Article: Why We Need Audiophiles, The subjective perspective Options

[2tec]

I'm interested in what the HA community thinks about this new Gizmodo article, or blog, about Michael Fremer, an audio reviewer from Stereophile, which clearly goes completely against the grain around here. For instance:

"We play my solid 256kbps VBR MP3 of "Heroes" off my iPod; it sounds like shit. Free of pops and crackles, yes, but completely lifeless, flat in every way. This is the detail that matters: Audiophiles are basically synesthesiacs. They "see" music in three-dimensional visual space. You close your eyes in Fremer's chair, and you can perceive a detailed 3D matrix of sound, with each element occupying its own special space in the air. It's crazy and I've never experienced anything like it." ~ Why we need audiophiles

[kornchild2002]

They "see" music in three-dimensional visual space. You close your eyes in Fremer's chair, and you can perceive a detailed 3D matrix of sound, with each element occupying its own special space in the air.

This made me laugh a lot. I didn't bother reading the whole article as there is no need to. However, I didn't realize that audiophiles had a third eye allowing them to actually see sound waves in three dimensions (possibly four?) just pouring out of $350,000 speakers. Hell, I would go crazy if I actually saw my music rather than listening to it. All those sound waves going everywhere would drive me insane. I guess I would hold myself up on a high horse too if I could actually see music. I guess 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the rest of us will just have to be fine with listening to music instead of trying to pear into the fourth dimension.

[rpp3po]

In the context of synesthesia the 3D metaphor is really amiss (like about 99% of anything audio related in the context of Fremer). But it's not complete bull. About 5 years ago I did extensive ABX tests (128kbit/s ABR AAC) with my brother-in-law, who was studying Jazz back then. Out of 20 random Jazz tracks (modern recordings from the 90's and 00's) he could differentiate 19 (myself 3). And he always explained that he heard differences within the spatial image in his head.

PS: We later repeated the tests with Nero 1.0.7.0 at q .5 (~200kb/s) and stopped after 5 tries, because he said that the differences he had originally heard were completely gone.

This post has been edited by rpp3po: Apr 16 2009, 19:19

[kornchild2002]

But it's not complete bull. About 5 years ago I did extensive ABX tests (128kbit/s ABR AAC) with my brother-in-law, who was studying Jazz back then. Out of 20 random Jazz tracks (modern recordings from the 90's and 00's) he could differentiate 19 (myself 3). And he always explained that he heard differences within the spatial image in his head.

I was actually making fun of being able to see sound waves coming out of the speakers in the fourth dimension. I can understand if some people are able to piece together a spatial image in their head. I have this ability when it comes to pip networks, wells, forces acting on objects, etc. I can pictures these things in three dimensions in my head. It is just that the quote kind of came off like he has the ability to actually see sound waves with a third eye or something. That and the whole 3D aspect is just way too "out there" to ignore. That is why I made such an obscene comment about using a third eye to see in the fourth dimension and that someone's vision would constantly be clouded with sound waves (since nearly everything makes noise). Just trying to poke fun at something which is kind of correct but mostly bull crap.

Do you think Fremer really gets into the music with his "$350,000 system", or does he dwell on what can be tweaked or repositioned or even replaced/upgraded. You can't really enjoy the music if you are constantly critiqing the equipment it is playing on. It's a hard habit to break.

That is a good question. Does he always listen for what can be changed or does he actually sit down and enjoy music? As previously stated, most people can still enjoy music regardless of what it is played on. They start listening to the actual song and stop trying to judge it for quality. I know that many musicians actually burn rough copies of their songs and listen to them in the car and at home on their systems (both of which probably weren't $350,000). I couldn't stand listening to music always judging its quality rather than actually enjoying what was coming out. Additionally, if I were extremely anal about these things, I would never be able to fully enjoy music unless I was sitting at home listening to my $350,000 sound system. I imagine that I would even have a hard time enjoying concerts. I know I wouldn't be able to enjoy concerts dealing with metal as everyone tries to push the volume up to obscene levels with clarity often taking a backseat.

[benski]

I was actually making fun of being able to see sound waves coming out of the speakers in the fourth dimension. I can understand if some people are able to piece together a spatial image in their head. I have this ability when it comes to pip networks, wells, forces acting on objects, etc. I can pictures these things in three dimensions in my head. It is just that the quote kind of came off like he has the ability to actually see sound waves with a third eye or something. That and the whole 3D aspect is just way too "out there" to ignore. That is why I made such an obscene comment about using a third eye to see in the fourth dimension and that someone's vision would constantly be clouded with sound waves (since nearly everything makes noise). Just trying to poke fun at something which is kind of correct but mostly bull crap.

It doesn't really work like that. I have synaesthesia and it can be a bit hard to explain. The response is automatic and fairly repeatedly - you don't have to "peice together" anything. The 4D viewpoint makes perfect sense to me
Also, I know you meant it as tongue-in-cheek, but the disorder does help sometimes with ABX testing, although it can be distracting at other times.