What are we objectivists missing?


I have been following (with much amusement) various threads about cables and tweaks where some claim "game changing improvements" and other claim "no difference".  My take is that if you can hear a difference, there must be some difference.  If a device or cable or whatever measures exactly the same it should sound exactly the same.  So what are your opinions on what those differences might be and what are we NOT measuring that would define those differences?

jtucker

A room is like a piano, it is easy to spot a lack with few months of listening experiments though... I never said it was easy for sure.. it must be learned...

People like to qualify 99% of people being deluded like idiots...And they like to put themselves in the 1 % of enlightened spirit. for sure..

This is not a sign of intelligence this labelling fury...

The truth is different, it is more 50 %...

It is more like a Bell or Gauss curve...

Like the I.Q. distribution...

Cretins are not a crowd of 99 %...

More like 50%...

And guess who claim to be in the 1% ?

Myself i claim to be in the good 50%...

I cannot prove it, save by rational post arguments...

 

 

 

It is the difference between what you ACTUALLY hear and what you THINK you hear.

Interesting statement.

What does it mean to actually hear something I don’t think I hear?

My dad has macular degeneration.

If I hold up an envelope to him and say, "What return address do you see, Dad", he will say, "It’s all a blur."

If I then add, "Ok, now what do you think you see, Dad?" He’ll say, "It’s all a blur."

If I then ask him, what’s the difference between what you actually see and what you think you see, he’ll say, "Please stop."

He really sees the blur he thinks he sees. I really see the address that I think I see. If I put it under a microscope, I would really see the pixels I think I see.

There is no independent access to "reality." There are just different components in different complex systems of experience. 

Reality is a word that does no work. 

Subjective claims are null and void for everyone but the one making them. In order to show that the subjective claim has any relevance  beyond that it needs to be verified. This is true for things besides audio as well. I can claim a teapot is orbiting Mars, that I have seen it, but until such time it can be verified this claim is only true for me. This isnt some wild radical notion it's true for all human experiences the idea some ignore it for audio, to claim audio is different is depressing in a way.

The point of blind testing isn't to claim someone is delusional. All humans have biases, the only way to eliminate bias and continue the investigation into why something sounds different is by testing the claim. 

All humans have biases

100% true. But, this works both ways. For the "objectivists" too

Subjective claims are null and void for everyone but the one making them

The emphasis is mine on the quoted phrase. Again, I don’t think people are making claims. Instead, they are sharing their impressions. It’s a public forum. Meaning people gather, talk to each other, share what they like and don’t like, sharing their experiences. If you don’t like what people share, ignore them. Let the people who enjoy the discussion with each other be. As easy as that. Go by whatever fits your bill, including the measurements you take yourself or read on the internet from a measurement guru of your preference.