Are you a Subjectivist or an Objectivist?

[ROOSKIE]

Well gee, and you don’t think that is how O and S -ist are being used?

Say. When did subjectivity and objectivity become synonymous with irrational and rational?
I don't agree with that at all.

 

[escksu]

My friend bought the 8030c. I'm sure they're great speakers. Not as expensive as Metas + amp. But lord I do not like the way those speakers (or the KH80) look! Had to go another route... I see my speakers all day every day! Can't have it look bad.

Yes, looks matter. Experience comes in a full package..... Just like when you dine.... Is it just only about the taste of the food?? Obviously, not. Palate differes so what taste good to one might not be to you.... Then its also about the smell, the presentation of the food (it looks gross, would you wnat to eat?). Even environment and your mood.

 

[escksu]

Say. When did subjectivity and objectivity become synonymous with irrational and rational?
I don't agree with that at all.

Haha..... Fully agreed. Many many many things in this world cannot be measured....

Even music itself cannot be measured....

 

[BoredErica]

Yes, looks matter. Experience comes in a full package..... Just like when you dine.... Is it just only about the taste of the food?? Obviously, not. Palate differes so what taste good to one might not be to you.... Then its also about the smell, the presentation of the food (it looks gross, would you wnat to eat?). Even environment and your mood.

Haha..... Fully agreed. Many many many things in this world cannot be measured....

Even music itself cannot be measured....

You say you want people to just believe what they want to believe and not talk to others who disagree about it and you're doing that very thing you say people shouldn't do, to me. Or you want to bait me into doing it. :/ The idea that people want flat sound is a fundamental part of speaker reviews.

It wouldn't weird me out as much if you didn't just randomly started making cryptic points about 'don't believe what you see on the internet'...

 

[ROOSKIE]

I wonder if anyone can answer this question for fun.
Full disclosure I voted "(soft)Objectivist", so I find measurements very meaningful, though often incomplete on their own.

Using speakers as an example and completely theoretical ones.
You are not using them to create content, only for playback in your home.

Eveything about the speakers is exactly the same (brand, looks, costs), except this one variable.
Set 1 measures better beyond any doubt using the current SOTA equipment and set 2 sounds better to you and this opinion of yours is confirmed in double blind test you take.

Which pair do you buy?
Would you choose accuracy or personal preference?

 

[escksu]

You say you want people to just believe what they want to believe and not talk to others who disagree about it and you're doing that very thing you say people shouldn't do, to me. Or you want to bait me into doing it. :/ The idea that people want flat sound is a fundamental part of speaker reviews.

It wouldn't weird me out as much if you didn't just randomly started making cryptic points about 'don't believe what you see on the internet'...

Easier, just add me to your ignore list. Or do you prefer me to do it instead? IF you don't understand what I am saying, its better to just ignore me. Then you don't need to see them. The thing is even if I add you to my ignore list, you still can see my posts. The forums doesn't have a 2 way ignore function.

OK, add you to my ignore list.

 

[BoredErica]

I wonder if anyone can answer this question for fun.
Full disclosure I voted "(soft)Objectivist", so I find measurements very meaningful, though often incomplete on their own.

Using speakers as an example and completely theoretical ones.
You are not using them to create content, only for playback in your home.

Eveything about the speakers is exactly the same (brand, looks, costs), except this one variable.
Set 1 measures better beyond any doubt using the current SOTA equipment and set 2 sounds better to you and this opinion of yours is confirmed in double blind test you take.

Which pair do you buy?
Would you choose accuracy or personal preference?

In the case of speakers I pick the second for sure. I think measurements are the best we've got for speaker purchases (sonically) but they're not perfect. For example the preference score is correlated with DBT but not perfect, Olive said he wouldn't put much in differences of rating at 0.5 or below (and in the study IIRC if there were extreme examples where it deviated more than that). Also it's possible speakers with various dispersion patterns interact with a room differently. Or maybe wide vs narrow dispersion is due in large part to personal preference and any rule would be too generalized to be helpful.

So in this case I would say, I'm not even entirely convinced what measures better according to what we know now *must* even 'more accurate', so I don't see a strict accuracy vs preference dichotomy here.

Maybe an example that gets at what I think you want to get at would be dac or amp comparison.

 

[escksu]

I wonder if anyone can answer this question for fun.
Full disclosure I voted "(soft)Objectivist", so I find measurements very meaningful, though often incomplete on their own.

