Popular Post mrmb Posted February 18, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2020 It's Chris' forum and obviously his rules. What's to discuss? Read and post if you like; if your don't like the forum or its rules, don't read and post. Teresa, The Computer Audiophile, AudioDoctor and 1 other 2 2 -Mike Link to comment
Popular Post mrmb Posted February 23, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted February 23, 2020 The reply volume to this thread is interesting. If I were to guess, the firestorm herein, possibly defines why Chris came to the conclusions he did. In the early years of such forums as this and in general, in an effort to help each other, hobbyist cited their experiences, shared their personal knowledge and provided their opinions. Folks with technical experience and listening experience helped those without. We all learned from each other. There wasn’t much sniping, and finger wagging based on I’m right and you’re not. As with all information that comes into our purview, it was understood that some information was, or may be incorrect, some was pretty accurate and other information was downright crazy (and an almost infinite amount of variance between these 3). As with all things in life, the researcher/reader (human) must make decisions and conclusions for themselves. Why should I try to tell someone -- especially in a very subjective pursuit such as a live performance recreation in our homes -- they can’t be correct because of this, that or the other thing!?! I may think it and oftentimes I do. But what would be my motivation for pointing out to them what is to me, the obvious? And herein lies the crux of the issue. Slowly but surely, what seem to be I’m right & you’re not chest-pounder's and activists began seeping in and popping-up (perhaps the devolution over the years, of our on-line discourse experiences). Their motivation for posting implied that they wanted to warn of wrong-headed bias and as such, save the uninitiated from self-serving vendors, but essentially themselves, or make it easier to conclude what to buy etc… For example, “Danger...Will Robinson….Danger”: Logic and "facts" dictate you can't be hearing what you believe you are and here's proof! Beware, this, that, and the other....is snake oil. You must be educated upon statistical and research bias (which of course assumes you are not) – e.g. recall bias, confirmation bias, I spent big bucks for it, so it must be good, et al. To be believed, double blind listening tests need to be conducted, your hearing needs to be bat-like and your room must be an ideal listening environment (https://www.amazon.com/Master-Handbook-Acoustics-Alton-Everest/dp/0071603328)….but more importantly, measurements must prove your conclusion....ad infinitum. So, the bottom line is a reversion to measurements (so called facts) and science. Only these aren’t the end all, be all either, especially if they are not repeatable or peer reviewed, or proven to be 100% correlated to the ways we process auditory input. It’s interesting that when I read a subjective pronouncement, I weigh its value and make conclusions about it, knowing I’m right/wrong, partially so &/or otherwise. I very rarely have seen the need to post a judging rebuttal. What would be my motivation? But then again, the question of my motivation, is something that I constantly attempt to ask myself when it comes to all, but such things as autonomic reflexes. One can learn a lot with that sort of introspection. However, when someone begins making pronouncements of right, wrong, citing so called facts based on this, that or otherwise, my back bristles. Especially if they begin on the bias routine which I’ve understood and personally fought-against for far too many decades to recount (much to my chagrin, sometimes I win, sometimes not, I'm only human). There are liars, damn liars and statistics. By its very nature, science constantly revises facts. Maybe not today, tomorrow or in our lifetimes, but we know from history, that “facts” will and do change. Too believe otherwise, is far too godlike to contemplate. Here’s a clue, we all biased in far too many ways to count. So what, it’s the human condition. Deal with it or not, whatever the case may be. I don’t, can’t care! I only care if I believe that the performance-recreating-illusion occurring in my 2-channel listening room is enjoyable, exciting, makes me happy etc. I can cite what equipment I have and state my musical and recording studio bonafides (which I don’t have by the way) in an attempt to convince or convey why I’m correct because of this, or that fact and you must not be correct etc. But again, what is the point, the motivation? To troll or not to troll, that is the question. If one posts to be helpful, so be it. But it appears that is becoming less and less often the case and it seems that Chris may somewhat believe likewise. Iving, MikeyFresh, audiobomber and 5 others 4 2 2 -Mike Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now