Subjective vs. objective? Or subjective and objective?

I like the fact that Danny makes a strong argument that a false dichotomy is being assumed between "objective" and "subjective"** in the context of audio, and Danny argues against it.

The core of the false dichotomy is the idea that objective measurements and subjective listening are *mutually exclusive* and opposing forces. This leads to camps of "objectivists" who dismiss anything not quantifiable, and "subjectivists" who may disregard measurements entirely. Danny actively tries to dismantle this by stating, "you can't rely on one only you have to use all of the tools that are available to you."

Danny points out that there is an over-simplification of "Objective Data." That is, the "objective" side often falls into the trap of believing that *all* relevant sonic information can be captured by current measurement techniques, and that a "flat" or "perfect" measurement always equates to superior sound. This is challenged with examples involving (a) parts quality, (b) an fact that a lot of distortion is not audible (and this highlights that while measurements are objective, their *relevance to human perception* is subjective), and (c) that measurements often focus heavily on frequency response and distortion but other things matter a lot, including "spatial cues," "soundstage layering," "speed," "resolution," and "air and extension" which are much harder to fully capture with simple amplitude or frequency sweeps, and often require more complex measurement suites (e.g., directivity, decay characteristics, or even novel psychoacoustic metrics) that are not always universally understood or applied.

On the other hand, the "subjective" side can fall into the trap of relying solely on anecdote or personal bias. However, Danny points out that our ears, especially in a properly set up listening environment, are incredibly sensitive and capable of discerning differences that current common measurements might miss or not fully explain. (His example of the notch filter illustrates this.)

I like the fact that Danny's approach is to advocate for a **synergistic relationship** where objective measurements identify problems and guide design choices, while subjective listening validates those choices, discerns subtle differences, and ultimately confirms the desired sonic outcome. They are not opposing forces, but rather complementary tools in the pursuit of better audio reproduction.

II didn't listen to the video, partly because I didn't have the time but mainly because it's a subject that has been part of my hobby for six decades and have seriously thought about it ever since. Plus I have had friends who were designers and who were among subjectivists. For one thing I even wrote for Stereophile when Gordon Holt who is the person most responsible for 'subjective' reviewing. And the answer is both and not either or.

Both subjectivity and objectivity should be used to their maximum. But while the final answer is sort of subjective, the more the objective the better just because objective is precise and agreed upon by most. While subjectivity has a lot more wiggle room. And making final subjective decisions it depends a ton on who makes the decisions. They vary from person to person. Although I do believe when a number of experienced subjective reviewers basically believe that comes almost close to objective subjectivity or is it subjective objectivity.

And finally there is the ultimate subjectivity but it only applies to yourself. I always advise those looking for audio advice that the most important factor is know thyself. You need to know those attributes that offend you because no matter what a device does that you like or even love if it offends you at all it will never satisfy. And it's good to know the attributes you want in a device, the more the merrier but I do think if it has many of them a few missing are less a problem than even one negative characteristic.

@hilde45  Very well said

By sheer happenstance watched this video just prior to visiting this forum. I couldn't agree more with Danny, completely correlates with my experience modding speakers. As for those who don't believe different parts of same value cannot sound different, some years ago I made a simple change of capacitors (same value) in some OEM speakers, got in contact with designer/manufacturer, he incorporated this mod. Not only did he hear the difference, so did literally hundreds of owners of these speakers who incorporated the same mod in their speakers and/or heard the difference in the two tiers of speakers offered by OEM, one with the prior caps, one with the new caps.

As @hilde45 and Danny stated, there is a synergistic relationship between the objective and the subjective as it pertains to loudspeakers and audio in general.

Phew, what a relief.

I have been avoiding my "How good is the crossover in your loudspeaker?" thread since my post on 5-19 (too many posts by those whose responses revealed an attitude that is of no interest to me). After reading all the great responses on this thread I went back and read all that followed my last one on that earlier thread, and was pleased to see all the well-reasoned posts that followed mine.

Carry on!