Empirical Evidence?...the gap between subjective and objective
As a curious music guy without science background, I stand in awe and gratitude for audio's accomplishments in the last half-century. From Julian Hirsch's "Stereo Review" to the here and now, Julian's measurements calling the shots vs "trust your ears." I solidly embrace both camps. Hard science gets us close, then the loosening of emotions in guiding us home.
Some years ago, I stood on a lower Manhattan Street corner, absorbing the cacophony. Surrounded by moving objects, sirens, vendors, helicopters, humanity...how can 2 channel replicate this? A distant friend with the pockets to chase high-end surround, smiles. More importantly, how could that experience be measured and compared with any degree of accuracy? "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Thoughts?
More Peace, Pin
This is a point that I and others have brought up before in similar threads. I truly believe that a lot of objectivists who argue here can hear the differences that others do and simply dismiss them as insignificant. The underlying reasons are not important. What is, is that they are dealing in bad faith. All the best, |
The question you asked is very good. I read it carefully but could not find anyone to help me understand it. Anyone can describe it correctly here https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/empirical-evidence-the-gap-bik-between-subjective-and-objective |
Thanks, viridian and nonoise ... Your feedback has spurred my thinking. Having grown-up around live music, the improvement of even tiny increments in that direction, for me, loom large. Through the tunnel-vision of my logic, I've assumed those differences matter greatly to others as well. With a moderate audio budget, I easily justify expensive plugs and outlets, which may indeed horrify the practicality of another. My process is gathering the best possible system for my room, then rolling up my sleeves. It becomes an emotional process, incremental gains, always moving towards more musicality and truth of timbre, things sounding as they do in life, in a real space, never boring. As veridian succinctly put it, "Audio is a big tent, with room for all of us." More Peace, Pin |
Interesting ... It is my opinion also but i am way less knowledgeable than Julian Hirsch for sure in audio system evaluation... For me the difference between piece of gear for sure exist but the acoustic and psycho-acoustic environment are at least on the same footing and most of the times exceed them...
|
i think you judge too hastily... Ignorance and/or different perspectives by different people are not most of the times expression of "bad faith"... Accusing people dont help here...Understanding is better because acoustic experience is not anyway simplistic matter at all... In a word "subjective gear fetichism " or "objective tool/gear fetichism" are fetichism and ignorance of the nature of acoustic experience, not "bad faith" they express legitimate perspectives disconnected from the other complementary perspective... It is not so much political oppositions here, but instead different perspectives excluding the other...Then ignorance more than "bad faith"...
|
