"It's the best" - Subjective or objective statement?

[joelha]

Priaptor,

Sorry, but I already told you (and anyone else who read post #4) why I started this thread.

Unless you know my intent better than I do, I think my opinion on that point is a bit more authoritative.

If you want to feel like everyone who disagrees with your position is ganging up on you in this thread, that's your right.

But there's far more to this thread than a focus on your posts.

"Crucify"? Really?

Joel

[Priaptor]

The statement in the review was that it was the "best dac he heard" for redbook and other pcm resolutions, which is obviously a subjective and un-falsifiable claim, so there is no point in arguing about that. By the end of the review, it just got shortened down to "the best".

 

 

Sorry beanie that is not what it says and that is fact.

 

Here we go again

 

"Chalk this magic up to the Alpha DAC RS and its brilliant designer Michael "Pflash" Pflaumer and the rest of the 'Berkeley' team who took part in creating the best DAC on the market"

 

Hardly "SHORTENED DOWN"

 

This is Bizarro world

 

Why can't you or others let this comment stand on its own. Why parse it for the author??

[Jud]

Why is it always true that lawyers love lawyer jokes....so spill!

 

Computer's being used for higher and better things (Gillian Welch) at the moment. But when I've got the keyboard back....

 

Three old buddies, an engineer, a surgeon, and a lawyer, are out in the woods with their hunting dogs, drinkin' and tellin' lies. It's evening and the dogs are back at camp and everyone's eaten and settled back by the fire.

 

The engineer is the first to speak up. "You fellas want to see what my ol' dog can do?" The others say, "Sure." So the engineer whistles for his dog: "C'mere, Slide Rule! C'mere, boy!" Slide Rule trots over, wagging his tail. "Show 'em what you can do, boy!" Slide Rule takes the bones from dinner and carefully arranges them in a model of a suspension bridge.

 

The other two friends give admiring whistles. "He sure is a smart dog."

 

Next is the surgeon. "You fellas want to see what my ol' dog can do?" The others say, "Sure." So the surgeon whistles for his dog: "C'mere, Scalpel! C'mere, boy!" Scalpel trots over, wagging his tail. "Show 'em what you can do, boy!" Scalpel takes the bones from dinner and builds a model of a human skeleton.

 

The other two friends give admiring whistles. "He sure is a smart dog."

 

The lawyer is last. "You fellas want to see what my ol' dog can do?" The others say, "Sure." So the lawyer whistles for his dog: "C'mere, Subpoena! C'mere, boy!" Subpoena trots over, wagging his tail. "Show 'em what you can do, boy!" So Subpoena screws the other dogs and eats all the bones.

[beanbag]

Sorry beanie that is not what it says and that is fact.

 

Here we go again

 

"Chalk this magic up to the Alpha DAC RS and its brilliant designer Michael "Pflash" Pflaumer and the rest of the 'Berkeley' team who took part in creating the best DAC on the market"

 

Hardly "SHORTENED DOWN"

 

This is Bizarro world

 

Why can't you or others let this comment stand on its own. Why parse it for the author??

 

Because the review starts like this:

"The Alpha DAC RS is without question the best DAC I've heard anywhere when it comes to 16/44.1 playback."

 

But even if I ignore this, the statement you quote is still a subjective and un-falsifiable claim, so there's nothing to get worked up about. Just another audiophile review.

[wdw]

Three old buddies, an engineer, a surgeon, and a lawyer, are out in the woods with their hunting dogs, drinkin' and tellin' lies. It's evening and the dogs are back at camp and everyone's eaten and settled back by the fire.

 

The engineer is the first to speak up. "You fellas want to see what my ol' dog can do?" The others say, "Sure." So the engineer whistles for his dog: "C'mere, Slide Rule! C'mere, boy!" Slide Rule trots over, wagging his tail. "Show 'em what you can do, boy!" Slide Rule takes the bones from dinner and carefully arranges them in a model of a suspension bridge.

 

The other two friends give admiring whistles. "He sure is a smart dog."

