Jump to content
IGNORED

Objectivists/Subjectivists


89reksal

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Have you ever done blinded testing where there *is* in fact a difference to control for the expectation bias that there will be no difference? If not, how can you be confident blinded testing would show a difference if one exists?

 

Have your blind testing protocols sought to determine the contribution of echoic memory by using procedures that depend on memory and procedures that don't, and comparing the results?

 

There are so many factors to control for, bias and otherwise, in a truly scientific, objective test before the results can be considered potentially authoritative.  Then they must be replicable.

 

Liking the idea of being objective and scientific is great, but there's a heck of a lot of work to be done to reach the reality.

BTW, yeah I've tested myself on echoic memory.  The difference in quick switching 10second segments and 30 second segments is huge. Yet so many insist only long term listening works. 

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, crenca said:

AHHH!  But you DO!  Subjectivism is about the "trying", not about engineering.  It's like you say, your not running "a lab", your running a subjective art and wine, try it out and see how it impresses you, objectivist and objective truth be damned experiment - or rather, personal experience.

No I don't at all. Hence the stupid smiley face. I was hoping because I was genuinely wanting to hear his impressions.

 

I'd say if anything, it would be more accurate to say subjectivsm is more about believing and trusting yourself. Engineering is a distant something. I don't consider myself qualified on the technical aspects so not much point trying to use engineering as a criteria. On the other hand, if I'm familiar enough or have done enough "research" to have faith in the engineering or science, then that may very well become a factor.

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, crenca said:

Right.  So using the cable thread mansr pointed out the objective facts, sandyk said "that's not true - we subjectivists have these experiences" and the objectivists say "that's not true, the signal is such and such" and...there is no real common ground.  No one "wins", rather a debate ensues...

Exactly.

Link to comment

 

 

2 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

I apologize if I misinterpreted your intentions, but on re-reading your words, I still get the same impression: 

objectivists have nothing better to do here but to attack subjectivists and to derail their threads. 

 

I think that you are reading way too much into what he has posted, and immediately gone on the defensive.

 An  Expectation Bias perhaps ? ¬¬

Not all Objectivists or Subjectivists are tarred with the same brush, neither do they all have rigid beliefs, with some having an interest in what they hear, as well as the measurements that may, or may not, confirm what they have heard.

 You fall into this group.

 The problem is when some take measurements as having complete precedence over listening,  and decide that those who disagree are in need of a reality check. They then go on a religious crusade to re-educate the people who disagree with them, quoting much earlier research in many cases as if the existing known Science is an absolute.

 Neither are they normally willing to try any suggestions or remedial products that others have found useful in their particular setup.

They simply dismiss them out of hand as worthless or Snake Oil products.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, esldude said:

BTW, yeah I've tested myself on echoic memory.  The difference in quick switching 10second segments and 30 second segments is huge. Yet so many insist only long term listening works. 

 

Is 4 or 5 better than 10? ? Said with a smile, but I'm also curious.  Have you had the opportunity to compare shorter periods than 10 seconds?

 

As I've said before, I'd also like to see simultaneous comparison of left and right channels using mono source to eliminate memory as a factor entirely, and put those results up against the memory dependent ones.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Yes it can be very difficult (blind testing) to do right.

But in many cases it should be relatively easy.

When lasker98 tell us to listen to some very expensive USB cable and that the difference will "Blow you away".  That should be a difference that will be easily determined in a blind test, hell even one of those audiophool "wife heard it from the kitchen" proclamations.

 

You would have determined whether there was a difference great enough it couldn't possibly be ignored. But if a subjective belief that something is possible can build castles in the air, shouldn't we pay due respect to a subjective belief that it's not possible?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Not all Objectivists or Subjectivists are tarred with the same brush, neither do they all have rigid beliefs, with some having an interest in what they hear, as well as the measurements that may, or may not, confirm what they have heard.

 You fall into this group.

 

That is the first time I hear you say this, Alex. So, thank you! ?

 

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

Engineering is a distant something.

 

Hey, it's what you're listening to/through.  ? 

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

I'm not in the mood to digest this brand new, for me, thread - umm, the weather ... ... excellent OP, BTW :).

 

I can guess most of what's been said, repetition of everything said already an infinite number of times - with very little crossover between the parties.

 

My POV is that everyone is 'right' - in some areas. That is, no new physics is needed; engineering can get it to work "perfectly"; every tiny damn thing matters; amazing quality can be realised if one keeps fiddling with "silly stuff"; and so on ...

 

How does this reconcile? The simple answer is that human hearing is remarkably acute to minor anomalies in the sound, and they have to be dealt with, thoroughly, for one to be at peace, during the listening; and it's the lack of desire by the "scientific crowd" to accept, 1) that this is true, and, 2) that what they do currently is not "good enough", that they have to lift their standards.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Jud said:

 

Is 4 or 5 better than 10? ? Said with a smile, but I'm also curious.  Have you had the opportunity to compare shorter periods than 10 seconds?

 

As I've said before, I'd also like to see simultaneous comparison of left and right channels using mono source to eliminate memory as a factor entirely, and put those results up against the memory dependent ones.

For me it seems like it tops out around 7 to 8 seconds.

 

Could maybe arrange for some dual mono tests of some sort.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, esldude said:

BTW, yeah I've tested myself on echoic memory.  The difference in quick switching 10second segments and 30 second segments is huge. Yet so many insist only long term listening works. 

 

See, here I'm "on the side of" the objectivists. The audible difference should be clearcut, as noticeable as an unwanted rattling that suddenly pops up in your car; if you have to switch on your thinking, to decide, then "you've lost".

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Man, if only speakers were all that mattered ...

 

And a strange thing again: speakers would be my last worry. Seriously.

So what's happening ? (actually responding to Dennis again)

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, look&listen said:

Also poor correlation to hearing tests.

 

In all honesty ... can someone show me measurements which show better on the figures but sound worse ?

Small bet: No.

Unless, of course, the measurements are so way off that nothing can be made of them to begin with.

 

So the other odd thing: people keep on talking about measurements ... but where are they ?

 

PS: Null tests ending at whatever -dB don't count because the whatever -dB is subjective to the tester to begin with. Prejudiced (wherever that came from).

-> Oh, I know, we can't perceive a -120dB signal. Bwehhhhhh. Solves all !

 

But nothing.

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...