Master Thread: “Objectivism versus Subjectivism” debate and is there a middle ground?

[JohnVF]

How are you in between those two?

I would imagine you're misunderstanding audio science and the role of objective data if you think you're somewhere in between.

No, I'm perfectly well-versed on scientific reasoning. I just have something called perspective.

But sure, let's put the rigor of the Apollo program on our stereos and then get all smug when somebody decides they can be a bit more relaxed with it even knowing full well the "dire" implications.

 

[pkane]

When it comes to audio know what I like. As an example when looking for speakers wouldn’t touch any with ABRs, all the ones I’ve heard have soggy bass. Don’t need to look up measurements, subjective measurements ( my ears) are good enough.

Maybe, maybe not. It's your impression and your opinion, and you're more than welcome to have one. Doesn't really translate into anyone else's, simply because we don't know what made you reach that opinion. Was it that the speakers were not set up properly? Or the room affected the sound negatively? Or that you prefer too much bass compared to most people? Or that you used an extremely poorly designed DAC or amplifier or these were not correctly connected or mis-matched?

There are too many variables here, and until we come to an agreement on the basics (is it an apple or a tomato?) there's really no basis to discuss opinions. Just like you can see in the PA5 thread from just today, multiple opinions, from thin, poor bass to extreme bass control. Opinions are dime-a-dozen. Objective facts are much harder to come by, but that's also why they are worth the trouble.

 

[xnor]

The fact that they can't be proven in AB tests is brushed off by stating those tests are flawed because hearing is not 'designed' for AB but long term.

Oh man, there are so many bad excuses... these people never understood the scientific concept of (double) blind testing and why it is so important.
What hinders them doing a blind test over days, weeks or even months? No technical reason. Pride.

 

[solderdude]

They don't even need to do a blind test because what they heard was so obvious ... night and day..

 

[JohnVF]

Pride.

Or they simply don't care about the consequences of getting it wrong as much as you do. That doesn't mean they don't understand the reasoning behind applying a more objective approach.

 

[Gorgonzola]

I think the better distinction is to treat it as different epistemologies.

Objectivism in audio believes that human beings are often unreliable evaluators of audio due to perceptual biases. That audience science and objective data is more reliable than human perception.

Subjectivism in audio believes that human perception can be more reliable than audio science and objective data. They tend to minimize the impact of perceptual bias. Or believe that it does not affect them as an individual (blind spot bias/golden ear)

I think this is also essentially true with one qualification: in my observation subjectivists less often question the reliability of objective measurements than they do their relevance.

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

Oh man, there are so many bad excuses... these people never understood the scientific concept of (double) blind testing and why it is so important.
What hinders them doing a blind test over days, weeks or even months? No technical reason. Pride.

Nonsense if you want someone to lose their sense of direction keep turning them one way and then the other and after a short time they will lose all sense of direction.
Years ago in HiFi Answers they conducted a blind test on amplifiers, the reviewer listed his preferences and an amplifier from Technics came out badly. He was coerced into going through it all again the blind tests were supervised by a man who at the time was the doyen of HiFi reviewers. It went on and on continually swapping amplifier after amplifier in the end he had a breakdown and never worked in the industry again. Judging anything is only valid when the environment isn‘t threatening, how could you possibly achieve this over days, weeks or even months?

 

[rdenney]

Or they simply don't care about the consequences of getting it wrong as much as you do. That doesn't mean they don't understand the reasoning behind applying a more objective approach.

But it's the way they represent it to others. All too often, it's some variation of "my experience is as valid as your controlled subjective testing, analysis and measurement. It is therefore as instructive to others as your controlled subjective testing, analysis and measurement."

But the real irony is that those who eschew blind testing (which demonstrably uses only the ears) are the first to claim that they use their ears to make their decisions. Then, they heap abuse on those who insist on blind testing as the basis for their experience even being real let alone instructive to others.

People make their own choices. The reaction is not based on that. The reaction is when they then offer their choices as instructive to others even when it runs against validated controlled subjective testing, analysis, and measurement.

Rick "loosely wrapping up controlled subjective testing, analysis, and measurement into 'informed by data'" Denney

 

[rdenney]

Nonsense if you want someone to lose their sense of direction keep turning them one way and then the other and after a short time they will lose all sense of direction.
Years ago in HiFi Answers they conducted a blind test on amplifiers, the reviewer listed his preferences and an amplifier from Technics came out badly. He was coerced into going through it all again the blind tests were supervised by a man who at the time was the doyen of HiFi reviewers. It went on and on continually swapping amplifier after amplifier in the end he had a breakdown and never worked in the industry again. Judging anything is only valid when the environment isn‘t threatening, how could you possibly achieve this over days, weeks or even months?

I think he meant days, weeks, and months of arm-waving about experiences without once taking the time to conduct an unsighted test to validate that the perceptions are actually real, let alone that one has a preference.

But that is not "objectivism versus subjectivism", that is "controlled subjective testing versus uncontrolled sighted impressions."

One of the reasons so many challenge new folks to do some of this testing themselves is so that it won't be threatening. Not everyone can do that with speakers. But if they are convinced that DACs are different, and construct a relatively simple test to compare them, and discover they are the same, they will be more likely to keep their impressions of other devices in perspective. Even if all a person does is test their belief that they can hear distortions at -80 dB, which is testing available on the internet and therefore easy and unthreatening, and they discover they can't hear distortion below -40 dB when actually playing music--even that will give them perspective.

Then, when they review facts revealed during objective measurement, they will have perspective about the relevance of those facts in their own case.

Once the first myth gets busted, the whole myth structure gets shaky.

Rick "who reliably can't hear harmonic distortion below -40 dB FS" Denney

 

[xnor]

Or they simply don't care about the consequences of getting it wrong as much as you do. That doesn't mean they don't understand the reasoning behind applying a more objective approach.

That doesn't make sense to me. They spend thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars on equipment and countless hours on trying to figure out what sounds best but then they somehow don't care if they have misheard, mischaracterized or tricked themselves into hearing something that's not actually there?
This would only make sense if they were hardcore solipsists with no reason for sharing experiences, forming groups of shared opinions, reading of reviews etc... which is the opposite of what most of them do.

Pride seems far more plausible, or blissful ignorance.

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

I think he meant days, weeks, and months of arm-waving about experiences without once taking the time to conduct an unsighted test to validate that the perceptions are actually real, let alone that one has a preference.

But that is not "objectivism versus subjectivism", that is "controlled subjective testing versus uncontrolled sighted impressions."

One of the reasons so many challenge new folks to do some of this testing themselves is so that it won't be threatening. Not everyone can do that with speakers. But if they are convinced that DACs are different, and construct a relatively simple test to compare them, and discover they are the same, they will be more likely to keep their impressions of other devices in perspective. Even if all a person does is test their belief that they can hear distortions at -80 dB, which is testing available on the internet and therefore easy and unthreatening, and they discover they can't hear distortion below -40 dB when actually playing music--even that will give them perspective.

Then, when they review facts revealed during objective measurement, they will have perspective about the relevance of those facts in their own case.

Once the first myth gets busted, the whole myth structure gets shaky.

Rick "who reliably can't hear harmonic distortion below -40 dB FS" Denney

The real problem with subjective judgement is it’s mood dependent.

 

[JohnVF]

That doesn't make sense to me. They spend thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars on equipment and countless hours on trying to figure out what sounds best but then they somehow don't care if they have misheard, mischaracterized or tricked themselves into hearing something that's not actually there?
This would only make sense if they were hardcore solipsists with no reason for sharing experiences, forming groups of shared opinions, reading of reviews etc... which is the opposite of what most of them do.

Pride seems far more plausible, or blissful ignorance.

No, they don't care. All they're ever going to do is listen to their stereo and if they like what they're hearing, they don't need any more 'proof' (even though its not actual proof) than that. You don't have to understand it, you probably can't understand it (not wired the same way), but no, they don't care. I can say this for sue because I'm one of them. I have spent tens of thousands of dollars of disposable income playing with different audio gear and not once have I given it a controlled listening test. And I've had a blast. Many drinks were had. Fun discussions. Friends made. And where I've ended up, I'm perfectly HAPPY with. I did look at objective measurements for a lot of the gear along the way but I didn't do any controlled tests of one unit against another. Yet I love love love my setups. I'm not suggesting you need to do it the same way, or that my system is any better than anybody elses.

