The problem with subjective impressions

[Allan F]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

George

 If you need to do that then the products are poorly designed. 

Well engineered products should reach optimum performance within 15 minutes or so after switch on unless they haven't been used for some time.

 

I could be wrong but I believe it was someone no less knowledgeable than John Swenson who said that, not only does he leave his DAC on all the time, but also that running music through it continually achieves optimum performance. And tube gear often requires far more than 15 minutes after being turned on to sound anywhere near its best.

[Allan F]

11 minutes ago, esldude said:

Wonder if the type of music changes the sound quality?

 

Yes. In particular, rock music containing electric guitar driving a guitar amp into distortion tends to make the sound quite distorted on playback.

[Allan F]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 

 What the forum needs is an inbuilt filter to automatically remove your inane and non wanted comments that add nothing of value to the threads.

 

As you know, the forum already has an option to hide a user's posts (except when quoted by another user).

[Allan F]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 There are some subjects where Ralf11 IS well informed.

 

The forum also provides an option to exercise if you have reason to believe that an Ignored User may have posted something of interest or value. IMO and experience, such instances are few and far between.

[Allan F]

7 hours ago, marce said:

I get the impression from these sort of comment on this thread and similar comments on other threads by others, that the hardcore subjective fraternity won't be happy until I and certain other members are banned and every thread is censored and cleansed of any comments they don't like. The forum has already been stifled by recent events and there are specific threads to discuss this, instead of every thread getting polluted by this negativity. What was an interesting forum full of lively debate has turned into a rather dull place, where the only conversations allowed are approved ones.

 

Your interpretation of my post does not at all reflect my intention or beliefs. I have no interest in banning people. That power is Chris' alone. exercised when he believes a member has egregiously breached the rules of the forum. As for "censorship", my post was simply a reminder that individual members can hide the posts of those users who they find to be offensive, of no value, or both. I do not advocate the general "cleaning of any comments they don't like" from any forum. Having said that, I reserve the right, as does every member, to attempt to avoid being subjected to what I consider to be the pollution spewed by certain members. It has nothing to do with disagreeing with a philosophical point of view, as evidenced by the fact that you are not one of the very view members on my Ignore List.

[Allan F]

8 hours ago, marce said:

Still is, just no reference to physics, electronics, engineering or perception allowed, pure belief only, even the faintest sniff of technical intrusion is often met with discord, such as a recent thread on master clocks where relevant technical intrusions were shot down before they even began.

 

 

What is most frequently met with discord, if not resentment, is the hijacking of threads intended to share subjective experiences by objectivists who demand scientific proof or measurements to justify the opinions expressed. A most obvious example are threads such as those sharing experiences with different cables and their effect on sound quality. Repeatedly insisting that cables cannot sound different contributes nothing to the discussion to those who hear such differences, and for whom the topic is intended..

 

Moreover, one should not conflate science and engineering. While the laws of physics may be known, the application of those laws to practical solutions is quite another matter, and innovation often makes possible that which previously had been generally believed not to be possible.

[Allan F]

19 minutes ago, esldude said:

A friend who should know better was all jacked up on the idea adding acetone could improve his gas mileage.  Asked my opinion, and I told him I was pretty sure it would not.  He asked for an explanation (I was going to be nice and say nothing more).  I explained how its BTU value vs gasoline was less, it wouldn't increase octane etc. etc.  He was only more adamant about trying it t

 

Increasing octane does not increase gas mileage. Filling a car with higher octane gasoline than that for which the engine has been designed to run is simply a complete waste of money. However, running a car on lower octane gasoline than specified will cause an engine to run inefficiently, thereby decreasing mileage. So, offering an explanation while lacking the requisite knowledge and/or expertise is often unhelpful, and the reason why some people feel they have to prove or disprove things, as the case may be, for themselves.

[Allan F]

17 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Repeatedly insisting that power or interconnect cables cannot improve sound is needed to counter such insanity.

 

17 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

NOT TRUE!!  My uncle did this once and loved the sound of the engine.

 

And some people actually question the value of the Ignore List. Go figure.

[Allan F]

39 minutes ago, esldude said:

I agree, and see this quite often.  What is a person to do?  I typically stay out of such discussions where someone says up front they don't want to hear from such people. 

 

You see someone sharing their experiences about something that can't be so.  Do you prefer we let them go on happily deluding themselves?  They seem to be happy.

 

Emphatically, yes. If opinions of that nature were desired, someone would not "say up front they don't want to hear from such people". Moreover, a distinction is to be drawn between what theoretically can't be so and what, in reality for a number of possible reasons, can be so.

[Allan F]

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

No. It’s needed when it’s wanted. 
 

The idea that you need to repeatedly do this is like thinking you can change the behavior of a spouse, who has been doing something for 50 years, by just repeating your arguments. You can’t change people, they have to want to change. 

 

All the more so when the unwanted repetition is not true.

[Allan F]

On 12/29/2019 at 5:06 AM, Summit said:

The question is how can I / we describe the difference between devices in a detailed way but still not make it sound like the difference is bigger than it really is?

 

I don't know that there is an answer to this question. Part of the problem is that we all don't necessarily hear the same way and what I may experience as a subtle difference, you may experience as a major one. A possible answer is to simply describe the difference as audible, and limit the detailed description to the nature or characteristics of the difference as opposed to its magnitude. But that makes it more difficult for someone to decide, based on the description, if the difference is significant enough to justify the expenditure of changing the device.

 

Ultimately, I suppose one can only use these experiences as guides to whether a device is of sufficient interest to investigate further.

[Allan F]

39 minutes ago, Summit said:

 

Thank you for responding on the topic of this thread. I only use the reviews as guides to whether a device is of sufficient interest to investigate further. The problem is that we have so many audio gear nowadays and I feel that many reviews are too vague for me to get a good grip of the actual SQ performance. I like a review to describe the sonic characteristics of the gear as well as the scale of some of the performance aspects.

 

IMO, ratings or scale of performance aspects are most helpful in the context of particular reviewers or publications that you are familiar with, as they provide at least one standard for comparison.

[Allan F]

14 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

As long as we're getting all philosophical, the universe doesn't have a particular need for humanity.

 

Let us not forget the words of Peanuts character Linus Van Pelt who observed, "I love mankind...It's people I can't stand".