objective vs. subjective rabbit hole

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. 

@mmb +1

How can you hope to persuade me of any particular claim to audiophilic excellence

IMO, rather than be persuaded, people should review both subjective opinions as well as objective measurements and specifications, compare those with their own experiences, and then come to their own conclusions.

However, any information on these forums could (should?) be viewed with healthy skepticism. Measurements can be both scientifically correct but also misleading in that the parameters being measured may or may not have the degree of impact on how something sounds as you might be "persuaded" to believe.

Likewise, subjective opinions rely on the experience and bias of the person providing the opinion. For example, how much reliance do you have in posters who report that the sound of their systems are "totally transformed" just about every time they install a new cable, fuse, or other tweek? Is that even possible, or are they just prone to exaggeration? When the same tweek fails to have a similar effect on the sound of your own system, common themes here are that your system is not resolving enough, or you didn’t let it burn in long enough, or maybe you just don’t hear well. I find it helpful when I am able to view the poster’s virtual system as their equipment choices provide some context or basis for their opinions, as do their previous posting history.

How about manufacturers who blur the lines between objective scientific facts and subjective hyperbole. As an example:

About the size of a shirt button, yet powerful enough to transform the way you experience music...your speakers and room disappear leaving you with nothing but a live holographic musical event in your listening room...

...oscillate at high frequencies creating an energy field in your room that overpowers room vibrational distortions to correct phase and frequency interactions for harmonic balance in your treated room. You hear an increase in depth and width, with clearer more extended highs, and tighter bass. Everything sounds more live, clearer, and more natural than you could ever imagine.

All of the above is claimed to result from placing 5 very small cylinders or discs ("the size of a shirt button") on the walls of the listening room and/or on the speakers - I find this an amazing blend of scientific claims and subjective rhetoric.

@mrmb , Well said.

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