Yeah but at least tinkering with EQ doesn't cost money. If one has to buy software, I don't believe there is a difference in sound between a $30 and a $300 piece of software, just the latter is going to be suited to a wider range of pro uses. I also find EQing to be tough. I also use oratory1990's or Crinacle's presets ; my main complaint with the Harman target is excess bass, so I just remove a little bass.
-
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!
Repentant subjectivist
- Thread starter Repentant subjectivist
- Start date
JSmith
Master Contributor
What really pisses these types off is when you can afford what they have and then some, yet choose to buy cheaper and better performing gear... one doesn't become wealthy by spending money on such items. An old saying "don't be pennywise yet pound foolish".
JSmith
There's no way I could afford a $250,000 system but would never do it even if I could. Pound crazy, indeed.
Isn't that sense of peace wonderful? To be able to dismiss the majority of the nonsense out there is such freedom.
Thanks for sharing your story.
You can try Equaliser APO on PC it's free .
I'm myself on the learning curve on headphone eq . I tried Oratyrys and Amirs settings for my phone .
But one quickly enters the "circle of confusion" how is this supposed to sound i was not present during the mastering .
But both Oratory and Amir and others that publish headphone EQ seems to try to address gross obvious deviation from a neutral presentation.
But the fine tuning you eventually have to decide for yourself . But when someone has measured and tried to adjust you are much closer to "right" than trying to wing it by ear only ?
I'm myself on the learning curve on headphone eq . I tried Oratyrys and Amirs settings for my phone .
But one quickly enters the "circle of confusion" how is this supposed to sound i was not present during the mastering .
But both Oratory and Amir and others that publish headphone EQ seems to try to address gross obvious deviation from a neutral presentation.
But the fine tuning you eventually have to decide for yourself . But when someone has measured and tried to adjust you are much closer to "right" than trying to wing it by ear only ?
Do you have kids?
He sounds like he's learned to pick his battles, like most good Dads...
He made a couple of comments, and asked a good question, and you figured it out before you were broke. Cheers to you both.
For some reason this thread caused me to imagine a new reality tv show modelled on the format of Battlebots...where a professionally setup blind test of two competing systems would face off against each other with a panel of subjectivists I) voting on which is the best system, and II) writing down the total cost they believe was spent to achieve what they heard.
The winner of the best system playoffs gets a design of the year trophy.
The subjectivist that achieves the best net match on system cost estimates would receive a golden ear trophy.
Everyone who watches becomes more objective.
The winner of the best system playoffs gets a design of the year trophy.
The subjectivist that achieves the best net match on system cost estimates would receive a golden ear trophy.
Everyone who watches becomes more objective.
Katji
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2017
- Messages
- 2,990
- Likes
- 2,273
Yes, because you have adjusted or tuned your perception, improved it according to that as a baseline / a reference standard. ...Improved your neural network.
not really related to audio, but I can give this little bit of history that I encountered that shows the folly of complete reliance on your senses:
for anyone who knows anything about firearms, you would know about the M1903 Springfield rifle. good rifle, however a number of earlier production rifles had some metallurgy issues (generally not serious since those rifles in service would have to first pass inspection and minimum standards, real problems only arise when its combined with other issues like say, bad ammunition).
the cause? heat treatment of the receivers earlier on, at least at the Springfield Armoury, was done by eye; the craftsmen responsible would judge the temperature by looking at the colour of the metal. the problem with this was that there were windows in their workspaces, which let in light which naturally affected the perceived colour of the metal those craftsmen were working on. temperatures were off by 200 degrees Celsius at times.
the metallurgy issues were solved with the installation and use of temperature gauges for later production of the rifles.
for anyone who knows anything about firearms, you would know about the M1903 Springfield rifle. good rifle, however a number of earlier production rifles had some metallurgy issues (generally not serious since those rifles in service would have to first pass inspection and minimum standards, real problems only arise when its combined with other issues like say, bad ammunition).
the cause? heat treatment of the receivers earlier on, at least at the Springfield Armoury, was done by eye; the craftsmen responsible would judge the temperature by looking at the colour of the metal. the problem with this was that there were windows in their workspaces, which let in light which naturally affected the perceived colour of the metal those craftsmen were working on. temperatures were off by 200 degrees Celsius at times.
the metallurgy issues were solved with the installation and use of temperature gauges for later production of the rifles.
Last edited:
Yes, but we have cookies.Good for you, man. Just beware you don't end up in yet another cult. The Enlightened Objectivists are pretty creepy in their own right.
bloodshoteyed
Major Contributor
Marc v E
Major Contributor
Nice to read this !
I was a subjectivist once as in believing what the Hifi shop told me but a stubborn type too! So I bought the Sennheiser hd650 first and several years later the Bose QC35.
The latter not considered hifi by brand name alone. My ears judged differently.
I did buy into the cable shizzle and ended buying a few costing 100 euros or thereabouts.
I think it was because of working in IT where I began doing more and more technical work that influenced me. And finally a tip from a friend to check out a review on ASR about a preamp I own.
And before I forget: reading Geoff Martin's blog Earfluff and Eyecandy helped a lot.
All in all, it's funny how our brain can fool us in believing something is there which is not.
I was a subjectivist once as in believing what the Hifi shop told me but a stubborn type too! So I bought the Sennheiser hd650 first and several years later the Bose QC35.
The latter not considered hifi by brand name alone. My ears judged differently.
I did buy into the cable shizzle and ended buying a few costing 100 euros or thereabouts.
I think it was because of working in IT where I began doing more and more technical work that influenced me. And finally a tip from a friend to check out a review on ASR about a preamp I own.
And before I forget: reading Geoff Martin's blog Earfluff and Eyecandy helped a lot.
All in all, it's funny how our brain can fool us in believing something is there which is not.
Last edited:
