Error corrections: 1) There's a typo around 14:27. When it says "Appox." on screen, it should be "Approx." It's not just some fancy scientific term ;) 2) At 17:10 the 6dB quieter sound is the one perceived further away than the 6dB louder sound
I have been waiting for this video for about a decade! Cannot thank you enough for this. Our brains are so fascinating, and the studies discovering how we precieve sound are mind blowing! Would love to learn more of these studies.
This really nails the core argument that I make in head-fi and other areas when I feel like engaging. The current battery of tests used by manufacturers to determine if audio equipment is functioning correctly doesn’t cover the full spectrum of human hearing. And to make overly wide or universal claims as to how something sounds based purely on a handful of tests is just plain unwise. Of course, he gets into more interesting detail with capacitors and negative feedback, so that’s really helpful when engaging with the ASR types who listen with their eyes.
Part of my University education was spatial acoustics but that was much more interesting. Thank you. I have always trusted my ears and this really helps to understand why.
You should watch Thomas Tan's video on how many months he spent testing capacitors as they changed the sound so much. Reinforces your capacitance comments. Alpha Audio proved that cables can smear sound, they measured it.
Incredible video 👏🏻 very educational and a pleasure to watch. Thank you very much for all the content that you have been producing and I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year ❤️
I appreciate this video, but all this detail masks some underlying truths. 1st, you could get the idea that the human ear wants the most accurate sound reproduction. Our ears might, but we certainly don’t. A couple of quick examples. Tubes are not more accurate, but the sound is very appealing to many audiophiles. One reason is that they produce a fair amount of 2nd order harmonic distortion which is pleasing to our ears. Another example: speakers. If our ears are such highly tuned and accurate instruments, why don’t we all agree on what are the best kinds of transducers and speakers??? You simply cannot take the subjectivity out of the hobby. I agree with your point about specifications. There is a tenuous connection between specs and the sound we appreciate. Take damping factor. A high damping factor indicates that the amp has full control over the woofer. But that doesn’t mean that is the bass presentation that we want to hear. I can think of several amps, even all amps produced by a certain company that have low damping factors that are so low as to be in the audible range and these products are well reviewed and liked. One of the things I love about Galion is that Thomas Tan isn’t even pretending to make the best measuring equipment, he is trying to make the best sounding equipment based on his ears and his experience. Lots of other companies are quietly doing the exact same thing because most audiophiles, including myself, are not interested in the most accurate sound. We want the sound most pleasing to our ears. And we all have music we love with crappy recordings and don’t want the crappy recording spoiling our love of that music. All of this raises some troubling questions for lots of equipment. Let’s take SS amps. If most audiophiles want the amp most pleasing to our ears, specs be damned, what are reviewers or audiophiles listening for??? Are there sound signatures to strive for? Do they change with the type of speakers or other equipment you have??? I’m building a system right now. The tweeter is a compression driver in a horn. Because of the synergy between horns and tubes, I chose the most “tubes” SS amp I could find, based on the comments of reviewers and people who previously purchased the amp. If I upgrade at some point in the future, tube amps need only apply. But what if my equipment had been different? What sound signature would indicate a good match with my equipment. And doesn’t this indicate that, in many instances, one piece of equipment is not better than the other, just suited best for different uses. Finally, you completely ignore the impact of psycho-acoustics. We expect impressive looking equipment to sound better and often “hear” differences that are not there. You rarely see any reviewer blind test equipment. The truly blind tests I have seen suggest that our ears are not the finely honed instruments this video would suggest. To make matters worse, reviewers listen to equipment and then pack it off to the next reviewer and to the manufacturer. When a new piece comes in, you can compare it to the equipment you have on hand, but not necessarily against other equipment in its price range or outside its price range. So the reviewer is forced often forced to compare the equipment under review to memories of other equipment and human memory is hardly reliable. This is not say that reviewers such as yourself should be completely discounted. The reality is that, for most of us, you are all we have. This is also not to say that you are not trying hard to be as informative and accurate as you can. But this is a tough area. What all audiophiles want to know is how this piece of equipment will perform for my ears with my other equipment in my room to produce the sound signature most pleasing to me. That is the bar. This video on the complexity of our ears doesn’t change the fact that we are FAR from coming any where close to clearing this bar.
Unusual offering from an audiophile channel, purely educational, and very much appreciated by those who are interested in how the science of music reproduction may guide our buying choices for optimal sound...loads of great info, many thanks!
