fleschler,
Good points.
On one hand I think someone who truly has reached a level of expertise and who has contributed to our knowledge - for instance about audio - deserves recognition and respect.
On the other hand, as you mention, the expert’s aims, criteria or subjective asssesment may not align perfectly with our own.
It reminds me of some interaction I’ve had with Floyd Tool who is about as close to an audio guru as there may be in terms of his work in audio and listener perception.
I have huge respect for his work. He’s determined so much about how to predict listener preferences in loudspeaker design.
And yet I am left puzzling when I listen to a speaker line like Revel, designed using all the techniques Tool has handed them; Why don’t I like those speakers more?
I mean, they certainly sound massively competent, yet they fail to grab me in ways many other speaker lines have which were not constructed via Tool’s research.
In no way does my own preference amount to a repudiation of Tool’s work, but it is a reminder to me that no matter how much compelling theory and experiment may support a product, there are still variables - particularly with speakers - that means theory won’t replace personal auditions.
Good points.
On one hand I think someone who truly has reached a level of expertise and who has contributed to our knowledge - for instance about audio - deserves recognition and respect.
On the other hand, as you mention, the expert’s aims, criteria or subjective asssesment may not align perfectly with our own.
It reminds me of some interaction I’ve had with Floyd Tool who is about as close to an audio guru as there may be in terms of his work in audio and listener perception.
I have huge respect for his work. He’s determined so much about how to predict listener preferences in loudspeaker design.
And yet I am left puzzling when I listen to a speaker line like Revel, designed using all the techniques Tool has handed them; Why don’t I like those speakers more?
I mean, they certainly sound massively competent, yet they fail to grab me in ways many other speaker lines have which were not constructed via Tool’s research.
In no way does my own preference amount to a repudiation of Tool’s work, but it is a reminder to me that no matter how much compelling theory and experiment may support a product, there are still variables - particularly with speakers - that means theory won’t replace personal auditions.