Audiophiles

[Kenneth Horne]

Dont start me on the wine cognoscenti. Nuances of elderberry.

Raspberries!

[prufrock]

"Cheeky little test exposes wine 'experts' as weak and flat

FROM ADAM SAGE IN PARIS

(Originally published in the Times of London)

Monday January 14, 2002

DRINKERS have long suspected it, but now French researchers have finally proved it: wine “experts” know no more than the rest of us.

Their rituals as they pronounce judgment have been revealed as little more than self-delusion by an awardwinning French study. They base their views as much on colour and labels as upon a wine's bouquet and flavour.

“The truth is that you cannot define taste objectively,” said Frédéric Brochet, a researcher from Bordeaux whose study won an award from the Amorim wine academy in France. The opinions of the so-called connoisseurs are are no better and perhaps worse than that of the occasional drinker, he said. The greater the expertise, the greater the cultural baggage that prevents you from perceiving the actual taste in your mouth.

M Brochet carried out two studies. In the first, he invited 54 of Bordeaux's eminent wine experts to sample different bottles, including a white wine to which he had added a flavourless substance giving it a red colour. Not a single expert noticed. “It is a well known psychological phenomonen – you taste what you are expecting to taste,” M Brochet said. “They were expecting to taste a red wine, and so they did.” Similar experiments elsewhere had come up with similar results.

“About 2 or 3 per cent of people detect the white wine flavour, but invariably they have little experience of wine culture. Connoisseurs tend to fail to do so. The more training they have, the more mistakes they make because they are influenced by the colour of the wine.”

In the second test, 57 experts tasted the same average bottle of Bordeaux wine on two occasions. The first time it was labelled as a high-prestige grand cru, and the second time it was labelled as a cheap vin de table. When they thought it was a grand cru, the experts described it as agreeable, woody, complex, balanced and rounded. When they thought it was a vin de table, they said it was weak, short, light, flat, faulty and with a sting. Forty said the wine was good when they thought it was expensive, but only 12 when it was cheap.

“This is why wine frauds are virtually never detected on taste alone, but because someone tips off the police who look at the paperwork,” M Brochet said. He has studied the brain activity of wine tasters and found that those sections handling information relating to colour and knowledge operate alongside those which deal with flavour and smell. What we perceive is a mixture of thought, vision and taste.

Indeed, the brain receives more information more quickly from the eyes than from the mouth or nose.

M Brochet also points out that the molecule that gives what is described as the taste of blackcurrants, redcurrants or raspberries in red wine is identical to that which gives an apricot or peach taste to white wine. The description of the connoisseurs changes because the colour is different.

Copyright 2002 Times Newspapers Ltd."

[Julf]

Given the fact that the author has no background in audio and works in a different field, to me, suggests that he may not be the most qualified person to take advice from. Also, the author does no listening tests at all to confirm the claims he makes. As a matter of fact, he can't have a valid opionion because of this. It's hard to have an opinion on something you haven't experienced.

Ah, the usual anthropology / sociology "you can't properly study aboriginals / criminal gang members / flat earthers / whatever without being one yourself" argument...

[Julf]

"Cheeky little test exposes wine 'experts' as weak and flat

And that brings us once again to the classic Penn & Teller The Truth About Bottled Water (from 4:55 or so on).

I think I'll go and open another bottle of Brunello...

[orgel]

Ah, the usual anthropology / sociology "you can't properly study aboriginals / criminal gang members / flat earthers / whatever without being one yourself" argument...

My Dad, a psychologist, used to say, "You don't have to be a bird to be an ornithologist."

--David

[prufrock]

Besides buyers remorse, what is your predicament exactly?

My predicament is that I am pathetic irrational being. I know the cable guys are taking me for a ride, but I always chose to purchase a cable at a price point commensurate with my income/how much I can afford to lose. In my case that figure happens to be about 3 times the required amount. I was really hoping that the 4 grand a cable guys would own up and make me feel better. Anyone out there spent a grand even? That would help.

[4est]

My predicament is that I am pathetic irrational being. I know the cable guys are taking me for a ride, but I always chose to purchase a cable at a price point commensurate with my income/how much I can afford to lose. In my case that figure happens to be about 3 times the required amount. I was really hoping that the 4 grand a cable guys would own up and make me feel better. Anyone out there spent a grand even? That would help.

You cannot rape the willing.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Penn & Teller are very entertaining. I hadn't seen the BS on bottled water. Thanks for the link :~)

[Kenneth Horne]

You cannot rape the willing.

Oh yes you can.

If the willing is under-age or drunk or both, there will have been a case of rape.

[4est]

Oh yes you can.

If the willing is under-age or drunk or both, there will have been a case of rape.

What is a drunk minor doing buying cables anyway? My point is that if he keeps spending too much money on something that he cannot distinguish from more cost effective version, who's fault is it? This is just silly talk really. Some things are worth what they cost, others aren't. That choice should be left to the individual consumer.

[4est]

Oh, for the record I have spent a grand on a cable and do not feel regretful or taken advantage of. It was solely my decision and is in use today.

[Kenneth Horne]

Quote from Andrew Everard in Gramophone:

"....the right system for you is the one you like and enjoy."

Problems arise only when it's entered in pissing competitions on forums, and then it's........ personal.

[Julf]

Oh, for the record I have spent a grand on a cable and do not feel regretful or taken advantage of. It was solely my decision and is in use today.

Good for you! It was your personal choice, and as long as it is recognized as that, and not generalized to anyone else, I applaud it.

[4est]

Julf: I certainly am not pushing anyone to buy anything. My statement was to answer prufrock's question. This cable is also commensurate with the cost of the system. Just so it is clear, I do not think that cables make much difference until you get into mid range ones, and on good systems that have been tuned in well. I would agree that spending double the money on a cable from Best Buy for HT is wasteful. Once you are into hopped up 2 channel it seems to make a difference...

Good for you! It was your personal choice, and as long as it is recognized as that, and not generalized to anyone else, I applaud it.

[xyz]

"I don't think very many people are saying we can define or measure all things that effect audio perception. Nor that some people don't hear better than others. I may be taking your comment wrongly. But what some of us people do say, is we don't have to accept every possible idea because while we don't know everything there are some things we do know to a very high confidence level."

I think I agree with that statement, for the most part. Its aparent that alot of the people on this web site will strongly agree with you. I'm not pointing my finger at any one person, but I think some people go way too far down that path. There are some things that we do know to a very high confidence level. The question I have regarding this, "How much weight do we give to the factors we do know?" If we are missing some of the pieces of the puzzle, then we are forced not only to deal in the subjective with the missing pieces, but the objective ones as well. A good analogy to explain this might be: Do we have 90 pieces to a 100 piece puzzle, or mabye a 1000 pieces? Also, along the same lines, we can't expect all the pieces of the puzzle to be all the same size either. When we take a nice, accurate measurement of something like frequency response, how much does it count for? 1%, 10%, 50% etc...

[Richard Dale]

My predicament is that I am pathetic irrational being. I know the cable guys are taking me for a ride, but I always chose to purchase a cable at a price point commensurate with my income/how much I can afford to lose. In my case that figure happens to be about 3 times the required amount. I was really hoping that the 4 grand a cable guys would own up and make me feel better. Anyone out there spent a grand even? That would help.

Why are you so hung up about cables? Is it because you system has five Vandersten speakers in it (from what I can remember) which must make speaker cables especially expensive. I'm personally very happy with my Nordost Red Dawn speaker cables and don't think I've been ripped off at all. I have no desire to tell you that you bought the wrong cables even if they are lamp cord. What puzzles me is the quasi-religious desire of the Objectivists to tell the Subjectivists how wrong they are.

Have you read Art Dudley's column about 'Woodies and Fuzzies'? He does a much better job as describing the difference between 'Objectivists' and 'Subjectivists' than the fairly useless academic study that is the subject of this thread:

Listening #44 | Stereophile.com

[xyz]

I have to agree with Richard Dale. You are going crazy for absolutely no reason. Just sell the $1000 cables and get the good ones for $5000. Problem solved.

