Advertisement



  1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

How do the 'non-subjectivists' choose their hi-fi systems?

Discussion in 'audio' started by Pete L, Apr 25, 2020.

  1. h.g.

    h.g. pfm Member

    No doubt but we have rather different knowledge bases on which to reason about how audio works which is likely to lead to drawing rather different conclusions.

    I was refraining from stating what I really think about people like John Curl in order to maintain a civil tone and because he is a person putting his audiophile trade/reputation on the line to some extent whereas I am semi-anonymous non-audiophile chatting on an audiophile forum with nothing much to lose or gain. I have refrained from comment/speculation about the chap from Onix for similar reasons although I am intrigued to know what is going on and whether what I suspect happened in the past did. A topic for conversation over beer but not archived posts on a forum.
     
  2. Joe P

    Joe P certified Buffologist / mod

    mansr,

    Thanks, man. I rather enjoyed that and it's good to know I'd be considered a nutter in the past, too.

    Joe

    P.S. Ooooooo, proper Tannoys at ~5:45, not to mention some Quad and 301 action.
     
  3. tuga

    tuga Legal Alien

    Believe what you want. Curl discusses the article he co-authored with Otala - A Method for Measuring Transient Intermodulation Distortion (TIM)*

    https://proaudiodesignforum.com/images/pdf/Leinonen_Otala_Curl_TIM_Measurement.pdf
     
  4. clivem2

    clivem2 pfm Member

    You make yourself sound like a voyeur. You must gain something.
     
  5. Emlin

    Emlin MQA Hater!

    "Non-subjectivists" demand that the musicians, etc, bring the musicality to the party. Subjectivists demand that their systems do that job, thereby letting the artists off the hook.
     
    mansr likes this.
  6. Tony L

    Tony L Administrator

    I think we’ll be needing a music collection fight for that one! My impression is relatively few of the more vocal measureists appear in the music room.

    PS Streaming the same Dire Straits album 5982 times from Spotify really doesn’t count!
     
  7. Emlin

    Emlin MQA Hater!

    So you think that you can rate systems by the music played through them? Or who owns them?

    Expectation bias writ large.
     
  8. gingermrkettle

    gingermrkettle Deep vein trombonist

    Not really (apart from the normal thing from audio writing that aspects not mentioned are as informative as those mentioned i.e. tonal colour in flat earth era reviewing), but a lack of obvious enthusiasm for music is fairly telling in some (but by no means all) cases.
     
    Sue Pertwee-Tyr likes this.
  9. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Well, I can dream, can’t I?

    This is, without doubt, one of the silliest things I've seen written on this forum in a long time.

    Clearly, if the musicians didn't get the musicality onto the recording, the system can't bring it out. But even if the musicality is on the recording, there's no guarantee the system will recover it, or not all of it anyway. That's the subjectivist view. Either you didn't understand that, or you did and were trolling.
     
  10. Tony L

    Tony L Administrator

    The broader and deeper a listener’s knowledge and taste in music the more likely they’ll understand and hear issues rather having to rely on the security blanket of reading measurements they likely don’t even understand.
     
  11. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    I enjoy listening to music, not arguing about it on the internet.
     
    Emlin likes this.
  12. Jim Audiomisc

    Jim Audiomisc pfm Member

    Yes. This is why tests need to be carried out in ways that expose such effects as and when appropriate. Human hearing does, indeed, 'adapt' as we listen, altering what we perceive. However one underlaying point in the above example is that the listeners *do* detect a 'difference' - but misjudge its nature and risk altering which they think is 'best'. Hence a single test in isolation isn't sufficient for all conclusions which might be drawn.
     
  13. Jim Audiomisc

    Jim Audiomisc pfm Member

    LOOP TO #962
     
  14. Woodface

    Woodface pfm Member

    I would distrust the views of anyone who only had a handful of records & liked Jazz at the Pawn Shop.
     
  15. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Well, I can dream, can’t I?

    If you spent any time in the music room, you'd know it was remarkably argument-free.

    I lurk there more than I contribute, but I find it a really useful resource for finding music that I'm unfamiliar with, to check out.
     
  16. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    In these discussions, people all too often focus on determining _preference_ when the more important task is to establish that a _difference_ can be reliably detected (or not).
     
    tuga likes this.
  17. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    What makes you think I'm any different?
     
  18. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    What's wrong with Jazz at the Pawn Shop? Although I don't understand how it acquired its audiophile cult status, I also don't have any problem with it. As live jazz recordings go, you could do a lot worse.
     
  19. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Well, I can dream, can’t I?

    Here's another area where subjectivists and objectivists differ, I think. If you have a preference, it is a given that there is a difference (even if only perceptually, anticipating your rejoinder).

    The purpose of subjective listening is to discover the most suitable piece of equipment for your purpose, which means establishing a preference. If your listening merely establishes a difference, without identifying a preference, then from a subjective POV it's been pointless.
     
  20. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Well, I can dream, can’t I?

    I'm merely taking what you said in the upper quote there at face value. If you didn't mean it, why did you say it?

    Edit: I've read it again, and can see that your comment about 'arguing' might have been in response to Tony's suggestion of a 'music collection fight'. Which I can see makes it look a little different.
     

Share This Page





Advertisement


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice