[Wind Chaser]

Had to start a new thread for this...

Audio memory is not very good.

Is that so?  I guess the first question would be is that true of everyone, or just some people?  I am certain most people know what their system sounds like and can detect changes that are either for better or worse. 

If you think auditory memory isn't reliable, then why would you even care if its digital or analogue, tubes or SS etc?

[Crimson]

I fail to see how system topology (a subjective auditory preference) has anything to do with auditory memory (a sensory retention phenomenon). And, as has been demonstrated time and again, auditory (or echoic) memory only lasts a few seconds, after which it is unreliable.

[Wind Chaser]

How can one have subjective preferences if one cannot recall and make a distinction between different things?

[Wind Chaser]

delete

[sts9fan]

Can you tell the difference between believing you remember and actually remembering?

[Wind Chaser]

Either we are altogether deluded about absolutely everything or we have to make a leap of faith in being certain about our reality regardless of sensory input.  If you can correctly and constantly remember how to drive an automobile, find your way home, remember your wife's name etc, then you can be reasonably confident that your memory is intact.

[BobM]

This thread is turning into a Zen lesson

"If you can grab the pebble out of my hand, Grasshopper ..."

I think there are some major differences that could be heard by anyone. There are also pretty obvious differences that can be heard by someone very familiar with a system readily. There are also subtle differences that can't be heard without a direct A-B comparison.

- In the case of major differences a winner will be pretty obvious. This could probably be heard immediately via auditory memory by someone somewhat familiar with the system.
- In the case of obvious differences you may need to go back and forth a few times to pick the 'winner", but personal preferences start playing a role here. The owner of the system very well may be able to hear this immediately, since they are intimately familiar with the sound.
- In the case of subtle differences it is highly a matter of choice. You may prefer one over the other because it is a change. Sometimes going back after a while shows you what you were missing with the new change and unfolds why the change was not "optimum". Sometimes not.

I think many contrarians are thinking of subtle changes, where auditory memory can't be fully trusted. I agree wholeheartedly. But I don't agree in the other 2 cases. Where is the line drawn for each? That's where grabbing the pebble comes in.

Enjoy,
Bob

[Crimson]

Either we are altogether deluded about absolutely everything or we have to make a leap of faith in being certain about our reality regardless of sensory input.  If you can correctly and constantly remember how to drive an automobile, find your way home, remember your wife's name etc, then you can be reasonably confident that your memory is intact.

None of your examples have anything to do with echoic memory.

[Ethan Winer]

I think there are some major differences that could be heard by anyone ... There are also subtle differences that can't be heard without a direct A-B comparison.

Exactly. I can tell a 100 Hz tone from 1 KHz every time, even after a year. Same for 1 percent distortion versus 20 percent distortion. But what about 100 Hz versus 105 Hz? Or 2 percent distortion versus 4 percent? For small changes you need to hear them one after the other. In other words, the larger the difference, the longer you can remember what that difference sounds like.

--Ethan

[Wind Chaser]

I don’t buy the echoic memory argument.  Regardless of sensory input, memory is a function of the brain.  Simply said, the more time you spend with something, the deeper the imprint on the mind and the more you know it.

For example, if you spend a night in a hotel, you will have very limited knowledge of the particulars like the color of the carpet and bedding.  Odds are you won’t remember the pictures hanging on the wall, or what brand of clock radio is beside the bed.  However chances are you would know these details and a whole lot more about the home in which you reside.  That’s how memory is.  Time and repetition deepens the imprint.

The same is true in audio.  If you are intimately familiar with your system, you should be able to detect any changes to the sound the instant you change something in the system, because you know what to expect under normal conditions. 

The notion that “auditory / echoic memory” lasts only a few seconds is only a half truth.  The above example proves short term visual memory isn’t any better.

IMO memory is not modal selective.

[jon_010101]

Not to throw a wrench into things, but as an audio synesthete, when I go to a hifi show I remember not the sound so much as the "image" of the sound.  I could describe to you what Let it Be "looks" like on a $500k Audio Note system, but the sound not so much.  Same goes for my past systems - my visual memory dominates, and I can only reconstruct a description of sonic qualities from the stored images.   

On systems that I presently own, my ears/brain play as much of a role as my system does in determining the sound.  Take a few weeks off of listening, or switch from one system to another, and it suddenly sounds like the voice of God herself.     Of course... in the long run, an objectively superior combination of components always seems to win my ears over. 

BTW, I cannot tell the difference between tones absolutely, only relatively, but many musicians will have preferences on the order of 1Hz variations in tuning.  Too many times I've heard musicians argue about whether 440 or 442Hz is optimal for "A".  The same musicians do not significantly notice differences between reproduction systems - they hear through the "interface" and focus immediately on the music, likely recreating it as they wish it were.

[Ethan Winer]

if you spend a night in a hotel, you will have very limited knowledge of the particulars like the color of the carpet and bedding.  Odds are you won’t remember the pictures hanging on the wall, or what brand of clock radio is beside the bed.

Sure, but if someone points out those details you can take notice and remember. Or, a better example, if someone put a red clock radio beside a white one, you'd spot the difference immediately. This is a better analogy IMO.

--Ethan

[jon_010101]

I spent a night in a motel room that had the scariest painting of the Tin Man I've ever seen.  I almost asked to change rooms, until I realized that I could end up with the Lion or Scarecrow instead.   

[Wayner]

Even a trained singer would have difficulty singing a middle C from memory without the help of a reference signal. That is why they have pitch pipes, and things like that. It is not the sound, but the memory of how the sound made you feel. Music is emotional. When it stirs the higher emotions, it will overwhelm the science of it....if there is one.

Wayner

[mjosef]

Some auditory memories may be short(specific tones), and some may be very long(overall 'feel' of the sound).
I say that because in my experience(very limited) I can recall the overall sound balance of a system a year later?   

[Tyson]

If we have no auditory memory, how could we possibly develop preferences over time?  How could we possibly "learn" to listen to the sound of a system?  Without pretty reliable auditory memory, these things would be impossible.

[BobM]

Somw people do have "perfect pitch" however they are fairly rare. They are also fairly miserable with it, because anything less than perfect sounds wrong to them. Most professional musicians have "relative pitch". However they tend to focus on the performance aspects and the emotion and phrasing of the music. They very rarely have audiophile approved systems, but they often have ones that can convey the emotion of the musis as they perceive it (I'll bet).

Our own home systems ARE our personal reference, and most of us know the sound of them well. We also know our reference tracks well. If put into a strange system with music we don't know it is all up for grabs. I know I personally tend to focus initially on what differs from my reference system. That focus is often not pertinent to what should be focused on for comparative purposes.

My conclusion is that, in our own reference system with music of our choosing, we can identify meaningful differences. Otherwise, perhaps not without lengthy comparisons and the beginnings of familiarity.

Enjoy,
Bob

[Wind Chaser]

Bob's nailed it!  That's exactly my point.  Your system is your point of reference.  If you listen to it often enough without making on going changes, you should KNOW (remember) what it sounds like.  From that vantage, if you change a cable or component, add a tweak etc, you should immediately be able to recognize the difference, assuming there is a legitimate difference. 

If you listen for differences between to different components / cables etc on someone else's system (a system you normally don't listen to) you're not going to recognize the differences as immediate or with the same confidence because you're comparing things from an established reference point.  From that perspective, I would agree that auditory memory or whatever you want to call it is short.  That's why I think double blind, A B comparisons aren't very useful.