AVForums podcast: objective vs subjective debate

[tonapo]

At around the 60min mark in one of the AVforums podcasts (see link to podcast #696) there is some discussion on the objective vs subjective debate. Some interesting points and I thought some people might be interested in having a listen.

 

[amirm]

I couldn't figure out what they were trying to say other than measurements make more sense for video than audio. Their points there were not clear or correct. There are plenty of things measured in video which are not noticed by people either just as well as SINAD for an amp. They also think you can't measure speakers without room impact which of course we do day in and day out. And they seem to say their subjective remarks are valid???

 

[amirm]

Listening on they just said that the B&W makes the world's best speakers. Well, if they paid attention to research and measurements they would know that is not true.

 

[Midwest Blade]

I’ll pass on this one.

 

[amirm]

I registered and post a response.

 

[Anton D]

I registered and post a response.

Good luck with that.

 

[amirm]

I hear you. Read a few of the audio reviews and they were hugely subjective. So I expect a negative reaction but let's see how they say that given their stance with video measurements.

 

[MattHooper]

I registered and post a response.

Great! I always enjoy when you visit another forum to clear up misconceptions.

 

[tonapo]

I found it interesting to listen to, I thought they were open to the concept of objective reviews rather than shutting it down immediately. They already objectively review TVs, and often discuss calibration etc, and it would be good if this measurement method could make the jump to hifi. Also, according to the podcast, the site owner is very much interesed in objective reviewing!

 

[MattHooper]

Wow. They removed Amir's post! Didn't know that site was like that.

 

[Purité Audio]

Every site is like that, no one wants to upset the I was going to say apple cart , but ‘golden goose’ is more appropriate.
Keith

 

[MattHooper]

If you haven't noticed, there's a war raging in the world between rationality and blind superstition. Hardly any venue is immune these days.

I'd say it's a tad extreme to cast the AVForums crew as blindly superstitious.

They may have removed the post because they saw it as mostly promoting Amir's website.

But I would have liked to see them interact with Amir's post, personally.

 

[Anton D]

If you haven't noticed, there's a war raging in the world between rationality and blind superstition. Hardly any venue is immune these days.

I see it more as a continuum.

Bell shaped curve with kooks at either end...the 2 standard deviation folks.

 

[MattHooper]

I didn’t say the AVForums crew is blindly superstitious (nice job putting words in my mouth). The wider conflict is fueling over reactions though, which is clearly what happened here.

We were talking specifically about the AVForum site. That's what I referenced, wondering why Amir's post was removed - it was removed by AVForum staff. And your response clearly implied an answer: that hardly any venue is immune to "blind superstition." That very clearly implies that "blind superstition" was the reason why the venue under consideration, AVForums, removed Amir's post.

Whatever you were thinking or meaning to say, what you actually wrote implied just that.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

on what possible basis would they have made the determination that B&W make the world's best speakers?

 

[Purité Audio]

Advertising revenue?
Keith

 

[MattHooper]

Nope, sorry. You misread what I said due to what appears to be a sensitivity around the terminology I used, which pretty much proves my point.

The question was: why did AVForum staff remove Amir's post.

You responded that there's a war raging in the world between rationality and blind superstition. Hardly any venue is immune these days.

Which implies that dynamic was at play in the removal of the post. (Otherwise, why write that when quoting the issue of Amir's post being removed?)

I'm open to your argument if you can actually connect the dots. Exactly how is "blind superstition" relevant to explaining the removal of Amir's post?

If you are going to impute derogatory intentions to people, I'd think the least one can do is justify doing so.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Advertising revenue?
Keith

Yeah, that's about the most rational explanation.

 

[GXAlan]

If you haven't noticed, there's a war raging in the world between rationality and blind superstition. Hardly any venue is immune these days.

In my opinion, this is partly why the audiophile online hobbyist world is largely male. Is it really a war between rationality and blind superstition? Us vs. them?

No one argues about car measurements and benchmarks. There are different ways to measure 0-60mph, and measurements may not correlate with preference even though ideals for most people, most of the time are consistent.

Everyone would argue against snake oil like tweaks that claim better fuel economy, better performance or better crash safety. If it is not measurable it isn’t real.

The claim that a seat is more comfortable, the steering is more engaging are all valid opinions which you can talk about steering ratio, adjustability, but ultimately subjective.

You have stuff like lighter forged rims. Probably not necessary unless you’re racing but it’s not snake oil if you like the look. Tinted windows. You lose clarity and transparency but it can be a worthwhile trade off for individual preferences. Giant rims on lower profile tires on SUVs, etc.

In audio, we would do a lot better to recognize measurements don’t lie, preferences are valid, and snake oil is universally bad. Less arguing. More cars and coffee.

 

[ahofer]

and...they "tidied" you right out "based on third party reports" and that's "all you need to know".

So fragile.