An alternative philosophical framing for audiophile subjectivism

[RexrothPigeon]

this is an internet forum, where people communicate with each other.

in communication with others, what matters is that the phenomena one is describing are generalizable. that is, if there is a quality we are discussing, a statement I make about it is of no use to you if it extends no further than the space between my two hairy ears.

so of course we all live in a mishmash of subjective impressions. that's all we have, experientially: the interaction between our senses and our brains is our only way of interfacing with the world. but waxing rhapsodic about those impressions, or, worse, proselytizing them to others, is solipsistic, naive, or outright manipulative.

so here we all are, a huge group of people each with our own subjectivities, preferences, sensitivities, biases, experiences, and blind spots. how are we to communicate anything qualitative about audio equipment that will be of use to others and not just be entertainment or pro bono marketing copy? turns out that the only way to do so is to communicate things that anyone with time, inclination, and equipment can verify for themselves.

now, the usefulness of that information is wholly contingent on its exhaustiveness, and I'll be the first to admit that I am incapable of assessing the exhaustiveness of, say, klippel nfs measurements, so I must resign myself to attempting to assess the credibility of those who claim to be able to assess it, a position of uncomfortable fallibility, but one that is remediable: I could, if I had time and inclination, learn the math required to make a credible assessment of my own; I could, if I had the resources, obtain access to a klippel nfs myself and replicate the measurements made by others.

this is the choice: verifiable, communicable information vs. a telephone game of impressions shaped by factors both known and unknown.

 

[kharan]

I’m kind of an armchair philosopher. I came across this paper and thought I would take a shot at summarizing. It seems relevant to the community, and I didn’t see it mentioned in depth anywhere.

You may be familiar with the research paper by Frédéric Brochet ( “La dégustation: Étude des représentations des objets chimiques dans le champ de la conscience” (2001) in which trained oenology students used red-wine vocabulary to describe a white wine that had been dyed red. Contrary to popular legend, Brochet does not interpret this as proof that wine experts are frauds, that tasting is meaningless, or that wine quality is imaginary.

Instead, he concludes that vision strongly influences olfactory representation, that this influence operates below conscious awareness, and that the effect is a genuine perceptual illusion rather than dishonesty or incompetence. It is not, however, in any way, a direct measurement of chemical reality. The difference is ontological (reality), not phenomenological (sensory).

He goes further to point out that perception does not equal measurement. Brochet is raising the ‘hard’ problem of cognizance and consciousness. What we experience in the neurons of our brain is not the actual sound energy hitting our eardrum (although Reductivism would conveniently make that true, few are convinced.)

Brochet notes that wine tasting expertise is real. It just relies on learned patterns and is demonstrated through language, memory, and categorization. It can even be objectively studied. It’s more about recognizing patterns than quantifying substances.

If Brochet is right, the approach can be easily applied to (trained) subjectivist audiophiles, who might, for instance, genuinely believe they are hearing a cryogenically lowered noise floor in the cable. Both wine tasting and audiophile listening involve genuine human perceptual experiences that are strongly shaped by tradition, cognition, and expectation —yet are often mistaken for direct detection of objective, unmeasured physical properties.

If an audiophile said to Brochet “Measurements don’t capture what I’m hearing.” He would say ‘That’s correct. Measurements can’t capture experience.”

But he wouldn’t invalidate what the audiophile thinks he heard.

I thought that was a relatively Milquetoast take. I can't fathom the number of times I've read or heard someone call a light (mass) amplifier lightweight and not capable of producing deep bass and vice versa. Or amplifiers painted in warm colours and having soft curves sounding musical and warn, or speakers with sharp angles sounding cold and clinical.

It is plain that visual impact, and discourse surrounding a product affects perceived sound.

Having said that, I can ABX red wines pretty easily if no preconception is influencing the sensory experience, I can't ABX DACs or cables or such like.

 

[Mr. Widget]

I personally think you pretty clearly communicated that aspect too. Regarding "perceptual innocence" of subjectivists, yes, I think folks understand that, and many of the responses you got affirm that - specifically, no one (well, almost no one, anyway) is claiming that subjectivists are lying, and even the idea of consciously "lying to oneself"....

Except as soon as it is someone who is attempting to make money from their subjectivist view... then all of a sudden they are liars, thieves, and charlatans.

To be sure there are many unscrupulous dealers, manufacturers, and probably reviewers, but all too often, the true believers are swept up with those who intentionally prey on the innocent.

 

[Timcognito]

Again just like a trained taste tester and a trained subjective listener will hear many more tasty nuances as well as bitter ones. The goal for all audio enthusiasts should be subjective listening pleasure, IMO.

 

[Mort]

Except as soon as it is someone who is attempting to make money from their subjectivist view... then all of a sudden they are liars, thieves, and charlatans.

To be sure there are many unscrupulous dealers, manufacturers, and probably reviewers, but all too often, the true believers are swept up with those who intentionally prey on the innocent.

Arguably they have a greater need to preserve those beliefs as their livelihood literally depends on that.

 

[Timcognito]

There is propaganda in all relationships, endeavors, vocations, religions, and social systems.

 

[Oddball]

There is propaganda in all relationships, endeavors, vocations, religions, and social systems.

Unfortunately so true. What I am concerned is that SPL of most propaganda is sadly increasing to extreme levels, and causing extreme distortion. If we could Klippel the world, probably would not be a pretty site.

I am sympathetic though with the audiophiles without the cause. While I enjoy my system, I must admit it is not with passion. Once you put math at work, it tends to take out poetry.

 

[Timcognito]

I am sympathetic though with the audiophiles without the cause. While I enjoy my system, I must admit it is not with passion. Once you put math at work, it tends to take out poetry.

This very true, that is why I try to focus on new music and genres and less nostalgically look back at my coming of age flower child music passion. It's been two years since I played one of my 6-700 lps. My Audio Reaseach CA-50 in now in the hands of my son and the advent of DSP has kept my Theil S-2.4s sounding good enough. I visit here at least one a week, sometimes picking a random page, like 627 and give something a "spin" on Qobuz. https://kfjc.org/music/ Latest discovery Mansur Brown Shiroi

 

[Mr. Widget]

Unfortunately so true. What I am concerned is that SPL of most propaganda is sadly increasing to extreme levels, and causing extreme distortion. If we could Klippel the world, probably would not be a pretty site.

Yes, but at least the audio related propaganda is unlikely to lead to wars and death.

I am sympathetic though with the audiophiles without the cause. While I enjoy my system, I must admit it is not with passion. Once you put math at work, it tends to take out poetry.

100%

Or at least it makes it much harder... I call it the magic of being an audiophile. You have to allow yourself to suspend disbelief in audio as we do when we enjoy a sleight of hand magic show. You can get some of that original fun back, but without the vagaries of nonlinear analog audio, there is less magic to chase. Then again, my recent purchase of a pair of D&D 8c speakers has put a pretty big smile on my face as I listen to my favorite music. Not the least of which is the sighted bias of hearing such deep bass from such comparatively small boxes.

 

[Oddball]

Yes, but at least the audio related propaganda is unlikely to lead to wars and death.


100%

Or at least it makes it much harder... I call it the magic of being an audiophile. You have to allow yourself to suspend disbelief in audio as we do when we enjoy a sleight of hand magic show. You can get some of that original fun back, but without the vagaries of nonlinear analog audio, there is less magic to chase. Then again, my recent purchase of a pair of D&D 8c speakers has put a pretty big smile on my face as I listen to my favorite music. Not the least of which is the sighted bias of hearing such deep bass from such comparatively small boxes.

Those are obviously iconic speakers and glad you are enjoying them. There is a new thread and looks like they have gone Godzilla with 15c's .