 

Next is the surgeon. "You fellas want to see what my ol' dog can do?" The others say, "Sure." So the surgeon whistles for his dog: "C'mere, Scalpel! C'mere, boy!" Scalpel trots over, wagging his tail. "Show 'em what you can do, boy!" Scalpel takes the bones from dinner and builds a model of a human skeleton.

 

The other two friends give admiring whistles. "He sure is a smart dog."

 

The lawyer is last. "You fellas want to see what my ol' dog can do?" The others say, "Sure." So the lawyer whistles for his dog: "C'mere, Subpoena! C'mere, boy!" Subpoena trots over, wagging his tail. "Show 'em what you can do, boy!" So Subpoena screws the other dogs and eats all the bones.

At a convention of biological scientists, one researcher remarks to another, "Did you know that in our lab we have switched from mice to lawyers for our experiments?" "Really?" the other replied, "Why did you switch?" "Well, for three reasons. First we found that lawyers are far more plentiful, second, the lab assistants don't get so attached to them, and thirdly there are some things even a rat won't do."

[Priaptor]

Because the review starts like this:

"The Alpha DAC RS is without question the best DAC I've heard anywhere when it comes to 16/44.1 playback."

 

But even if I ignore this, the statement you quote is still a subjective and un-falsifiable claim, so there's nothing to get worked up about. Just another audiophile review.

 

Beano,

 

One more time:

 

"the best DAC on the market"

 

ON THE MARKET

ON THE MARKET

 

Not in his listening room, not that he heard at a show(s), not just best redbook, not that he has heard.........

 

ON THE MARKET!!!!!!!!!!

 

Get it!

 

THE BEST DAC ON THE MARKET has NOTHING subjective about it NO MATTER how you would or others would like to perceive it.

 

It really is Bizarro World.

[sandyk]

I would like to see Chris do a review where he compares this DAC and the most recent Phasure NOS DAC from Peter.

We appear to see mainly U.S.A. designed gear reviewed, which I guess is understandable given the large number of members from the industry who come from the U.S.A. and the more ready availability of the local product for review purposes, but this IS a forum with world wide membership.

[wisnon]

I would like to see Chris do a review where he compares this DAC and the most recent Phasure NOS DAC from Peter.

We appear to see mainly U.S.A. designed gear reviewed, which I guess is understandable given the large number of members from the industry who come from the U.S.A. and the more ready availability of the local product for review purposes, but this IS a forum with world wide membership.

 

Not just Phasure, the TRINITY guys over at AudioExotic must be having conniptions now. hahahaha

[wisnon]

Beano,

 

One more time:

 

"the best DAC on the market"

 

ON THE MARKET

ON THE MARKET

 

Not in his listening room, not that he heard at a show(s), not just best redbook, not that he has heard.........

 

ON THE MARKET!!!!!!!!!!

 

Get it!

 

THE BEST DAC ON THE MARKET has NOTHING subjective about it NO MATTER how you would or others would like to perceive it.

 

It really is Bizarro World.

hahahahaahahahahahah.

 

Fun thread.

[firedog]

You've repeated yourself ad nauseum. Here's what YOU don't understand. Some of us read the review differently than you. You obsessively focus on one phrase; the rest of us don't.

 

You think that makes your reading strictly accurate. I (and apparently others) think your reading is so strict that it distorts the meaning of the review.

 

Your are welcome to think I am (we are) wrong and you are still correct. That's fine. The fact that some people don't see it your way should at least open you up to the possibility that what you think is some sort of objective truth about the review, isn't. If it was we'd all have read it the way you do.

 

So in spite of your boldface statements, I don't "Get it". I simply disagree with your understanding of what Chris wrote. It's obvious to me that his "best" statement is subjective.

 

The only "bizzarro" thing here is that you can't understand that your personal perceptions are not facts, but just your understanding, which might be incorrect.

 

 

Beano,

 

One more time:

 

"the best DAC on the market"

 

ON THE MARKET

ON THE MARKET

 

Not in his listening room, not that he heard at a show(s), not just best redbook, not that he has heard.........

