objective vs. subjective rabbit hole

@mrmb  Thus, the goal of far too many objectivist posters, seems to be the need to save equipment buyers from themselves. The purpose of their posts is to cite how correct they are, because their measurements say they are.  (...) They seem to get the adrenalin rush of an activist naysayer and debunker, by deriding equipment manufacturers and owners, based on the measurements that seem to prove how bad their equipment is, or how bad their buying decisions are.

Interesting take on the matter! This is exactly my experience as well -- It is as if reviews of audiophile products are purposely used as a foundation for "audiophile bashing" discussions.

In many cases I refer to measurements -- especially when it comes to speakers, for example, where one can partly correlate the actual sonic result with certain real-time measurements.

Thus, the goal of far too many objectivist posters, seems to be the need to save equipment buyers from themselves.

 

Are you familiar with the term hypocrite? What were the last 25 or so paragraphs you posted? Who were you trying to save.

 

Once, a really good frequency response level is attained, especially a superb, nuanced and detailed midrange, incremental improvements can found be in the intangibles and mainly unmeasurable areas, such as soundstage and imaging.  

 

You should have a chat with the acoustics engineer who designed and tuned my room. I believe the term he would use is poppycock. He does not think soundstage and imaging is at all intangible and many others I talked to do not either. Perhaps that comes from your lack of knowledge that others do not lack?

 

If you start with the assumption that other people could not possibly have the knowledge you lack then you are destined to repeat the mistakes they have long overcome.

 

There is enough animosity on both sides but not accepting the knowledge or experience of either makes little sense.

 

On a side note, the most revered headphones, very very expensive Sennheisers ($30K) have very very low distortion. They measure about as perfect as possible. Everyone who hears them raves. What can we learn from that?

 

 

 

 

^^^^^^^^

the goal of far too many objectivist posters, seems to be the need to save equipment buyers from themselves. The purpose of their posts is to cite how correct they are, because their measurements say they are.  Perhaps they want to quantify their choice or purchase.  They seem to get the adrenalin rush of an activist naysayer and debunker

Yup! Well said again @mrmb !

This type of behavior is likely subject to several psychologic diagnosis and studies on mental health I suppose. Savior Complex, Hero Syndrome, etc. etc. I cannot explain it another way

@thyname and @mrmb , do you not see the irony and hypocrisy that you are doing the exact same thing, but just selling a different form of religion?  That should be obvious to you.

I was not exaggerating. MRMB wrote 22 full paragraphs to accuse others of proselytizing. If that is not trying to sell a particular way of thinking I don't know what is. That tweak comment, to me, is very revealing.

I find it gross exaggeration that people who use measurements are only interested in measurements as a determination of quality. Obviously those people exist, but they are the exception. Most people I have met who rely on measurements in this hobby, especially when I was working through our custom room, use measurements as a tool to understand what is happening, or what is not happening. They use it as a guide to achieve a particular sound, as opposed to buy and hope, or playing mind games on themselves with questionable devices as @mitch2 identified. The term he used, "subjective rhetoric" was overly kind. I much more appropriate term comes to mind.

 

Without measurements there is no acoustic treatment well done...

Without measurements there is no mechanical room tuning controls...

Why?

Because the BALANCE between reflective/absorbing /diffusive surfaces is the KEY... but it is not enough, even the location is important...

And in the mechanical control side of acoustic, how someone could tune many, many , resonators without adjusting size volume, neck/mouth cross ratio? and critical locations?

 

Measurements are mandatory in acoustic...

How to make them ?

You can apply EQ.

But no EQ. will be able to do the COMPLETE job right...

I chose at no cost to make it by ears like someone tune a piano, in fun times months long experiments...

It worked more than great... Cost me nothing but it take a dedicated room for me...And much time...Much....But you can do minimal experiments in a living room and take care of the esthetical aspect, which i did not do... My basic materials were cheap and anyway i am creative but not crafty at all... 😁😊

 

Now there is acoustic but there is basic psycho-acoustic measures also...

I also used measures of distance here, locations of diffusers and resonators with a foldable treated wood screen behind my position.... Psycho-acoustic help us to correlate in timing the front/back/lateral reflections with the first frontwave coming from speaker A and from speaker B for ear A and ear B...

All this is impossible without measures experiments...

This is the bad news...

The good news is it is way more easy to do it with your ears in ongoing listening experiments...Nothing is more fun than learning...

A small room is a complex set of geometry, size, topological factors, and specific acoustic properties content materials distributed in the room ...I dont own a program able to compute all this for my human ears and in place of them... Acoustician have learned to use their ears and measures...In small room acoustic reverberation time will not be used like in a great hall...We must tame them for postive effect... All which i talk about you can search on the internet and study basic...

Why?

Because learning acoustic by ears will help you to learn HOW to listen and WHAT to listen to...

The concept of "listener envelopment and sound saurce width ratio, for example, will no more be a "chinese" concept or the deceptive illusion it is for some ignorant, if you read only about it without experimenting with it...

Acoustic is easy and complex, easy if you go slowly, complex because it will take a long time with experiments...

But trust me the results and the fun exceed any non necessary short satisfaction related to an upgrade....If your gear choice is good to begin with for sure...

 

 

 

There is another aspects of measurements that is more difficult to understand for ordinary customers: electronic measurements...

Here there is arguing without end...

For sure the designer measurements are essentials for pairing components, but there is no way that electrical measurements all by themselves can predict good sound...It can predict only a POSSIBLE good sound, because the designer know  his art of trade-off... Some...

A good component must be paired with other components and not only that his full potential cannot be experienced in a bad room either or other non synergetical components...

Then measuring components to VERIFY design sheets is good...Like Amir do...

Promoting the idea that this is enough to know if a component will sound good is ignorance...This is  what some  few of his  zealots do...

Then listening without measurements is ludicrous, and taking ONLY one species of measurements, electrical one, without taking the other acoustic and psycho-acoustic measurements is ludicrous too...

 

I know what i know by experiments... And reading acoustic basic, and  applying it...