It's not pride at all. They're doing a hobby in a way they enjoy it. You're entitled to your opinion about it but you're not entitled to tell them how to have fun.

EDIT: Also what sounds best is something you've not correlated with measurements. It's an assumption. You can say what measured best or what had the lowest distortion but only a person themselves can make the call for what sounds best -to them-. Your goal may be total neutrality. A goes in A comes out. Some people like the look and feel of gear. Some like a particular distortion and how it sounds. Some just like screwing around with different gear and hearing how they think it sounds. There is NOTHING wrong with this, except to you all here. You don't hold the keys to universal fun. In fact, on a cursory look around, I would say you hold the keys to the opposite. This place is like a black hole where fun goes in and never comes out.

 

[ahofer]

You're entitled to your opinion about it but you're not entitled to tell them how to have fun.

As long as "fun" means not being an allegedly golden-eared twat in an audio store, on social media, and particularly ASR. Yet it happens. Ad Nauseam.

 

[JohnVF]

As long as "fun" means not being an allegedly golden-eared twat in an audio store, on social media, and particularly ASR. Yet it happens. Ad Nauseam.

In life if you exhibit the most exaggerated traits of one fringe, you'll tend to attract and notice the most exaggerated traits of your complete opposite. It's like people who spend all day online talking politics think there's about to be a civil war breaking out, and meanwhile out in the real world most people don't even give a hoot.

 

[xnor]

Nonsense if you want someone to lose their sense of direction keep turning them one way and then the other and after a short time they will lose all sense of direction.
Years ago in HiFi Answers [...]

LOL thanks for that anecdote.
But on a more serious note, my comment was regarding the common excuses that blind testing is stressful, has to happen under time pressure, requires short samples or rapid switching, etc.
All of this is nonsense as blind testing can be done fairly easily and over any duration you'd like, in your own home, without anyone pressuring you.
For example you can have someone randomly switch between two level-matched DACs and throw a towel over them. You don't even need to see the other person, in fact it'd be even better if you didn't (see clever Hans).
The switching can happen at any time interval you want. Could be each day, every other day, once a week.. or whenever you feel like it. The other person can simply flip some dice to decide whether to actually switch something or not.

So you can listen for as long as you want and whenever you want.

And you don't need to publicly post your results either. Nobody forces anyone to be as honest as rdenney.
You can do it just for yourself... blind testing can be a real eye-opener.

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

LOL thanks for that anecdote.
But on a more serious note, my comment was regarding the common excuses that blind testing is stressful, has to happen under time pressure, requires short samples or rapid switching, etc.
All of this is nonsense as blind testing can be done fairly easily and over any duration you'd like, in your own home, without anyone pressuring you.
For example you can have someone randomly switch between two level-matched DACs and throw a towel over them. You don't even need to see the other person, in fact it'd be better if you don't.
The switching can happen at any time interval. Could be each day, every other day, once a week.. or whenever you feel like it. The other person can simply flip some dice to decide whether to actually switch something or not.

So you can listen for as long as you want and whenever you want.

And you don't need to post your results either. Nobody forces anyone to be as honest as rdenney.
You can do it just for yourself... blind testing can be a real eye-opener.

In a subsequent post I pointed out subjective judgements are mood dependent. Some days I can’t be a***** bothering with Vinyl, other days?

 

[Purité Audio]

No, they don't care. All they're ever going to do is listen to their stereo and if they like what they're hearing, they don't need any more 'proof' (even though its not actual proof) than that. You don't have to understand it, you probably can't understand it (not wired the same way), but no, they don't care. I can say this for sue because I'm one of them. I have spent tens of thousands of dollars of disposable income playing with different audio gear and not once have I given it a controlled listening test. And I've had a blast. Many drinks were had. Fun discussions. Friends made. And where I've ended up, I'm perfectly HAPPY with. I did look at objective measurements for a lot of the gear along the way but I didn't do any controlled tests of one unit against another. Yet I love love love my setups. I'm not suggesting you need to do it the same way, or that my system is any better than anybody elses.

It's not pride at all. They're doing a hobby in a way they enjoy it. You're entitled to your opinion about it but you're not entitled to tell them how to have fun.