 

ON THE MARKET!!!!!!!!!!

 

Get it!

 

THE BEST DAC ON THE MARKET has NOTHING subjective about it NO MATTER how you would or others would like to perceive it.

 

It really is Bizarro World.

[Teresa]

"It's the best" - Subjective or objective statement?

 

Subjective because he cannot know what other people hear, nor can he possibly have heard every single similar product made.

 

In my opinion statements made in a review are subjective opinions with the sole exception of accurate verifiable measurements. What one person finds the best another person may not. There is no substitution to listening for oneself. Reviews are never gospel but just ideas of what to audition.

 

Most readers here are smart enough to realize that any review (especially one where money is involved) is just a data point to consider. No one has the time, money and desire to review and compare every bit of kit out there scientifically. A review is always subjective based on experience, personal preference, money, mood, etc.

 

Most still enjoy reading them without getting too fussy.

 

You are totally correct, in my opinion this is the only sane way to approach any review, with a healthy dose of skepticism and if interested to listen to said product for oneself.

 

No, he is stating his opinion. It can't be anything else, because "best" implies evaluation. He saying he thinks it's the best DAC on the market. Has he heard every DAC in existence? Obviously not. And he obviously also hasn't surveyed the entire world to get agreement. So clearly it's his opinion of DACs he knows about. To claim he is somehow stating otherwise is to be an extreme literalist and to take the phrase out of context.

 

When a statement that something is "the best" is made by a reviewer, by definition it is an opinion…

 

Correct! I agree with you both, there is no other way to look at it, it is clearly his opinion, which others may or may not agree with.

 

What a boring place this would be if every opinion started "I currently believe, but subject to new facts and information, and this is only one person's current opinion, subject to change at any time, that the following might be true....

 

Agreed, I believe in using logic to differentiate between opinions and facts. A fact is something that can be verified, an opinion is a personal view or judgement, such as "it's the best".

 

Finally, why do people put so much trust in other people’s reviews? In my opinion reviews should only be used as guides and the personal opinion of the reviewer.

[Allan F]

Personally I try to take the opinion that yes when someone says x is the best that is a completely subjective opinion. However many people in such statements go further and say x is the best because... at that point they are being subjective.

 

I'm sorry Eloise but I am having difficulty trying to make sense of what you wrote above. Your use of the word "However" suggests that there is a distinction between your two statements. If there is, it's a distinction without a difference.

 

What is not valid is someone coming in to such a thread and saying "all cables sound the same; science shows us there can't be a difference" or in reply to a statement that "all cables sound the same" saying "thats rubbish, lots of people hear differences"

 

Those are classic cases of 'begging the question".

[beanbag]

Even if the review said that it was the best DAC in the entire universe, and is the best DAC that will ever exist until the heat death of the universe, it is still a subjective opinion because there are no objective, testable, verifiable claims attached to the review. So therefore I can't be bothered to get worked up about it.

[ksyfumedland]

I think Chris' comment is pretty clear and based on that comment I, personally, must question the veracity. No biggie. Not the first time and it surely won't be the last.

[PeterSt]

I would like to see Chris do a review where he compares this DAC and the most recent Phasure NOS DAC from Peter.

We appear to see mainly U.S.A. designed gear reviewed, which I guess is understandable given the large number of members from the industry who come from the U.S.A. and the more ready availability of the local product for review purposes, but this IS a forum with world wide membership.

 

Alex, this must be the 100th+ time someone asks. But as you have read in the other thread, Chris already listened and the Phasure is not on par with anything review worthy. Or something like that. Anyway, it doesn't need a review to claim ~ that.

Apparently.

I guess "we" need to do it ourselves.

 

So wisnon, what about re-attempting to contact that guy in Holland with his Trinity. Maybe now he's up to it ?

All it needs next is someone with an Alpha RS loaner; I estimate that will happen soon.

Anyone ?

