The problem with myths

Join Our Community Subscribe to Paul's Posts

In Copper Magazine, Issue 26, Ethan Winer writes about audio myths. It’s an article worth reading because Ethan is a bright guy, an excellent engineer, and contributes to the state of our art. I openly welcome his input.

I disagree with some of what he believes to be truth.

The basis of my disagreement is its collision course with my own findings. Ethan doesn’t hear what I hear. Therefore, in each of our worldviews, we are right and the other is wrong. How can that add up?

Each of our beliefs is based, in part, on methodology. Ethan has crafted a system and technique of auditioning that obviates subtle differences, while I have done the opposite.

We build systems that support beliefs. Kind of like alternative facts. It doesn’t take long to find evidence that supports real facts or alternate facts. Like the Blind Men and the Elephant.

One thing Ethan and I disagree with is his preferred methodology of the blind audition. It’s an unfortunate truth that humans require all our senses and wits to perceive subtle changes to complex stimuli. Put a clothespin on your nose and try tasting the difference between vanilla and strawberry.

What saddens me is the loss of intellect in pursuit of truth. We focus our energies on supporting our beliefs.

When great engineering minds are convinced there is a difference, they set about explaining those differences, adding value to the state of the art.

Imagine if I tried to convince you there’s no difference between vanilla and strawberry.