EDIT: Also what sounds best is something you've not correlated with measurements. It's an assumption. You can say what measured best or what had the lowest distortion but only a person themselves can make the call for what sounds best -to them-. Your goal may be total neutrality. A goes in A comes out. Some people like the look and feel of gear. Some like a particular distortion and how it sounds. Some just like screwing around with different gear and hearing how they think it sounds. There is NOTHING wrong with this, except to you all here. You don't hold the keys to universal fun. In fact, on a cursory look around, I would say you hold the keys to the opposite. This place is like a black hole where fun goes in and never comes out.

If people want to listen to distortion ( lo-fi) that is their choice but the equipment isn’t sold as lo-fi is it?
Keith

 

[rdenney]

No, they don't care. All they're ever going to do is listen to their stereo and if they like what they're hearing, they don't need any more 'proof' (even though its not actual proof) than that. You don't have to understand it, you probably can't understand it (not wired the same way), but no, they don't care. I can say this for sue because I'm one of them. I have spent tens of thousands of dollars of disposable income playing with different audio gear and not once have I given it a controlled listening test. And I've had a blast. Many drinks were had. Fun discussions. Friends made. And where I've ended up, I'm perfectly HAPPY with. I did look at objective measurements for a lot of the gear along the way but I didn't do any controlled tests of one unit against another. Yet I love love love my setups. I'm not suggesting you need to do it the same way, or that my system is any better than anybody elses.

It's not pride at all. They're doing a hobby in a way they enjoy it. You're entitled to your opinion about it but you're not entitled to tell them how to have fun.

EDIT: Also what sounds best is something you've not correlated with measurements. It's an assumption. You can say what measured best or what had the lowest distortion but only a person themselves can make the call for what sounds best -to them-. Your goal may be total neutrality. A goes in A comes out. Some people like the look and feel of gear. Some like a particular distortion and how it sounds. Some just like screwing around with different gear and hearing how they think it sounds. There is NOTHING wrong with this, except to you all here. You don't hold the keys to universal fun. In fact, on a cursory look around, I would say you hold the keys to the opposite. This place is like a black hole where fun goes in and never comes out.

You define fun your way, and others will define it their way. If others aren't entitled to tell you how to have fun, then what standing do you have to tell them how to have fun?

I wonder to what extent those who think all ASR does is argue about this stuff venture away from the threads where these arguments have been channeled, and read from the archives and from threads that are delving into some corner of audio science. I hope (at least) I'm not talking about you--you have been around enough to have seen things. But new folks who seem to come here with the express purpose of telling ASR regulars what hopeless nerds they are, and how they are the death of enjoyment. Those who do so in bad faith eventually get booted, and they go back whence they came with their "banned from ASR" badge of honor, one supposes. But I'm talking about those who do so in good faith--come here resistant to any form of actual testing of their own perceptions. Rather than take up the torch of their sacred flame, maybe they would benefit from just reading a bit, trying some things like online ABX tests, and get away from the threads where these arguments are contained.

Most of us like our setups, even those we constructed prior to coming here. I don't see Amir selling his high-end amps, or Frank selling his reference turntable, etc. But some have sold off a bunch of expensive stuff on realizing that all they were getting was a brand name rather than real performance. Just as many resolutely hold on to archaic technologies (like vinyl LPs) and traditional equipment for no other reason than that's the hobby for them. Nobody has issue with that (well, almost nobody). The issue is when folks try to give those traditional analog sources magical powers--that's when the regulars (even those who also enjoy those sources) push back, demanding some data.

Rick "don't complain about being made a patient and then play psychologist" Denney

 

[ahofer]

In life if you exhibit the most exaggerated traits of one fringe, you'll tend to attract and notice the most exaggerated traits of your complete opposite. It's like people who spend all day online talking politics think there's about to be a civil war breaking out, and meanwhile out in the real world most people don't even give a hoot.

Notice I'm only holding forth on this here, not on Audiogon, or super best friends or whatever. I understand 99.9% of the world doesn't give a damn about these distinctions, but here we do.

 

[rdenney]

In a subsequent post I pointed out subjective judgements are mood dependent. Some days I can’t be a***** bothering with Vinyl, other days?

That they are mood-dependent is one of the issues.

Rick "among many others" Denney