2. misc-audio
  3. 179344-140760

My take on subjective vs. objective

I’ve been thinking about these words lately and feel there is a disconnect with how these words are being used in audio forums and how I would normally use them. I think of subjective statements as statements of value judgement while objective statements are statements of material fact, whether true or false. "The cat is on the mat." That’s an objective statement. "It is good and proper for the cat to be on the mat." That’s a subjective statement. So if an audiophile declares that one cable sounds better than another, that is on its surface a subjective statement - a statement about a preference. But there is an objective statement hidden in it, and that is that the cables do indeed sound different, as measured objectively by the listener’s senses, presumably by their hearing alone. The argument comes in as to whether they can still perceive that difference if they don’t have any other information to work with other than their hearing. Can the ears alone distinguish the sound or is the sound perceived to be different only when other senses are involved? This argument is purely an objective one about what can actually be perceived by the ears alone or what requires other senses to be working in conjunction with the ears in order for the difference to be perceived.

So the people that get labeled "objectivist" are the ones who want to know what can be heard when other sensory data is not available. The ones labeled "subjectivist" are the ones that want to know what they can perceive as sounding different when they are fully informed about what kind of equipment they are listening to. These are both objectivist. One should be called hearing exclusive objectivist while the other is called fully sensory informed objectivist.

A similar situation in the visual would be to compare lengths of things by eye. If a person looks at a piece of dowel sitting on a table, and then looks at another piece of dowel nearby and declares that one dowel is longer than the other, that’s a perceptual measurement they have made by eye - an objective measurement. They could also subjectively declare one length to be better looking than the other. They could then put the dowels side by side to give the eyes a more direct perspective. It may be noticed that they seem identical in length when right next to each other, so they then measure them with a gage that repeatedly and consistently reveals that one dowel will fit into a slot a bit easier than the other, so that indicates that one is slightly longer than the other. But maybe it’s not the one that the observer thought was the longer one. Maybe one dowel weighs more than the other, so this gave the observer a sense that the heavier one must be longer. It’s still all objectivity here. All objectivity requires perception. Tools give us different ways to assist our perceptions and perhaps draw logical conclusions. If the person insists that the heavier one is longer visually even though it fits in the slot easier, they are making an objective statement that it looks longer, not that it actually is longer.

asctim
djones51
4,947 posts
 

It's not being objective that reliably creates good results, but careful testing of objective claims 

Knowing human senses are fallible and accepting the results of tests over your senses is objective.  I make an "objective claim" 2 DACs that measure basically identical sound different. I test my claim using generally accepted scientific methods and I fail the test, I can't tell them apart. I realize my claim was wrong, that's being objective.  

This isn't rocket science.  When you accept human limitations and trust the testing you're objective.

mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 

@edcyn , Cynthia is obviously a better cook than Edward. In my house Michael is a better cook than Gena but, I would never call myself Gemi. 

@asctim, you have your objectives and subjectives mixed up. One Dowel looks longer than the other is subjective. One Dowel is 12" and the other is 18" is objective. There is nothing objective about human senses because they are interpreted by a very subjective device called a brain which is one of the most unreliable gizmos ever invented. Everything we hear is subjectively evaluated. The question is what is accurate and what is not. When it comes to HiFi this is a very difficult it not impossible question to answer. So, why bother. I only care that, subjectively my system sounds accurate to me. What everyone else thinks is of no consequence. 

nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,883 posts
 

So, why bother. I only care that, subjectively my system sounds accurate to me. What everyone else thinks is of no consequence. 

Finer, truer words have not been spoken.
(in this thread)

All the best,
Nonoise

asctim OP
492 posts
 

@mijostyn

To determine that something is 12" or 18" is still going to require perceptions that have to be interpreted. I don’t think it’s useful to call every interpretation of an instrument readout "subjective." At that point everything becomes subjective. Subjectivity I feel is a word better limited to describing our feelings about what we perceive, if we find it pleasurable, distasteful, intriguing, boring, etc. Saying one dowel looks longer than the other isn’t saying anything about feelings. It’s just a factual perception, which may change when more perceptions become available. Your system sounds accurate to you. No need to add the word "subjectively." If you like the fact that it sounds accurate to you, that says something about your subjective state. 

cd318
2,636 posts
 

Subjectivity is only what you think.

An opinion.

An impression.

Something depending on no more than a casual mood.

Something that can change from month to month, week to week, day to day.

Or sometimes, from even hour to hour.

 

A never-ending merry-go-round way of spending vast sums of money chasing an impression only to eventually find yourself back back to where you started from.

After which you will find none of the eager money collectors prepared to accept liability for encouraging you and leading you on this time and money consuming wild goose chase.

They will have moved on to the next mug, err I meant to say, enthusiast.

Not that I know anyone like this. 

Pause for laughter.

 

Objectivity is an attempt to discern what's actual.

Something measurable and repeatable.

A way of comparing the fidelity of the original recorded signal to the signal being transmitted by the loudspeakers.

It's called progress.

There is no need to be scared of objectivity when it comes to audio playback.

You will lose nothing by having a more accurate reference point upon which to base your listening pleasure.

Why wouldn't you want your playback to represent the recording you are listening to more accurately?

 

Even better, if you are so inclined and so wish, there's nothing thereafter to prevent you bringing your imagination into play as you listen.

If you don't, you will still have a faithful representation of the recording before you.

More to discover