objective vs. subjective rabbit hole

snilf, I understand your position and accept your logic.  But let me suggest that the situation isn’t as dire or impossible as you may believe, or have expressed.  However, it may be time consuming and as such, may be considered difficult.  Many posters here, post on other audio sites.  Find the ones you gel with sonically and equipment wise and go from there. 

Fortunately, I have managed to be around a lot longer than CD’s, the Internet, iPods, cell & bag phones, Walkman’s, cassette recorders and 8-tracks; coming from a time when audio shops and component sales were profuse, measurements were published, but reliable reporting, information and personal observations were scarce to non-existent. 

Thus, I can’t stress enough how beneficial the internet and forums such as this, have been to me and hobbyists in general and the audio hobby specifically.  And it wasn’t that way because someone published equipment measurements, discussed electrical theories, the pros and cons of individual parts etc.  Some of those discussions, may aid equipment designers, but individual parts are not the end all, be all, to we end users.  In fact, I have found designers and their designs to be far more important and relevant, than the mix of their parts.    

Over the decades, I have learned about and bought equipment after spending untold hours and then more, reading and researching.  If enough time is spent, it is possible to wade through the chaff to find the wheat.  By doing this, I've bought and enjoyed several wonderful, decently priced, boutique components.  Without forums such as this, I would never have found those.

I have met with people at their homes and audio stores and found individuals on forums with similar sonic preferences and equipment tastes like mine.  We have been able to share a glass of wine, observations, preferences and together, we have come to similar conclusions.  I have learned from those.  The learning was NOT quick or easy, but it was doable. 

There are many very high-quality components; who many will agree are just that.  But we each develop our own tastes and preferences with our own audio tastes that may be the same as others or not, as you suggested with your wine analogy.  Who is right, wrong or otherwise?  In total, no one.  It is a subjective personal hobby where minds can meet to agree, or disagree.  In the end, it is all about what pleases us, not others.  But we must learn just that, through trial, after trial.   

Once, a really good frequency response level is attained, especially a superb, nuanced and detailed midrange, incremental improvements can found be in the intangibles and mainly unmeasurable areas, such as soundstage and imaging.  These provide the ability to recreate the illusion of being in a recording room, a concert hall, or smoke-filled jazz and blues club – close your eyes and your there.  Well of course not really, but goosebumps and a feeling of being there are possible and important.  Until those so-called intangibles are heard, they are unknown.  Just as until a really good wine or whiskey is sampled, or varietals are tasted, their positives and differences are unknown.   

As much as some want to diss the golden ear premise, to learn what is good or what one prefers, one needs to sample many and varied audio systems, including for example, speaker types such boxed cones and domes, open baffles, panels/ribbons/eltrostats, horns etc.  But live instruments and music for points of reference, must also be sampled.  For example, I fondly recall the first time I took my percussionist son to an acoustically great performance hall, for a symphonic performance.  I leaned over and asked him what he thought?  He said it sounds like the audio room, dad.  Well of course it didn’t!  But it was a good approximation, in that instruments sounded like the instruments they were and music was equally enjoyable in both places.   

I do agree that jaw dropping hyperboles abound in reviews and forums when changes to our system's may be thought to produce same.  But you know when that new component is inserted (let alone a tweak is made), no one but us would generally know the difference.  We then become accustomed to the status quo, until a until another change is made. 

Suffice it to say, that I have heard many more good, or great systems than otherwise.  They might not have been my precise cup of tea, but the performances they recreated were entertaining and fun to listen to.  Isn't that what we're seeking?  Once a certain level is attained, sideways or incremental moves are possible, but difficult and the law of diminishing returns kicks-in.

I think there are those that want system builds to be quick and easy. They are not!  But objective measurements and parts are easy to prioritize and quantify.  Simply seek 1) the best measuring component; 2) with the parts that everyone agrees are good; 3) at the all-important best price; 4) voila you’re done!  You can then feel good about your choice(s), because the measurements said you should and they were the best, for the bucks spent!  So, I can see why some go in that direction and remain there.  But I would hypothesize that is only an impatient few and not the majority of us, or we wouldn’t be here.   

 

@deludedaudiophile said: Are you familiar with the term hypocrite? What were the last 25 or so paragraphs you posted? Who were you trying to save.

