Objectivists/Subjectivists

[Abtr]

16 minutes ago, Jud said:

Not the only reason. In some cases masterings are different and better. Yes, you have to "listen through" vinyl distortions to hear them, and I understand many people might not be able to abide that.

 

There are also some things I'm fond of that may never have made it to digital format.

 

So there are many different reasons. Sometimes it's easier to be dismissive than to inquire a little further.

Often the vinyl version of an album (also of current new releases) has a higher dynamic range than the CD version. Whether or not you like this higher DR is of course subjective.   @Bryan Lucey (ME) loved DR compression, yet, the vinyl versions of some of the albums he mastered have a significantly higher DR than the CD versions. But that was another discussion.. 

[Abtr]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

...

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.

Well, a "true objectivist" ultimately wants scientific proof of any SQ improvement claim. This can be measurements or double blind tests. If available measurements don't warrant a relative SQ improvement and double blind tests don't show a difference, then there is no SQ improvement. And that would be a valid objective conclusion, until more tests or different measurements show the opposite is true. 

 

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

Also why would a true "Subjectivist" engage in a technical argument or care?

Even a "true subjectivist" may be interested in the theory/technology behind an audio  product. It's always best if theory confirms subjective experience and vice versa.  

 

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

... 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?

Yes, I think so..

[Abtr]

1 hour ago, wgscott said:

Perhaps  "Did you blind test?" could be substituted with "Is there any objective, reproducible evidence for your claim, or is this a subjective impression?"

 

The latter is probably better, but it comes off as snottier and more combative (even though if you take it at face value, it is less so).

I think the latter is much better! 

[Abtr]

30 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

Are you serious here or are you also exaggerating for effect? How could you possibly come to that from what I wrote?

...

I think it's called trolling.

[Abtr]

2 hours ago, crenca said:

One thing that strikes me about this conversation is that generally (exceptions of course) objectivists see the objective/subjective divide as about substantial issues, understanding, and the facts around audio/high fidelity, whereas the subjectivists see this divide as....wait for it.....subjective - it's not really about reality but about how they are perceived/treated, or its about politics (of audiophiledom), and the like

 

No wonder it is in general the subjectivists who are unhappy with how this forum is moderated...

Can you explain what's the point of what you say here?

[Abtr]

35 minutes ago, crenca said:

I will try but the point of the post is how both sides see the subjective/objective divide differently, and thus don't have a common frame of reference, language, and sensibility, and understanding of reality in which to use to even discuss these things.

 

Objectivists see the obj/sub divide as one over facts, reality, and meaning, and the methods related to these things

 

Subjectivists see the obj/sub divide as one over persons, perception, acceptance/rejection.

 

This observation is a general one - a trend and emphasis about a group.  Each individual in each group varies to a degree, there are exceptions, etc.

 

I could be wrong.  I way to test my assertion would be to go back to the beginning of this tread and evaluate each response into each group, noting exceptions, etc.

OK. Next time make sure you state it that way.

[Abtr]

41 minutes ago, crenca said:

Honest question:  why did the second way click with you but the first did not?

 

edit:  fixed question

Haha, also ask @lasker98. To be honest, the first way reads like nonsense and just sounds offensive.  

[Abtr]

45 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

...

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

...

Huh? Why?