Objectivists/Subjectivists

[PeterSt]

It isn't getting too technical, I hope ?

[Music Enthusiast]

4 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

 

What means "looking for a scrap" ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOW22gIXrPk

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

59 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

I'm an anonymous internet poster just like 97% of the others who participate on this forum. 

 

A hah I am a measurement guy and I know the correct figure is 97.2567% !!! 

[Music Enthusiast]

5 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

A hah I am a measurement guy and I know the correct figure is 97.2567% !!! 

Watch the video in my last post. That guy is also a measurement guy. Only he uses his finger. 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

Watch the video in my last post. That guy is also a measurement guy. Only he uses his finger. 

ok, time to regroup. You have valid points to make. We have all been wronged at some point.I wish you all the best.

[Music Enthusiast]

"To see the world in black and white is to live within the contours of extremism. This outlook neatly divides the world into right versus wrong, good versus evil, and yes versus no.

This thinking is dependent upon such words as always and never. Especially in times of crisis, the black and white worldview is looked upon as strength and courage to the casual observer.

Black and white thinking makes up a good portion of American cinema. It does not require much analysis to determine who is the “good guy” and who is the “bad guy.”

John Wayne, who is an American icon, made millions portraying himself in myriad roles as a clear thinking man of action. Wayne, the character, was definitely a man who had little use for nuance; and once a decision was made that was it.

America’s ongoing struggle with race is usually summed up in black and white terms. Though appearing to be the best choice in the short term, black and white thinking can bring about long-term negative consequences.

The problem with black and white thinking is that it usually does battle in a world that is nuanced and gray.

Cognitive analysis begins in black and white terms, this is how children learn to use words and organize their thoughts. How many parents have provided their seven-year-old with a rule, only to later alter the decree ever so slightly and have the child retort with: “But you said?” In the world of Developmental Psychology this is called primitive thinking.

As adults, we are prone to primitive thinking during moments of crisis and stress. Mark Sichel, author and psychotherapist, writes, “When the adult starts relying on the words “always” or “never,” and seeing the world in black and white terms, they are slipping back to the way they saw the world as a child.”

In the world of black and white we can become overwhelmed with the desire to find “the” answer. This is why church attendance grew across the country immediately following 9/11—folks looking for an answer, trying to understand the “why” question.

For all of the obvious short- term reasons to embrace black and white thinking, there is definite a downside.

Not only does black and white thinking show little appreciation for the world of gray it has even less for the concept of self-reflection. To self-reflect, especially after a decision has been made, could open one to the possibility of being wrong—which defeats the purpose of black and white thinking. Many psychologists maintain that black and white thinking actually exasperates mental health issues like depression and anxiety.

 

Black and white thinking is also flawed because it inherently assumes a static world. It is dependent upon everything and everyone maintaining the role that such thinking has already preordained.

There is little regard for the human condition that does not correspond to its beliefs, because black and white thinking is rooted more toward the generic than the situational. Failure becomes harder to confront because one tends to place an inordinate amount of energy being right. It is an unfortunate default against the complexities of the world.

Our political leadership has been at its best when those leaders have dared to enter into the world of gray. Imagine how America would be different had Washington, Lincoln, or Roosevelt maintained black and white thinking throughout their respective wars. Their greatness today is not measured simply by the end result but also by their ability to adapt in lieu of unsuspected challenges—some by their own making.

It requires far less courage to live in the black and white than it does to live in the gray. The world of gray requires that we show up and be present. It does not afford us the luxury of putting life on automatic pilot.

Moreover, black and white thinking, though it may provide momentary comfort, is simply unrealistic to sustain. After all, even black and white photos come with their own varying shades of gray."

[Thomas savage]

Having been on both sides or at least observed  both side of this rather ridiculous self imposed division Iv come to this conclusion..

 

the Internet fosters dual narratives / binary debate that otherwise might not take hold so vigorously. You can see this base reactionary dynamic all over the Internet, people have been given a voice online and simply get very used to secluding that voice from questioning forces. On audiophile forums this tends to mean two groups of self affirming people’s.

 

You have those that want to express their listening thoughts unencumbered by challenging voices, they might want to make up their own logic mechanisms to ratify their experiences . I see this as a kind of creative almost artistic undertaking where people can just express themselves without let or hinderance.  This wave of freedom is seductive and many will defend it even when this might push the debate to quite fantastical areas of complete nonsense that they otherwise would never do. Through protecting this new license they often can become uncharacteristicly illogical.  The defence of this ‘free thought’ tends to mean disregarding and mistrusting knowledge as “how can it be true when my intuition and listening experience say to me it’s not”..  this path is the easiest place to walk, Iv done it and it’s great. It’s a fantastic self affirming bubble that requires no entrance exam or effort and buys you into the audiophile club as your fellow audiophile will gain mutual affirmation from you so your very welcome. I think it’s call enabling. 

