Are you a Subjectivist or an Objectivist?

[Mart68]

I think that we must first make a distinction between the general public and the audiophile consumer.
The former will probably own one or three systems in his lifetime, the latter takes pleasure in box-swapping. You can argue that digital EQ will in some ways produce the same effects but they'll rightly reply that there's no fun in that...

I agree but I'm only talking about the potential audiophile consumers, people who want better than whatever passes for a replay system for the majority (Alexa or a single wireless speaker that was thirty quid on Amazon - IME) but who don't know where to start.

Or maybe someone who bought an 'entry level' system 30 years ago and now they have retired and children have left home they have the time and motivation to get back into their music and want to upgrade it. That's not uncommon on forums and the advice they tend to receive is terrible. Regrettably they are also the demographic who have the most money to waste.

 

[Geert]

but who don't know where to start.

I think that's a more important factor than being put off by the potential cost.

Or maybe someone who bought an 'entry level' system 30 years ago and now they have retired and children have left home they have the time and motivation to get back into their music and want to upgrade it. That's not uncommon on forums and the advice they tend to receive is terrible.

Ussualy people advice them the same components as theirs so options are all over the place, leaving the OP behind totally confused

 

[Mart68]

I think that's a more important factor than being put off by the potential cost.


Ussualy people advice them the same components as theirs so options are all over the place, leaving the OP behind totally confused

Agree both counts.

Although cost-wise I recall age 17 going to a 'proper' dealer with all my money. Their cheapest amplifier (Rotel) cost my entire budget.

I walked out disillusioned and would probably have shelved the idea of owning a proper hi-fi for many years hence, until a friend pointed me to another retailer who sold all the Japanese 'bin end' equipment (this was back when they would change the model range every year) and I was able to buy a whole system there for the price of that Rotel.

Scale that up to someone today in their late twenties with a couple of grand to spend who is led to believe that sum will not even buy him decent power cables...

 

[tuga]

Although cost-wise I recall age 17 going to a 'proper' dealer with all my money. Their cheapest amplifier (Rotel) cost my entire budget.

Same here. And the 20W/channel RA-810A I bought was the cheapest they had in store.

 

[Ken1951]

Scale that up to someone today in their late twenties with a couple of grand to spend who is led to believe that sum will not even buy him decent power cables...

This exact thing happened in another thread where the OP had a budget of $2K and one bright mind told him that he needed to greatly expand his budget if he wanted anything to sound good. Total tripe and immensely unhelpful.

 

[pinpoint_oxford]

This exact thing happened in another thread where the OP had a budget of $2K and one bright mind told him that he needed to greatly expand his budget if he wanted anything to sound good. Total tripe and immensely unhelpful.

Considering you can get a decent bluetooth speaker for less than $200 these days that is such a terrible attitude. There is something for every budget whether $2k or $2m. Although higher budgets can end up with wasted audio jewelry and diminishing returns, but if you want to spend that much, there is no shortage of ways to do it.

 

[Hapo]

...I would venture that the point of diminishing returns starts in at around $100 these days...

 

[pinpoint_oxford]

...I would venture that the point of diminishing returns starts in at around $100 these days...

I disagree. Especially for things like speakers. $100 for a pair of speakers vs. $500 is going to be a huge change.

 

[pablolie]

I think I'd define myself as pertaining to the 80/20 rule - the objectivist in me likes equipment to measure well (it shows good engineering fundamentals), but I openly admit the subjectivist in me likes stuff to be pretty and come in colors I like etc.

I'd also like to point out that there are those that go gaga over, for example, the latest specs of a slightly updated great speaker that measures -tops!- 0.2% better than the predecessor, and they go on a crusade telling the world it is a MUCH better speaker and the old speaker is rendered "unlistenable"... and to me that obsession about the ~0% measurement is subjectivist too, because when they claim they can hear the difference I can't help but roll my eyes.

