Objectivists/Subjectivists

[wgscott]

The term "objectivist" is primarily deployed by "subjectivists" as a label and a term of dismissal.  It is like calling the other guy a "socialist."  You give them a label, so you don't have to take their point of view into consideration.  They become, by definition, the outsider, the gadfly, the disruptive tendency.

[wgscott]

15 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

 

 Maybe a lot of us don't really understand what civility is. There's a lot of common ground here. Why do some have to focus on the extremes instead of that common ground?

 

Because others use "uncivil" as a term of dismissal, and "civility" as something to hide behind, while declaring their safe-space.

[wgscott]

2 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

What do you think ?

 

Because exponents of irrational belief and imaginary phenomena (think religion) cannot tolerate dissent.

[wgscott]

6 minutes ago, look&listen said:

IMO - agressive distraction & dissension.

 

i.e., people with the temerity to voice an opinion at variance with my own.

[wgscott]

@esldude  Probably safer just to measure differences, so you don't waste too much effort and time trying to detect differences that don't exist.

 

To help him out, can we get a quick list of "high-end" cables that measure differently (compared to a $10 Belkin)?

[wgscott]

11 minutes ago, esldude said:

On another forum is a fair discussion about speaker distortion. That's an area that really matters and you don't need any special sauce to make it interesting. Mostly that is the only area worth pursuing for better sound quality on the playback end.

 

It is funny that we don't seem to have very many (if any) arguments over the reality of differences in speakers.

 

Why?

 

Because (a) the differences are easily measured, even if not easily heard, and (b) such claims don't countravene the laws of physics.

[wgscott]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

Except the challenge being discussed was "Did you blind test?"

 

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).

[wgscott]

Again, sometimes it helps to look at a concrete example.  Here is a very recent one from the mac mini thread, where it is being claimed by several people that it is necessary to modify the power supply in order to obtain "decent" sound quality:

 

2 hours ago, astrostar59 said:

Yes, you need to convert your new Mac Mini to run off an LPS feeding it clean DC to then elevate it to a decent music server player. Without that is will be no better than a Laptop. I have said this before on this thread but been attacked ~(mainly by those who have not even tried this mod). 

 

There are several key points typical of the subjectivist argument that should be addressed:

 

1.  The assertion that the opinion is true (in this case, two opinions.  The first opinion is that the sound quality of a mac mini (or a laptop) is not even "decent" out of the box, and the second is that you need to make this expensive modification (switching out the power supply).

 

2.  The assertion that someone has no right to question the above assertions unless they have tried the modification.  That seldom makes any sense, but in this case, it is comically illogical, because the essence of the assertion is that no one can claim the sound quality for a mac mini is "decent" unless they have made the modification (which makes no sense whatsoever).

 

3.  The assertion that anyone questioning this point of view is "attacking" the person who is stating this point of view as fact, simply because they called it into question. This seems to be a dominant ethos in the subjectivist camp.

 

 

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

 

[wgscott]

12 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

I just roll my eyes and move on.  I assume many folks do, and those who don't - well, I'm not the boss of them.  Best of luck to 'em.

 

The problem in this case is that someone new to computer audio is being told they must make these kinds of modifications (which is why I previously raised this example in the moderation thread).

[wgscott]

10 minutes 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. 

 

We are coming up on the two-year anniversary of the worst counter-example I can think of since pre-WWII times.

 

11 minutes ago, Jud said:

I feel that we can wait for people to say "I'm a newbie, can you give me any hints about how to undertake this mod?" before chiming in that there are some of us who feel it's not necessary in order to get good sound.

 

Isn't that pretty much what the OP was doing in that thread?

 

[wgscott]

2 minutes ago, Abtr said:

Huh? Why?

 

They still have the Senate.

[wgscott]

20 minutes ago, look&listen said:

All would fail.

wgscott entire argument fraudulent. No actual experience with topic (Mac Mini modifications), yet asserts authority to make judgements over others with real experiences of topic. Has no standing to comment & should know that, but loudly & bitterly declares his uninformed opinions must prevail. Even gaslighting astroboy for own arrogance. 

Defends with ridiculous assertion that experienced audiophile listening experiences invalid (because 'science'?)

Rejecting skilled experiential data only make one more ignorant, less worthy to claim 'correctness'. Clear he not know, practice, understand or skilled audiophile hearing. So all opinions based on willful ignorance best ignored as unlikely to be correct, or even close.

My experience with Mac Mini modifications go back years, and try many things, carefully assess changes to sound quality, remember SQ changes, continue to change & refine & listen.

My real experience with the tech & sound of Mac Mini modifications give me knowledge to say, without doubt, that wgscott opinions about topic nothing but dishonest BS.

 

Ignore him.

 

You are a real class act.

[wgscott]

1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

If there ever was an argument for additional moderation, Mr. L&L would be it.

 

Strangely enough, they get a free pass.

[wgscott]

5 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

Apparently my other types of replies didn't help either.

 

I posed essentially the same question a few years ago:  

 

[wgscott]

45 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Just like your recent extreme put down of the possibility of any improvement when using a product sold by a supplier in the sponsored section of this forum, despite the large numbers sold to other C.A. members  and many posted  reports in this forum that these members were not only happy customers, but went on to purchase additional products from the same supplier.

 You have zero personal experience of any of these products that were designed by a well respected forum member who is a highly experienced  E.E. , yet you continue to attack their usefulness  just as several others do, without even trying them for yourself.

 

You misread and have mischaracterized what I wrote.

 

The claim was that using a mac mini with its built-in power supply won't even produce "decent" sound.  

 

The claim is demonstrably false, even if a LPS is significantly better.  (The only claims I have made about linear power supplies are that no measurements that I am aware of have been produced that demonstrate the LPS results in better sound.)

[wgscott]

55 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

I don't think that's the case. I was honestly trying to bridge the gap. I see nothing like that from you. I honestly believe you're the worst offender. I'm sure this will be deleted but I'll copy it anyways just for posterity.

 

Very sorry for your troubles.  Please place me on your ignore list, and I will do likewise.  

[wgscott]

Just now, lasker98 said:

What an asshole!

 

You are angry when you are beautiful.

[wgscott]

37 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

...now who would have thought a thread entitled "Objectivists/Subjectivists" could end this way.....

 

 

[wgscott]

1 minute ago, Teresa said:

 

I use the built-in power supply with my 2012 Mac Mini and I find the sound more than decent. Could it be better? I guess so. I'm willing to spend the money to make it so? No.

 

Thank you, Teresa!  That is exactly the point I was trying to make.  Telling a beginner that they "have to" make some upgrade to get it to work (get decent sound) is what I was objecting to.  This would hold even if the LPS made it (say) 10% better.  

 

(I also agree with your suggestion to put the thread on ice.)

[wgscott]

[wgscott]

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

I seek all opinions and try and maintain a scientific indifference to the outcome not a doctrinaire and slavish adherence to one audio faction .

 

Oh, please.

[wgscott]

5 minutes ago, Sonicularity said:

 

I'm sensing a Thomas theorem.

 

[wgscott]

20 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Subjectivists simply trust (that their ears are telling them the most important information), objectivists (attempt to) verify (that there is something measurable that is easy to correlate with significant audible changes, but usually fail).

 

Do you know of any "significant audible changes" that cannot be measured?

[wgscott]

I am beginning to think people keep arguing about this because nothing interesting has happened in this hobby (or whatever you want to call it) in a fairly long time.  (MQA was a nice try, but ...)

[wgscott]

The Water Bear dude abides!