objective vs. subjective rabbit hole

Since we have not created full AI we have no real idea of how it will "think" and behave. Unfortunately or maybe fortunately we will find out.

If you like it, then that is all the objectivity you need.

The answer to your question is no one can persuade you of any claim.

Think of it as tasting wine. One can measure acidity, sweetness, color, transparency, viscosity, alcohol % and more, and a spectrum analysis can define all its components with great accuracy.

But no one can persuade you how it tastes. It’s only you who can judge that ... and only after you tasted it, not after studying the measurement results.

Still it’s helpful and fun to exchange information on a forum like this.

What if they give you two glasses of the same wine and tell you they are different or put different labels on them. You then go on to describe how those two glasses are different when they are exactly the same.

Personally I think the subjective/objective debate is vastly over stated in audio. Most of it is marketing driven. When companies are trying to make you feel good or bad about your purchases based on what you believe and not the detailed proven merits of their products, then you know you are being played (or should know).

I see purely arrogance and ignorance at issue on both sides. In other words we are dealing with people and people don't like change or being wrong.

Think of it as tasting wine. One can measure acidity, sweetness, color, transparency, viscosity, alcohol % and more, and a spectrum analysis can define all its components with great accuracy.

But no one can persuade you how it tastes. It’s only you who can judge that ... and only after you tasted it, not after studying the measurement results.

Good analogy....

What if they give you two glasses of the same wine and tell you they are different or put different labels on them. You then go on to describe how those two glasses are different when they are exactly the same.

Yes you are right about inducing biases, but the way to become a musician for example is to learn how to listen then educating your biases or replacing them, or making it more difficult to be fooled by an external inducement of some biases...O even posted an article about the way a trainedc musician can evaluate chords trespassing Gabor limit...

Anyway this possible conditioning of biases does not logically imply that subjective evaluation would be always deceptive attitude in all cases at all times and on all counts... Saying the opposite will be a sophism...

And yes market conditioning FOCUS on the GEAR objectively with measures and subjectively with "tasting appeal" to the subject...

Acoustic cues and factors are not focussed mainly on the gear but on the space-time environment and on the subjectivity valuable evaluation and their limits...

All acoustic factors are objectively reproducible and under will control in psycho-acoustic experiments...No taste here, perception biases can be evaluated and measured in controlled conditions.... In my audio room or in a more rigorously controlled audio laboratory...

I see purely arrogance and ignorance at issue on both sides. In other words we are dealing with people and people don’t like change or being wrong.

I think the same, the people who focus on gear tasting or in only measuring specs to pick the gear, are blind to the necessary acoustic and psycho-acoustic correlation between their perceptive experiences and the environment and the gear potential optimal working...

And they are more easily fooled by their biases or "tastes" because they dont have any objective control on their biases or tastes like a means and tool to  test them, and here i  dont speak mainly about blind tests but more importantly about acoustic and psycho- acoustic listenings  experiments in their room...... Acoustic factors are not mere equations, they are living events that must be intregrated by the ears body ...Acoustic is also an ART of listening ....