Don't we sometimes go too far in subjectivism?

[amirm]

the best i can do is use words.....

'could not hear any consistent difference'

'barely perceptable'

'very slight'

'slight'

'very subtle'

'subtle'

'solid'

'not quite profound'

'profound'

'jumps out at you'

'night and day'

'a week later i removed it and had to immediately put it back'

'made me smile', 'listened until 3am', and the always popular 'better than sex' (which i've never used).

This I think is as far as we should take subjectivism. The article went far beyond which causes the whole camp to look bad in process as folks paint with a broad brush.

 

[dallasjustice]

Recalls the great quote by Bum Phillips; to paraphrase..."Either I don't know how to listen to a stereo or you don't know how to have sex"

Luv ya blue.

 

[class a]

Mark Twain:There are 3 kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies and statistics.

 

[cjfrbw]

Subjectivity means "I paid for it, and I can hear whatever I damn please!"

 

[RogerD]

This guy get's paid for it too. I don't get paid,but I can hear...atleast I think I can....lol.

 

[FrantzM]

Subjectivity means "I paid for it, and I can hear whatever I damn please!"

Seems to be lately the perfect defintion for High End Audio

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Subjectivism is a bit tricky. For example, when listening at a friends place to his tall speakers to a song, we could both say that the guitar was way bigger in height than it should be as far as balance with the rest of the instruements. we could also agree it was due to the large vertical surface of the speaker (similar to martin logans) and so, that worked, but to say it was 40% too tall would be maybe pushing the description some. I can understand if you and I were comparing something, and really trying to agree on how much of a change we heard, and attempting to use some form of percent, but we would have to agree on what 50% was or 100% was before we could go further.

Fortunately we don't have to gauge such things, as this can't possibly be a problem. In high-end audio, bigger is better, the best speakers have tweeters and/or mids 3 feet above the seating position, and because small, more modest speakers can't possibly be better than big impressive ones, we have decided, against all reason, that stereo images vertically.

There. A perfect example of subjectivism (a very nice word for it) going too far; so far that it exits reality altogether.

Tim

 

[cpp]

Hi Tim

First and probably last time we cross swords (last because I’m not a match to your mastery of the language).
What’s the difference between a tad brighter, a bit brighter, brighter or any other qualitative statement?
One might express it a percentage as well.
But what is the difference?
It is the same subjective stuff presented in a different phrasing.
The problem IMHO is not the phrasing

Why cringe?
Wetting one’s pants is a better option.

Cat6 sounds better than Cat 5. Of course 6 is bigger than 5.
Wait until they listen to Cat 8!

Vincent you can add, a shade brighter is a tad darker than a bit brighter

We all know Cat6 has got to be better than Cat5 because Cat6 has one extra Cat

 

[Vincent Kars]

We all know Cat6 has got to be better than Cat5 because Cat6 has one extra Cat

Explains it all :b

Wonder what happens if one bi-wires with 2 Cat6

 

[DonH50]

I like dogs.

 

[amirm]

This would be a good exercise. What would happen if we added author's percentages over time? What number would we get?

 

[microstrip]

This would be a good exercise. What would happen if we added author's percentages over time? What number would we get?

The author addressed this issue in an article, explaining why the scale is dynamic and should be looked with some reserve and some care. Unfortunately every time some one googles his name and scale he just gets the scales and naively interprets them.

 

[microstrip]

I like dogs.

I like big dogs.

 

[jazdoc]

Part of the problem is the labeling itself. So called 'subjectivists' use objective data to drive decision making; even if it's only pricing. For so called 'objectivists', subjective interpretation of objective data drives decision making. If 'objectivists' were truly solely data driven, they would first need to agree what data is important. The logical endpoint would be that that for every price point, they would all own the same equipment.

Unlike irreconcilably dichotomous beliefs, the 'objective-subjective' argument is along a continuum and small differences incite the strongest opinions.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Explains it all :b

Wonder what happens if one bi-wires with 2 Cat6

Deeper sound stage.

 

[TheMadMilkman]

Because when you say a "3% difference," it implies a precision, a measurement, a data point that does not exist. This kind of nonsense is, IMO, about people who have almost nothing to support their argument, playing fast and loose with numbers and language in an attempt to make it appear as if they do. Or maybe I'm just cranky....

As a disclaimer, I haven't looked at the scale. I don't particularly care to. But I do appreciate that the author's attempt to recognize that differences between some components are small and subtle. While the "3% difference" that you cite does imply a precision and measurement that does not exist, I get equally, if not more, annoyed at writers who gushingly apply huge percentages (at least 75% improvement!) or multiples (3-4 times better!) to what amount to little more than minor differences in sound quality.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I'm callous to the audiophile poetry of gushing overstatement. Implying that there is actually data behind the gushing overstatement is annoying in its gushing disingenuousness.

 

[Atmasphere]

Fortunately we don't have to gauge such things, as this can't possibly be a problem. In high-end audio, bigger is better, the best speakers have tweeters and/or mids 3 feet above the seating position, and because small, more modest speakers can't possibly be better than big impressive ones, we have decided, against all reason, that stereo images vertically.

There. A perfect example of subjectivism (a very nice word for it) going too far; so far that it exits reality altogether.

Tim

That does not explain why little high end monitors are so popular...

 

[Robh3606]

That does not explain why little high end monitors are so popular...

They are easy to get into a room WAF and you can get some really good sound from them. Add a sub and now you have almost full range performance in a very space friendly package. Perfect for a living room or a smaller second system if you don't have a dedicated room.

Rob

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

That does not explain why little high end monitors are so popular...

It doesn't, does it? It does, however, explain why, even when paired with a great sub or two, they are considered a compromise in the high end.