Using speakers as an example and completely theoretical ones.
You are not using them to create content, only for playback in your home.

Eveything about the speakers is exactly the same (brand, looks, costs), except this one variable.
Set 1 measures better beyond any doubt using the current SOTA equipment and set 2 sounds better to you and this opinion of yours is confirmed in double blind test you take.

Which pair do you buy?
Would you choose accuracy or personal preference?

I would choose personal preference. What matters to me is that it sounds good and I enjoy listening to it.

 

[ROOSKIE]

In the case of speakers I pick the second for sure. I think measurements are the best we've got for speaker purchases (sonically) but they're not perfect. For example the preference score is correlated with DBT but not perfect, Olive said he wouldn't put much in differences of rating at 0.5 or below (and in the study IIRC if there were extreme examples where it deviated more than that). Also it's possible speakers with various dispersion patterns interact with a room differently.

Maybe an example that gets at what I think you want to get at would be dac or amp comparison.

Sure, but real question in the hypothetical situation is would you chose "accuracy over preference".
I think that is a great way to discover if you are more objectively swayed or more subjectivly swayed.
I would choose my preference, even if it was less accurate.

The same question can posed for an amp or DAC.
You are not using it to create content, only for playback in your home.

Eveything about the amp or DAC is exactly the same (brand, looks, costs), except this one variable.
Unit 1 measures better beyond any doubt using the current SOTA equipment and unit 2 sounds better to you and this opinion of yours is confirmed in double blind test you take.

Which DAC or amp do you buy?
Would you choose accuracy or personal preference?

 

[ahofer]

We just hate all the fun, wants to destroy it and will replace it with nothing but a dark, cold void.

I just want to buy something I will be happy with for a long time and eliminate as much of the search cost as possible.

 

[BoredErica]

Sure, but real question in the hypothetical situation is would you chose "accuracy over preference".
I think that is a great way to discover if you are more objectively swayed or more subjectivly swayed.
I would choose my preference, even if it was less accurate.

The same question can posed for an amp or DAC.
You are not using it to create content, only for playback in your home.

Eveything about the amp or DAC is exactly the same (brand, looks, costs), except this one variable.
Set 1 measures better beyond any doubt using the current SOTA equipment and set 2 sounds better to you and this opinion of yours is confirmed in double blind test you take.

Which DAC or amp do you buy?
Would you choose accuracy or personal preference?

First thing is what we actually mean by subjectively or objectively swayed. For example Matt said he thinks subjectivist means somebody who thinks uncontrolled listening tests are the best way of figuring out sonic differences and what's better. That's definitely not me. Here you're defining subjectively swayed as a person who would pick preference over accuracy (assuming we knew the preference was real and passed controlled testing). These are very different concepts. So a person can be an objectivist who is 'subjectively swayed' as you phrased it and still be coherent imo.

Here for a dac or amp to be preferred by DBT, such a device would have to be inaccurate to the point where the differences are audible. I assume I prefer the inaccurate gear more across a wide genre of tracks and the difference isn't some kind of familiarity bias.

I would opt for what's accurate most of the time and there are two reasons for this. First is if possible I would rather have accurate gear and add inaccuracies/EQ/etc to taste afterwards. Second is I personally like things that are accurate whenever it's practical most of the time. When I do photography I obsess over the art yes, but even more so delivering accuracy when I want. I feel like that's the way I've always been even for fields where it's less popular, like photography or microphones. However if accuracy strays *too far* and it's big drag on what I enjoy and I can't add it in post, then even I would have to pick what I enjoy more.

I think most people would pick what's more pleasing in my shoes and I don't think there's anything wrong with that either. My problem isn't when people pick what they like vs what's accurate. My problem is lack of respect for controlled testing, measurements, and facts that I perceive coming out of almost all subjectivist audiophile circles. If somebody says 'I know I need DBT to really tell, IDC, this is a hobby, I do whatever I want and this is fun so I'm going to buy it and use it', I don't have a problem with that so long as they're clear when they talk about their experiences that they're uncontrolled and probably don't mean much. Such a person would be classified by Matt as an objectivist and I think I agree.

So personally I care a lot about accuracy, moreso than is really needed. That part is just a personal preference. But for society at large, what I actually care about is for people to understand controlled testing, measurements, and admit their uncontrolled testing has a very high degree of uncertainty. If they do that, I have no problems no matter what they call themselves.

 

[Duke]

Everything about the speakers is exactly the same (brand, looks, costs), except this one variable.
Set 1 measures better beyond any doubt using the current SOTA equipment and set 2 sounds better to you and this opinion of yours is confirmed in double blind test you take.

I understand what you're asking, BUT...

If our measurements do not predict preference under controlled blind conditions, then we're either measuring the wrong thing(s) or analyzing/interpreting our measurements incorrectly. (Admittedly a sample size of one doesn't rule out anomalous preference and/or anomalous hearing.)

In the scenario you describe, imo the measurements are of academic interest only. For instance, who cares which speaker has the better THD measurements or the flatter in-room response, if such is not predictive of preference?

 

[Steve Dallas]

Hard objectivist for electronics, although I try to be aware of the threshold of audibility and stop somewhere around there. Once there, features or aesthetics can outweigh chasing better measurements. Why do I run power amps based on ICEpower rather than Hypex or Purify? I need the volume control, the input switching, the 300W, and yes, the mediocre DAC on one of the inputs.

Soft objectivist for speakers. I like plenty of speakers with middling preference scores, although I use objective data to choose those with directivity that will respond well to EQ, so I can change aspects of the frequency response as desired. Certain objective data must be verified before I will even consider a speaker.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

Confirming new designs with measurements has served the audio industry well since its beginning - if this wasn't the case, not one component, ever, would have been worthy of praise by subjectivists. Some components surely have been, so measurements have obviously been of some use!

 

[BoredErica]

I understand what you're asking, BUT...

If our measurements do not predict preference under controlled blind conditions, then we're either measuring the wrong thing(s) or analyzing/interpreting our measurements incorrectly. (Admittedly a sample size of one doesn't rule out anomalous preference and/or anomalous hearing.)

In the scenario you describe, imo the measurements are of academic interest only. For instance, who cares which speaker has the better THD measurements or the flatter in-room response, if such is not predictive of preference?

I totally agree, though I think they intended to make a hypothetical where you (or I) happen to be the outlier and how we would cope in light of that.

Am I right in assuming most objectivists would pick what they preferred? That seems like that has to be the answer.

 

[Newman]

Say. When did subjectivity and objectivity become synonymous with irrational and rational?
I don't agree with that at all.

I meant “the problem of just lobbing derogatory terms” as MH said. Not specifically rational/irrational.

 

[ROOSKIE]

I understand what you're asking, BUT...

If our measurements do not predict preference under controlled blind conditions, then we're either measuring the wrong thing(s) or analyzing/interpreting our measurements incorrectly. (Admittedly a sample size of one doesn't rule out anomalous preference and/or anomalous hearing.)

In the scenario you describe, imo the measurements are of academic interest only. For instance, who cares which speaker has the better THD measurements or the flatter in-room response, if such is not predictive of preference?

I totally agree, though I think they intended to make a hypothetical where you (or I) happen to be the outlier and how we would cope in light of that.

Yes, the idea is hypothetical and is pared down to an easy to pose question - maybe not easy to answer for some though.
This is for the sake of pondering the idea.
Maybe you are an outlier or whatever, in any case you are forced to choose between a genuine tested preference and genuine SOTA accuracy (but that you found in a test that for whatever reasons you enjoy said accuracy less.)

Also everyone is a sample size of one when they are buying for themselves. I don't think measurements can predict preference for an individual. They communicate the potential for preference, (at least as I understand it with speakers and the Harman data.)
Something like given 100 people, 50 people will prefer A over B, 25 people B over A and 25 no preference A&B are equal. That bodes well for speaker A appealing to 75 buyers out of a hundred but B also appeals to 50 buyers out of a 100, a pretty good chunk.
Potentially speaker A above is a better choice however this can not be predicted for any given individual, only a group.
You don't really have be an outlier, though one may be an outlier. (like in a 99-1 ratio example of preference)

 

[Galliardist]

I think that it would be useful to distinguish tasting (subjective assessment) from critical listening (objective assessment).

And whilst I would agree that critical listening (objective assessment) must be performed under controlled conditions and requires proper training, I don't see why tasting (subjective assessment) should require a scientifically valid methodology even if such would or might be beneficial. Most audiophiles rely on the trial-and-error approach and many take at least as much pleasure from the experimentation as they do from achieve their sonic goals (if or when they have them).

But critical listening is still subjective! To achieve any degree of general validity, you need a statistically valid study that reflects the subjective assessments of a sample of the population. We can then use that study as a starting point to understand preference. That work's already been done, hasn't it?

