Can useful knowledge be gained via subjectivity?

[JP]

In the context of a forum like this, one way of disrespecting someone comes when you imply they are not even worth reading or responding to, wouldn't you agree?

I didn't imply anything about the value of what you write in general, I only gave you my personal opinion of a specific case. Likewise my response was not offered as an insult, rather an honest answer to your question.

There's not a universe where I'd think that everything I wrote, or how I wrote it, was to everyone's interest, benefit, or stylistic liking. I'm actually rather certain there's a sizable population that'd find what I write to be a complete and utter waste of time, and don't read any of it. I've no problem with that reality.

 

[Timcognito]

So everyone here skips those amazon and best buy reviews. I recently bought a subwoofer for my HT that I knew was just good not perfect because it had the size I needed, room correction, controls via an app, an audiophile brand that usually measures well, and it was on sale for a very good price. I did find reviews with measurements and the surprising thing is that the sonic strengths and flaws it did have were recognized by many in the reviews by buyers , most of whom do not read forums like ASR I'll bet. So if something is widely distributed and reviewed I think that consensus can lead to subjective information helping an informed decision for an educated and discerning buyer. I will agree that a magazine review of an unmeasured expensive component where sound blocking veils are lifted is bogus.

 

[JohnVF]

I don't think you'd have much trouble were you to genuinely engage directly. You came in to this thread guns blazing, and for the most part were treated with courtesy. Far more than I've been treated with on other forums we're both members of, for far less. When and if you're up for it, give it an honest try, but understand that this place is full of people and therefore will never be online panacea.

While it may have come across as guns blazing they're honest observations and I still stand by them. I don't think everybody here is reflective of whatever I said but I still have an extreme distaste for this place that I didn't have before participating. Which is fine, I'm not trying to change what's here. I just thought it would be free of a lot of the smugness that is so pervasive in this hobby when, in fact, I think this place has the worst lot of it I've seen. Again, not as far as every person posting, but the extreme intolerance for anything even slightly from outside the echo chamber is pretty surprising.

 

[Killingbeans]

So everyone here skips those amazon and best buy reviews.

I use them to get a feel for QC and customer service. Trying to filter out the fake ones and the ones with people complaining about nothing.

 

[JP]

While it may have come across as guns blazing they're honest observations and I still stand by them. I don't think everybody here is reflective of whatever I said but I still have an extreme distaste for this place that I didn't have before participating. Which is fine, I'm not trying to change what's here. I just thought it would be free of a lot of the smugness that is so pervasive in this hobby when, in fact, I think this place has the worst lot of it I've seen. Again, not as far as every person posting, but the extreme intolerance for anything even slightly from outside the echo chamber is pretty surprising.

Without any specific example of what you consider smug, or the echo chamber, I've no ability to have a meaningful discourse on those perceptions. I do see things that lead me to believe that your understanding may not be quite as sound as you think it is, and I don't think that gap can be closed until you experience some controlled testing yourself. I'm not exactly new and my success rate of uncontrolled impressions being what I think they are is about as good as a coin toss, and worse if I'm the one tweaking the dials.

 

[Newman]

Don’t worry I won’t be here long.

Believers in non-science never are.

Oh I don’t. And I get it. I did the forum debate thing for years, just over other battles.

Yes, I thought you were likely to have form.

I’m more agnostic.

Haha, everyone thinks they are the agnostic one. Good try.

BTW, I see others have also pointed out to you the attitude problem that you brought into this discussion, and this is the reason you got the responses you did, despite your protestations that it was all due to their narrow-mindedness, not yours. Your very first post here was brimful of accusations of all this non-objectivity, straw man arguments and hilarious parody that you see. By others of course, not by you. You behaved badly from the start, predicted you would get a bad reception, then said "see?" when you got it. The only hilarious parody here is that you blame it on the closed-mindedness of your audience, instead of owning your very own creation.

Can we return to the topic please? And without the constant focus on your wish to make it personal all the time? Stop the constant name-calling of everyone who disagrees with you. "Man you are all full of yourselves", "tribalism off the charts", "echo-chamber", "you're all so offended and defensive", "Parroting the tribes tropes", "the tribal smugness here", "a tribalist trying to make points for your team", "help me with my screenplay for the satire about the scientific method", "He comes across as a tribalist playing for a team", "at least call up a wittier jester", "out to save humanity from big bad opinions", "wired for a black and white world", "I have an extreme distaste for this place"....

