I been in 20 years and I can still learn.
Yes indeed, no more caps. AAaahhhhhh, thanks.
Have we lost civility and respect on Audio forums?
I think we have. I have seen many discussion on audio forums and how nasty they can become when you have people disagreeing. Seems like there are a lot more know it alls now. I been in 20 years and I can still learn. But I also know I know quite a bit. Like cables can enhance the sound and higher end well designed gear can truly be ear candy special. Is this just on audio forums or the internet period.
- ...
- 308 posts total
A subjectivist judges sound quality based on their personal preferences. The same way someone would judge food or art. If one finds the sound to their liking and then declares that to be good that is subjectivism. An objectivist judges sound quality on accuracy to some reference. Maybe the recording or maybe live sound. So we had people like Harry Pearson who cared nothing about measurements or science but was an objectivist because he felt there was an objective reference, “the absolute sound” the sound of live acoustic music, against which the accuracy of audio playback could be judged. Then you have people like Floyd Toole and Sean Olive who strictly evaluated sound quality in their research using proper time synchronized quick switching double blind tests but are subjectivists. All of their studies were based on listener preferences. All scoring of their tests were done with subjective ratings. And yet many would label Harry Pearson as the poster child for subjectivism in audio and would consider Toole and Olive to be poster children for objectivism in audio. | |
...and I’m going to be totally rude and inconsiderate, ignoring all the fine (and the not-so-much) discussion and dis’ing that has occurred since pg. 2, 12/10, 8:14pm to reply to: @2psyop , and Yes, I agree with you as well. There isn’t ever an adequate excuse for rude and inconsiderate behaviors. But there ’they’ are....🤷♂️ One can dial back the millennia to the one-celled organisms that started this whole morass, when 2 competed for some bit of nutrient where the ’winner’ not only got the bit from the other and consumed its’ competition in some unconscious sort of spite.... There’s been an awful lot of it, wayyyy beyond the warp and weft of this dialog...
| |
Good post and interesting answer thanks ...
A subjectivist use ONLY his ears to decide that a system is good or bad... the objectivist will not say that in this way, they will state that the subjectivist listen with his biases and tastes to pick up gear...
An objectivist will pick up gear by the electrical measured specs mainly, but a subjectivist will not agree to this bias favoring the measuring tool over the ears trained or untrained biases...
Then Scottwheel your description of the objectivist and subjectivisdt is at the same time very good but beside the point and beside the quarrels in opposite audio forums as audiogon and ASR ...
You definition is very good because by the choice of names of professionals you associated with the two sides , you picked very wise people with divergent attitude but convergent goal ...Psychoacoustics is a science used by them all and this science fly over these marketing and ideological postures of these two sides as manifested in opposite audio forum as audiogon and ASR for example ... It is why your definition is very good but also miss the point which can explain the fanatical quarrel roots itself : the choice of pieces of gear based on listening biases or on electrical specs ...
A living room is not an acoustic laboratory ... In the laboratory Toole select subject as himself with their ears and biases and study them objectively trying to eliminate the biases gradually by blind tests or other methods of selection...In a living room the listener is not tested and very relax in familiar condition ...
Psychoacoustics tell us that the best listening conditions are those of the living room or any familiar acoustic environment ...Not the laboratory , the living room in relaxation is better for memory, (true memory or fabricated) or for acuity ( true acuity or fabricated one ) ... Acuity under deep relaxation of the body may be increased way over any test condition... This is why psychoacoustic use statistical method and not blind test of individuals to eliminate exception and study the average listener as representative of humans in general...
But listeners are not laboratory rats...For the most part they identify with the subjectivist attitude not with the analysis of a dial nor with statistical elimination of biases or statistical studies of the biases untrained or trained as with musicians ...
Then as you capture well ,with your description of some individuality carefully chosen by you , the subjectivist and objectivist separation, as such you missed the occasion to put the emphasis on this quarrel derived from the marketing imperatives of gear choices; which quarrel is an ARTIFICIAL and IMPOSED distinction that makes no sense in psycho-acoustics nor in acoustics ...on that we understand then each other you and me ...
Your description so good it was as i said omit the source of this separation : marketing methods to sell the gear ... And your very good description of these intelligent and wise exceptional professionals mask and hide in an involontary way the root origin of these battling crowds of ignorant subjectivist and objectivist fanatics , which mock one another all day long in the name of taste or in the name of their electrical reading tools and in the name of double blind test ( i myself as most people designing their system/room use simple blind test ) ...
We must become conscious and wise....We must go over these ideological separation in the crowd and act more as the personnalities you had wisely picked ...😊
|
- 308 posts total