Empirical Evidence?...the gap between subjective and objective


As a curious music guy without science background, I stand in awe and gratitude for audio's accomplishments in the last half-century.  From Julian Hirsch's "Stereo Review" to the here and now, Julian's measurements calling the shots vs "trust your ears."  I solidly embrace both camps.  Hard science gets us close, then the loosening of emotions in guiding us home.

Some years ago, I stood on a lower Manhattan Street corner, absorbing the cacophony.  Surrounded by moving objects, sirens, vendors, helicopters, humanity...how can 2 channel replicate this?  A distant friend with the pockets to chase high-end surround, smiles.   More importantly, how could that experience be measured and compared with any degree of accuracy?  "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."  Thoughts? 

More Peace, Pin

pinthrift

Showing 3 responses by nonoise

There's my way (short and succinct), and then there's your way,

All the best,
Nonoise

He told me that he did, in fact, hear clear differences in power amplifiers, but that he did not value the differences as significant in the context of an audio system.

This is a point that I and others have brought up before in similar threads. I truly believe that a lot of objectivists who argue here can hear the differences that others  do and simply dismiss them as insignificant. 

The underlying reasons are not important. What is, is that they are dealing in bad faith.

All the best,
Nonoise