My intent was never to try to “save” anyone; let alone someone from themselves and their purchasing decisions, quite the opposite.  My post was bemoaning the activist, objectivist and their push to dismiss or purchase equipment based solely on their measurements.  But of course I have no problems with measurements being part of the purchase decision equation and measurements are definitely important when treating a room.  Hell, I have owned a Rat Shack analog meter before they were digital and when Radio Shack still existed.🙂

As I said, I have no qualms with objective, scientific, electrical engineering, acoustics and physics discussions as they relate to the audio hobby, or objective discussions and measurements in general; although I rarely frequent audio forums for those.  But I do have qualms with the measurement objectivist evangelist proselytizing their seemingly new found religion.    

The measurement objectivist activist seems to be a fairly recent phenomena in the audio forums I frequent.  Perhaps the holy church of the god of measurement is growing its numbers and is sending out evangelists to convert the unworthy, unwashed heathen subjectivists.  I’m happy that the reverse isn’t the case.  

I have no need to tell anyone what they should do in regard to equipment selection.  I will give advice from my experience and knowledge.  But I understand that what I like or have found to be acceptable, will not be so for all; nor do I expect it to be; quite unlike the measurement objectivist activist, who has the “facts” and if you doubt them…well I have heard enough about science compliers/deniers in general, to last 10 lifetimes!    

Until the last decade or so, we forum members blithely and happily went along telling each other how we felt about a new component, an acoustic modification, a tweak, or how we felt about the music we were listening. Sure, there was misinformation, snake oil, hokum, or honest mistakes etc. When any information is being exchanged, overt, covert and unknowing misinformation and dis-information is expected and either kept, or thrown to side as we encounter it.  If not, we learn by our mistakes and move on. 

We are confronted with those sorts of informational misfits and puffery daily from all directions, not just audio.  However then, galloping in, came the measurement cavalry.  Who seemingly just discovered that there were these potential pitfalls and hazards. Wow, imagine that!?!  With the god of measurement objectivism on their side, the cavalry righteously informed us of the scientific method and all of the psychological methods we supposedly had been using to delude ourselves.  Thanks, but no thanks for the information! I was educated in the scientific method and understand all we humans do to psychologically delude ourselves into believing what we want.  I don’t need, or want the measurement objectivist activist cavalry coming in to save me from myself, under the auspices of  preventing me from throwing my hard- earned money away on a poorly measuring component!      

The remarks I made previously in this thread, were an attempt to understand what seems to be the activist motivation of many objectivists and their:  my measurements are god perspective and they should also be yours, because…well, you can’t argue with the god of objective measurements!  To think otherwise, you must have confirmational bias, don't understand the placebo effect, don't believe or defer to double-blind experiments, blah, blah, blah.  Objectivists obviously have every right to believe what they believe.  But what’s the point of their measurement crusading zeal directed at a subjective hobby and on a forum such as this? 

If anyone chooses to select equipment based solely on measurable criteria or any other data that seems important to them, I say have at it.  All should do likewise. 

All are welcome to buy measurably defective equipment or otherwise.  There is no need to point that out.  Get your rocks off, by getting your rocks off; not by measurement proselytizing to the unwashed masses and disbelievers, as if they don’t have a clue. 

@deludedaudiophile:  You should have a chat with the acoustics engineer who designed and tuned my room. I believe the term he would use is poppycock. He does not think soundstage and imaging is at all intangible and many others I talked to do not either. Perhaps that comes from your lack of knowledge that others do not lack?

You should have a chat with the professional calibrator who setup the projector in my home theater.  He said blah...blah...blah and “many others” agree.  

Both your acoustic engineer and my video calibrator could well be accurate in their pronouncements and assessments.  That doesn't mean that the results of their efforts are preferable, or without rebuttal.  I may prefer sonic or visual settings to be skewed from what the measurer, or the measurement device(s) suggest.  Or their devices may be flawed, my vision or hearing may be, or their observations and conclusions may also be flawed, or not (as it were).  

As the room owners you and I are the final arbiters of what we prefer -- not the professionals and certainly not the measurements, unless we want them to be! 

As far as poppycock goes, and “everyone” does, or does not concur: who cares?  I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything.  You're welcome to prefer what you do and I assume you would agree, that I am welcome to do likewise; regardless of some sort of accurate, inaccurate, or questionable objective measurements, or the advice of experts in their respective fields. 

My 2-channel audio room is for my relaxation and entertainment.  I needn’t an expert involved to tell me what I should like, or prefer.  However, I definitely have found that an aged distilled adult beverage positively helps.🙂  But, you may need or prefer a professionals hand holding and advice to be satisfied and that’s you and of course, I’m fine with that.  Why should I not be?  However, I don’t need or want someone to tell me what component sounds good, because it measures good and for me to think otherwise, is wrong headed and incorrect!    