This is an excellent video. You're directly addressing a lot of the issues that I personally have with how we talk about the "science of Hi-Fi," if that's what you want to call it.
Very interesting! Well done! I was very skeptical of the cables or power supply influence… but I did experienced it with very good system and then, I changed my opinion. One thing to mention is that if one component of a system (let stay speakers) mess the timing of a recording, the better cables can’t probably being heard… The other thing to mention is that blind test still don’t show that “supernatural” capability of the human ears/brain…
Now that you’ve informed us about the importance of cables, I’m in the process of increasing the speed of my modem’s power cord. I can see that correcting the initial weakness of sound from the true real source. I’m purchasing a linear power source.
very interesting thanks! Great video Lachlan touching on the complexity of our hearing along with aspects of the complexity of electronic sound reproduction. I'll definitely come back to this video again. Two additional intrinsic layers of complexity relating to music -- related to our minds... the projected intent expressed within the musical information by the artist/s, and the unique interpretation processed within the mind of the listener...
Worth noting that Nelson Pass did experiments to find what sound customers liked best and it was not 100% accurate. "This effect is described as having negative phase 2nd harmonic at approximately 1% of the amplitude of the original signal..." from Stereophile. You can even make a second harmonic generator using his design to test it yourself.
That's a slightly different phenomenon I think, and not one I've explored yet. The mix of harmonics in the sound definitely alters our subjective enjoyment of the music, but timing accuracy and system resolution achieved through low noise, etc. will create the sense of realism that the harmonics can then build on.
Seriously well done... talking about grasping a nettle! And shaking it... regarding timing especially. I can't wait to see this video being linked to in certain forums... I think that the 'measurement' vs 'subjective' push, especially with Audio Science Review has been very important, but we need a proper scientific counter balance to 'push' the measurements further into this timing domain. Bravo, fantastique, fantastico ...
Another aspect that degrades sound is vibration. The microphonic aspect of electronic components cannot be underestimated. Vibration introduces sonic disruption some of which is in the time domain.
Thanks Chuck. I do too! In hindsight, I wish I'd structured it differently because the opening isn't as strong as the midpoint onwards. I just hope lots of people get to see it because the research is so valuable to understand.
PREACH!!! I’ve been saying a lot of this for years! I stopped because I just got tired of the cable denier stuff. Thinking that everything you need to know is all in a FR graph is just plain foolishness to me!
These phenomena can account for perceived differences among audio systems and superior audio equipment may provide opportunities for potential additional perceptions. However, there are no guarantees because another function available to the brain is sensory gating, which allows it to ignore certain details if it so chooses. Nevertheless, that is the prerogative of the brain, not of the reproduction equipment.
Thank you for this video!!I have the same exact opinion about this!!Many of the reviewers especially audioscience........ they don't even hear at all they only see measurements.Maybe many of the best speakers manufacturer in the world are "stupid" when they say that they trust first their ears and far less the measurments!!!
You might think that the ears came about by random chance but I believe they were made by the Creator God and his Son, Jesus. Such complexities as how the human ear works cannot originate anywhere else. If it isn't man-made, it is understood that those things are seen as attributes of our God. (Romans 1:18:23; Colossians 1:15-18)
all well, but only possible for analog signal cables ... not possible with digital signals ... those are either bitperfect or they give a broken signal ... better then bitperfect isn't possible 😂
You're missing 90% of what this video is saying and ignoring the fact that digital cables can carry noise which can alter the timing accuracy of the clock in the DAC.
Error corrections:
1) There's a typo around 14:27. When it says "Appox." on screen, it should be "Approx." It's not just some fancy scientific term ;)
2) At 17:10 the 6dB quieter sound is the one perceived further away than the 6dB louder sound
I have been waiting for this video for about a decade! Cannot thank you enough for this. Our brains are so fascinating, and the studies discovering how we precieve sound are mind blowing! Would love to learn more of these studies.
This really nails the core argument that I make in head-fi and other areas when I feel like engaging. The current battery of tests used by manufacturers to determine if audio equipment is functioning correctly doesn’t cover the full spectrum of human hearing. And to make overly wide or universal claims as to how something sounds based purely on a handful of tests is just plain unwise.
Of course, he gets into more interesting detail with capacitors and negative feedback, so that’s really helpful when engaging with the ASR types who listen with their eyes.
