speaker.The industry has to rely on specs just like some folks rely on a particular religious tome or doctrine or constitution in order to find footing.If you can't hear differences in performance or never learned how to listen carefully than really the spec thing is moot or ancillary in an almost specious way.The designers have to grapple with this soup but the end consumer just needs to know how to listen.This is a great topic and in the end specs can and do profoundly mislead the average audiophile.By way of example I recall in the seventies the second coming of audio designers hovered about the ether ...and HIS NAME WAS CARVER, can I get an amen.Anyone knows that the magnetic cube amp was daring to be sure but talk about razors and glass shards, that thing was a screech owl.I had to buy a counterpoint tube pre to stop the bleeding.

[Daniel]

I voted for #5.  Specs are important for design and trouble shooting.  After that, its just the ears that count.

[JLM]

IMO we hear with ears and brains.  Ears to gather the information and the brain to make sense of the information.  That same brain (but other side) is also at work in most of us, to make sense (reconcile) what we're hearing with the nuts and bolts of the design.

I voted for #3.  (Good question)

[Tonto Yoder]

.... That's just the optimistic scientist in me, I guess.
....

Optimistic scientist?   I thought you were a "Scientific  Onanist"??  

[Rob Babcock]

I actually had to google to see what the fuck you're talking about.  Now that I did, I can't decide whether I should laugh my ass or want to kick your ass!

No, I've decided- I'm laughing my ass off!

Thanks, Tonto.  The word for today is "onanist!"

[Rob Babcock]

Damn, Tonto- you're either an extremely learned man........or an onanist yourself!

[DVV]

I've "talked" (in the online sense) to other designers:  I can assure you their opinions run the gamut, too.  I also voted "#3".  No one can convince me we can describe sound adequately with just the measurements we use now.  However, I do think one day we will be able to.  That's just the optimistic scientist in me, I guess.  Everying that's not flatly in violation of the laws of physics, is inevitable.

Actually, the way you describe it falls under #3 almost word for word.

We could argue about specs no end, but let me put it this way, as a personal example.

Someone shows me an amp which is ultra linear and has a great damping factor, say 200:1 into 8 ohms, 20...20,000 Hz. Unlike most (I believe), I wouldn't jump up from happiness because we all know a good damping factor is necessary, rather I'd peek inside to count the number od devices the man uses at the output. If I see less than three or four pairs, depending on device type, I'd walk away, because I'd know he probably used a lot of feedback to get it that low.

And if he does have an inductor at the output, I'd KNOW for a fact the man is using a truckful of NFB.

The point is, specs are MOST useful if you know how to interpret them properly. They do tell us quite a lot, perhaps even most of the story, but I know for a fact they can never tell the WHOLE story, not even electrically, let alone acoustically.

While experimenting the other day, I brainstormed a method of connecting the circuit that I have never seen done anywhere before. I have no idea if I just innovated or not, nor do I care, but I do know that amp will sound better than your ordinary types. It will have better real life speaker control because it is very insesitive to speakers, even such catastrophic loads as 2 ohms in parallel with 3.3uF. Try that at home if you want to burn your amp, or chech out whether its protection circuits still work.

However, while I now know for a fact that it will keep its cool far longer and far better than all others I have see to date, I still don't know what it will actually sound like. Nor will I until I assemble it and try it out.

You see the paradox? Specs can tell you a hell of a lot, but they never ever tell you exactly how something sounds - bright, dark, easy, heavy, whatever. It's quite possible my "new" circuit may sound just so-so, no better.

Cheers,
DVV

[Tonto Yoder]

Damn, Tonto- you're either an extremely learned man........or an onanist yourself!

Doing crossword puzzles gives a person a fairly unique vocabulary of obscure  words whose letters are easy to work into the puzzles.
Of course, there IS an official  Onanist club, complete with its own secret handshake!  

[Rob Babcock]

Hmmm....I think the arguement would be short, as we both seem to agree.  I think specs do say something about the design, but I don't care about any "proprietary design."  I'm more alluding to the fact that no one seems to really be able to create a measurement set that really describes what we hear.

I don't want to lose the forest for the trees.  I'm mostly concerned with the AC'ers individual philosophy, not a list of specific examples or measurements.

Good post, though.

[Rob Babcock]

Damn, Tonto- you're either an extremely learned man........or an onanist yourself!

Doing crossword puzzles gives a person a fairly unique vocabulary of obscure  words whose letters are easy to work into the puzzles.
Of course, there IS an official  Onanist club, complete with its own secret handshake!  

STOP!  I'm gonna fall of my friggin' chair!

[eico1]

Choice 1 is a bit contradictory, measurement only is the opposite of dbt(ears) only. I might think dbt should be grouped with choice 5 if I get the meaning of the survey.

steve

[Rob Babcock]

1 & 5 are diamtric opposites.  #1 implies that you needn't listen to a component at all to determine it's quality.  #5 implies you needn't measure it at all.

