Are you a Subjectivist or an Objectivist?

[sergeauckland]

Thats interesting Serge, having heard the Dutch and Dutch speakers I can see where your coming from, I would say good enough for most. Unfortunately I'm longish in the tooth and been heavily into DIY speakers and amps for the last 25 years .. thats been a slippery slope looking back

The reason I'm not looking for new loudspeakers is that my current ones are a largely DIY effort, albeit based on modifying old B&W 801 loudspeakers with active DSP based crossovers and EQ. The result is a pseudo anechoic on-axis frequency response flat to +-1dB from 200Hz to 20kHz. Below 200Hz I'm limited in what I can measure and therefore equalise, but in any event, at low frequencies, the room has a far bigger influence, and I'm not equalising for that, as it's pretty benign.

I could probably get lower distortion and possibly better dispersion characteristics with modern drivers than the 36 year old B&W drivers, but overall, I'm sufficiently happy with them not to feel the need for change.

S.

 

[Killingbeans]

That said I'm mostly subjectivist. I don't think it's fair to dismiss something that I might like because it measures poorly against something else. It's my money and it's not hurting anyone if I like how it sounds.

Sounds like you have no problem discerning the difference between preference and reality. That makes you an objectivist in my book.

 

[MattHooper]

The best amplifier will not have any 'sound' of its own. Also true of the DAC, the turntable, the cartridge etc.

(emphasis mine)

That's a commonly held value, especially on this forum. But remember it is a personal value statement, not some objective statement about which someone else can be wrong.

In other words, for some a "better" amplifier etc WILL have a bit of "sound of it's own"...if that's what they prefer over something strictly neutral.
Same with any other aspect in which there are audible variables to be found. For instance, I have sometimes preferred vinyl albums over their more accurate digital counterparts because the vinyl sounds different in a way I preferred.

As I've said, my preferred understanding of an "objectivist" isn't that we'd all be in lock-step in terms of what we prefer (e.g. preferring neutrality), but rather being in lock step epistemologically/methodologically: understanding that objective data correlated to audible consequences, and when necessary controlled listening tests, are the best way to work out what's actually happening in audio gear. Then you have "knowledge = power" to get what you want, without fooling yourself, be it seeking a coloration or seeking the lowest distortion/highest accuracy possible.

 

[Mart68]

(emphasis mine)

That's a commonly held value, especially on this forum. But remember it is a personal value statement, not some objective statement about which someone else can be wrong.

In other words, for some a "better" amplifier etc WILL have a bit of "sound of it's own"...if that's what they prefer over something strictly neutral.

Only if you consider enjoying hi-fidelity replay of recordings and enjoying listening to how an amplifier (or some other bit of kit) changes the sound as the same hobby. I don't.

I think we all start off into hi-fi with the original aim of enjoying our music more, but then some get side-tracked to the point where 'listening to the system' (and the changes made to it) becomes the hobby and the original purpose of the system i.e a tool to enjoy music, is forgotten or at best relegated to a secondary endeavour.

I know one person, quite wealthy, who got to the point where he had upgraded and tweaked absolutely everything real or imagined, at which point he lost interest entirely and now no longer uses the system at all and only ever listens to music whilst driving.

 

[Descartes]

Why do we have to be in a box with a tag, objectivist, subjectivist, middletovist , balblastivist…to each their own!
Electronics are designed by engineers sometimes constrained by marketing as to what sells!
Personally as a scientist I need to see double blind studies with measurements before purchasing a speaker! But If it is going to be on my desk or my living room it has to look good otherwise I would rather use my AirPods! Now in a dedicated home theater where speakers are behind acoustically treated walls and screen then who cares about the look!

Immersive Rooms | JBL Professional Loudspeakers | English (US)

Immersive rooms vary in their needs and dimensions, but the goal is always the same: make the audience feel like it’s in the middle of the action. The advanced technologies from HARMAN brands like JBL, Crown, and Lexicon allow you to create the most impactful system for your room. Based on the

jblpro.com

Dolby Audio Cinema Products - Dolby Professional - Dolby Professional

Dolby Atmos and Audio products provide the perfect solutions for your movie theater to gain the immersive Dolby Atmos sound that moviegoers love.

professional.dolby.com

https://meyersound.com/public/brochures/cinema.pdf

 

[Frgirard]

Double bind studies for speakers before purchase ? Have you example?

Thanks

 

[Descartes]

Double bind studies for speakers before purchase ? Have you example?

Thanks

Unfortunately none

So I compromise reading reviews and listening to Amir and Erin videos to see how speakers measure and then try to go and listen to the short list!

 

[DonR]

I am an objectivist in circuit design, implementation and measured results, a subjectivist in exterior design and aesthetics and somewhere in the middle when it comes to "build quality".

 

[Robin L]

As a subjectivist, I'm optimistic.
As an objectivist, I'm pessimistic.