Why don't you list your system, including cables. If you have Vandersteen speakers, I have a ton of experiance with them and all types of cables. You may not have even made a mistake. I can probably show you how to set them up and/or how to listen to the system so you can hear what the cables are doing. There's no gaurantees, but we can at least try to make something positive come of the situation.

"I was really hoping that the 4 grand a cable guys would own up and make me feel better. Anyone out there spent a grand even? That would help."

We can start with your above question. My answer: Yes

[Kaleidosoul]

Oh, for the record I have spent a grand on a cable and do not feel regretful or taken advantage of. It was solely my decision and is in use today.

Ditto, and I experienced a significant difference in sound quality, almost equal to the experience I had with the upgrade to my new preamp.

[Kaleidosoul]

Audiophilia has the additional problem of being pretty much an all male review. Why this is the case is a topic in itself. It has posed a problem nevertheless as the gear has to coexist often with tasteful furnishings, but only the guys know how the gear works or its requirements.. Photographers dont have this problem as the gear can go back into the bag and into the cupboard. However speakers have to coexist. Yes, we are talking about the wife factor. Just this afternoon I noticed someone had put a large potplant on top of on of my woofers. The speakers often get little adornments put on top of them. Looking now one of mains has a pretty red glass bowl perched on the top.
So not only are we geeks, but our wives talk about our silly looking speakers at lunch and shake their heads. And we are suckers as well.

Am I the only female on here???

I will admit, I like my room to be aesthetically pleasing but I would never put anything on my speakers nor should you stand for your wife putting anything on them. You need to be able to draw the line somewhere! I hope I don't end up with a husband like your wives. Maybe this is why I don't have a husband at all. It sure is nice to be able to listen to what I want, whenever I want, AND I can have my room exactly how I like it!.

You might benefit from that pot plant but I'm sure that's not exactly what you meant with your choice of words. He He.

[Kaleidosoul]

Certainly one part of it is that we tend to fetishize the gear. From the audiophile's perspective, this is understandable and not that uncommon. After all, people do it with musical instruments, cameras, cars, computers. But from the outside looking in (I'm thinking of some audiophiles' spouses I know well), it just seems like bizarre (not to say batshit) behavior, barely distinguishable from that of any other kind of fetishist.

--David

Do you think anyone would understand my stereo system fetish on fetlife? I do say, it is the best relationship I have ever had and often refer to a night of listening pleasure as having a date with my boyfriend. As you've seen from my posts on AoftheE, I really do get into (off on) it!

[prufrock]

Sorry guys.

[esldude]

Do we have 90 pieces to a 100 piece puzzle, or mabye a 1000 pieces? Also, along the same lines, we can't expect all the pieces of the puzzle to be all the same size either. When we take a nice, accurate measurement of something like frequency response, how much does it count for? 1%, 10%, 50% etc...

It's a pretty good analogy there with the puzzle and how many pieces and how large. Don't know I can answer your question. I believe we have most of the larger pieces already. Maybe there are a 1000 pieces, and maybe we have 100 of them, but they are the largest 100 and might account for 3/4's of the whole puzzle in size.

I do think frequency response is responsible for more of the genuinely audible differences than anything else by far. Even fairly small deviations are audible. I also think they get attributed to something else, at times almost anything else when that response is all the difference there is. More than once a fairly explainable response difference is involved and people wouldn't believe it and go looking for something else. Something they won't find because they are ignoring the real difference. The good thing about modern gear is unless made intentionally otherwise frequency response is a solved issue. Where it matters big time is loudspeakers.

We know about the more obvious distortions pretty well. Masking is something probably understood not at all completely, but well enough to be very useful knowledge. It seems many audiophiles fear it is an excuse for not looking at more detailed issues. I think it is highly useful knowledge and am not sure why it is so mistrusted. It is an area that not all is known and plenty of work needs doing. But when you have to keep backing up because people don't trust or accept the known well worked out issues, it kind of mucks up the works for getting further along.

[prufrock]

I sense we have a bit of a support thing happening here with more and more listeners coming forth sharing stories of 1 grand and more cables purchased in the past. Join us in feeling taken advantage of. Together we can do anything. Alone and silent we are vincible.

[mav52]

That's my take on expensive cables

[wgscott]

Red Dawn speaker cables