Jump to content
IGNORED

Article: Let 1,000 Frequency Responses Bloom


Recommended Posts

Thanks for Erin's video, that was helpful.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree on what A was getting at. I still think Amir's responses were valid, although he did get increasingly intemperate through the course of the 750-post thread (as one is wont to do). He was directly asked by the designer why people would buy that headphone even with a noncompliant curve. Amir gave reasons. Is it condescending to do so? Maybe, but if it's also true then that can't be helped, unless we want to sacrifice truth in the name of politesse.

 

This is audiophilia. There's a lot of people making purchasing decisions based on factors that would disappear if that person had to evaluate the product unsighted. Maybe your line for what constitutes snake oil is different from A's, but just about everyone has a line. Because there are intelligent people who sincerely believe that they hear improvements from green pens on CDs, connecting radio shack clocks to their system, and audiophile ethernet switches (despite ethernet power being galvanically isolated). That's because even intelligent and sincere people are prone to all kinds of cognitive biases under sighted conditions.

 

The idea that customers buying a product means that those customers prefer that tonality is the argument that A says has "no value," because of the various confounding factors related to sighted decisionmaking. But you say that A 'argues that those consumers’ preferences have “no value,”' and that A is saying that people with different preferences are 'a bunch of rubes' (emphasis added). You're conflating his opinion on the "75 million Elvis fans 8 people at CanJam can't be wrong" argument with his opinion of whether different people can have different preferences. He acknowledges that people can have different preferences (#228, #526). He's not saying people with different preferences are rubes. He's saying that there's value in having a standard that matches the preferred curve for a significant majority of people because a) that means the headphone will have correct tonality for a significant majority of people; b) circle of confusion issues; and c) it even helps people who have different preferences because it gives them a consistent starting point to tweak their sound.

 

Again, I don't entirely agree with him because while EQing is "easy" at one's computer, it can be difficult in other contexts. But again I think the marketing should be upfront about the tonality.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, shuppatsu said:

audiophile ethernet switches (despite ethernet power being galvanically isolated). That's because even intelligent and sincere people are prone to all kinds of cognitive biases under sighted conditions.

Most of the people here would disagree strongly with that opinion. I suspect you have never tried an EtherRegen or other audiophile switch?

Main System: QNAP TS-451+ > Silent Angel Bonn N8 > Sonore opticalModule Deluxe v2 > Corning SMF with Finisar FTLF1318P3BTL SFPs > Uptone EtherREGEN > exaSound PlayPoint and e32 Mk-II DAC > Meitner MTR-101 Plus monoblocks > Bamberg S5-MTM sealed standmount speakers. 

Crown XLi 1500 powering  AV123 Rocket UFW10 stereo subwoofers

Upgraded power on all switches, renderer and DAC.

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Josh Mound said:

It’s the argument that preference curves are so scientific that one should be enforced upon everyone that I object to. 

Who's making that argument? Certainly not Reviewer A. Half the headphones he recommends roll off at around 100Hz. Maybe Reviewer S, but really the two should not be mentioned in the same paragraph.

Link to comment

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...