There *is* "measurement subjectivism" that can equally be countered with the same "did you do a blind test?" challenge that is so effective when countering claims as to cable differences or the ability to hear to tell 16/44 apart from 24/192 etc...

 

[Hapo]

I disagree. Especially for things like speakers. $100 for a pair of speakers vs. $500 is going to be a huge change.

...I spent $1000 on a set of speakers recently but also very much enjoy listening to a set of Edifier R1280T powered bookshelf speakers currently available @ $90...

​

 

[Weeb Labs]

I disagree. Especially for things like speakers. $100 for a pair of speakers vs. $500 is going to be a huge change.

That's rather straightforward to quantify. The most significant characteristics correlating with loudspeaker preference are frequency response, directivity smoothness and width, low distortion, cabinet inertness, SPL capability and low frequency reach.

There exist multiple speakers around the $100 price point which satisfy the first four criteria (given frequency response correction), which leaves SPL capability and low frequency reach as the primary advantages of a more expensive speaker.

All things being equal, you might be surprised as to how little of a difference exists between a corrected budget monitor such as the T5V and a much more expensive 8030C when both are played at reasonable volume levels.

 

[Newman]

There exist multiple speakers around the $100 price point which satisfy the first four criteria (given frequency response correction), which leaves SPL capability and low frequency reach as the primary advantages of a more expensive speaker.

Those two advantages are huge, not in the 'diminishing returns' category.

Also, the 'given FR correction' caveat is a copout. Remove it, and try again.

 

[Weeb Labs]

Those two advantages are huge, not in the 'diminishing returns' category.

Also, the 'given FR correction' caveat is a copout. Remove it, and try again.

Spending more money does not greatly improve the first four stated characteristics. Returns are therefore inherently diminished. There are also numerous expensive speakers which neither reproduce lower bass frequencies nor reach significantly higher SPLs than their much cheaper counterparts and vice versa.

Frequency response is not an immutable characteristic and is very straightforward to correct. I don't consider this to be a copout at all. I'm also uncertain as to what you mean by "try again", as to me this is simply a friendly conversation and not some sort of gamified Reddit argument.

 

[Newman]

para 1. Repeating your first, incorrect, point does not constitute a response.

para 2. FR is NOT straightforward to correct, within the price paradigms we are talking about. I dare you to defend that statement beyond 2 channels, ie with relevance to other than the past. Take Atmos and work it through, 'straightforward'.

 

[Weeb Labs]

para 1. Repeating your first, incorrect, point does not constitute a response.

para 2. FR is NOT straightforward to correct, within the price paradigms we are talking about. I dare you to defend that statement beyond 2 channels, ie with relevance to other than the past. Take Atmos and work it through, 'straightforward'.

I'm happy to discuss this subject at great length but the hostility that I see within your responses is very off-putting, so I have decided not to pursue this conversation with you.

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

I agree with this.


I don't think that "subjectivists" (audiophiles, antivaxxers, Tramp or Brexit supporters, etc.) are sensitive to reason and logic. Any evidence based argumentation is lost in them, they just go with their gut...
And when you attak their ideas they feel that they are themselves under attack.

You seem to be so biased maybe even bigoted! What has Trump or Brexit to do with audio reproduction whether it’s measured or subjective? Please post your politics on a different Website!

 

[tuga]

You seem to be so biased maybe even bigoted! What has Trump or Brexit to do with audio reproduction whether it’s measured or subjective? Please post your politics on a different Website!

Q.E.D.

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

Q.E.D.

Using a set of their interconnects.

 

[donpachi]

Fascinating discussion, edifying, on the one hand, but might also make one lose faith in the human race altogether, on the other.
I would call myself an objectivist open to reasonable discussion, mainly because of the following quote:

'Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, NONE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN'
(R. Feynman)

 

[NTK]

'Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, NONE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN'
(R. Feynman)

There are things that I am quite certain about -- such as I am not going to win 50 mega lotto's in a row and make billions. But Feynman was right, I can't be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN.