Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site drufl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!drutx!drufl!pmr
From: pmr@drufl.UUCP (Rastocny)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Thoughts on subjectivity and specifications
Message-ID: <779@drufl.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Jan-84 10:51:36 EST
Article-I.D.: drufl.779
Posted: Fri Jan 13 10:51:36 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Jan-84 03:43:02 EST
References: many
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Denver
Lines: 50

I suppose that a lot of you may not agree (flame?) with what I
am about to say.  But remember that this is a discussion group as well
as an information group and everyone has a right to an opinion.  I know
it's 1984 but let's try to keep Big Brother off this net until some
time in the distant future somewhere.

In General:
I don't care about what statistics accompany a piece of equipment.  I
don't care what technology it employs.  I don't care what the
manufacturer claims or what the industry claims any given format
or technology can do.  What I do care about SINCERLY is the accuracy
of sonic reproduction!

On Specs:
Now if there is a set of technical parameters that will assist me
in relating what can be heard to what can be measured, fine.  Specs
are supposed to steer us in the direction of what equipment we want
by correlating them to what we hear.  AND we should be able to measure
literally anything that we hear.  Great!  No argument.

On Subjectivity:
But if I can hear something that any of the specifications supplied
with a piece of equipment cannot be correlated to the observation, then
where do we go?  We talk about what we hear (like the soundstage size
or inner detail) and then poke around in the circuit until we realize
exactly what causes the observation spec-wise.

Example:
Amplifiers that have similar distortion, damping, power, bandwidth, etc.,
should all sound about the same.  But when comparing two equivalent
amplifiers (like an Acoustat TNT-200 to a Kenwood Basic M-2)
on a suitably refined reference system, they still sound different.
(Both amps are class B about 200W, < 0.01% THD and IM distortion, both
slew > 100V/uS, and both are finely engineered.)  All of the specs are
orders-of-magnitudes greater than the ear should be able to detect and
essentially identical.  But yet they still do not sound insignificantly
different.

Closing Thoughts:
What can we do about this dillema?  I'm not anit-digital, anti-tube, or
anti-analog.  I'll listen to anything (except Barbara Streisand, and
even then I may someday).  I encourage the engineering community to
develop MEANINGFUL specs so that subjectivity can be done away with.
Today, these spec correlations haven't been identified.  Until they are,
I'll have to trust my ears.

		Yours for higher fidelity,
		Phil Rastocny
		AT&T-ISL
		..!drufl!pmr