Announcement

Collapse

HUG - here for all audio enthusiasts

At its inception ten years ago, the Harbeth User Group's ambition was to create a lasting knowledge archive. Knowledge is based on facts and observations. Knowledge is timeless, independent of the observer and can be replicated. However, we live in new world in which objective facts have become flexible, personal and debatable. HUG operates in that real world, and that has now been reflected in the structure of HUG.

HUG has two approaches to contributor's Posts. If you, like us, have a scientific mind and are curious about how the ear works, how it can lead us to make the right - and wrong - decisions, and about the technical ins and outs of audio equipment, how it's designed and what choices the designer makes, then the factual Science of Audio sub-forum area of HUG is your place. The objective methods of comparing audio equipment under controlled conditions has been thoroughly examined here on HUG and elsewhere and can be readily understood by non-experts and tried-out at home without deep technical knowledge.

Alternatively, if you just like chatting about audio and subjectivity rules for you, then the Subjective Soundings area is you. If upon examination we think that Posts are better suited to one sub-forum than than the other, they will be redirected during Moderation, which is applied throughout the site.

Questions and Posts about, for example, 'does amplifier A sounds better than amplifier B' or 'which speaker stands or cables are best' are suitable for the Subjective Soundings area. From Oct. 2016, Posts in the Subjective Soundings area will not be spell checked or adjusted for layout clarity. We regret that but we are unable to accept Posts that present what we consider to be free advertising for products that Harbeth does not make.

The Moderators' decision is final in all matters and Harbeth does not necessarily agree with the contents of any member contributions and has no control over external content.

That's it! Enjoy!

{Updated Jan. 2017}
See more
See less

"Audio and technological myths" - the Top Ten most incredible

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Hearing versus seeing

    This months, july 2012' editorial of the absolute sounds found here http://www.enjoythemusic.com/tas/ could be of interest re :photography v audio raised in the last few posts.

    Comment


    • #17
      Keelping an open mind

      Originally posted by Euler View Post
      ...With audiophilia, on the other hand, you have folks (including reviewers) going on and on about the transparency of this cable or the musicality of this preamp. It's all so psychological -- ignoring science and engineering, they convince themselves that they would be able to hear differences if the levels were matched, but of course this belief is never put to the test -- and these strong psychological forces keep the belief system of the audiophiliac closed off from rational counter-argument...

      Bruce
      Those who read your arguments carefully, Bruce, might get the impression that you are a little afraid of people "who's belief system is closed off from rational arguments". If they "convince themselves" that they hear differences, why not let them? Why do you on the other hand try to convince them of the opposite? Seems to me quite as irrational, only vice versa. As I said: tolerance.

      People who's belief system only relies on science seem to forget that they only got the science of the year 2012. Perhaps there are psycho-acoustic effects which can be proven later. Who knows? ;-)).

      Comment


      • #18
        Audiophiles are skydivers, without parachutes - why?

        After over 30 years in professional audio, I've learned a few things about electronics, about sound and above all, about people.

        Amongst the things I've learned is that if one jumps out of an aircraft without a parachute, the eventual impact is likely to do fatal harm.

        Why on Earth do so many audiophiles insist that skydiving without a parachute is worth attempting because it might prove that science is not always right.

        Comment


        • #19
          Not All Science, But How About a Little Science?

          Originally posted by Reinhard View Post
          Those who read your arguments carefully, Bruce, might get the impression that you are a little afraid of people "who's belief system is closed off from rational arguments". If they "convince themselves" that they hear differences, why not let them? Why do you on the other hand try to convince them of the opposite? Seems to me quite as irrational, only vice versa.
          Why not let them? Because they are doing harm. Surely it cannot be irrational to defend something you care about. As Alan has pointed out, audiophilia is in the process of killing serious audio.

          Originally posted by Reinhard View Post
          People who's belief system only relies on science seem to forget that they only got the science of the year 2012. Perhaps there are psycho-acoustic effects which can be proven later. Who knows? ;-)).
          I never advocated for a belief system that relies on only science. In the meantime, I'm not going to jump from a plane without a parachute, hoping that on the way down advances in science will allow me to turn gravity off before I smash into the ground.

          Bruce

          Comment

          Working...
          X