Give it a rest. Matt Hooper said that one way of disrespecting someone comes when you imply they are not even worth reading or responding to. How many times do you think you have implied that in this thread, with statements like the above?

 

[BDWoody]

I don't think everybody here is reflective of whatever I said but I still have an extreme distaste for this place that I didn't have before participating.

Given how poorly you've been hiding that (not that you've been trying), it's not surprising you are attracting some of the responses you are getting.

When you first grossly mischaracterized what 'pretty much the premise of the entire site' was, it seemed you had already decided how it would go from there.

This place isn't for everyone, that's for sure, but if you think your own version of condescension isn't going to get some snark in response, maybe it isn't for you.

 

[MattHooper]

I didn't imply anything about the value of what you write in general,

"you tend to write walls of text that say very little" is a confusing way of saying it then.

I only gave you my personal opinion of a specific case.

So you didn't mean to imply I tend to write stuff of little value (by saying my replies tend to "say very little"), and then as an example offer an "opinion on a specific" case that you did not read? Let alone point out what was wrong with it when asked?

Can you see why I find your replies a bit confusing? (And note how I'm not simply dismissing you by saying "I find you tend to write confusing replies" but instead I'm explaining exactly what I find confusing?)

You'd just written to JohnVF "Without any specific example of what you consider smug, or the echo chamber, I've no ability to have a meaningful discourse on those perceptions"

So...if someone makes some sort of claim or complaint, we'd want specific examples...explaining what, in those examples, show the problem. Right? This is all I've been asking of you, too, so that it would be meaningful discourse, rather than "your posts tend to mean very little" or "I think your post said very little" without even giving an example justifying that critique.

Likewise my response was not offered as an insult, rather an honest answer to your question.

There's not a universe where I'd think that everything I wrote, or how I wrote it, was to everyone's interest, benefit, or stylistic liking. I'm actually rather certain there's a sizable population that'd find what I write to be a complete and utter waste of time, and don't read any of it. I've no problem with that reality.

Ok thanks then. I've no problem whatsoever if you don't like my writing style. (Neither do I sometimes). I was just hoping for a more interactive, informative reply to what I'd written, that's all. (Especially since you'd voiced a negative opinion about it).

But...no biggie, and no problem. Thanks.

 

[JohnVF]

Given how poorly you've been hiding that, it's not surprising you are attracting some of the responses you are getting.

When you first grossly mischaracterized what 'pretty much the premise of the entire site' was, it seemed you had already decided how it would go from there.

This place isn't for everyone, that's for sure, but if you think your own version of condescension isn't going to get some snark in response, maybe it isn't for you.

No I think I pretty much nailed the premise.

 

[JP]

No I think I pretty much nailed the premise.

Wanna talk smug?

 

[JohnVF]

Wanna talk smug?

I stand by it and have seen no evidence to refute it. This place exists to refute a strawman.

 

[BDWoody]

No I think I pretty much nailed the premise.

Doesn't change how wrong you are.

Maybe having you go back to read only for a little bit is best for us all.
If after a couple weeks you feel like you want to tell us more about our missing perspective...don't. If you'd like to try good faith exchange (for a change), then you are certainly welcome.

 

[Killingbeans]

I don't think everybody here is reflective of whatever I said but I still have an extreme distaste for this place that I didn't have before participating.

I hope this thread isn't responsible for your distaste? I made it clear in post #1 that it was aimed at a subject that more or less doomed it to become a dumpster fire. As in: Be cautious when entering, and prepare to take some flak.

Nothing gets people as blue in the face as these objective vs. subjective roundabouts.

There's other theads that aren't as tragicomic to you?

Again, not as far as every person posting, but the extreme intolerance for anything even slightly from outside the echo chamber is pretty surprising.

There's a lot of nerds in here. Not many diplomats or mediators. Also, years and years of being spoon-fed voodoo products has made a lot of the users fiercely protective of this little oasis. Again, don't take the perceived smugness personally. Just stay focused on healthy and productive communication, and the claws and teeth will be retracted in no time.

"You guys suck, and I wish you didn't" won't get you anywhere.

Has civility on ASR declined recently?

