Why not objectivist music reviews?


"Objectivist" equipment reviews are gaining in popularity, enabling audiophiles to rest easy knowing that their preferred piece of equipment with SINAD of
 98 is _objectively_ better than one with SINAD of 97.5

Why not do the same for music?

I propose the following criteria for guitarists as an example:

1. Notes per second (NPS)--since speed is valued as a sign of mastery in an instrument, why shouldn't someone who plays faster be considered better than a slower player? (Goodbye, David Gilmour!) 

2. Mistakes Per Minute (MPM) - - accuracy counts!! You could say it is equivalent to jitter or THD+N in equipment. (and goodbye, Jerry Garcia!!)

3. Length of Leads (LOL)--If you're so good, why are your solos so short? This is a no-brainer (later, guitarists before 1966!)

Put these together, and there is only one rational conclusion:

JOE BONAMASSA IS THE GREATEST GUITARIST OF ALL TIME

Thoughts?

WW
wassaicwill
https://youtu.be/qTmwZsy8xbg

There are more than one type of guitarist
Max, that guitarist would score exceptionally high, with excellent NPS, MPM, and LOL. I just need to create the software that allows me to make proper measurements and then we will all know who the greatest guitarists are. I love science! 
Then there's this old gag:
A company chairman was given a ticket for a performance of Schubert's "Unfinished Symphony." Since he was unable to go, he passed the invitation to the company's Quality Assurance Manager. The next morning, the chairman asked him how he enjoyed it, and, instead of a few plausible observations, he was handed a memorandum which read as follows;

For a considerable period, the oboe players had nothing to do. Their number should be reduced, and their work spread over the whole orchestra, thus avoiding peaks of inactivity.

All twelve violins were playing identical notes. This seems unnecessary duplication, and the staff of this section should be drastically cut. If a large volume of sound is really required, this could be obtained through the use of an amplifier.

Much effort was involved in playing the demi-semiquavers. This seems an excessive refinement, and it is recommended that all notes should be rounded up to the nearest semiquaver. If this were done, it would be possible to use trainees instead of craftsmen.

No useful purpose is served by repeating with horns the passage that has already been handled by the strings. If all such redundant passages were eliminated, the concert could be reduced from two hours to twenty minutes.

In light of the above, one can only conclude that had Schubert given attention to these matters, he probably would have had the time to finish his symphony.
Cleeds lol that's new to me 😆
You have to be kidding me. The entire premise of this is so ridiculous,I will not bother to address anything beyond number one. As Kenny Wayne Shepherd learned when doing 10 days out; the blues masters he met with all played at a very slow pace but they hit all the right notes. It really influenced his playing going forward. Listen to Muddy Waters, Buddy Guy or Howling Wolf, they weren’t shredding their guitars but every note counted and had an impact. Speed might or might not be an indicator of instrument proficiency but not musical ability. 
Post removed 
The greatest musician i listen to in the family of plucked string instrument is Master Ostad Elahi...

even Yehudi Menuhin said listening to him that it was the greatest musical experience in his life...

By the way it is a sufi master praying with his instrument, then he never give any concert.... He was recorded by his disciple behind the scene... It is the reason why the sound is only acceptable....

But it is one of the greatest master i listen to , he plays tanbur adapted by himself.... He was the greatest virtuoso of his country at 9 years old...and he was playing indifferently by right or left hand....His mystical teaching are deep and on par with his musical virtuosity... His music is very complex improvisation....

https://www.ostadradio.com/index.html#

 I know this thread is a joke but this may interest one people or 2.....
I appreciate Joe B, don’t get me wrong. But given your criteria, and a reliable scientific method for measurement, I would argue that Buckethead would score a higher cumulative grade. 
Faster Pussycat!  Faster!  Then there's the remark a young Mozart gets in Amadeus.  "Too many notes!"

     I was just reading a forum thread, about objectivist versus subjectivist audio equipment gear reviews, on the Audio Science Review website:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/anyone-else-with-reference-gear-and-colle...

     Nobody mentions "SINAD" a single time.  But they do interestingly mention how to easily obtain a very objectivist system which, apparently, equals a very accurate and neutral system:

"Why bother obsessing over gear when you can just buy some NC400s, Modulus, an AHB2 etc., one of dozens of excellent DACs, decent generic cables, and good speakers with appropriate room treatment? After all, any improvement in amplifier or DAC beyond what the current cutting-edge offers is probably inaudible in most cases. This creates an issue for audiophiles who claim they are chasing the most accurate sound reproduction but actually just want to buy new gear or gear that doesn't measure very well."

     This does make some sense to me since gear with a high degree of accuracy and neutrality are likely to receive high SINAD scores.  This makes me question the whole efficacy of the concept of objectivism and SINAD scores, however, since it's not very helpful to individuals subjectively preferring less accuracy/neutrality and more euphonic distortions and added even order harmonics in their audio system.
     OTOH, wouldn't an especially low SINAD score usefully indicate gear these individuals may actually subjectively prefer?  Seems like we're back to where we were at pre-Objectivist/SINAD.

Tim       


noble100--I agree with the sentiment, but ASR in fact ranks all components by sinad score. There are also regular criticisms about looks, connectivity, drivers, etc. - - not remotely objective criteria. That said, I think it's a very useful resource, as long as one doesn't mind and/or ignores the extreme subjectivity on offer. 
j_husker I will investigate further! 
Hello wassaicwill,

     I personally agree with you that objectivist gear reviews and sinad scores are interesting and useful.  I was just trying to be objective in my post.

Later,
 Tim