@deludedaudiophile: If you start with the assumption that other people could not possibly have the knowledge you lack then you are destined to repeat the mistakes they have long overcome.

I'm not sure where that comment emanated.  I'm here to acquire and offer subjective knowledge gained from experience.  But I obviously get to pick and choose what is acceptable and isn’t.  Of course, I may be wrong according to some.  But isn’t that always the case?  My way is not remotely the right way for anyone, but me.  Nevertheless, there was a long and torturous path to get there.   But yet, I’m still constantly learning and trying to refrain from making mistakes, especially the same mistake twice.  However, my mistakes are mine, especially when they affect no one else on this forum, or elsewhere. 

How about you, do you have all the answers?  How about your acoustic engineer(s), do they have all the answers?  Or might other acoustic engineers agree to disagree, or have ancillary or divergent beliefs or thoughts – a tweak of this here, or there etc.?  Line up a number, of any experts and there will be disagreement.  Some disagreement may be subtle, other disagreements not so subtle.  So much for the great and wise “everyone” you seem to banter about, as if that word has meaning?    

@deludedaudiophile: There is enough animosity on both sides but not accepting the knowledge or experience of either makes little sense.

I’m uncertain what knowledge is being discussed or is accepted or is unaccepted.  I have no animosity for those fixated on equipment measurements to make purchasing decisions.  Nor do I wish to tell them what to do or that they may be suffering from delusional auditory biases compounded by staring at measurement matrices for hours on end etc.  So yes, I do have animosity for their overt and pronounced prostalizing, however. 

Measurement Objectivists Activists:  have at it, by all means make equipment selections based on objective measures, or as you see fit. As such, measurement objectivists, should not object or have animosity against folks that manufacture or select equipment that do NOT meet the measurement criteria they value and if they do, what is the point of pointing it out.  You go your way and I will go mine, no harm, no foul.

@deludedaudiophile: On a side note, the most revered headphones, very very expensive Sennheisers ($30K) have very very low distortion. They measure about as perfect as possible. Everyone who hears them raves. What can we learn from that?

Whoo hoo, “everyone” that hears them raves!  Consequently, I’m sure all other headphone manufacturers have thrown in the towel and conceded defeat.  The best are indeed, measurably the best!  I'm happy for Sennheiser's feat and that their headphones have “raves” by "everyone" that hears them. 

There’s that “everyone” word again.  It may have meaning to you; it has none to me!  Feel better now that “everyone” is in agreement? 

Throughout history there have been times when “everyone” has been in agreement about issues that later were found to be inaccurate, immoral, unethical and heinous, among but a few adjectives.  But I suppose your use of “everyone” now as if it has meaning, is unquestionably accurate and without dissent or debate!  There you have it, use “everyone” and the questioning ends, the subject is settled! 

Speaking of "everyone", there were posts on this site by an individual referencing a specific cable brand and citing the continuous rave reviews “everyone” in the reviewing industry provided, as if “everyone” and their findings were meaningful and indisputable.  What a load of dung.  My “everyone” will see and raise your “everyone”.  Now, who is the hypocrite?       

Lastly, the pure equipment objectivist and subjectivist will always disagree.  Neither should have the need or desire to convince each other that their equipment purchasing decisions are the wrong way or the right way.  As long as the system owner is happy, there is no purely right or wrong decision in a subjective hobby such as this. 

Hence, as I previously mentioned, I relished the fact that the AudioPhileStyle.com forum peeled off the purely objective discussions into an “Objective-Fi” Forum, “the space for scientific / objective audio discussions”.  There is obviously some overlap between the two.  But activism from either camp should be dissuaded and moved into their respective domains for the civility and sanity of everyone involved.  

          

I applauded the day one of the forums I frequent -- Audiostyle.com -- created an "ObjectiveFi" section for objective zealots. 

I have no problem with electrical engineering and physics discussions.  I have no problem with discussions about why capacitor “A” might be objectively better than “C”.  What I do have a problem with are measurement zealots – i.e., component “C” must be better than “G” because its noise measurements are better, or it contains "X", or it doesn’t contain "A" etc.       

This forum among all the others I began frequenting decades ago, formerly had very few postings about snake oil, double blind testing, confirmational bias etc., as if those terms and the term buyer beware, weren’t already known and understood.  And if the premise of caveat emptor wasn’t learned in one’s teens before discretionary income was sufficient to buy a CD, let alone the type of hardware being discussed in this forum, using an audio forum for that sort of post and education is too little, too late! 

Thus, the goal of far too many objectivist posters, seems to be the need to save equipment buyers from themselves. The purpose of their posts is to cite how correct they are, because their measurements say they are.  Perhaps they want to quantify their choice or purchase.  They seem to get the adrenalin rush of an activist naysayer and debunker, by deriding equipment manufacturers and owners, based on the measurements that seem to prove how bad their equipment is, or how bad their buying decisions are.  Great, if that’s the objectivist’s thing, buy a Topping DAC and have fun listening to its measurements.  

My experience in my audio room is strictly a subjective, emotional one.  Equipment measurements have been available forever, from when Hi-Fi was basically a DIY hobby.  While I may have glanced at measurements, especially at input and output values, I have never chosen a product based upon anything but listening to it!  Duh, that’s what I do with it. 

I don’t give a damn how a component measures.  I make equipment buying decisions solely for my enjoyment not someone else’s!  So, I could care less whether the item I choose is floating in snake oil, its distortion measurements suck, cables can’t make a difference, or someone’s measurements prove that I can’t be hearing what I am.  I buy equipment based on my sonic preferences; more importantly however, I almost exclusively come here to read posts from others regarding their personal sonic preferences and experiences.

There is no audio heaven road map, no reliable equipment choosing matrix based on objective measurements, nor should there be.  If that day comes, we will all be listening to the same hardware. 

@mrmb , Quite … Once upon a time most of these tweeks  were reasonably inexpensive so where was the harm ? $3K fuse anyone

"Reasonably inexpensive"?  What's the heck does “reasonably inexpensive” mean?  Reasonable cost wise, is only reasonable in the eye of the beholder and their bank account. 

When it comes to discretionary spending, why would I pass any reasonableness judgement on any seller or buyer?  In fact, why would I pass judgement on anyone but myself and my wallet? 

Besides, if someone wants to spend their income on a $3,000 fuse, or $47,000 on a gold & diamond encrusted 1-meter IC and wear it around their neck as jewelry, why would I, or anyone care, or use the term "harm", when NO harm is always the answer?  Frankly, I'm happy that there are people with disposable incomes to buy whatever fuses they choose and more!  And if they don't have the disposable income, again why should I care; or consider posting or arguing the insanity (to me), of some of the questionable products (to me) pawned-off as being beneficial?

I don't know about anyone else, but living within my means, began with my first job at 14.  It is a lesson that must be learned long before buying non-essentials, let alone luxury items like 100% of the audio items discussed in this forum.  If you have it, there is always someone who will want it and will do whatever it takes to get it.  This includes every relationship you have and every possession you own, including your money.  Does anyone with the ability to read and comprehend this forum and thread not understand this basic fact of human nature and life?  So yeah, have fun, buy those $3,000 fuses that have no known electrical measurable advantages and enjoy!

mahgister, And I'm talking about my audio room and listening to music!  I'm not sure A.I. is particularly suited to art and our forum.  But it is obvious that you've been pondering the AI question far more than I. 

What a philosophical post!  Thanks for giving me something to consider, whether I find doing so pleasant vs sticking my head in the sand to escape it. 

Your: "we are unbalanced" statement is persuasively thought provoking.  And indeed, human freedoms of thought, actions and speech have recently been excerpted and more easily parted with, far more readily and in numbers than I would have ever imagined, in turn for "comfort" and supposed safety.  We have seen that there are no freedoms, unless they are fought for with the imperative importance and the loving protection they deserve.  Once we have underestimated their utmost importance and have allowed them to be taken away, wining them back, will be a battle.  You and your loved ones may be your friend and care for and about you; but no one else does, especially entities such as private and public businesses and governments. By definition, they are like AI, empathyless, soullessly inward-looking, self-preserving, caring only for themselves; quite contrary to the verbiage and lies that they spokespersons spout; which is the  opposite of what they're trying to convince everyone.      

Science can be stranger than fiction.  However, you are correct, the science fiction authors have been spot-on regarding many issues and subjects.    

 

mahgister, Before my above post, I didn't watch the video.  It was supremely interesting....thanks for including it!!!  The yin and the yang, the pros and cons, the balance sheet of everything we touch or do in life.  Food for thought coupled with food to survive or, _______ _______   So may blanks to fill-in, where to start??