Why is high-end audio so subjective?
Subscribe to Ask Paul Ask a QuestionIt seems only high-end audio is based on subjectivity while video performance is more carefully controlled through measurement and science. Is that really true?
COMMENTS
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
High end audio is subjective because basically all things involving human response are subjective. I can imagine two cave men discussing throwing rocks. One picks up a rock and says it’s perfect due to how well it fits the hand and it’s beautiful roundness. The other says a good throwing rock should have some angularity and be smaller. Now even if there were some cave man testing service which could provide charts and graphs on the qualities of rocks, what would that mean to the cave men? Their experience would incline them to prefer one or the other regardless of testing and charting. Is it any different with cars, washing machines, power drills or any other artifact of civilization? Is it any different even when it comes to appreciation of the natural world? Some prefer the mountains; others the seashore. We as humans are mixed up bundles of knowledge, playfulness, prejudice, and experience. Try as some might, we simply cannot be reduced to charts and graphs.
Comparing apples with oranges was another clever idea of the marketing guys when they pretended that digitization of a static (!) picture would be comparable with the digitization of an audio signal varying in time. Based on this false analogy they argued that higher resolution format would improve the sound quality per se – as everybody had experienced with HD-formats for video. But: On a plasma or LCD or OLED screen precisely the pixels of the original picture are precisely placed. In contrast a real world multi-way loudspeaker will never be able to precisely reconstruct the sound-wave catched by the microphone, because the drivers placed all around on the baffle beam their sound waves to the ear under different angles and non-phase-coherently! Only a perfect point source loudspeaker or a perfect line-source loudspeaker could do the job.
As I photographer I could argue that the ultimate in rendition of detail and perfection of tonal range comes from pictures which are made with 8 x 10 view cameras with negatives contact printed. (Negative placed directly on photographic paper and exposed to light thus eliminating an enlarger lens.) Such pictures simply can’t be beat. If you’re a serious, dedicated photographer you will get rid of all other gear and use only the 8 x 10 view camera. This would be absurd. The large view camera is clumsy to operate, heavy, requires a tripod, has very limited depth of field, and cannot be used for candid photography. These severe limitations mean that it could only be the “ultimate camera” for certain types of photography: perhaps landscapes and still lifes. And even within those limited realms you’d find plenty of dispute amongst photographers. The truth is there is no ultimate camera. There are only human beings attempting to attain various goals and choosing their gear accordingly. Subjectivity is inescapable.
It’s subjective because we don’t have a reference for a lot of the words we use for describing high-end audio reproduction. For example, someone tells you the sound is warm or bright, is one better than the other ? Most audiophiles chase the holy grail ” Neutral” what the heck does neutral sound like if you don’t have a reference of what the recording engineer decided was the final production. Then there is the Stradivarius violin that sold for $16 million dollars, how neutral, warm or bright did it sound?
I understand (sorta ?) that speakers can be subjective since a person may prefer a certain tone/timbre/etc that a particular designer may put into it. But electronics ? At my point in life, I can’t hear differences in power cords, speaker wires, amplifiers, etc, etc. They just all sound the same (and I suspect that they also do to a big % of people who say otherwise). So, if I decide to pay a premium price for something then it must be for the aesthetics or, just maybe, for the pride of ownership. And if I made such an investment I certainly expect it to measure well on all typical measurements for that product line. Just would not be happy to find out otherwise.
Our hearing varies from person to person. Stereos will vary in pleasantness depending upon the listener’s perception. Peaks in highs may be annoying to some and not heard by others. Why does vinyl sound good and euphonious even though it doesn’t measure flat. Because a slight accentuation in low midrange-high base sounds warm and inviting. CDs measure flat and measure more accurately than vinyl. Some people like the warmth, others like the precision. That’s why what one person says is good stereo may be less good to someone else. Viva la difference.
Yesterday morning, I called up a guy down in Daytona Beach Florida.
I wanted to know about certain Mcintosh tube audio gear.
He told me about this massive mono block that Mcintosh calls the MC-2KW.
He didn’t know that that amp was not a tube amp until I told him that it wasn’t a tube amp at all.
He was looking at the fact that it uses an output transformer.
But transistors even when matched to speakers by way of an output transformer, don’t sound like tubes to my ears.
So, as they say, “knowledge is power!”
You just have to know exactly what it is you want, and how to get it.
If you’re yoost to listening to your music throo old school tube tech because it sounds better to you, then that’s what you go for.
I subjectively object to the BOSE watchamacallit sitting on the desk behind Paul!
What?
That BOSE coffee maker??
Coffee is NOT subjective. There is The Absolute Coffee. And it is an espresso machine set up right with the right dose of good beans ground right …
“Coffee is NOT subjective”
That’s funny, bordering on…
…hey, do you do ‘stand-up’ too??
I could. Using The world’s best jokes.
Because recycling is not plagiarizing.
My Audition:
Hifi enthusiasts
Because sitting alone in the dark in your mothers basement spying on other people enjoying themselves is normal.
Why are pirates?