I have noticed an increase in combative and insulting posts on ASR over the last couple of months--mostly, but not always, by new members. The posters definitely have not seemed to heed the message at the top of every forum page to Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[DanielT]

Tips, regarding the learning process:

Jean Piaget - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MattHooper]

Very good post Killingbeans!

I empathize with some of JohnVF's frustration regarding some of the interactions here. I also understand the counter reactions. However, as I've said I generally find this forum to be excellent. Also, I would disagree with the proposal that the forum just exists to disprove "subjectivist" woo-woo rather than seek knowledge. Yes that does seem to be the motivation in some conversations and reviews, but there is also tons of information-seeking and openness to information. Amirm himself has produced the occaisional surprising results in his reviews.

 

[JP]

"you tend to write walls of text that say very little" is a confusing way of saying it then.




So you didn't mean to imply I tend to write stuff of little value (by saying my replies tend to "say very little"), and then as an example offer an "opinion on a specific" case that you did not read? Let alone point out what was wrong with it when asked?

Can you see why I find your replies a bit confusing? (And note how I'm not simply dismissing you by saying "I find you tend to write confusing replies" but instead I'm explaining exactly what I find confusing?)

You'd just written to JohnVF "Without any specific example of what you consider smug, or the echo chamber, I've no ability to have a meaningful discourse on those perceptions"

So...if someone makes some sort of claim or complaint, we'd want specific examples...explaining what, in those examples, show the problem. Right? This is all I've been asking of you, too, so that it would be meaningful discourse, rather than "your posts tend to mean very little" or "I think your post said very little" without even giving an example justifying that critique.



Ok thanks then. I've no problem whatsoever if you don't like my writing style. (Neither do I sometimes). I was just hoping for a more interactive, informative reply to what I'd written, that's all. (Especially since you'd voiced a negative opinion about it).

But...no biggie, and no problem. Thanks.

I said exactly what I meant to say, as it pertains to my perspective. I don't represent anyone else. Perhaps stop trying to read in to things, especially when you're engaging a person with an obvious high degree of candor? I do not imply anything; if I have something to say, I say it.

From my lens I don't see that anyone here tried to insult you. I understand that you read it that way, but I do not believe it to be the case. I only see consistent messaging that says 'too many words'. If that bothers you then adjust your messaging for the audience. Or don't.

 

[JP]

Very good post Killingbeans!

I empathize with some of JohnVF's frustration regarding some of the interactions here. I also understand the counter reactions. However, as I've said I generally find this forum to be excellent. Also, I would disagree with the proposal that the forum just exists to disprove "subjectivist" woo-woo rather than seek knowledge. Yes that does seem to be the motivation in some conversations and reviews, but there is also tons of information-seeking and openness to information. Amirm himself has produced the occaisional surprising results in his reviews.

I tend to stay away from the review conversations as there's a bit too much pitch-fork wielding for my taste, or at least there used to be (haven't looked in a while). I typically find that people without experience think they know where the obvious/not obvious difference line is when they don't, and usually aren't prepared for how black and white a lot of this stuff is. Sadly they typically don't engage in topics where there is actual grey area, rather they want to jump to (publicly or privately) dead horses like amp and DAC 'sound signatures', or any of several analogs.

 

[billyjoebob]

I think I'll stay on the call to humor thread. At least there i might learn something. This thread has turned into an absolute f^*king joke that ego's & pride have ruined.

 

[krabapple]

So everyone here skips those amazon and best buy reviews.

I do. Don't know about 'everyone here'.

I recently bought a subwoofer for my HT that I knew was just good not perfect because it had the size I needed, room correction, controls via an app, an audiophile brand that usually measures well, and it was on sale for a very good price. I did find reviews with measurements and the surprising thing is that the sonic strengths and flaws it did have were recognized by many in the reviews by buyers , most of whom do not read forums like ASR I'll bet. So if something is widely distributed and reviewed I think that consensus can lead to subjective information helping an informed decision for an educated and discerning buyer.

Or it's a circle jerk where readers only believe/recall the reviews that reinforce their own view. That's called confirmation bias.

 

[krabapple]

Haha, everyone thinks they are the agnostic one. Good try.

God must love 'middle grounders' , She made so many who call themselves that.

To me, a “subjectivist“ is the one unwilling to accept the concept of “cognitive bias” and to work toward eliminating/controlling it (in evaluation/analysis). Everything else follows…

That is a super complicated stance and needs at least 20 more page-length posts to debate and ultimately agree with.