Part of my University education was spatial acoustics but that was much more interesting. Thank you. I have always trusted my ears and this really helps to understand why.
Wow. This gift of knowledge about hearing is much appreciated. Thanks. I will be sure to share it.
All of these points are why I laugh at frequency response graphs so widely used in our hobby.
You should watch Thomas Tan's video on how many months he spent testing capacitors as they changed the sound so much. Reinforces your capacitance comments. Alpha Audio proved that cables can smear sound, they measured it.
You're absolutely right. Humble Home made hifi hast a big list a tested caps
Yes, capacitors can have a major influence on sound. I learned this with the Bottlehead Crack and Mainline kits I've modified.
Incredible video 👏🏻 very educational and a pleasure to watch. Thank you very much for all the content that you have been producing and I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year ❤️
I appreciate this video, but all this detail masks some underlying truths. 1st, you could get the idea that the human ear wants the most accurate sound reproduction. Our ears might, but we certainly don’t. A couple of quick examples. Tubes are not more accurate, but the sound is very appealing to many audiophiles. One reason is that they produce a fair amount of 2nd order harmonic distortion which is pleasing to our ears. Another example: speakers. If our ears are such highly tuned and accurate instruments, why don’t we all agree on what are the best kinds of transducers and speakers??? You simply cannot take the subjectivity out of the hobby.
I agree with your point about specifications. There is a tenuous connection between specs and the sound we appreciate. Take damping factor. A high damping factor indicates that the amp has full control over the woofer. But that doesn’t mean that is the bass presentation that we want to hear. I can think of several amps, even all amps produced by a certain company that have low damping factors that are so low as to be in the audible range and these products are well reviewed and liked. One of the things I love about Galion is that Thomas Tan isn’t even pretending to make the best measuring equipment, he is trying to make the best sounding equipment based on his ears and his experience. Lots of other companies are quietly doing the exact same thing because most audiophiles, including myself, are not interested in the most accurate sound. We want the sound most pleasing to our ears. And we all have music we love with crappy recordings and don’t want the crappy recording spoiling our love of that music.
All of this raises some troubling questions for lots of equipment. Let’s take SS amps. If most audiophiles want the amp most pleasing to our ears, specs be damned, what are reviewers or audiophiles listening for??? Are there sound signatures to strive for? Do they change with the type of speakers or other equipment you have??? I’m building a system right now. The tweeter is a compression driver in a horn. Because of the synergy between horns and tubes, I chose the most “tubes” SS amp I could find, based on the comments of reviewers and people who previously purchased the amp. If I upgrade at some point in the future, tube amps need only apply. But what if my equipment had been different? What sound signature would indicate a good match with my equipment. And doesn’t this indicate that, in many instances, one piece of equipment is not better than the other, just suited best for different uses.
Finally, you completely ignore the impact of psycho-acoustics. We expect impressive looking equipment to sound better and often “hear” differences that are not there. You rarely see any reviewer blind test equipment. The truly blind tests I have seen suggest that our ears are not the finely honed instruments this video would suggest. To make matters worse, reviewers listen to equipment and then pack it off to the next reviewer and to the manufacturer. When a new piece comes in, you can compare it to the equipment you have on hand, but not necessarily against other equipment in its price range or outside its price range. So the reviewer is forced often forced to compare the equipment under review to memories of other equipment and human memory is hardly reliable.
This is not say that reviewers such as yourself should be completely discounted. The reality is that, for most of us, you are all we have. This is also not to say that you are not trying hard to be as informative and accurate as you can. But this is a tough area. What all audiophiles want to know is how this piece of equipment will perform for my ears with my other equipment in my room to produce the sound signature most pleasing to me. That is the bar. This video on the complexity of our ears doesn’t change the fact that we are FAR from coming any where close to clearing this bar.
Unusual offering from an audiophile channel, purely educational, and very much appreciated by those who are interested in how the science of music reproduction may guide our buying choices for optimal sound...loads of great info, many thanks!
Amazing topic and discussion building up and leading to what is a complex understanding about what we hear
Excellent video..... for sure this made some more enemies again on the ASR cult website 🤣🤣
ASR crowd recommendations are useless 🤮
This is an excellent video. You're directly addressing a lot of the issues that I personally have with how we talk about the "science of Hi-Fi," if that's what you want to call it.
I'm so glad you liked it! I wasn't sure how this video would be received, but I felt it was an important video to make.
Very interesting! Well done! I was very skeptical of the cables or power supply influence… but I did experienced it with very good system and then, I changed my opinion. One thing to mention is that if one component of a system (let stay speakers) mess the timing of a recording, the better cables can’t probably being heard… The other thing to mention is that blind test still don’t show that “supernatural” capability of the human ears/brain…
Now that you’ve informed us about the importance of cables, I’m in the process of increasing the speed of my modem’s power cord. I can see that correcting the initial weakness of sound from the true real source. I’m purchasing a linear power source.
I felt like I was back in an anatomy class!
very interesting thanks! Great video Lachlan touching on the complexity of our hearing along with aspects of the complexity of electronic sound reproduction. I'll definitely come back to this video again.
Two additional intrinsic layers of complexity relating to music -- related to our minds... the projected intent expressed within the musical information by the artist/s, and the unique interpretation processed within the mind of the listener...
Worth noting that Nelson Pass did experiments to find what sound customers liked best and it was not 100% accurate. "This effect is described as having negative phase 2nd harmonic at approximately 1% of the amplitude of the original signal..." from Stereophile. You can even make a second harmonic generator using his design to test it yourself.
Yes you can
It is called a SE Tube Amplifier
That's a slightly different phenomenon I think, and not one I've explored yet. The mix of harmonics in the sound definitely alters our subjective enjoyment of the music, but timing accuracy and system resolution achieved through low noise, etc. will create the sense of realism that the harmonics can then build on.
Seriously well done... talking about grasping a nettle! And shaking it... regarding timing especially. I can't wait to see this video being linked to in certain forums... I think that the 'measurement' vs 'subjective' push, especially with Audio Science Review has been very important, but we need a proper scientific counter balance to 'push' the measurements further into this timing domain. Bravo, fantastique, fantastico ...
Another aspect that degrades sound is vibration. The microphonic aspect of electronic components cannot be underestimated. Vibration introduces sonic disruption some of which is in the time domain.
Thanks!
Best of Christmas and the new year to you and yours .
Like good food …you either like it or you don’t …always trust your ears 👂.
Merry Christmas and happy new year to you too, Carmine!
I love this video so much!
Thanks Chuck. I do too! In hindsight, I wish I'd structured it differently because the opening isn't as strong as the midpoint onwards. I just hope lots of people get to see it because the research is so valuable to understand.
PREACH!!!
I’ve been saying a lot of this for years! I stopped because I just got tired of the cable denier stuff. Thinking that everything you need to know is all in a FR graph is just plain foolishness to me!
These phenomena can account for perceived differences among audio systems and superior audio equipment may provide opportunities for potential additional perceptions. However, there are no guarantees because another function available to the brain is sensory gating, which allows it to ignore certain details if it so chooses. Nevertheless, that is the prerogative of the brain, not of the reproduction equipment.
Brilliant, like how do you explain a Beethoven symphony? You cant, you experience it.
Yep. There's accuracy and then there's feeling, soul and emotion.
Thank you for this video!!I have the same exact opinion about this!!Many of the reviewers especially audioscience........ they don't even hear at all they only see measurements.Maybe many of the best speakers manufacturer in the world are "stupid" when they say that they trust first their ears and far less the measurments!!!
My Division set are on the way...
It's almost like our ears were designed but we all know it came about by random chance.
You might think that the ears came about by random chance but I believe they were made by the Creator God and his Son, Jesus. Such complexities as how the human ear works cannot originate anywhere else. If it isn't man-made, it is understood that those things are seen as attributes of our God. (Romans 1:18:23; Colossians 1:15-18)
@robertschlechter4407 If I wrote what you did YT would have censored it. 😆👍 Well said.
Do tier list, its end of the year where’s yours
Cocktail deafness is another interesting one
Yes, that's all wrapped up in the functions of all those different brain centres and the cochlear amplification function, I believe.
When is a review of Adam D3V?
Very early 2025. It's the next video I'll produce after a short holiday.
How about THC effects?
That would be a whole other field of research 🙂
"Cable deniers don't want you to know this ONE trick!"
It's a bit like that
all well, but only possible for analog signal cables ... not possible with digital signals ... those are either bitperfect or they give a broken signal ... better then bitperfect isn't possible 😂
You're missing 90% of what this video is saying and ignoring the fact that digital cables can carry noise which can alter the timing accuracy of the clock in the DAC.