They just aaaargh
Bye bye
I share Jay’s pain, especially when it comes to speakers. How many speaker manufacturers are there? 100, 1000? My biggest complaint about the subjectivism of hi-end audio is that it doesn’t give much guidance to a beginner, or a veteran, for that matter. Let’s take speakers. I wish reviewers would have a little more courage to directly compare different brands and tell you which speaker is better than another one because of such and so (in their opinion). I do appreciate the Recommended Components lists in Stereophile magazine and The Absolute Sound buyer’s guides. Those are at least a good place to begin. They help you narrow down your lists of speakers and other components. But you have to listen before you buy, if at all possible, especially for speakers. Your “subjective” experience is the only one that matters in the end. You should also pay attention to the reputation and financial strength of the company that makes the stuff, unless you are willing to simply throw your money away if something goes wrong down the road. It would be nice if hi-fi stuff could be evaluated in a more scientific way, but that is not the case now. Buyer beware!
The measured step response tells a lot more than the frequency response about the designer‘s qualification and his understanding of basic requirements for accuracy, a core aspect of high fidelity! 🙂
Another fundamental difference is that video has an objective, an absolute – the physical world the video depicts. Despite the title of a famous audio magazine, there is no objective referent to the accuracy of live sound, partially due to the MEMORY of what live sound is, but also due to the fact, as I understand it, that sound waves have a different shape coming from a transducer than those coming from an instrument in your presence. Absolute sound, as in live music, is a goal that audio strives to replicate. Video has no problem replicating what it sees. Also, audio is about reproducing a subjective art/entertainment form. But once a video tries to distort or enhance its image to communicate an emotion along with the object, then it becomes subjective as well.
Indeed. And I never heard of a image engineer mixing the pictures taken from different cameras using a mixing console to improve the recorded video! 🙂
Vídeo does not replicate. It is flat. It convinces you to imagine depth. Meantime, audio people complain that audio doesn’t replicate. It can’t.
Vídeo artists play with cameras, lighting, focus, color saturation, filters, etc., to generate a flat image for you. Audio guys complain they can’t get their rooms to sound like Carnegie Hall. But musicians play with recording techniques, instruments, devices, plug ins, etc., to generate a sound they want you to get in your speakers.
Still the analogy video versus audio remains false. Stereoscopy delivers a 3-D image based on two photos taken from a different angle corresponding the angle difference of both eyes. But rarely two loudspeakers will give you a holographic image of the real music. And most funny: even listening with only a single ear allows you to define the position of the sound source – unless there are no or only sound reflections of much lower SPL. It’s just not serious comparing video and audio!
You watch on a flat screen. Only few videos are produced for VR, and they are mostly games.
You can move in front of a video screen and the images won’t change. The entire experience of video is produced by the screen (as long as the room is dark enough). In audio, the room is a very active participant of the process.
While “watching” you suspend disbelief. Subjective audio has made it impossible for people to “suspend disbelief” while listening. But most music is produced for two speakers.
If you think your positioning skills while listening are so good, try and go find a frog singing in your garden, or a grasshopper. Or birds. You will have a very hard time finding precisely where they are. You will find “generally” where they are. It is because of this inability to locate sounds precisely in space that speakers can make you believe that sound from them has a 3-D effect in your room.
It is serious to compare the objectivity used by video with the total subjectivity falsely espoused by “people who know”.
Paul,
I am not sure that I can agree with your explanation. There are standards to set up video. Specifically, color palettes to check for accuracy. Your example of interlacing (this is what is called) is also a measurable distortion. It is truly highly recommended to set up any new video device against these standards to get proper color accuracy.
The same thing can be said for “stereos”. There is science associated with amplifier performance, DACs. etc. There is validated and reproducible science related to speaker performance too. You can do this in your stereo at home. You will find that most “effects” at home are due to the room once you have proper measuring speakers. You can even ask your guy Chris to explain them to you…
The primary reason there is so much subjectivity in “audio” is that most people ignore the science. Or mislead you with nonsense. If you ignore science, any opinion will appear reasonable.
First of, I have the same coffee machine and the display still blinks just like yours, second, I don’t know up to what point, a person that considers itself a audiophile, has the knowledge to judge or to give an opinion on the way someone else’s system sound like if the person that enjoys it is totally fine with the way it sounds, my brother likes less mids than me, he knows it, but I do not dare to tell him to change it, I’m happy he enjoys his system, and he’s happy I enjoy mine, and I have great respect for his knowledge on this field. So, I would say with confidence, yes, it’s subjective, the problem is that lots of people want to judge what’s not theirs and take for granted the fact that we all like things differently, sometimes we agree in lots of things, but not all the time.
I have to agree with the Paul about his example. Paul has such a way of explaining things in an easy to understand way… However I have to also agree with ctA that measurements specially in audio are science based, and when it comes to speakers, yes there is lots of science involved in having the right measurements/data and also in interpret them. It is not easy since there are so many variables involved such as the music media/software/recording used, the equipment/wires, type of speakers, placement and also the environment/room where everything is taking place, not to mention how experienced the person doing the testing. All that plays big roll in any production. I think it is subjective in the sense of what type of sound an individual likes too much of (Bass/Mid & treble). The subjectivisms becomes like a color preference, it is personal. I remember a comment from the master Arnie Nudell RIP “Speakers are the most difficult thing to design”.