 

 

Then theres these really annoying people that come along just as your in mid flow describing how you’re so happy with your new power conditioner and just how it all works in your mind and how this is all backed up by your listening impressions they come along quite uninvited and start telling you your wrong .  This is unpleasant, generally though it’s ok as your online buddies will back you up and chase them away. Hopefully to hydrogen audio , like who wants to go to that den of kill joys anyway.  Meanwhile your left knowing somewhere your lacking in real knowledge but who wants to admit that anyway, it’s probably the case Science is yet to understand hearing and your ideas are just as valid as theirs .. 

 

we have a break down , a breakdown in the respect for knowledge and a breakdown in communication as being online we are missing many facets involved in real world interactions and we live in a bizarre world where traditional pillars of knowledge compete with the self affirmed on the Internet. It’s all a bit of a mess. 

 

What we need is both sides ( just playing along with the self imposed definitions here) to make room for that feeling they get when they get irked out of their comfort zone and try and drop the typical defensive reactions that cause all this tension . The objectivists need to stop assuming everyone needs to know they are wrong and feel it’s their duty to take it on themselves to say so at every opportunity.  In turn the so called subjectivist need to make room for that fact they might be ignorant and instead of taking offence look at it as a opportunity to explore another way and maybe go and see if there’s something to what these grumpy guys are saying.

 

Not all objectivists are wise, many are just as guilty of ignorance as anyone else but ime they are more willing to face that ignorance down and be challenged in a respectful and civilised manner.

 

please try and coexist here at computer audiophile, cut each other some room it’s not like anyone’s stealing your Mrs it’s just a Audio forum . If you don’t manage this the hobby and to a degree all of you will be poorer for it.

 

Well done if you got through all that ha ha and if you did thanks for reading .   

 

BW

 

Thomas

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

6 minutes ago, Thomas savage said:

Having been on both sides or at least observed  both side of this rather ridiculous self imposed division Iv come to this conclusion..

 

the Internet fosters dual narratives / binary debate that otherwise might not take hold so vigorously otherwise. You can see this base reactionary dynamic all over the Internet, people have been given a voice online and simply get very used to secluding that voice from questioning forces. On audiophile forums this tends to mean two groups of self affirming people’s.

 

You have those that want to express their listening thoughts unencumbered by challenging voices, they might want to make up their own logic mechanisms to ratify their experiences . I see this as a kind of creative almost artist undertaking where people can just express themselves without let or hinderance.  This wave of freedom is seductive and many will defend it even when this might push the debate to quite fantastical areas of complete nonsense that they otherwise would never do. Through protecting this new license they often can become uncharacteristicly illogical.  The defence of this ‘free thought’ tends to mean disregarding and mistrusting knowledge as “how can it be true when my intuition and listening experience say to me it’s not”..  this path is the easiest place to walk, Iv done it and it’s great. It’s a fantastic self affirming bubble that requires no entrance exam or effort and buys you into the audiophile club as your fellow audiophile will gain mutual affirmation from you so your very welcome. I think it’s call enabling. 

 

 

Then theres these really annoying people that come along just as your in mid flow describing how you’re so happy with your new power conditioner and just how it all works in your mind and how this is all backed up by your listening impressions they come along quite uninvited and start telling you your wrong .  This is unpleasant, generally though it’s ok as your online buddies will back you up and chase them away. Hopefully to hydrogen audio , like who wants to go to that den of kill joys anyway.  Meanwhile your left knowing somewhere your lacking in real knowledge but who wants to admit that anyway, it’s probably the case Science is yet to understand hearing and your ideas are just as valid as theirs .. 

 

we have a break down , a breakdown in the respect for knowledge and a breakdown in communication as being online we are missing many facets involved in real world interactions and we live in a bizarre world where traditional pillars of knowledge compete with the self affirmed on the Internet. It’s all a bit of a mess. 

 

What we need is both sides ( just playing along with the self imposed definitions here) to make room for that feeling they get when they get irked out of their comfort zone and try and drop the typical defensive reactions that cause all this tension . The objectivists need to stop assuming everyone needs to know they are wrong and feel it’s their duty to take it on themselves to say so at every opportunity.  In turn the so called subjectivist need to make room for that fact they might be ignorant and instead of taking offence look at itvas a opportunity to explore another way and maybe go and see if there’s something to what these grumpy guys are say. 

