-
At times, the measured performance coincided with the subjective experience
We could analyse these data to guide engineers to optimise the performance parameters which produce effects people like while minimising those which people dislike. For example, it turns out that a lot of people pretty much don't care about harmonic distortion, probably because in the amounts generated by even slightly competently designed amplifiers it's hard to tell harmonic distortion in the reproduction chain from the normal variation in harmonic content produced by different players using instruments made by different makers.
Of course, if you've actually heard a particular player with a particular instrument playing live, you might notice that he sounds like somebody else playing a different maker's instrument once the waves have been wrecked by your objectively inaccurate tube amp, but it's hard for even the most reckless electronics manufacturer to make a trumpet sound like a violin or vice versa; that's something you'd actually have to be trying to do, probably with DSP.
You are reading a single comment by @gbj_tester and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
gbj_tester
I'm not against measuring things. There is an engineering element to reproducing sound, and there are measurable features of speakers, amplifiers etc which are not irrelevant to how they perform.
And there is a lot of BS in subjective hifi reviews as well; i can understand people reacting to that by getting out a few meters. There was a hifi mag which used to include a separate "lab report" as well as the "listened" review. At times, the measured performance coincided with the subjective experience.
I've not read the ASR site so not commenting on that specifically.