A Harry Nilsson hit in 1971. Also used in a few movies since then.Humm, that one must be before my time.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
A Fellow Skeptic of Subjective Reviews?
- Thread starter Anton S
- Start date
- Status
Curvature
Major Contributor
- Joined
- May 20, 2022
- Messages
- 2,041
- Likes
- 3,124
I believe @pablolie has the previous, not recommended version. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-ls50-bookshelf-speaker-review.11144/
Thomas, we get accused of that way too much, just as the subjectives accuse us of saying "all amps sound alike". Even without much background you just know that's not right. But they just have to find a way to devalue audio science in favor of, "I heard it, so it is so". (now where'd I hear that before?)
I guess the sarcasm flu right by ya. LOL
I dont think it's about any of that , all that us and them stuff is unhelpful.Thomas, we get accused of that way too much, just as the subjectives accuse us of saying "all amps sound alike". Even without much background you just know that's not right. But they just have to find a way to devalue audio science in favor of, "I heard it, so it is so". (now where'd I hear that before?)
I guess the sarcasm flu right by ya. LOL
There's information, how its presented , its validity and how then its absorbed and used by others.
Focusing on that will serve us best .
With millions of eyes on the site every month and very few , relatively speaking , active members , iv always had a feel for those millions of silent folks.
True. I don't even get why you responded to it.
Maybe, but OTOH we as a group been getting unfairly attacked and ganged up on for decades, and ASR in particular is trashed almost daily across the web.
Sorry but I've never been much of a "turn the other cheek" kind of guy.. LOL
Simply a touch of humor. ?
I posted that to answer a question about my momentary setup, not as part of the discussion on subjectivism. I am sure the LS50 Meta is a great speaker.
sceptical1
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2025
- Messages
- 181
- Likes
- 161
The popup ads make Soundstage unbearable.
It feels to me that the tide may be turning. I was on another forum recently and there was a discussion of a pure digital widget to polish bits before a DAC, 2 years ago this would have been pure subjective flights of fancy, not now, it was all let's see some measurements that show an improvement, there isn't anything left to improve, any improvement will be inaudible etc, very similar to here. It's the measurements plus the education that eventually causes people to re-evaluate beliefs, but it's not quick.
Even in reader mode?
Multicore
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2021
- Messages
- 4,146
- Likes
- 5,114
I am hopeful that this tidal turn may be analogous to Planck's principle.
I'm starting to slightly more positive than that, but the major shift was always going to be in those not already indoctrinated, and without huge sunk cost.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,873
- Likes
- 19,251
Again: He has been adamant that the reviewer is not cognizant of the measurements - those happen after the review when the speakers are sent to the NRC. So the reader has both types of information available. It’s the same set up as with Stereophile.
Therefore, I would not expect to see comment about the measurements in the subjective review.
Last edited:
Things have started to improve, thanks to some strong objective sites and their members like ASR, Archimagios, Audioholics, etc.
Our voices have began to be heard over the clamoring of the $30,000 power cord crew. As our numbers have grown we've started to gain some muscle of our own. I do believe the trend will continue, the hyper expensive gear, cable, and power cord pushers have finally started to make normal folks start to question the claims just using some common sense.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,873
- Likes
- 19,251
Instead of forcing people to watch the video I provided the text to the video.
How awful of me to produce the evidence for my claim about what Doug has said concerning measurements.
Now can you ever stop with ad hominem attacks on me and address my actual point rather than red herrings?
None of which addresses the point I’ve been making, which was the claim about Doug/Soundstage’s motivations for doing measurements. And the one-sided interpretations of Doug’s view of measurements.
If you felt capable of reading the actual transcript I produced instead of finding more reason for snark, you’d see that it does not support the one-sided spin of Doug’s views.
To no surprise, you are adding the same type of spin.
Very good for you.
I often enjoy both aspects. So I’m very glad they supply both. How awful of me.
And amazingly Quint wasn’t nearly as much of an (redacted) as you. Maybe switch to decaf?
Ad hominem is fun, huh?
Please drop it, and stick to addressing arguments.
It is not at all the same. JA interprets the measurements. Doug doesn't. It is a throw away appendix as far as Doug is concerned. Only his sighted listening matters.
In other words, measurements have zero value when it comes to reviewing a speaker!
I put him on my ignore list a couple of weeks ago. My life is better now.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,873
- Likes
- 19,251
In stereophile, with the exception of JA’s reviews for obvious reasons, the reviewer does not interpret the measurements.
There’s a very clear difference in roles between what Doug and JA (JA being in charge of doing Stereophile’s measurements).
I would agree with you it would be good to see some interpretation given of the measurements. For instance, if Soundstage had their own “JA” doing that. That’s what I appreciate about your reviews (and Erin).
But then again, as I’ve said, I also appreciate the more detailed subjective impressions as well.
No, the measurements matter Doug has said so, explained why, and that’s why they supply measurements.
No. If that were the case, then soundstage would have ended up like positive feedback, magazine, and all the other rags that don’t supply measurements. As long as I’ve known him, Doug has gone on about measurements mattering.
You are still taking a black-and-white view.
Doug clearly does not hold the position that measurements have zero value, and that the only thing that matters is the reviewer’s subjective impressions. He’s not putting forth the subjective portion of the reviews as some sort of perfectly accurate delivery from omniscient golden ears. That’s why there are the measurements too. So that the reader, who cares about measurements, can look at the measurements to see how they correspond with the subjective impressions of the reviewer. The reader would undergo the same type of analysis that the reviewer would have undergone: they might see for instance a wiggle in the frequency response that the reviewer did not remark on. The inference could be that the reviewer should’ve heard it but missed describing that character on the speaker. Or the inference could be that the frequency response wiggle was ultimately less obvious in subjective impressions, once the rest of the speakers character was factored in.
Similar to the type of analysis you’ve made for various speakers. You don’t put much emphasis on subjective impressions so you don’t spend a lot of time on that. But there are plenty of audiophiles who do value the subjective impression portion of reviews, and that includes Doug, and that’s why they provide in depth informal subjective impressions as well as measurements when they can.
I’m not ignoring what Doug wrote to you; I’m trying to place it in context of what I’ve seen of Doug’s views and what Doug has expressed in articles over the years. And the type of strict black-and-white “ he’s saying measurements don’t matter” interpretation just doesn’t fly IMO. That’s just one-sided interpretation.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