 

Not all objectivists are wise, many are just as guilty of ignorance as anyone else but ime they are more willing to face that ignorance down and be challenged in a respectful and civilised manner.

 

please try and coexist here at computer audiophile, cut each other some room it’s not like anyone’s stealing your Mrs it’s just a Audio forum . If you don’t manage this the hobby and to a degree all of you will be poorer for it.

 

Well done if you got through all that ha ha and if you did thanks for reading .   

 

 

 

Nice post

[Music Enthusiast]

34 minutes ago, Thomas savage said:

Having been on both sides or at least observed  both side of this rather ridiculous self imposed division Iv come to this conclusion..

 

the Internet fosters dual narratives / binary debate that otherwise might not take hold so vigorously otherwise. You can see this base reactionary dynamic all over the Internet, people have been given a voice online and simply get very used to secluding that voice from questioning forces. On audiophile forums this tends to mean two groups of self affirming people’s.

 

You have those that want to express their listening thoughts unencumbered by challenging voices, they might want to make up their own logic mechanisms to ratify their experiences . I see this as a kind of creative almost artist undertaking where people can just express themselves without let or hinderance.  This wave of freedom is seductive and many will defend it even when this might push the debate to quite fantastical areas of complete nonsense that they otherwise would never do. Through protecting this new license they often can become uncharacteristicly illogical.  The defence of this ‘free thought’ tends to mean disregarding and mistrusting knowledge as “how can it be true when my intuition and listening experience say to me it’s not”..  this path is the easiest place to walk, Iv done it and it’s great. It’s a fantastic self affirming bubble that requires no entrance exam or effort and buys you into the audiophile club as your fellow audiophile will gain mutual affirmation from you so your very welcome. I think it’s call enabling. 

 

 

Then theres these really annoying people that come along just as your in mid flow describing how you’re so happy with your new power conditioner and just how it all works in your mind and how this is all backed up by your listening impressions they come along quite uninvited and start telling you your wrong .  This is unpleasant, generally though it’s ok as your online buddies will back you up and chase them away. Hopefully to hydrogen audio , like who wants to go to that den of kill joys anyway.  Meanwhile your left knowing somewhere your lacking in real knowledge but who wants to admit that anyway, it’s probably the case Science is yet to understand hearing and your ideas are just as valid as theirs .. 

 

we have a break down , a breakdown in the respect for knowledge and a breakdown in communication as being online we are missing many facets involved in real world interactions and we live in a bizarre world where traditional pillars of knowledge compete with the self affirmed on the Internet. It’s all a bit of a mess. 

 

What we need is both sides ( just playing along with the self imposed definitions here) to make room for that feeling they get when they get irked out of their comfort zone and try and drop the typical defensive reactions that cause all this tension . The objectivists need to stop assuming everyone needs to know they are wrong and feel it’s their duty to take it on themselves to say so at every opportunity.  In turn the so called subjectivist need to make room for that fact they might be ignorant and instead of taking offence look at it as a opportunity to explore another way and maybe go and see if there’s something to what these grumpy guys are saying.

 

Not all objectivists are wise, many are just as guilty of ignorance as anyone else but ime they are more willing to face that ignorance down and be challenged in a respectful and civilised manner.

 

please try and coexist here at computer audiophile, cut each other some room it’s not like anyone’s stealing your Mrs it’s just a Audio forum . If you don’t manage this the hobby and to a degree all of you will be poorer for it.

 

Well done if you got through all that ha ha and if you did thanks for reading .   

 

BW

 

Thomas

 

You are suggesting a balanced viewpoint to folks who have been taught by society from the day they were born that the world is either black or white. Hard to teach old dogs new tricks.

 

You're also suggesting that self proclaimed objectivists who lurk on Internet forums are actually knowledgable. Not the case. Most objectivists who have anything worthwhile to offer avoid forums like the plague.

 

One thing the subjectivists have on them is they do have the ability to accurately describe what their senses are telling them. Whether or not some of it may be placebo based. If that particular product becomes a success partly due to placebo effect, then that product is a success either way. If it brings joy to the person who paid for it, then no harm was done. Job well done by the designer. Mission accomplished. 

[Norton]

20 pages in and I’m still no clearer how those who describe  themselves as objectivists differ in their approach to system building from everyone else.

Any objectivist here prepared to detail their system and the regime of comparative physical and listening tests undertaken, and publish the resulting data underpinning their choice of that system rather than any other?  

 

Or is objectivism just about criticising  other people and their systems? 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

11 minutes ago, Norton said:

20 pages in and I’m still no clearer how those who describe  themselves as objectivists differ in their approach to system building from everyone else.

Any objectivist here prepared to detail their system and the regime of comparative physical and listening tests undertaken, and publish the resulting data underpinning their choice of that system rather than any other?  

 

Or is objectivism just about criticising  other people and their systems? 

 

 

Object-to-it-ism

[Thomas savage]

38 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

 

You're also suggesting that self proclaimed objectivists who lurk on Internet forums are actually knowledgable. Not the case. Most objectivists who have anything worthwhile to offer avoid forums like the plague.

 

One thing the subjectivists have on them is they do have the ability to accurately describe what their senses are telling them. Whether or not some of it may be placebo based. If that particular product becomes a success partly due to placebo effect, then that product is a success either way. If it brings joy to the person who paid for it, then no harm was done. Job well done by the designer. Mission accomplished. 

 

 

50 minutes ago, Thomas savage said:

Not all objectivists are wise, many are just as guilty of ignorance as anyone else but ime they are more willing to face that ignorance down and be challenged in a respectful and civilised manner.

 

Reason is a fair aspersion, and there are many out there that exploit people’s ignorance for profit.  

[rickca]

I don't care if someone is an objectivist or a subjectivist.  I classify forum participants as people who waste my time or people who contribute something.  There is good input from both objectivists and subjectivists.  Same goes for useless posts.

 

Talking about this topic is mostly a waste of time.

[Music Enthusiast]

5 minutes ago, Thomas savage said:

 

 

 

Your entire post is filled with undertones that the objectivists are correct, and the subjectivist's have closed minds. And as a moderator of an objectivist forum, it's no surprise.

 

However the areas you guys lack understanding is that if the product sells and makes the people who buy it happy, and it doesn't burn down your house, the company who made it was successful. No matter what formula this success was derived from. The knowledge to be able to accomplish this can not be found from learning how to run an Audio Precision audio analysis device. 

[diecaster]

29 minutes ago, Norton said:

20 pages in and I’m still no clearer how those who describe  themselves as objectivists differ in their approach to system building from everyone else.

Any objectivist here prepared to detail their system and the regime of comparative physical and listening tests undertaken, and publish the resulting data underpinning their choice of that system rather than any other?  

 

Or is objectivism just about criticising  other people and their systems? 

 

 

I don't view myself as an objectivist. But I do turn into more of one when subjective feedback seems out of whack with what should be reality based on what I know.  

 

Specifications don't tell the whole story as I discovered many years ago when I bought an amp based on specs and was completely disappointed with the sound. I don't ignore specs but they don't mean much to me at this point as we don't have specs that measure what we need to measure to quantify sound quality.

 

To find audio equipment to buy, I generally rely on the opinions of those that I believe have ears that I can trust. I do my best to find a local sample to listen to but that is not often possible these days. Ultimately, I have to listen to equipment to see if it is pleasing to my ears with the music I like to listen to. How little do I care about specs? My preamp and amp are custom made to order and I don't have any specs on them. That bothers the objectivist in me to a certain degree. But, based on the sound I am getting, I don't care what the specs are. They are the best sounding preamp and amp I have ever heard in the price range I am willing to entertain (which is over triple what I ended up spending).

 

In other words, my buying decisions are almost purely subjective.

[Thomas savage]

50 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

You are suggesting a balanced viewpoint to folks who have been taught by society from the day they were born that the world is either black or white. Hard to teach old dogs new tricks.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

Your entire post is filled with undertones that the objectivists are correct, and the subjectivist's have closed minds. And as a moderator of an objectivist forum, it's no surprise.

 

However the areas you guys lack understanding is that if the product sells and makes the people who buy it happy, and it doesn't burn down your house, the company who made it was successful. No matter what formula this success was derived from. The knowledge to be able to accomplish this can not be found from learning how to run an Audio Precision audio analysis device. 

Well I think these two are conflicting statements, one written without prejudice and then later contradicted ( with a edit) when you made  a ‘discovery ‘ . 

 

This serves to highlight the depth of the issue , my post actually documents my own experience as a independent minded person . You could call the whole thing subjective. Let’s hope the natives back at base done burn me on a stake.

 

anyway I’m done , I just thought I’d try and highlight some of the issues and hopefully encourage you all to stay as one , objectivists and subjectivist. 

 

My bad.

[Music Enthusiast]

12 minutes ago, Thomas savage said:

 

 

Well I think these two are conflicting statements, one written without prejudice and then later contradicted when you made  a ‘discovery ‘ . 

 

This serves to highlight the depth of the issue , my post actually documents my own experience as a independent minded person .

No it is not a new discovery to me that if an audio company is successful,  they did a good job. Most companies who make audio gear strive for success. This success is weighed by the sales numbers, combined with positive client feedback. And most successful companies who sell audio gear in this industry publish very little for objective data. What this tells me is you're chasing the wrong goal with that soul-less machine over at ASR. If this wasn't the case then the majority of successful companies in the industry would publish more data.

 

What you should be focusing on is discovering the formula of building successful audio gear. Not gear that appeals to a very limited demographic. Most of the gear that's the highest rated over on ASR, does very poorly when it comes to bringing pleasure to the ears of the masses. Unless you're specifically targeting folks who only have experience with very poor sounding gear. Then the feedback from them can give a false impression to newcomers that those products will actually satisfy them as well. 

[Music Enthusiast]

36 minutes ago, Thomas savage said:

 

 

 

Reason is a fair aspersion, and there are many out there that exploit people’s ignorance for profit.  

If someone derives pleasure from an audio gear purchase, ignorant is the last thing they should be called. The whole point of being an enthusiast of audio gear should be to enjoy how it stimulates the senses of the person who makes the purchase. If a company is producing gear that achieves this, they aren't exploiting anyone. They are doing a good job. 

[PeterSt]

36 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

they aren't exploiting anyone. They are doing a good job.

 

Not the best thing.

[Music Enthusiast]

3 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Not the best thing.

Do the clients who buy your products enjoy what they hear? BTW you would be burned at the stake over at ASR for making a USB cable. 

[PeterSt]

Just now, Music Enthusiast said:

Do the clients who buy your products enjoy what they hear?

 

Subjectively ?

Honestly ?

I think so. Now what.

[PeterSt]

22 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

BTW you would be burned at the stake over at ASR for making a USB cable. 

 

Give my special regards to AmirM.

[Shadders]

2 hours ago, Norton said:

Any objectivist here prepared to detail their system and the regime of comparative physical and listening tests undertaken, and publish the resulting data underpinning their choice of that system rather than any other?  

 

Or is objectivism just about criticising  other people and their systems? 

Hi,

For me, amplifiers, and most signal sources i purchased based on their specification. The transmission line speakers - if i did not like the sound, i would have changed, as they make the most difference, and are vastly significant when compared to an amplifier difference (assume solid state).

 

I have seen many people talk about burn in - and it takes a few weeks before the equipment sounds its best. To me, this is someone just getting used to it - getting used to the difference.

 

The objectivists just analyse what the new equipment is for example. They question anything new - to expose scams, as an example.

 

Most well engineered equipment is sufficient - and do the claimed differences actually exist ?

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[Rt66indierock]

5 hours ago, Norton said:

20 pages in and I’m still no clearer how those who describe  themselves as objectivists differ in their approach to system building from everyone else.

Any objectivist here prepared to detail their system and the regime of comparative physical and listening tests undertaken, and publish the resulting data underpinning their choice of that system rather than any other?  

 

Or is objectivism just about criticising  other people and their systems? 

 

 

Whether you consider me on the objective side or not my objectives of a system are in KIH's  as we have discussed. 

 

I consider audiophiles to be normally distributed so half are on the wrong side of the bell curve, a third are on on the upper side of mediocre and a sixth may have something to say that is interesting.  Where do I put myself? Just on the right side of the bell curve in the professional category.

 

Or to put it subjectively just play Pet Sounds and if you don't get a "wall of sound" with your  system you failed in my opinion. 

[Rt66indierock]

5 hours ago, Music Enthusiast said:

No it is not a new discovery to me that if an audio company is successful,  they did a good job. Most companies who make audio gear strive for success. This success is weighed by the sales numbers, combined with positive client feedback. And most successful companies who sell audio gear in this industry publish very little for objective data. What this tells me is you're chasing the wrong goal with that soul-less machine over at ASR. If this wasn't the case then the majority of successful companies in the industry would publish more data.

 

What you should be focusing on is discovering the formula of building successful audio gear. Not gear that appeals to a very limited demographic. Most of the gear that's the highest rated over on ASR, does very poorly when it comes to bringing pleasure to the ears of the masses. Unless you're specifically targeting folks who only have experience with very poor sounding gear. Then the feedback from them can give a false impression to newcomers that those products will actually satisfy them as well. 

 

I'm going to test your theory. I gave my home system to my son. I'm going get some active pro monitors and a "soulless" DAC with XLR out. And connect it to my music laptop. 

 

And maybe for my office go completely "soulless."  Active pro monitors with digital in, a USB/XLR adapter and computer with digital audio workstation software.