Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo Science and mass market headphones

When you consider the ADAs gain is 29db, the 8805 needs to get the noise floor pretty low not to hear it from 6 inches. Like I said … not an issue. The noise which does bother me is the ADA’s transformer electro-mechanical hum (especially after they warm up for a while). Didn’t really hear it till the walls were in … But when there is silence … I may be building building some hush boxes in the near future (for the ADAs and the projector).

Sounds like ( ) audio is bad for your health …

I agree, as long as your not one to crank it.

The average audiophile has a litany of beliefs that empirical evidence doesn't necessarily validate:
- more expensive audio equipment sound better
- loudspeaker companies with heritage and pedigree are more trustworthy than upstarts
- bit rate and high-res audio matters for good sound, and you can only achieve it through lossless, 192/24, or going analog-only
- high power amps sound better than well designed low power amps at normal (<90 dB) listening volumes
- it's not hifi unless it's stereo. Subwoofers, multichannel speakers, and televisions have no place in an enthusiast's setup.
- spatial details, rhythm and pace, and musicality has everything to do with good equipment and nothing to do with the room, the recording, nor psychoacoustics.
- anyone with good ears can hear the difference that good equipment makes, and anyone who says otherwise needs to check their ears

Each one of these have been debunked, though they're often based on a kernel of truth. The audiophile subculture is not one that embraces science, and they're definitely not ones that can ever reach happiness without that next tweak or purchase.

The average audiophile is not everyone and it's not clear what defines an "average" audiophile. Let's set that aside though and examine what you wrote.

I agree the beliefs you laid out are not absolutes.

The average audiophile has a litany of beliefs that empirical evidence doesn't necessarily validate:

- more expensive audio equipment sound better.

It might. It depends on the system the equipment is introduced into. The system includes the space and listener. I will bet half of me left 'nad my ALFRs sound better, at any volume, with Bryston 9B cubed amplification rather than my ADAs. I will also bet the other half 'nad anyone who can hear can hear the difference. Why? Significantly lower noise floor.

- loudspeaker companies with heritage and pedigree are more trustworthy than upstarts

It depends. Maybe a heritage company has better service and warranty policies. Maybe better product development processes. Then again, B&W has produced at least one dud. Although apparently it sold well.

- bit rate and high-res audio matters for good sound, and you can only achieve it through lossless, 192/24, or going analog-only

Many enjoy the channel cross-talk of vinyl and tape. This cross-talk creates a large soundstage. There are other psychoacoustic effects also related to the frequency response. It's difficult to argue this is bad when it sounds so good. Like the M3 or M50. They're not "as right" as the other v4 but damn they're both seductive in a vinyl or tape kind of way.

- high power amps sound better than well designed low power amps at normal (<90 dB) listening volumes

They might. Because folks think they're listening to 90dB but those damned peaks of 105dB keep getting chopped off with the lower power amps. Also the higher power amps, like say the Brystons, may have a lower noise floor and when used with a highly sensitive speaker in a quiet room, they will sound better even at lower volumes.

- it's not hifi unless it's stereo. Subwoofers, multichannel speakers, and televisions have no place in an enthusiast's setup.

Maybe. Large TVs mess with imaging and soundstage. Subwoofers can sound like crap if they're bad products or folks don't know how to set them up.

- spatial details, rhythm and pace, and musicality has everything to do with good equipment and nothing to do with the room, the recording, nor psychoacoustics.

I whole-heartedly agree this is categorically untrue.

- anyone with good ears can hear the difference that good equipment makes, and anyone who says otherwise needs to check their ears

In the case of Brystons vs. ADAs in my system, please see my previous wager. Agreed though that this is not an absolute.

"Each one of these have been debunked, though they're often based on a kernel of truth. The audiophile subculture is not one that embraces science, and they're definitely not ones that can ever reach happiness without that next tweak or purchase."

I consider myself an audiophile. I love science. I love engineering that is based on science. I'm happy and was happy when I upgraded M80v2 to M5v4. And I'd be perfectly happy with just my M2s.

We're not in disagreement, it's just inflaming to me when the myths keep circulating long after they've been debunked.

There's good reasons to buy some products: convenience, aesthetics, a good warranty, pride of ownership, innovation, or even loyalty. But better audio often isn't one of them, but masquerades as such.

Well, if you know what you know deep down into your bollocks, then it shouldn't bother you, should it?

So I have to ask. Do you know? Or is something akin to a cold, dead finger probing from the stanky darkness of doubt into the far recesses of your frontal lobe?

If so, how far will you take this? Do you possess the constitution and the depth of faith to go as far as needed?

The problem with following myths is that it leads you down the dead end that are red herrings. A non-audio example would be the fact that most Americans and Canadians are overweight (BMI >25.0) or obese (BMI > 30.0). Most people would rather be skinny (BMI <23), so why do people struggle with their weight?

If your philosophy follows the Energy Balance hypothesis, you're bound to follow the health recommendations of the last 50 years: eat less, move more. If you have a lot of willpower and enjoy being miserable, it can work. Most of us don't have a lot of willpower nor enjoy being miserable.

The alternative is the Hormonal hypothesis, which mostly blames insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia. Insulin controls not only fat storage and fat metabolism, but also hunger. If you understand that North Americans live in an insulin-stimulating culinary environment, you can understand why 88% of North Americans have hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance (as measured by HOMA-IR and Hg-A1C).

It's a deep rabbit hole if you're willing to look at the latest science, but these two videos summarize the state of the art without the gobbledegook.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPGGOhsK29o&list=LL&index=8&t=219s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qs5GnUDJVrk&list=LL&index=11

So it's not that myths bother me, it's that your life gets better when you understand why they take you off track of your goals.

Apparently these are the prettiest earphones my son has ever seen. We'll see if the Harman Reference curve changes his life.

You spewed alot of crap in here Mojo.
Less opinion, more fact.

Not to pile on you after Chessero's reply, but look no further than your advice Mojo. You consistently tell folks looking for advice on improving their sound to upgrade their speakers, and have shown this as a mantra by a continual upgrade of all your personal Axiom products, while slagging the previous models.

What happens when V5 is released, will you continue that approach?