 

As we know, all I do is doing this for myself is to keep acquainted with what the market brings. I don't care about the results apart from being able to 100% genuinely being able to tell potential customers what they can expect, and whether they really should obtain a Phasure over their current good DAC or not.

But I'd love to run into another result than the Alpha being the best out there, which I won't believe anyway for technical reasons. Therefore it is very very good that Chris turned this into a 16/44.1 story, so we only need to focus on that, which is what my current life is about anyway.

My personal prediction of this would be that or the Trinity or the Phasure ends up as #1 (I just don't know but again for technical reasons - but with the notice that the former Trinity was nowhere) and that the RS will end up a mile down but still #3 (and that is because there will be 3 contenders only).

 

From there we may see how a "review" will be full of context and relates to references (of aspects) we don't know yet.

Do notice that theoretically there's one reference only : the one of which we see NOTHING lacking or being wrong. Nothing = nothing and this probably does not exist.

[Audio_ELF]

I'm sorry Eloise but I am having difficulty trying to make sense of what you wrote above. Your use of the word "However" suggests that there is a distinction between your two statements. If there is, it's a distinction without a difference.

Allan ... sorry I was having a bad day yesterday - kept writing Subjective when I meant Objective and vice versa...

 

To try to correct what I meant to say...

Personally I try to take the opinion that when someone says "x is the best" then they are expressing completely subjective opinion ... in other words what they mean is "in my opinion, x is the best under the conditions I have tested it". However many reviewers with make further statements and say "x is the best because..." at that point they have become objective and therefore more open to being taken to task for their opinion. All in my opinion and how I read reviews, etc.

 

To take a sideways look at two (fictional car reviews)...

• The Ferrari 458 is the best sports car ... a purely subjective opinion which cannot be invalidated - as a reader you have to judge the experience of the reviewer.
  
• The Bugatti Veyron is the best sports car because it is the fastest ... the opinion is now becoming objectively measured and therefore if Ferrari come out with a car which does 260MPH presumable the reviewer will then think there is a new best sports car.
  

 

Eloise

[Audio_ELF]

Alex, this must be the 100th+ time someone asks. But as you have read in the other thread, Chris already listened and the Phasure is not on par with anything review worthy. Or something like that.

Peter ... that was a very petulant reply.

 

Can I suggest your simple response should be that Chris is welcome to review the Phasure DAC but he chooses not to; without any speculation further.

 

Eloise

[PeterSt]

Eloise, surely outside of all contexts it can - or will be read like that. The truth is very different though. Best is not to elaborate on at least 50% of that.

 

The other 50% is more easy and those with the insight can complete it to 100% (some to their own imagination, others just know already, but alas);

 

Supposed there's first this steaming up forum posts about "what I have here is the best". Next another chimes in and he says "I doubt that seriously". A third interferes for the good cause and he arranges for a shoot out.

I am all in for this for the reasons I told about in my previous post.

The subject, the owner of a DAC starting with T, already is under suspicion because of (not by me) expected unreal plugging and a sort of hell breaks loose because it is me contacting the T-guy on the advise of person-3.

The whole issue was shoveled under the carpet for the adopted reason that nobody (like me) should attempt to kill a new born baby of 60K USD. Sure, there's truth in that, and the subject was closed (but it was not me arranging for it anyway).

 

Remember, this was the 50% which I can bring across to some extent.

 

The real message is that you guys (gals too) don't get any of the forces playing their roles in this world, but which is about how I only can read / interpret threads like this one; The only thing which can be repeated (by priaptor) is some stupidly written down sentence, which makes that sentence the subject of the discussion or issue if you want. The most "we" can do is telling about "red flags" coming up, and right there we should stop. I mean, telling what's on that red flag goes too far and for 100% sure it goes too far for me. And no, I am NOT trying to imply anything, but I gave an example above.

 

Now you can call my post petulant, but you can also see it as the only way (left I mean).

And by no single means I am trying to force any review. That would be the dumbest thing ever. Those with the insight will know that I will refuse that.

 

This is not to be worked out further. If that happens, it won't be a nice thing.

