Hard to swallow, sorta
- Thread starter roadie1
- Start date
Well, if that's the point, then there's nothing to discuss, and AK may as well shut down.
If all that matters is how one's system sounds to them, in the context of accepting an assertion that everything sounds different to everyone, why is it at all relevant how anything sounds to anybody else?
What are we talking about here, who has the biggest woofers or the tallest stacks?
No, there ARE differences, and they are quantifiable, and there are standards of performance which are themselves verifiable via subjective evaluation.
What's missing is a recognition and acknowlegement that there is, in fact, a better and there is also a worse, in absolute terms, and that a preference for the worse goes to either A) unawareness of the better, and/or B) an inability to discern the difference, or C) an unrelated agenda.
If the bottom line is, "I don't give a whit, all that matters is that *I* like it," then along with that should also come the appreciation that, while one is certainly entitled to like whatever they like, absent some relation to objective standards, the preference is utterly without significance to anyone else, and the discussion is devoid of substance.
[Unless they've got a gun, of course....
: ]
Those are all quantifiable. You make the best compromise among all of them, and more.
There are better compromises, and there are worse compromises. The objective is consensus that the result accurately reproduces the source.... :yes:
![JimJ[VT]](/forums/data/avatars/m/20/20031.jpg?1443894878){kind=avatar}
JimJ[VT]
Super Member
Not introducing anything else to the recording that wasn't there to begin with, and reproducing everything that is there, at least that's my take on it.
I guess what I don't quite follow is your use of "better". Better how? If you're talking better adherence to the original, that works, but "better" by itself doesn't really mean a whole lot.
I don't think it's totally devoid of substance, there's plenty of music forums out there
Because we can't objectively quantify the subjective, we have nothing to talk about?
What if someone A) had an awareness that one speaker system sounded better to them than another B) chose so because they could discern a difference and C) had no unrelated agenda, but they still picked the speaker that didn't "measure as well"?
I still haven't seen an objective standard that will relate to an accurate prediction of one's enjoyment of a given speaker. I'm sure that if you came up with one, you'd be a very rich man and probably too busy to chat with us all here!
:
Yes. Precisely. As best is known how. With few exceptions, it's been that from the beginning. :yes:JimJ[VT];1272063 said:
There are absolutes. Consider the Edison phonograph, though I suppose there are some who might prefer it....
:
They are Quantifiable. The problem is we have different ideas of what qualities we view as most important. Therefore, our choices for speakers varies. Add to those variables that most people don't necessarily even want or like "accurate". Further, add to that that the second biggest variable, perhaps the biggest, is the room they are listened to in.
Therefore, it is my opinion that the idea that there is one design that is the most accurate is plain and simple fallacy and those that claim it don't even understand what it is that they are claiming. These claims only lead to disagreements from those that value a different balance.
Ask me which speaker I like the best today, in a certain room and I MIGHT be able to tell you.. Ask me which is best or most accurate and my guess is exactly as good as yours or anyone else's. It's inconceivable that it is an answerable question.
What I'm saying is, if all that matters to you is what your system sounds like to you, then there's little value in discussing what your system sounds like to me, and even less value in discussing what MY system sounds like to me, because, in that context, it's irrelevant.
Yet, you know that's not true. What we do is compare notes according to some ill-defined criteria, some standards of performance. Recognize it or not, by virtue of your very argument, the only criteria of significance are those which are objective, unless we're willing to accept others' preferences on faith, because what you believe IS true: everyone's subjective opinion must be evaluated in light of their ability to discern better from worse according to those very objective standards. Otherwise, it's just opinion, no more, and of minimal value to any of us in making rational judgments relating to the speaker under discussion.
There are evolving complexes of standards based upon measurements which correlate very highly with subjective performance evaluations. They are proprietary to those whose success depends upon employing that knowledge. We learn some of those attributes from the literature; some of the rest we might surmise from evidence apparent in what they produce.... :yes:I still haven't seen an objective standard that will relate to an accurate prediction of one's enjoyment of a given speaker. I'm sure that if you came up with one, you'd be a very rich man and probably too busy to chat with us all here!
Is it irrelevant? We all have different tastes, tho I'm sure we can compare notes about what foods we like and draw meaningful conclusions. Must audio be so different? You can objectively measure what is good, and that's what the content of discussion should be about? :scratch2:
So you're saying there is an objective measurement that will show us what speaker is "better or worse", and there is a way for us to objectively quantify our tastes along these lines? You keep talking as if there is an objective scale that will determine which speaker is "better" than another, which is a totally subjective experience, and I still wait for you to demonstrate it.
ozmoid
Lunatic Member
Well, that's it for me then - I guess I'm outta here...
OK, maybe I'll stay. Thanks, Squid.
ozmoid
Lunatic Member
In other words, If I can't hear what you hear, my hearing (and therefore my opinion) is no good and I should sell all my stuff and just watch TV? :headscrat
(And it's judgments, BTW. Common misspelling, easy mistake. Unless you're in Britain?)
This is a heuristic pursuit, and there are thousands of engineers and designers studying and working with the multiplicity of factors involved.
Significant progress on the room interactions you mention has been made very recently. There is a substantial literature on much of this stuff, and the AES is a core resource.
I'm afraid I don't have a lot to offer those who prefer to adulterate the music while concurrently professing to revere it. There's far more versatility available to exploit in applying EQ and EFX to a baseline accurate system. Fun, yes, but fake, and ultimately, unfulfilling as standard practice or serious endeavor. See Gyusher @ #20, above....