I do get the bass but not with magic. 4 huge boxes pumping it out and honestly polluting the space a bit. Thanks god that ART is there to finally make sense out of those so they are now approximately worth the volume they occupy.

 

[Jim Taylor]

And I think this is true for some of those who many ASR members are quick to call charlatans. I think people like Paul McGowan really believe in what they are selling. These people are not selling meme coins but actual hardware they believe will perform as advertised.

It may be true that they believe that the hardware will perform as advertised .... for themselves.

As @JiiPee noted in this post ....

I have no problem with an audiophile who prioritizes his own experience over objective measurements, as long as he does not claim that his experience represents objective truth.

... the problem becomes what they claim (or assume) for other people.

 

[Oddball]

It may be true that they believe that the hardware will perform as advertised .... for themselves.

As @JiiPee noted in this post ....

... the problem becomes what they claim (or assume) for other people.

I think it is simple enough to ignore that. I do ignore quite a bit of stuff in my noisy environment. Tough work, 3 kids, difficult wife, finances to worry about, lots of friends and family with their own problems. I'd go mad if I took it all to heart.

I'd rather discuss stuff with the audiophile without the cause than with people using bots. That really ticks me off.

 

[Mr. Widget]

...as long as he does not claim that his experience represents objective truth.

I think the distinction between objective and subjective truth is lost on many. "I experienced this, therefore it must be true."

 

[Oddball]

I think the distinction between objective and subjective truth is lost on many. "I experienced this, therefore it must be true."

If digging into philosophy, this might be the right time - along the lines you noted, but in original:

Cogito, ergo sum - Descartes 1637. Taking this a step further, what you think is all you know. Having an "objective" layer on top of that is what they thought us, but sometimes it does not really work. And unfortunately, objective is clear in audio world, but not so much if you venture beyond that.

 

[tmtomh]

Yes, but at least the audio related propaganda is unlikely to lead to wars and death.


100%

Or at least it makes it much harder... I call it the magic of being an audiophile. You have to allow yourself to suspend disbelief in audio as we do when we enjoy a sleight of hand magic show. You can get some of that original fun back, but without the vagaries of nonlinear analog audio, there is less magic to chase. Then again, my recent purchase of a pair of D&D 8c speakers has put a pretty big smile on my face as I listen to my favorite music. Not the least of which is the sighted bias of hearing such deep bass from such comparatively small boxes.

I appreciate what you are saying here, but I do think your comment mixes together the musical source and stereo listening experience on the one hand with the reproduction equipment on the other hand. In other words, I agree that without a suspension of disbelief whereby I (and my brain) imagine a soundstage, musical enjoyment would essentially disappear. But I don’t need “the vagaries of nonlinear analogue playback” for that. Acoustic transmission and room effects, yes of course. But not a subjective suspension of disbelief as to what the gear is or is not doing to the signal as it reproduces it.

 

[voodooless]

I have no issue with experiences. I do have issue with some of the ways they are created. Because much of these experiences that have no physical reality are the result of decades of brainwashing of the industry. I’m sure the wine stuff is no different. It’s basically a self fulfilling prophecy: the more you shout something is true, the faster it will become so. It’s basic propaganda 101.

The real question should be about the morality of it all…

 

[MattHooper]

in communication with others, what matters is that the phenomena one is describing are generalizable. that is, if there is a quality we are discussing, a statement I make about it is of no use to you if it extends no further than the space between my two hairy ears.

Fortunately, we are not stuck in that situation.
People in their day-to-day lives are not doing science yet they are successfully communicating subjective information to each other all the time. That’s a great thing about being human: we share enough to have all sorts of reference points to communicate information by correlating our subjective experience. Not to scientific certainty, but often enough usefully.

As I’ve pointed out before, I work in film sound POST PRODUCTION doing sound design. I don’t have the luxury of just throwing my hands up as if subjective description is mostly fruitless. If I could not usefully extrapolate my own subjective impressions of the work I am creating to what other people are like likely to experience, my job would be impossible (and my success would be inexplicable).

