Can things that measure the same sound different?

[notaclue]

Can things that measure the same sound different?

No to you. Or in your experience. But in the real world?

What do you think?

And by measure, I mean things that current scientific knowledge can measure (frequency response, distortion etc.)

Basically, science would say that things that measure the samewould objectively sound the same.

Has 'science' got it wrong?

Do you slap a glove in the face of science?

Or do you agree that science is just telling it as it is?

Note that there is no 'don't know' option on this poll. The mother of all polls is simply not a poll for those who don't know.

 

[Hawk]

Speakers can be the most 'different' sounding from one type to the next, even different types that measure the same height

 

[meninblack]

I voted NO: but only if you have measured all of the relevant properties over the entire frequency range of interest at some appropriate current and voltage! And remembered to include a measurement of the interference screening.

 

[rockmeister]

no one will ever produce an accurate absolute measurement of anything. So since all measurements will eventually prove to have been flawed, why not stop worrying?

 

[White Pheasant]

notaclue wrote:

And by measure, I mean things that current scientific knowledge can measure (frequency response, distortion etc.)

Trouble is, canscientific knowledge evermeasure allthe relevant parameters?

For example, can we measure things like 'soundstage', 'imaging', 'timing', 'naturalness' etc?

 

[uzzy]

Good question and the answer is yes.

Point in question is amplifiers that measure the same but when you listen do sound different.

Also there is the capacitor differences they measure the same but they sound different.

Then there is the choke differences - they measure the same but the solid silver "foil" chokes sound better.

Then there is the old heart rules the mind, oooh it looks fabulous, so it has a head start.

Then there are all the other variables with a piece of equipment namely having to use other components to listen to it.

Makes life fun tho doesn't it

Uzzy

 

[George 47]

Notaclue...luv the avatar very seasonal.

In the words of Einstein (nealry) : What can be measured does not always matter and what matters cannot always be measured.

 

[murray johnson]

Things that measure worse can often sound much, much better. Its all about the relevance of the measurements and its beyond the knowledge of anyone to make all of the pertinent measurements so far. It might be possible one day, but not yet I'm afraid.

 

[notaclue]

White Pheasant wrote:

notaclue wrote:

And by measure, I mean things that current scientific knowledge can measure (frequency response, distortion etc.)

Trouble is, canscientific knowledge evermeasure allthe relevant parameters?

For example, can we measure things like 'soundstage', 'imaging', 'timing', 'naturalness' etc?

Well, 'science' would say that 'naturalness', for example,does not objectively exist. The 'naturalness' of an amplifier would purely be a product of its distortion andfrequency response etc.

'Timing' would also be seen as non-existent. Maybe speed stability in turntables. But problems such as wow and flutter are known and measurable.

I suspect you are a 'yes' voter as I suspect that you suspect that science does not have all the answers/explanations.

 

[Ant]

why do people prefer things that measure worse?

 

[enbee23]

Answer has to be yes.

I don't think that science has got it wrong at all but I do suspect that that there are relevant factors which we do not yet know to measure or maybe even how to measure.

 

[penance]

Science does not know everything, it is a permantly evolving study.

To say science disagrees and rest your ideas on that principle is folly.

 

[Kiang]

For the patient among you - have a read

http://pcfarina.eng.unipr.it/Public/Papers/123-JNMR98.PDF

 

[Miller-8]

I voted no. But you have to measure everything that matters.

 

[Alex A]

George 47 wrote:

Notaclue...luv the avatar very seasonal.In the words of Einstein (nealry) : What can be measured does not always matter and what matters cannot always be measured.

You're looking for:

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted"

 

[Uncle Ants]

Of course they can sound different, and science knows this. A good scientist would ask the pertinent question - "What are you measuring?" After all speakerA could weigh exactly the same as speaker B. If weight is what you are measuring then they measure the same ... would it be reasonable to assume they sound the same?

If you measure something and think your measurement, measureshow it ought to sound, and two things which by that same measurement are the same, sound different, then whatever you are measuring is the wrong thing to measure (in terms of how they sound) or you are missing something else that you should be measuring.

BTW this is in no way a sound argument for spending four figures on a bit of wire.

 

[Anthony]

i voted yes

both my plastic ruler and tape measure give the same reading for the length of a piece of A4, but when i put my ear close to them the ruler tells me I' have beautiful eyeswhereas the tape measure says I'm a twat.

 

[saab]

Measuring things is for peasants

 

[uzzy]

Ooer did i do it wrong when i measured the kitchen to make sure the cabinets would fit in it?

If you are making a pair of loudspeakers to reproduce music as it was recorded you need as flat a response as possible so thank god the speaker manufacturers measure (well some of them anyway) to ensure from a starting point the frequency response is flat, then some of them screw it up.

Measurement has its place but it is not the b all and end all but is an indication and a bench mark.

Uzzy