http://www.ultraaudio.com/index.php...st-give-me-a-break&catid=25:opinion&Itemid=27
Enjoy, hopefully . . .
Enjoy, hopefully . . .
At least as far as forum arguments go, their position is that they don't trust the *other camp's* ears. That is what triggers the food fights. That one person says the other is wrong. Not what they personally believe and don't impose on others....I do think there is more than a grain of truth to some of the things she said. For example, the point she made about objectivists not trusting their ears.
Hmmm. You left one out. Hardcore subjectivist. Does that camp not exist?I have read that exact same statement numerous times on this forum from objectivists. I do believe there are ‘hardcore’ objectivists and I also believe that lots of audiophiles have one foot in both camps. It’s not cut and dry.
I'm considered a card-carrying, fire-breathing objectivist by many around here, and I trust my ears. Tim
I'm an objective, subjectivist...
That's strange, I'm a subjective objectivist.
I'm considered a card-carrying, fire-breathing objectivist by many around here, and I trust my ears. I'm just wary of my biases and the effect they can have on my perceptions. Some seem to think that trusting their ears means denying their biases. If you think you can switch between a midfi AV receiver (making this up as I go along...) and the gleaming, beautiful free-standing DAC you've just invested a few grand in with your eyes wide open and not be affected by bias, you're not a subjectivist, you're a fool. Really trust your ears; close your eyes. See what you hear then.
Oh, and by the way, I don't know what kind of fairy dust that lady's been sniffing, but subjectivists are not the live and let live, loving, it's all good sweethearts she paints a picture of. Log onto Computer Audiophile or Audio Asylum or Pink Fish media and make a statement about a modest component, any modest component, measuring better than whatever is the elite thing dujour. Make sure you wear Kevlar. A lot of these guys call themselves subjectivists because the objective data doesn't support their beliefs. That doesn't mean they don't think they're right and everyone who disagrees is wrong.
Tim
I am both. In my regular line of work I am a hard nosed objectivist. If the science doesn't pass muster then it's unproven. Because I pay so much attention to the science involved, I am more aware than most of its limitations. What something does in the lab is completely different to the real world. Any blind tests need to have controls in place, otherwise they are meaningless. If you believe in the DBT's that say that MP3's sound the same as CD, or that a 1970's solid state amp is state of the art because DBT's can't show any difference, you are not an objectivist. You are a fool.
Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |