• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Science: Are You Consistant in Your Views?

Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
61
Likes
137
#21
I had no idea this thread was about a private beef that had taken place here, and I have no interest in the PM-vs-thread argument.

In the spirit of the thread topic, I will say that while I strive for consistency in my views - in other words, I strive to be equally rigorous in my analysis and understanding regardless of where the facts lead - I am sure that I am not entirely consistent, because I'm a human being, and therefore flawed and liable to all sorts of influences and biases.

But I don't think "gotchas" are useful - for example, if someone writes something that is not scientifically rigorous about one topic, that doesn't invalidate everything they've written, or measured, scientifically about another topic. I would say there's nothing wrong with pointing out contradictions or inconsistencies in someone's logic or analysis - but since we all are hypocrites at one moment or another, we're all liable to being called out, and that can be abused easily.

The point, as I see it, is to try to pursue factual knowledge, and to be as rigorous as we can about separating what we think or feel on the one hand, with what can be proven or established and replicated by other people on the other hand.
 

Thomas savage

Retired Sheriff
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,668
Likes
3,279
Location
uk, taunton
#22
Since that was a message sent to mansr, myself, and others here I can see nothing out of line with his decision to make it public? Just because a member sends words in a PM to another member is no reason to let him hide behind those words. I don't get your position on this Thomas?
No ones hiding behind any words and there’s been no deception to uncover , also non of this is relevant to the membership it’s a matter started in a non public area that should stay there and indeed was addressed by both myself and amir before this thread started. I don’t see this thread as having anything to do with the beef between you both so there absolutely no reason to then try and make it have.

You want to fight people don’t do here, we are a Audio forum . If there’s issues between members we sort them out with the relevant parties involved.
 

Thomas savage

Retired Sheriff
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,668
Likes
3,279
Location
uk, taunton
#23
I had no idea this thread was about a private beef that had taken place here, and I have no interest in the PM-vs-thread argument.

.
It’s not but it’s been rather unhelpfully hijacked and now there’s a mess where there was just a good example of what we want. In fact it would have serve new members to read it until just now.
 

Sal1950

Major Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
4,642
Likes
1,823
Location
Central Fl
#24
Neither I nor anyone beside the OP came here wishing to start a fight, it was a very obvious tactic by him to continue what he began at CA. I never even bothered to respond until you made your comment about the PM to mansr. This as an area we have to disagree, if someone said something to me while walking down the street, at a hi fi show, or in a PM here and I chose to repeat what was said to me, that's my choice and should not be a item subject to censor unless it is libel, in which case it becomes a legal matter.
 

JJB70

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
684
Likes
1,043
Location
Milton Keynes, England
#25
On the point of the OP, since most fields of science and engineering tend to be in a constant state of evolution as we expand our knowledge base and understanding it is important to retain an open mind and receptiveness to new ideas.

I am a complete ignoramus on matters audio related but as an engineer in another field I also thinks it's important to recognise that there is a wider range of interested parties and stakeholders on many technical issues than a narrow band of technical specialists. I think it's an important role of technical specialists in any field to communicate and educate when necessary. I work in the field of emissions and previously engine design (well, torsional vibration and combustion thermodynamics, an odd combination I know) and believe me I wish I had a pound for every nonsensical or just downright disingenuous statement I have heard or read from politicians or NGOs on the subject of emissions. I think I have two choices, retreat into some sort of echo chamber where I can agree with my peers that the rest of the world is a bit thick and tut about how the world is going to hell in a handcart, or engage in a debate and try to educate. I suspect the former would lend itself to an easier and probably happier life but that the latter is more useful. Which is not to say we should ignore all counter views or dismiss the thoughts of the less technically able as it is not uncommon for them to be articulate and surprisingly well considered and it is very unwise to assume that insight is limited to those with a formal education or industrial experience in a given field.
 

Thomas savage

Retired Sheriff
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,668
Likes
3,279
Location
uk, taunton
#26
Neither I nor anyone beside the OP came here wishing to start a fight, it was a very obvious tactic by him to continue what he began at CA. I never even bothered to respond until you made your comment about the PM to mansr. This as an area we have to disagree, if someone said something to me while walking down the street, at a hi fi show, or in a PM here and I chose to repeat what was said to me, that's my choice and should not be a item subject to censor unless it is libel, in which case it becomes a legal matter.
But would you publish it in a magazine? No of course not , you would deal with whatever with the folks involved. There was no fight here unit somebody went out their way to start one . It’s also the case this is not the street , it’s a owned and managed space so yes folks will get censored , it’s not free speech no matter what people want to say and PM messages ( especially those involving management) are not to be publish in public areas unless it's in the intrest of the wider membership and that’s decided by us.

Certainly we don’t start or continue wars with them, we are here to discuss audio. That’s the same for everyone here. Iv a few messages of late asking me to censor the forum more strictly or moderate it more strictly, funny how it’s censorship when folks disagree and moderation when they want something done .

I guess that’s humans for you.
 

Thomas savage

Retired Sheriff
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,668
Likes
3,279
Location
uk, taunton
#27
On the point of the OP, since most fields of science and engineering tend to be in a constant state of evolution as we expand our knowledge base and understanding it is important to retain an open mind and receptiveness to new ideas.

I am a complete ignoramus on matters audio related but as an engineer in another field I also thinks it's important to recognise that there is a wider range of interested parties and stakeholders on many technical issues than a narrow band of technical specialists. I think it's an important role of technical specialists in any field to communicate and educate when necessary. I work in the field of emissions and previously engine design (well, torsional vibration and combustion thermodynamics, an odd combination I know) and believe me I wish I had a pound for every nonsensical or just downright disingenuous statement I have heard or read from politicians or NGOs on the subject of emissions. I think I have two choices, retreat into some sort of echo chamber where I can agree with my peers that the rest of the world is a bit thick and tut about how the world is going to hell in a handcart, or engage in a debate and try to educate. I suspect the former would lend itself to an easier and probably happier life but that the latter is more useful. Which is not to say we should ignore all counter views or dismiss the thoughts of the less technically able as it is not uncommon for them to be articulate and surprisingly well considered and it is very unwise to assume that insight is limited to those with a formal education or industrial experience in a given field.
It’s a hard balance and it’s one that comes down to me to manage and maintain here. I think we all do well and members generously give their time to help inform the argument in a positive and constructive way and for that I’m grateful and it’s why I bother doing this.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
61
Likes
111
#28
I find the constant fight between extreme subjectivity and extreme objectivity very tiring to be honest, and quite unfortunate.
Extreme subjectivity has appalling consequences: a market filled with crooks and shills, fools losing money. Extreme objectivity tends to dismiss everything that can't be measured, often contemptuously.

The extreme objectivity approach suffers from a certain level of contradiction though: while it uses the placebo/buyer bias/poor methodology/lack of AB test/psychoacoustics/variation in hearing curves/etc... arguments to dismiss the subjective approach wholesale it seems to be selectively blind to the fact that music listening is essentially a subjective experience. Proving subjectivity is pervasive then dismissing it as if it had no importance in the field is a bit peculiar.

I have a few systems and, subjectively, prefer certain systems or combination of parts for certain types of music, and probably moods as well. That's totally subjective. Now, where I am objective (or at least try to be) is that I make hypotheses when it comes to the differences I hear subjectively and try to test them. Some times it is relatively easy: speaker's response curve, dispersion, tube vs AV vs D. Some times it is harder: room interaction with speaker design. Some times I just can't explain: lack of knowledge, wrong hypothesis.

Not saying my approach is the best one, that would be highly subjective ;) but the polite "hypothesis - test - adjust hypothesis" approach seems to have more merit in general than the "dismiss because guy on the Internet said so" approach.

And, in any case, never worth fighting for or attacking people...
 

Similar threads

Top Bottom