STILL it is all about what this thread is about and when people like, they can think about it. But to own imagination, because I am not here to find my right or anything close. All I can add is that when you follow my postings you will have read that *I* say and claim how difficult reviewing is in the first place, which I told about a couple of times from various angles.

 

Peter

[alfe]

Alex, this must be the 100th+ time someone asks. But as you have read in the other thread, Chris already listened and the Phasure is not on par with anything review worthy. Or something like that. Anyway, it doesn't need a review to claim ~ that.

Apparently.

I guess "we" need to do it ourselves.

 

So wisnon, what about re-attempting to contact that guy in Holland with his Trinity. Maybe now he's up to it ?

All it needs next is someone with an Alpha RS loaner; I estimate that will happen soon.

Anyone ?

 

As we know, all I do is doing this for myself is to keep acquainted with what the market brings. I don't care about the results apart from being able to 100% genuinely being able to tell potential customers what they can expect, and whether they really should obtain a Phasure over their current good DAC or not.

But I'd love to run into another result than the Alpha being the best out there, which I won't believe anyway for technical reasons. Therefore it is very very good that Chris turned this into a 16/44.1 story, so we only need to focus on that, which is what my current life is about anyway.

My personal prediction of this would be that or the Trinity or the Phasure ends up as #1 (I just don't know but again for technical reasons - but with the notice that the former Trinity was nowhere) and that the RS will end up a mile down but still #3 (and that is because there will be 3 contenders only).

 

From there we may see how a "review" will be full of context and relates to references (of aspects) we don't know yet.

Do notice that theoretically there's one reference only : the one of which we see NOTHING lacking or being wrong. Nothing = nothing and this probably does not exist.

 

The only claim you can do Peter is: out of the 3 my DAC is the best from price point of vue.

And any how with this price difference and if the saving is invested wisely on other component you are the winner.¨-)

[spdif-usb]

Oreo cookies are always the best.

 

[mav52]

Oreo cookies are always the best.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]14521[/ATTACH]

 

Which one, they have Original, CookieDough, Chocolate, Berry, Lemon, Mint, Peanut Butter and Marshmallow Crispy

[Priaptor]

You've repeated yourself ad nauseum. Here's what YOU don't understand. Some of us read the review differently than you. You obsessively focus on one phrase; the rest of us don't.

 

You think that makes your reading strictly accurate. I (and apparently others) think your reading is so strict that it distorts the meaning of the review.

 

Your are welcome to think I am (we are) wrong and you are still correct. That's fine. The fact that some people don't see it your way should at least open you up to the possibility that what you think is some sort of objective truth about the review, isn't. If it was we'd all have read it the way you do.

 

So in spite of your boldface statements, I don't "Get it". I simply disagree with your understanding of what Chris wrote. It's obvious to me that his "best" statement is subjective.

 

The only "bizzarro" thing here is that you can't understand that your personal perceptions are not facts, but just your understanding, which might be incorrect.

 

Yes, sometimes a person MUST repeat themselves to get the point across and defend some absurd desire among some to distort. You and others keep trying to refute my claim, thinking and believing that somehow, I am repeating my claims "ad nauseum" while you fail to see that the constant refutations by you and others who want to defend Chris' comments is more "ad nauseum" if you will, by a vast number. You see the majority defending your perspective as validation of your views whereas, I see, like in most cases in this crazy world, the majority is usually misguided-but that is my OPINION.

 

This is going to be my last post regarding this absurd merry go round. Chris is a very bright individual, NOT a newbie to the reviewing game and when he uses the term "market" and more specifically "the best DAC on the market" he is making a bold claim way outside the precepts of a review or subjectivity, IMHO and I look at such a claim as utter nonsense. "The Market" has a specific meaning way outside the scope of the reviewers domain especially pertaining to subjectivity and covers every single DAC for sale, used or otherwise, ever made. Not a very subjective or even realistic claim even if you chose to interpret it as a subjective claim. Even if that was his attempt, it was a bad decision, in my opinion, because it is an absurd comment that once again, IMHO, taints a review.

 

When a guy like HP, makes a personally moving claim, and I reference his very last review, as he states:

 

"I'll say it here and now – these are the most fluidly musical loudspeakers I have ever heard", he does so in a very subjective manner.

 

Pretty enthusiastic review that obviously moved the reviewer, but with the caveat there is nothing other than "opinion", whether one chooses to agree with him or not. When claims are made, especially from the writings of an old timer like HP, who in his heyday wasn't afraid to review a product and state his strict opinion, it is clear it is opinion without outrageous claims, other than when referencing to his own domain. Referring to the best in the market is outside any reasonable scope.

 

I have nothing against Chris, he and others on this site have helped me tremendously, I am not a newbie, been around doing this since 82 had my own high end business for 4 years and am doing nothing but making a critique of an over the top comment of what is otherwise a generally good review of a product I am sure is wonderful by a company I highly respect. My opinion, for what it is worth (obviously not much around here since I question the unquestionable) is to leave nonsense out of reviews to make a review more believable. End of story. Done.

[mav52]

Yes, sometimes a person MUST repeat themselves to get the point across and defend some absurd desire among some to distort. You and others keep trying to refute my claim, thinking and believing that somehow, I am repeating my claims "ad nauseum" while you fail to see that the constant refutations by you and others who want to defend Chris' comments is more "ad nauseum" if you will, by a vast number. You see the majority defending your perspective as validation of your views whereas, I see, like in most cases in this crazy world, the majority is usually misguided-but that is my OPINION.

 

This is going to be my last post regarding this absurd merry go round. Chris is a very bright individual, NOT a newbie to the reviewing game and when he uses the term "market" and more specifically "the best DAC on the market" he is making a bold claim way outside the precepts of a review or subjectivity, IMHO and I look at such a claim as utter nonsense. "The Market" has a specific meaning way outside the scope of the reviewers domain especially pertaining to subjectivity and covers every single DAC for sale, used or otherwise, ever made. Not a very subjective or even realistic claim even if you chose to interpret it as a subjective claim. Even if that was his attempt, it was a bad decision, in my opinion, because it is an absurd comment that once again, IMHO, taints a review.

 

When a guy like HP, makes a personally moving claim, and I reference his very last review, as he states:

 

"I'll say it here and now – these are the most fluidly musical loudspeakers I have ever heard", he does so in a very subjective manner.

 

Pretty enthusiastic review that obviously moved the reviewer, but with the caveat there is nothing other than "opinion", whether one chooses to agree with him or not. When claims are made, especially from the writings of an old timer like HP, who in his heyday wasn't afraid to review a product and state his strict opinion, it is clear it is opinion without outrageous claims, other than when referencing to his own domain. Referring to the best in the market is outside any reasonable scope.

 

I have nothing against Chris, he and others on this site have helped me tremendously, I am not a newbie, been around doing this since 82 had my own high end business for 4 years and am doing nothing but making a critique of an over the top comment of what is otherwise a generally good review of a product I am sure is wonderful by a company I highly respect. My opinion, for what it is worth (obviously not much around here since I question the unquestionable) is to leave nonsense out of reviews to make a review more believable. End of story. Done.

 

Maybe Chris should have said, its the best dac on the market that I have heard.

[firedog]

Maybe Chris should have said, its the best dac on the market that I have heard.

 

Yes, but to reasonable readers that is obvious and understood in context of a review where he is evaluating a DAC and giving his opinion. To not like the style is understandable and I might even agree with it; to inflate the minor criticism to some sort of issue that makes the review invalid or tainted is not.

 

The point was not to "defend" Chris, but to disagree with the critique. I guess it comes down to your concept of what a review is.

[joelha]

Maybe Chris should have said, its the best dac on the market that I have heard.

 

How is that not implied by his message? Who else's opinion is he representing besides his own?

And frankly, even if he said that the DAC was truly and without a doubt the greatest audio component ever created, who cares? It's obviously only his opinion and it's up to us to judge as to how much we want to rely on his comment.

Joel