Haha..... Fully agreed. Many many many things in this world cannot be measured....

Even music itself cannot be measured....

Of course music can be measured. Every recording in your collection... is a measurement, or a series of measurements.

 

[Newman]

I don't think measurements can predict preference for an individual. They communicate the potential for preference, (at least as I understand it with speakers and the Harman data.)
Something like given 100 people, 50 people will prefer A over B, 25 people B over A and 25 no preference A&B are equal. That bodes well for speaker A appealing to 75 buyers out of a hundred but B also appeals to 50 buyers out of a 100, a pretty good chunk.
Potentially speaker A above is a better choice however this can not be predicted for any given individual, only a group.

I really don’t think this is right. The low p that Olive achieved says the odds are low that any one individual won’t conform with the measurement-based expectation.

 

[ROOSKIE]

First thing is what we actually mean by subjectively or objectively swayed. For example Matt said he thinks subjectivist means somebody who thinks uncontrolled listening tests are the best way of figuring out sonic differences and what's better. That's definitely not me. Here you're defining subjectively swayed as a person who would pick preference over accuracy (assuming we knew the preference was real and passed controlled testing). These are very different concepts. So a person can be an objectivist who is 'subjectively swayed' as you phrased it and still be coherent imo.

I would opt for what's accurate most of the time and there are two reasons for this. First is if possible I would rather have accurate gear and add inaccuracies/EQ/etc to taste afterwards. Second is I personally like things that are accurate whenever it's practical most of the time. When I do photography I obsess over the art yes, but even more so delivering accuracy when I want. I feel like that's the way I've always been even for fields where it's less popular, like photography or microphones. However if accuracy strays *too far* and it's big drag on what I enjoy and I can't add it in post, then even I would have to pick what I enjoy more.

I think most people would pick what's more pleasing in my shoes and I don't think there's anything wrong with that either. My problem isn't when people pick what they like vs what's accurate. My problem is lack of respect for controlled testing, measurements, and facts that I perceive coming out of almost all subjectivist audiophile circles. If somebody says 'I know I need DBT to really tell, IDC, this is a hobby, I do whatever I want and this is fun so I'm going to buy it and use it', I don't have a problem with that so long as they're clear when they talk about their experiences that they're uncontrolled and probably don't mean much. Such a person would be classified by Matt as an objectivist and I think I agree.

So personally I care a lot about accuracy, moreso than is really needed. That part is just a personal preference. But for society at large, what I actually care about is for people to understand controlled testing, measurements, and admit their uncontrolled testing has a very high degree of uncertainty. If they do that, I have no problems no matter what they call themselves.

Yah I was deff touching on a different concept.
Not really trying to define the subjectivist/objectivist just really interested in how folks who like and appreciate measurements would also deal with being faced with a genuine preference.

You bring up familiarity bias which is a really interesting bias right? Very strong in a lot of folks. So even if taking a controlled test a person is going to appreciate what sounds familiar, at least at 1st. Would be really interesting to be able to take controlled tests for several days in a row and see if that familiarity bias dissipates in myself/others. I would also be interested in how my energy levels, moods, environmental noise exposure and other factors would affect the test each. I'd love to see if my results varied day by day.

In any case I'd love to see the HiFi press and Vbloggers addressing testing and measuring. Dropping the golden ear shtick and certainly also dropping the impossibly good aural memories. I actually think the right, entertaining people could introduce testing, measuring, good engineering to masses and make in really fun. I actually think real people want this, it the manufactures of snake oil and inferior products who do not. A lot of money is spent keeping people focused away from what matters.

Here for a dac or amp to be preferred by DBT, such a device would have to be inaccurate to the point where the differences are audible. I assume I prefer the inaccurate gear more across a wide genre of tracks and the difference isn't some kind of familiarity bias.

Anecdotally, while I don't usually swap or test DAC's I deff heard an unpleasing difference awhile back. I switched from a LG V20 to an LG V30 in a set-up I was very familiar with (familiarity bias or genuine preference may be at play). I expected no difference but there was one that slowly revealed itself. A minor but ever pressing harsh quality and at 1st I actually though maybe I was having a sensitive/bad ear week.
Turned out the LG V20 has one setting for the DAC digital filter and the LG 30 has 3. I had no idea. I played around and changed the setting and the strange sense of "harshness" was gone. This was a very minor SQ difference that I may not have ever noticed in any other environment in any short test, it was also surprisingly important.