Subjective vs. objective? Or subjective and objective?

Objective led subjective is what I subscribe too. 

Being militant on either spectrum takes away from truly getting to the end of your search (who am I kidding, this space is just a cycle of purchase hungry addicts)

So for example, I heard the MoFi 888 last year in a less than ideal but better than normal convention space during AXPONA. Loved it so much I placed an order before ever seeing any reviews or any data set (CEA-2034 to be exact) and I am very measurements leaning but i trusted my ears and Andrew Jones.

Note: I heard many speakers that people extol here, and they were anything but balanced. Some were outright terrible, and I question people’s hearing but hey, that is what they hear.

But when I got them in my space, I used Room EQ Wizard, a measurement mic to determine how they were exciting my room modes and then planned sound acoustic solutions as a result of that. then Erin’s review even made everything I was hearing that much clearer (that was my first time actually listening to a speaker reviewer be right about things from start to finish)

So yes whilst I iterated with data, I listened to note what I like about the changes I was making. That actually saved me a lot of headache andled to me achieving my goal of a competent speaker system in my space.

On the other hand if I had just gone blindly into only listening, out hearing whilst sensitive and good is susceptible to many biases and having a guiding light can lead to you spending less and actually making the right decisions.

Long story short, subjective for how we feel about a system but through an objective lens to weed out useless fixes, unneeded fixes, wrong fixes and wrong systems @bdp24 

Thanks for the interesting video driven by common sense ...

Interesting video. Oblective measurements can be very helpfull as he points out. I think most people would agree. I would not buy any speaker without looking at the objective measurements.

However, I'm not convinced that the sound can change that much (if at all) by using more expensive components if the values of the crossover are identical. 

Make sure you compare an apple to an apple... A blind test of two identical speakers one with expensive parts and one with lesser expensive parts. (I did not say crap/junk parts) Lets say Nichicon vs Dayton. The example Danny using the three different speakers proved nothing. Too many variables.

My bet would be if people knew in advance that there were expensive parts they would subjectively hear improved sound. This mental bias is a powerful thing. However, in a controlled blind test I doubt they could hear any difference at all.

Years ago Peter Snell would go to dealers with one cheap crossover and one with the most expensive parts. He could quickly switch crossovers by unplugging them and switch them out. He proved over and over that NO ONE could tell the difference in parts quality. Just because it cost more doesn't mean it's better.

I'd like to see Danny do the same subjective test as Snell. 

The best manufacturers I know use testing as a starting point, and fine tune be ear from there, they remeasure to confirm they're still in the ball park after listening sessions are concluded.  The one's I've known well admit that measurement doesn't detect nuance or subtle things well.  It's important to note that microphones and the ear/brain detect sound very differently, so relying too heavily on measurement without developing the skill of listening can give a false sense of being right.  Hearing is a sense, but listening is a skill that can and should be developed.

The concern of bias can work both ways.  Knowledge of a specific measurement can just as easily sway our perception as knowledge of a part change...it's just tougher to argue if objective data is considered truth.  Long term listening tends to overcome initial bias.  

It takes me extended listening sessions....sometimes days and weeks to decipher the full impact a small change in my system has made.  Big changes show up quickly, but small ones do not.  That long term view helps overcome day to day variables, and provides ample opportunity to get familiar with a given change.  Most blind tests are done with very quick samples, often on a system and room other than our own, and sometimes with music samples we're not familiar with.  If the test is done with more than a couple of people, there's the issue of less than optimal seating.  Add in the pressure of trying to hear a difference on demand, and it's all too possible for the listening test to prove ineffective....at least for subtle changes, which things like cables, caps, etc., tend to be.  I simply don't consider most blind tests to be strong evidence as proof of  anything but the most obvious differences. 

AFAIK, Danny did do a blind cable test, and correctly identified 8 out of 10 changes.  The two he missed with done with music he didn't pick, which highlights the importance of the material used.