Oops I meant ear. I think I understand the basics. At least to ensure I make no major gaffs and don’t spend completely pointlessly in the wrong way. E.g buying a naim uniti box because it’s naim so must be good when for example you can get something which may not look quite as sexy but will produce sound with far greater fides to the recording for less than 1/10th price. I’m not a sound engineer. I use this site to eliminate the snake oil from the decision process. Do I need to be a physicist to be an objectivist? I certainly understand the words subjectivist and objectivist very well. My point is still how many people are pure objectivists - I’ll wager rather fewer than one thinks. I’m certainly not going to buy the definitive headphone sound issue if it has razor blades on the ear pieces because I wouldn’t find it comfortable. Technically that eliminates my pure objectivism short term as long term slicing my ears to ribbons will probably compromise my hearing. My point is most people use holistic decision making unless they really are purists. That means by definition they are not pure objectivists.I'd say it has more to do with using reality as your guide. It doesn't require you to pick any particular item, it just requires understanding.
I'm not sure what Jack Nicklaus has to do with it () but I'd suggest you spend more time on the understanding part.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Master Thread: “Objectivism versus Subjectivism” debate and is there a middle ground?
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Fear of your ears being sliced up is based on reality, so I'm not sure why that wouldn't be a valid part of the objective decision process to not buy them.
You have decided that to be objective is to buy based only on highest reported test results (whatever that means...?), and that's not what it means. It's about using reality and evidence.
Because the impression I get when people discuss objectivity on this site is that it’s all about the fides to the original recording and the ability of the equipment under test to reproduce that without deviation or at least with minimum deviation. Perhaps the value in this discussion is that it’s thrown up an issue with the way the site and its goals are presented and more to the point communicated. Perhaps the definition of objectivity needs to be made much more clear in the context of the site as you’ve just suggested a slightly different definition of objectivity to many others I’ve seen (one I agree with btw). I believe I am being largely objective within the context of reality and my specific needs.
Seems more like FOMO.
Can you point me to where any of our established members try to push people to buy the best measuring gear to the exclusion of all else?
There are many misconceptions about the site, and about what being objective means.
I haven’t said that they do. You have completely misunderstood what I’m getting at. Oh and btw I readily admit FOMO in my decision making process. I’m absolutely certain I’m not alone or I’d buy one item and wait till it broke before bothering to look for a replacement. Instead I’m continuing to try to improve my position. Furthermore I’d have stoped with the Smsl m500 mk1 which still works fine but I prefer my e50/l50 combo and am eyeing up the e70/l70 even though from an sq standpoint there’s nothing in it. It looks nicer though. I’ll sell the rest.
er...no.
You seem to be willfully misreading. Or else you have a definition of 'objectivist' that's all your own.
Replace the word "true" with "absolute" and I'd agree (lets get away from the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
I am a true objectivist. That doesn't mean I look *only* at measurements - there are many more influences to the buying decision than pure sound quality.
I might not be an "absolute" objectivist - who only looks at scientifically proven aspects. As you suggest - there might not be anyone who is. If there were, they would probably not be acting sensibly.
Where on earth have you got that impression?
Fair description of what ASR values in electronics. Accurate down to audible thresholds.
Anyway, it seem to me that the main dividing line in practice is can your ears alone determine what you purchase, or do you believe that you have biases for which you should compensate by using measurements and/or controlled testing.
xnor
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2022
- Messages
- 193
- Likes
- 207
@nonnyno, could you please define what a "true objectivist" is?
Subjectivism, at least to me, is the rejection of objective reality/truth and of an external world. Instead, perception, opinions, feelings are used to create a personal "reality" and "truth". Truth and belief, essentially, become meaningless synonyms. Without going on an off-topic rant what's wrong with the world, it is a fundamentally corrosive and egocentric mindset.
Objectivism is the opposite and opposition of that, and ironically includes understanding of how e.g. feelings, biases distort our perception.
Subjectivism, at least to me, is the rejection of objective reality/truth and of an external world. Instead, perception, opinions, feelings are used to create a personal "reality" and "truth". Truth and belief, essentially, become meaningless synonyms. Without going on an off-topic rant what's wrong with the world, it is a fundamentally corrosive and egocentric mindset.
Objectivism is the opposite and opposition of that, and ironically includes understanding of how e.g. feelings, biases distort our perception.
Last edited:
But is that the ONLY thing that ASR values. Or do we also value usability, quality, after sales, aesthetics etc etc.
Of course all are components of a really good product.
Keith
Keith
He seems to be defining 'objectivist' in this hobby as someone who only considers the audio performance of a prospective purchase*. Which is absurd, as e.g., cost and features very commonly play into a purchase, and there's nothing inherently irrational about that.
*And even if such person existed: when choosing a transducer, 'audible transparency' is not something that can be set as a goal. So, preference -- even for one set of measurements over another, neither indicating 'transparency' -- necessarily comes into play.
Last edited:
Or (for the items you listed) it's not going to sound at all.
mdunjic
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2021
- Messages
- 173
- Likes
- 168
Exactly
mdunjic
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2021
- Messages
- 173
- Likes
- 168
100 % agree
Maybe there needs to be third classificiation: the audio realist. Somebody who foremost believes that science, measurement and blind testing tells us what is audible and what isn't. This person also takes into account his or her's hearing ability, listening conditions and preferred music: some measurable differences don't make any practical difference and as such don't necessarily warrant spending a lot of extra money.
The ideas that you need ruler flat freuquency response, huge amounts of headroom, bass the reaches low teens and of course SINAD of way over 100 are borderline subjectivism in my opinion. If we want to be the voice of reason in for example the newbie area then it must be made clear that some Genelec The Ones or big Revel floorstanders should not be considered necessary or probably even resasonable if you are mostly interested in the music reproduction AND are working with somewhat average budget, in somewhat average living conditions.
Audio realist can of course spend any amount of money for state of the art equipment, but he knows what he is getting into and accepts it.
The ideas that you need ruler flat freuquency response, huge amounts of headroom, bass the reaches low teens and of course SINAD of way over 100 are borderline subjectivism in my opinion. If we want to be the voice of reason in for example the newbie area then it must be made clear that some Genelec The Ones or big Revel floorstanders should not be considered necessary or probably even resasonable if you are mostly interested in the music reproduction AND are working with somewhat average budget, in somewhat average living conditions.
Audio realist can of course spend any amount of money for state of the art equipment, but he knows what he is getting into and accepts it.
You've just described an objectivist - we don't need a new word.
The more zeros between the decimal point and the first non-zero integer to the right of it in the distortion reading, the better, right? Especially if the product is relatively inexpensive, such as a hand-held size switch-mode amplifier for a couple of hundred USD. My opinion is that once performance gets good enough such that better is no longer audible, then it's time to just relax and enjoy the music. I laud the engineering capability that can bring such low distortion figures to inexpensive equipment, though; it's just that it's entirely unnecessary.
