To me the fundamental problems between the subjectivist and objectivists concerns definition, definition conflation, marketing and presentation.
The objectivists define what they mean by hi fi but aren’t always entirely blatant about it. When arguing with subjectivists they tend to get aggression and respond in kind.
What the subjectivists hear is that an arrogant jerk expert says “your system is crap and sounds bad”. WTAF I’ve just spent $15,000 dollars ( I told my partner half that). Do not tell me my system sounds bad. My system sounds awesome. I think so and all my friends think so. I bought the XYZ with twit twats and added the chromed elephant turd to one leg of the amp and I could hear the difference. You say you can’t measure the difference, well what does that say about you???? I heard it and so did my friends. Your expertise isn’t worth much – you might as well be a lawyer or an economist!!! ;-> You’re about as useful as t*ts on a bull.
I’d describe myself as a relaxed and realistic objectivist.
To me hi fidelity (hi fi) means adherence or fidelity to the original recording (I’m sure Amir has said this somewhere but it needs to be put up in 48 point font all by itself on a sticky called READ ME BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE AND SCREAM.
One always hopes that the sound engineers were sufficiently competent to get the recording reasonably faithful to the original live performance with minimal deviations given the equipment and interpretation they wished to convey at the time.
With this definition, Hifi is materially not the same as good sound or perhaps what should be more appropriately defined as enjoyable sound, or even more appropriately defined as the sound the specific listener enjoys more than other sounds they’ve heard.
That is coloured by perceptions, memory, expectation, ear state and capability, attention given to listening at the time and a host of variables so complex as to cause an engineer to have kittens.
The problem is that the marketing industry has (I suspect deliberately) conflated the two. The audio equipment manufacturers have been befitting from this ever since.
I was guilty of chasing hi fi marques before happening on this site. I have since changed my thinking as I have begun to understand :
- That a product by any marque is not necessarily well engineered sonically. It may produce a sound I enjoy, but it may actually constitute really bad engineering from a hifidelity perspective.
- That if something measures well it is probably well engineered. If it is well engineered there is probably a correlation between being well engineered and sounding reasonably enjoyable (this isn’t guaranteed but is probably more likely).
- You can’t rely on a posh box (solid/tanklike build), a high price, or a label to guarantee that something is well engineered from the hifi testable front.
- For some devices they are now capable of materially transparent output. Any distortion or other issues are well beyond what any human can even theoretically hear.
- I cannot escape the subjective nature of the fact that I am human. My eyes are flawed, my ears (more so – I’m now 53). I am as prone as the next man to prejudice and unrealistic expectations. I am capable (and probably rather good at expectations and confirmation bias even whilst knowing I’m doing it). My audio experience is most definitely not confined to my ears. I am experiencing with my eyes as well for example if contemplating some piece of hifi gear whilst looking at it. A Michell Gyrodec for example is a thing of loveliness (it might be a terrible turntable form a measurement perspective but I loved the way it looked – it wasn’t mine) and I could pretty much hypnotise myself watching the brass weights going round whilst listening to music. It was very relaxing.
- I have wants and needs that need to be satisfied beyond a strictly hifidelity approach (as an example you may have hit upon the perfect set of components that all measure divinely. If your wife or husband thinks they look horrible or are simply a step too far your choices are stark). Most would go with the partner but some may choose the components ;->
Ultimately therefore.
- I want something that is well engineered from the basic functional point of view. If its purpose is hifi I want it to do hifi as well as possible. I have defined hifi - that is my criteria. I do not believe in rewarding companies for producing that which does not fulfil its stated purpose. A company that claims to produce hifi I will treat very differently to one that claims to produce musically enjoyable products (and draws the distinction).
- I want it to look and feel good (for me). That’s minimalist, probably heavy with nice smooth knobby things. Or clicky things with definite but rich feeling clicks rather than the sound of a handbrake being applied when the button isn’t depressed. I want it to look and feel like a quality product.
- I want it to sound enjoyable whilst ideally being as true to the original recording as possible.
What this site has done has stopped me chasing snake oil (not that I was ever that bad at it). No longer will I pay silly money for cables or go for the chrome plated elephant turd which sits on one side of an LP because the imbalances created somehow make the sound more enjoyable (note I didn’t say make the sound more hifi).
Having said all of this I sympathise with the subjectivists. I have listened to the Senn HD650 which is incredibly popular and apparently measures as well as any headphone currently do. I have hated it every time I have listened to it. It sounded muffled to me. Perhaps this was down to amplification (I don’t know). I had no expectations whatsoever. I’ve listened 3 times now through different amps and have never been able to like it. I don’t have one available now to try with the oratory PEQ settings again (mebbe that would change things).
I ought to point out that I have also listened to most of the Audeze, Hifiman headphones too and didn’t like any of them (they mostly sounded muffled in a way that most speakers I have heard don’t – perhaps the PEQ settings would have changed this). AKG 550’s, Beyer DT 770’s, Shure 1540’s and 1840’s, Sennheiser HD800’s and Beyer Tesla T1’s were far more enjoyable and clear to me with no Oratory PEQ settings. I have just applied the Oratory PEQ settings to the Beyer 770’s and they have improved for me even more. I have no idea what any of this says about my hearing – perhaps I have odd ears. Note I am NOT saying that these are the best headphones or that they are better engineered than the ones that have recs and measure well but to me they just sounded more enjoyable.
I have a decent mid priced DAC SMSL M500 MK 1 (so the source is basically reasonable from an engineering perspective). I bought this on the Amir Rec.
I am currently listening to it through jriver with my Beyer DT770’s which have the Oratory settings applied. I find the sound quite enjoyable. I have no doubt it can be bettered with suitable choice of headphone (any suggestions???). Whether or not a different DAC would improve things further I have no idea.
Now for a question. I’m very new at this. It may be an entirely stupid question for which I apologise in advance.
Is it possible to see how different dac/headphone combos measure. E.g. how do the Sennheiser HD650’s (or name your headphone poison) measure on say a Topping D90 vs and SMSL m500 vs something else. Is there any synergistic effect in the chain combination that causes better or worse outcomes when compared against other combos? Is it measurable?