 

[MattHooper]

Only if you consider enjoying hi-fidelity replay of recordings and enjoying listening to how an amplifier (or some other bit of kit) changes the sound as the same hobby. I don't.

(emphasis mine)

Exactly.

I think we all start off into hi-fi with the original aim of enjoying our music more, but then some get side-tracked to the point where 'listening to the system' (and the changes made to it) becomes the hobby and the original purpose of the system i.e a tool to enjoy music, is forgotten or at best relegated to a secondary endeavour.

There is certainly truth to that. However, it also treads along a similar path of assuming one's own (or a group's value). The purpose of being interested in audio gear spans a large range among individuals. If it were "only about the music" then this forum would be empty, and we'd all be listening via our ear buds, laptops, smart speakers "average stereo systems" or however else non-audiophile/music lovers listen. Clearly there is a range between people for whom the gear may be largely a means to an end - "the music," but there are clearly many for whom the gear itself is a source of fascination - engineers, gear heads, hobbyists etc. If someone's bliss is found in their fascination with the gear more than another person, I don't see any reason to judge them as having "lost the path" or whatever. That would just be from my own criteria, not necessarily theirs. I mean, while I certainly contribute a lot of posts to the forum, there are many here who have put tons more time, energy and brain power in to understanding the technical "how things tick" side of the hobby, measuring things, building things, you name it. In no way would I say they have forgotten what it's "really all about" if that's what turns their crank.

(BTW, that isn't to say that there can't be instances of people getting mired in the technology in a negative way. That would depend on your own psychology, goals and attitude. IF your goal really is to forget about the technology and only be aware of the music, then you can cerrtainly go down a rabbit hole where have undermined your own goal - the forever tweaking or upgrade itches or constant comparisons of gear or whatever. I've been there before).

 

[Frgirard]

As a music love, I am realistic.

 

[Killingbeans]

As a subjectivist, I'm optimistic.
As an objectivist, I'm pessimistic.

 

[Robin L]

 

[Purité Audio]

‘Upgrading’, buying a more expensive component with the same or even worse measured performance.

 

[pinpoint_oxford]

Sounds like you have no problem discerning the difference between preference and reality. That makes you an objectivist in my book.

Interesting take. When does one cross the line? When someone believes he can hear differences where none exist? For example, I use a tube amp. I don't know the measurements (as far as I know nobody has measured it publicly), but I'm sure they're mediocre. That said, I love the way it sounds. I feel it rolls off the top end a little that is pleasing to me and makes the music more enveloping and "liquid" without being too harsh.

 

[Killingbeans]

Interesting take. When does one cross the line? When someone believes he can hear differences where none exist?

Yes, or when you are presented with evidence of something real that's causing the difference, but you reject it because you feel something else.

That's my personal defintion of a "subjectivist" in this mind-numbing debate. Someone who lets their feeling and ideas take precedence over any empirical evidence. The "objectivist" looks at the evidence and accepts the probability of his/her idea being erroneous, and/or that the person's feeling have lead to an unlikely conclusion. Preference isn't even a part of it. Only cause and effect.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

When does one cross the line? When someone believes he can hear differences where none exist?

You just categorized yourself. You said, " ... where none exist? ...." . No subjectivist would ever say that. For subjectivists, if they THINK they hear differences, then the differences exist. That is the essence of subjectivity, not just in audio, but in all the human senses. It's why people seriously swear they saw an alien UFO, or saw and heard a ghost.

Because you posited that none exist, you removed yourself from the subjectivist camp. Jim

 

[pinpoint_oxford]

It's why people seriously swear they saw an alien UFO, or saw and heard a ghost.

Aha! Now it makes sense. Whereas they would say a UFO, I would say I saw something, even if I can't explain it, I likely wouldn't say it was a alien. Likewise with audio I wouldn't think there is magic in a product, but if I hear a difference that I like, I'll take it. Maybe that makes me an objective subjectionist? Haha.

 

[audio2design]

Yes, or when you are presented with evidence of something real that's causing the difference, but you reject it because you feel something else.

That's my personal defintion of a "subjectivist" in this mind-numbing debate. Someone who lets their feeling and ideas take precedence over any empirical evidence. The "objectivist" looks at the evidence and accepts the probability of his/her idea being erroneous, and/or that the person's feeling have lead to an unlikely conclusion. Preference isn't even a part of it. Only cause and effect.

Unfortunately that happens to technical people and scientists all the time too. There is a saying in the science community that new ideas progress not because they are so evidently better but because all the detractors die. People latch onto questionable "scientific" ideas all the time.

 

[pinpoint_oxford]

No, it makes you just like all the rest of us. Welcome to ASR and the human family! Jim

Thank-you! I've been having a good time reading through many of the threads. I have already learned so much in my short time here.