" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...


Tell us, what role does emotional reaction have in current audio
theory.
And what part of conventional audio testing takes it into account?

What place should emotion play in audio testing? Audio is science,
music is art as Stewart like to say. This is in fact the truth, but
how your emotion work on hearing music that science has allowed to
passed on to you is your affair. The science is to get what the artist
and the recording engineers decided was the way they thought would
convey the art to best effect.


You are confusing emotional response to the music with emotional response to
the music *as reproduced", which is where audio design and engineering come
in. Equipment that grows more and more irritating, or less or less
involving over time is triggering this reaction at an emotional level. On a
short term comparative basis it will not be operational. And yet this is
one of the most universally cited reasons for distrusting the comparative
test, because the phenomenon if not universal is at least widely experienced
among audiophiles at one time or another in their lives. It is this type of
experience that John Atkinson, among others, cites as his reason for turning
away from quick-snippet, comparative testing in favor of extended listening
tests.


Shouldn't we out of respect for all that work try our level best not
to screw it up with equipment that distorts or alters what they spent
their time trying to communicate?


We certainly should...but such respect means paying attention to long term
emotional satisfaction in the reproduction of music, not just in short term
"scientific" tests that may very well (and I believe do) miss this aspect
completely.