If you choose #1, you're basically saying that all components that measure similarly will sound identical- choices then should be based on options and price.

If you choose #5, you'll likely feel that there's really no point to measurements.  Your buying decisions will be made on reputation, word of mouth, and/or personal auditions.

[eico1]

1 & 5 are diamtric opposites.  #1 implies that you needn't listen to a component at all to determine it's quality.  #5 implies you needn't measure it at all.

If you choose #1, you're basically saying that all components that measure similarly will sound identical- choices then should be based on options and price.

If you choose #5, you'll likely feel that there's really no point to measurements.  Your buying decisions will be made on reputation, word of mouth, and/or personal auditions.

that's why I thought the dbt option should be in 5...you are not measuring just listening. Though now it seems the dbt text was changed to blind listening. Blind listening doesn't require measurements...

steve

[Rob Babcock]

DBT= Double Blind Test.  IMOHO, that's the same thing as measuring, although technically you're correct.  The spirit of the question was more:  do you trust your ears or tests?  DBT is certainly listening, but in a very controlled environment.  Lots of people don't approve of the way DBT's work, but that's a different matter.  So, essentially you're right.  Hey, I'm not a pro writer & I'm not gettin' paid for this, so cut me some slack!

[DVV]

...Hey, I'm not a pro writer & I'm not gettin' paid for this, so cut me some slack!

Here's some slack, Rob.

Say you have a tube amp. Say you audition it at home and find it most agreeable, but since the weather is poor, you decide to run the full course of the free test your dealer gave you before you make up your mind whether to buy or eschew.

You sit down, and measure it. Holy cow, that thing is intermodulating at 3% even at 1 watt, and you know we hear IMD at 0.5% and over. But, it still sounds nice. You are frying over a slow fire.

You go listen to some live music, and decide that the amp sitting back at home is a darn liar, it rounds things off, it gives you a pink outlook on music, and yes, it sounds nice, but it changes what you hear live.

By now, you are in hellfire. To be, or not to be, that is the question now, say you, bravely disregarding the wife's dirty looks, because she knows what that dreamy look on your face means. But she fails to notice your audio dilemmas ...

So, it intermodulates, i.e. seriously distorts the real truth, measurements show it to be flawed, but it sounds nice, or did sound nice until you measured it and compared to live music.

What wilt thou do in such catastrophy of thy sound mind, Hamlet? (pun intended)

Bless thee,
DVV

[Rob Babcock]

Hmmm...I dunno about that premise.  You're not likely to see me auditioning a tube amp any time soon!   Specs aside, it would never make it thru my front door for a variety of reasons.  (I'll give you a hint:  the item that would most get my heart racing, amp wise would be a monster 5 X 500 W Digital amp, or perhaps half a dozen monster digital monoblocs).

Yes, you basically rephrased my question without the poll- what indeed does one do if something measures lousy and sounds great?  I might yet get on my soap box and add my $.02, but right now I'm more interested in what others think.  

Lets keep it simple, too; I won't insult someone by asking if they'll keep a peice of gear that sounds terrible to them simply because it has good specs.  I'll assume no one here is that obtuse.  The question is a rhetorical one, not about any specific item.  If it helps to think of a specific peice, you of course may do so.  I'm concerned with the philosophy involved, and in a way just how one decides what they're going to investigate or lust after next.

Anyway, keep in mind, I voted the same way you did, DVV.

[nathanm]

Someone elsewhere commented that the Halcro gear, which apparently is near-flawless in regards to measurements as sounding boring or something.  "How can that be?" I wondered  My guess is that people find distortions of various kinds to be subjectively pleasing and that perhaps a truly useful piece of gear would be one that could 'dumb down' a bit and offer "lousy specs" as an option in addition to its near-perfect textbook option.

I can tell the difference between tube and SS amplifiers (or at least I think I do) but am not sure which specs spell out this difference.  Is that the damping factor number by chance?  These days I am wont to consider the input\output impedance specs as being a controlling factor of frequency balance but as of yet I haven't read any layman's explanation of how this works.  I guess specs can't mean much to a person if they have only the smallest grasp of what they mean. *sigh*

The square wave response is rather telling though, which you can test for yourself by playing with a WAV editor.  Generate a triangle, square or sawtooth wave and mess with the Smooth\Enhance filter (SoundForge has got this, I dunno what a similar effect might be called in other software) basically this controls the shape of the peaks, either rounded off or sharp.  It's amazing what a tiny difference in the shape of that waveform makes in the harshness of the sound.  Then consider the fact that even though your screen is showing a perfect square wave your amp and speakers are further mashing up the integrity of it.  It's difficult to know wether what's hitting your ears is what the voltage values really are on that album or what.

My feeling is that specs probably are more valuable to you guys who actually grok electronics and have a mental correlation between the graphs and what comes out of the speakers.  I envy that!