What about articulating information to one another using our subjective impressions and subjective language?

Again, my industry does this all day long.
When I am communicating with mixers about how we want things to sound, we are almost never talking in technical terms. Likewise when we are interacting with clients, clients are articulating how they want things to sound, we are articulating back what type of sound we can create, etc. The more articulate the client the easier our job is.
And especially when it comes to mix playbacks, I need to be able to understand a clients subjective descriptions of what she is or is not satisfied with, what type of alternative sound she might like, and I have to produce the sound that she is describing essentially on the spot, under heavy deadline pressure and expensive mixing time.

If we could not successfully communicate about the character of sound to one another this way, all this would be impossible.

so here we all are, a huge group of people each with our own subjectivities, preferences, sensitivities, biases, experiences, and blind spots. how are we to communicate anything qualitative about audio equipment that will be of use to others and not just be entertainment or pro bono marketing copy?

While it is certainly no guarantee of accurate information, somebody who listens carefully and who can articulate their perception can be quite helpful in conveying some useful information about audio gear. It’s done very often in the audiophile world. It certainly does require a wise approach to navigating the obvious pitfalls, but the rewards can be both entertaining (it’s fun to share subjective impressions!) and helpful.

I remember when I was first getting into high end audio in the mid 90s and the Stereophile review of the audio physic Virgo speakers, a very interesting design with a unique set up philosophy, compelled me to investigate those speakers and they sounded exactly like they were described in the review… all the same virtues… leading me to become a lifelong fan of that brand (and owning some of their speakers).

Likewise M Fremer’s old Stereophile review of the Conrad Johnson premier 12 tube monos alerted me to the possible virtues of those amplifiers when I was seeking a higher power tube amp. I got a hold of a pair and they performed precisely in my system as Fremer described. It’s been one of my happiest gear purchases and I’ve owned them for 25 years.

I could give so many more examples of where I’ve been informed through the subjective descriptions of others about gear, and where my own descriptions have been helpful to others in seeking out and purchasing gear.

I’ve also noted that a variety of subjective reviews of the speaker brand I currently own converge very nicely on precisely the qualities I hear in my speakers, and I find the subjective descriptions even more informative - the perceptual benefits of the design when listening to music - than what I can personally pull out of simply the measurements.

None of which is to cast shade on measurements at all or anybody using strictly measurements as their criteria which can of course work great. I like it when there are measurements available as well. I am just disagreeing with the level of skepticism often cast on our ability to communicate information subjectively. For those of us who like to communicate this way, it can be useful. (As I often say: a tool can only be useful if you decide to use it).

Cheers.

 

[mlsstl]

An excellent thread. As I've frequently said in the past, I'm the biggest variable in my system....

 

[pablolie]

".. Both wine tasting and audiophile listening involve genuine human perceptual experiences that are strongly shaped by tradition, cognition, and expectation —yet are often mistaken for direct detection of objective, unmeasured physical properties. .."

Big difference though: In wine tasting, visual and olfatory cues are important tools... not just the tongue. In audio, it is very often claimed it is all *heard*, the visual and tactile cues are in fact dismissed as distracting and irrelevant.

I find that part about audio enthusiasts dishonest and pretentious. I have zero qualms admitting I like certain things because I simply like the design and craftsmanship. Many "audiophiles" lie about blind test results and cheat on listening tests.

Wine aficionados embrace their ability to learn by mistake. Audio aficionados often lie and cheat to not get caught in theirs'.

 

[voodooless]

Again, my industry does this all day long.

Your industry is about a creative process. There, anything goes to further the creative result, no matter if things are real or not.

And yes, you guys generally confine yourself to things that actually impact sound in a meaningful way, because that is simply effective

That’s quite different from the perception of a lower noise floor due to some magic cable.