• 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). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Stereophiles editor Jim Austin publicly disagreeing with Kal Rubinson

Status
Not open for further replies.

fpitas

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 7, 2022
Messages
2,968
Likes
3,536
Location
Northern Virginia, USA
Am glad that "our" appreciated @Kal Rubinson doesn't give up fighting with the typical audiophile myths, but let's see for how long...
I notice Kal has speakers that measure very well. I doubt that's by coincidence.
 

jools

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
70
Problem is, Kal was telling people not to go out and waste their time and money on things that don't add to the musical enjoyment.
Jim Austin is saying that all you have to do is tell people that they can enjoy music without wasting money and it will cause them to not enjoy their music.:eek: And Jim Austin is right, because Stereophile made those people.
Telling people that there is moderately priced equipment which outperforms the gear on which they've spent a small (or not so small) fortune is almost bound to spoil their enjoyment, if not their whole day.
 

fpitas

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 7, 2022
Messages
2,968
Likes
3,536
Location
Northern Virginia, USA
Telling people that there is moderately priced equipment which outperforms the gear on which they've spent a small (or not so small) fortune is almost bound to spoil their enjoyment, if not their whole day.
Nah. They just won't believe you ;)
 

Astoneroad

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 16, 2022
Messages
503
Likes
977
Location
Cave in the desert
Nah. They just won't believe you ;)
I don't believe that's true. I can prove how good my stuff is... I've got the receipts and a stack of subjective magazine reviews to prove it. ;) We don't need your stinking badges... or Ohm, Maxwell and Majidimehr... when we have Ritchie, McGowen and Austin. My reality is really... really... true. Really.
 

fpitas

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 7, 2022
Messages
2,968
Likes
3,536
Location
Northern Virginia, USA
I don't believe that's true. I can prove how good my stuff is... I've got the receipts and a stack of subjective magazine reviews to prove it. ;) We don't need your stinking badges... or Ohm, Maxwell and Majidimehr... when we have Ritchie, McGowen and Austin. My reality is really... really... true. Really.
Think how many times we've been told our silly measurements are pointless, when numerous internet experts have weighed in with subjective assessments. It's hard to argue with reasoning like that.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,539
Likes
1,660
Location
California
I notice Kal has speakers that measure very well. I doubt that's by coincidence.
Kal also owned a pair of B&W 802D speakers for a long time. He also reviewed them in Stereophile. I purchased a pair myself and I agree with what he wrote in his review.
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
6,920
Likes
13,654
Location
Monument, CO
Ok I didn't read the article. But I do agree with him to a certain extend that science has little relevance on music enjoyment.

Read Toole?
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,539
Likes
1,660
Location
California
Subjective listening impressions are still useful data.
This is difficult for applied scientists (“engineers”) to appreciate, since you can’t measure subjective listening impressions with an oscilloscope.
Whereas, this is easily appreciated by natural/research scientists, who are accustomed to experimental research involving human subjects. Unfortunately, natural/research scientists also happen to be vastly underrepresented in this forum.
 
Last edited:

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
3,391
Location
Winnipeg Canada
Subjective listening impressions are still useful data.
This is difficult for applied scientists (“engineers”) to appreciate, since you can’t measure subjective listening impressions with an oscilloscope.
Whereas, this is easily appreciated by natural/research scientists, who are accustomed to experimental research involving human subjects. Unfortunately, natural/research scientistsmalso happen to be vastly underrepresented in this forum.

Can you explain what a subjective opinion of a device that does exactly the same thing as another device would tell us? I mean it's like a food critic saying he can tell that food cooked on one stove tastes better than food cooked on another stove that in any objective way is the same...but he can only make that subjective confirmation if he knows the food was cooked on the one stove and not the other.
 

AdamG247

Fishing Permitted-Must Eat catch!!
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
3,206
Likes
8,575
There is no room for, fact based evidence and scientific measurements, in SALES endeavors. Unless said science/engineering strongly supports the SALES pitch. SALES and Truth represent the polar opposite extremes in which a SALES pitch can function to motivate readers into Buyers. Not believers. Feelings, Emotions, Desires, Imagination and Dreams are what they Sell. This should not surprise anyone who has been a member of ASR for more than a week. ;)
 

DavidEdwinAston

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 18, 2021
Messages
512
Likes
369
Subjective listening impressions are still useful data.
This is difficult for applied scientists (“engineers”) to appreciate, since you can’t measure subjective listening impressions with an oscilloscope.
Whereas, this is easily appreciated by natural/research scientists, who are accustomed to experimental research involving human subjects. Unfortunately, natural/research scientists also happen to be vastly underrepresented in this forum.
Presumably, there are other audio related sites where they are, over represented?
 

puppet

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
410
Likes
255
This all comes down to how many audio tapes you can sell to the deaf community.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,539
Likes
1,660
Location
California
Can you explain what a subjective opinion of a device that does exactly the same thing as another device would tell us? I mean it's like a food critic saying he can tell that food cooked on one stove tastes better than food cooked on another stove that in any objective way is the same...but he can only make that subjective confirmation if he knows the food was cooked on the one stove and not the other.
Well for starters, why start with a single sample?

To build on your example, suppose:
100 food critics tried a particular dish cooked on stove A and stove B.
90 of those food critics reported that the food cooked on stove A had a burnt flavor to it.
But when you measured the temperature of each stove using a precision thermocouple, they were identical to within 0.001C

It would be tempting for many folks here to stop and say, "well the stoves are identical, the precision thermometer tests prove it, and the food critics are fools."

But a natural/research scientist would say, no, maybe there's some merit to the fact that in our sample, 90% of food critics reported the same subjective concern about food cooked on Stove A. And a natural/research scientists would ask WHY. And would generate a hypothesis that explains all observations (i.e. both the subjective food critic responses AND the thermocouple readings) - and then would test that hypothesis.

That's the difference.
 

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
3,391
Location
Winnipeg Canada
Well for starters, why start with a single sample?

To build on your example, suppose:
100 food critics tried a particular dish cooked on stove A and stove B.
90 of those food critics reported that the food cooked on stove A had a burnt flavor to it.
But when you measured the temperature of each stove using a precision thermocouple, they were identical to within 0.001C

It would be tempting for many folks here to stop and say, "well the stoves are identical, the precision thermometer tests prove it, and the food critics are fools."

But a natural/research scientist would say, no, maybe there's some merit to the fact that in our sample, 90% of food critics reported the same subjective concern about food cooked on Stove A. And a natural/research scientists would ask WHY. And would generate a hypothesis that explains all observations (i.e. both the subjective food critic responses AND the thermocouple readings) - and then would test that hypothesis.

That's the difference.

If none of those food critics can identify that burnt flavor unless they know the food was cooked on stove A ahead of time, I don't care about their subjective opinion because it's false. We already have a hypothesis that explains such situations - cognitive bias.
 

puppet

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
410
Likes
255
Well for starters, why start with a single sample?

To build on your example, suppose:
100 food critics tried a particular dish cooked on stove A and stove B.
90 of those food critics reported that the food cooked on stove A had a burnt flavor to it.
But when you measured the temperature of each stove using a precision thermocouple, they were identical to within 0.001C

It would be tempting for many folks here to stop and say, "well the stoves are identical, the precision thermometer tests prove it, and the food critics are fools."

But a natural/research scientist would say, no, maybe there's some merit to the fact that in our sample, 90% of food critics reported the same subjective concern about food cooked on Stove A. And a natural/research scientists would ask WHY. And would generate a hypothesis that explains all observations (i.e. both the subjective food critic responses AND the thermocouple readings) - and then would test that hypothesis.

That's the difference.
Left out the critical variable ... the cook on stove A.
 

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,224
Likes
16,078
Location
uk, taunton
People still read stereophile , it's just a puff mag that pedals whatever boosts their industry mates and defacto themselves.

It's all vested interest, very small community they all play the game .

Personally can't respect anyone who buys it or pushes reviews and gains money from it .

Big bag of shite , always misterfied me so many here still hold it in regard . Hopelessly intellectually dishonest tripe .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom