Better Sounding Systems, Objectivists or Subjectivists?

I like @mapman too....omni fans are hard to find, off enjoying the things. *L*

Objective is measured in plots and purpose, both good to have but only the point to make or jump from towards.

Subjectivity is what we experience and respond to; sometimes well, not hard to keep when discussing the same.  It's hard to translate moments into meanings that can only hint at the subject....

My stuff ain't SOTA, but I don't let that stop me.

Nor I towards all y'all.*S*

@noske, yeah I learned that cringe from the Women in Black.  Well-intentioned, no doubt.....like most things that revolve on being blind....

Harsh, perhaps...much like the candy-coated thing called 'history', lived through.

'Bots don't hurt...much...yet

Who says ’objectivists’ don’t listen? As an electronics scientist I consider myself an ’objectivist’ in the sense that I’m not a ’believer’ in cryogenic treated fuses and super expensive cables that after a 100 hour run in time magically improve the sound. Passive components can only act as a filter. (Before someone says ’have you ever listened to them’ ... yes I have, and I did’t hear a difference. Which doesn’t mean to say no one can hear a difference, if you do and if it’s worth the money to you, that’s great.)

But that doesn’t mean I don’t listen to speakers, amplifier, source and room acoustics to decide which sound ’better’ ... with that I don’t rely on any measurements at all besides my own ears and my dB meter.

The subjectivists seem less worried about being duped by some unusually clever nasty capitalist. 

The subjectivists seem less worried about being duped by some unusually clever nasty capitalist. 

There may be various explanations for that and not all of them are complimentary.

It is way to easy today for people to loose focus and get lost in their system to the point of no longer enjoying the music. For me it is a overweighted compromise or music first system second.