Why is science just a starting point and not an end point?


Measurements are useful to verify specifications and identify any underlying issues that might be a concern. Test tones are used to show how equipment performs below audible levels but how music performs at listening levels is the deciding criteria. In that regard science fails miserably.

Why is it so?
pedroeb

Showing 1 response by cd318

@clearthinker,

"Properly derived science contains only provable conclusions that are bedrock.
All the rest is conjecture - interesting but not the basis for anything solid.

The problem is bad science. This is in the ascendency. One reads the most obviously idiotic nonsense every day, often obtained by extrapolation.

Extrapolation is always bad science.

The one I like best was around 15 years ago. ’All the snow and ice on the Himalayas will be gone in 30 years.

Palpable stupidity at the time; we’re about halfway there and there’s plenty left. I said at the time that if the entire Chinese nation went up there with blowlamps working 24/7 it wouldn’t happen."



The problem is bad science and in particular its politically motivated uses - Covid-19, vaccine wars, PCR tests, global warming etc etc.

As far as Hi-Fi goes, it would seem pretty obvious that the use of science and technology has come a very long way from its origins in the 1920s and 30s.

This situation with ever increasing use of software and modelling is only going to become more prevalent.

The subjectivists, with all of their capricious moods, opinions, and pursuit of a personal audio nirvana may not be happy - but this can only be good news for the other consumers.