Objectivists/Subjectivists

[jabbr]

8 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

Based on that it's all about winning. The winning is pointless. This isn't a debate club. It's an audio site. Most are here to some extent to enjoy listening to their system and music. I'm also here to see if I can pick up any useful tips to increase that enjoyment. Over the years, that's worked out quite well for me. That's the common ground. Some may require different approaches to get there, whether subjectivist or objectivist. Great. No need to try and convince everyone else that only your way is the right way. Make your point and move on.

 

Some people are splitters and others are lumpers, said another way, some people look for differences and others look for commonality. Your OP suggests that you are trying to oppose so called Subjectivists vs Objectivists. I resent such labels. There are so many other potential labels that to characterize a person as A or B is an artificial categorization and such categorizations foster tribal behavior.

 

There is value in listening and there is value in measurements. There is value in building something yourself and there is value in buying something prebuilt. Yes, most people here are, I presume, here to improve their audio reproduction. There is much to be learned from listening, and there is much to be learned from engineering. To place yourself entirely in one camp or the other is severely limiting. That is your own choice and now that you've learned not to stick your tongue on freezing metal, you've also learned not to stick your right hand, left hand, right foot, left foot and other moist body parts onto freezing metal. Likewise you should avoid glowing red metals... In any case we all have different ways of learning, and some of us like to learn in different ways so please don't assume...

[jabbr]

19 hours ago, lasker98 said:

Not sure where that's coming from but right back at ya ?

 

The term "Objectivist" is meaningless to me except as a label that the crew who calls themselves "Subjectivist" uses to call the people who aren't in their club.

 

I understand the term "Subjectivist" better perhaps but wouldn't want to assume to label what another calls themselves. Is Subjectivist a person who considers themselves non-technical and who cares only about the SQ of what they hear? @Teresa describes herself that way. Fair enough, I know many people who are very very intelligent but not technical. Regarding computers (this is "Computer" Audiophile after all), the Mac and iPhone have achieved great adoption not because they are the most technically advanced or have the best "specs", but because of ease of use. Turn it on and it just works. There is fantastic value in that.

 

Writers that I know who love the Mac, use the Mac because it allows them to write with the least intrusion. It gets the job done.

 

Is that Subjectivism?

 

Subjectivists seem to categorize Objectivists as only caring about measurements. Is that what an Objectivist is? I don't know any here. I do know folks who are very practical and who come at this from an engineering perspective. Yet all the advances in Computer Audio have arisen from engineering. In any case if you are a self described "Subjectivist" and self described "non-technical", then why would you be attracted to "oxygen free copper", or try to claim that the crystalline structure of a cable affects its directionality? Why would someone be attracted to such technical marketing? 

 

What I am saying is that I don't even know what a reasonable definition of the term "Objectivist" is, so please supply a real world one. Also why would a true "Subjectivist" engage in a technical argument or care?

 

Perhaps the real distinction here is between folks who use measurements to make decisions and those who don't? I include cost as a measurement though   I'll tell you though that my most recent major purchase was made without consideration of any measurements, so does that make me a Subjectivist?

[jabbr]

1 minute ago, lasker98 said:

I don't know about a real world one but from the OP this is how I see it:

 

"Broadly speaking, for me, a subjectivist leans more to being interested in other's listening impressions, and personal experiences with whatever is being discussed. Objectivists lean more towards being interested in actual measurements and a scientific explanation of what's behind these subjectivist reports. Within each group there's various degrees of overlap."

 

Those are 4 different things:

1) other people listening impressions

2) personal experiences

3) actual measurements

4) scientific explanation

 

Why do you assume that 1 and 2 necessarily go together as well as 3 and 4 to the exclusion of 1 and 2? My last major purchase was based on (1) as well as getting a good price on an unavailable product -- does that make me a Subjectivist?

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I have a bit more faith in humanity’s ability to read more information and make a decision appropriate for each individual. 

Well yes which is why robust discussion is necessary. 

 

Not that we are doing science here but time honored methods are used are used as a neutral way to solve disagreements among willing individuals. 

[jabbr]

5 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

To my eye, it sure looks like the "objectivist" is trying to incite dissent, rather than have an open and meaningful discussion.

 

To have an open discussion means tolerating and understanding dissent. Dissent is not bad. 

 

5 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

 

So where does that leave us? What makes your eye better then my eye?

 

At this point I'm sorry I wasted my time on this thread. I was naive to think some would be interested in seeing a different perspective.

 

Perhaps you made assumptions that were not borne out?

 

5 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

 

It looks like the objectivists have "won" again. Good job guys. Congrats.

 

Won? It doesn’t have to be a zero sum game. Perhaps we can all learn by understanding different viewpoints?

[jabbr]

43 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Nice subject for a new thread.

 

But yes, I saw you stipulating in that direction already (other thread). All I like to say is that it will save you a lot of money in the end.

However, a real audiophile won't recognize much of that. He always eagerly watches the mail for his/her new toy to arrive ...

 

Stated like a true vendor  ?

 

Quote

 

A new thread really is better and I must say it could bring a fresh look on a subject which isn't talked through often. It would also perfectly fit the bill of "Objectivists" vs. "Subjectivists", which you are more aware of by now than you asked for. Haha.

Subjectivists should have no voice in that thread. Or at least not profound.

Great subject ...

 

Interesting, so you are suggesting that Subjectivists aren't interested in the bottom line sound output? See, that further exposes what I see as a S/O distinction that just doesn't hold up. If a Subjectivist is concerned only with the sound, and an Objectivist with measurements, then an Objectivist would upgrade to a system with better "specs", and a Subjectivist would go about listening to music...

 

The distinction here is not S/O rather folks who want to listen to good music vs folks who want to tweak. i.e. Musicophile vs Tweakophile ?

[jabbr]

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Love listening to good music, also curious about tweaks. Lots of us can be described that way. (Was your interest in ClearFog and espressobin purely musical, or also for the fun of the education?) So not a very clear distinction. (Surely part of your point that any attempt to divide us into opposed camps is wrongheaded from the get-go.)

 

Exactly!

[jabbr]

42 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

Chris has banned my home IP address. Signed in with my phone. Guess I’m making far too much sense to be a part of this forum. 

You've kinda sorta indicated you have commercial interests in a DAC. You should identify your specific commercial ties in your sig.

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, Music Enthusiast said:

If mentioning a DAC I've heard is a commercial interest, then Chris can go fuck himself. I'm out of this shit hole. 

 

Wow! That was unprovoked. Chris had no part in what I said.

 

You didn't claim merely to have listened to DAC, rather done so along with a team of engineers and there was some teaching and learning going on. Unless its a DAC engineering club, then it sounds like it might be a commercial enterprise. At the very least its not an unreasonable question on my part. Why not simply answer? No big deal, or it shouldn't be.