An objective measure of subjectivity. Where do you lie, vote now!

[Ittaku]

5 minutes ago, rantan said:

Actually, staying a very safe distance back from it and I am not even sure where I would fit with the choices anyway.

You belong on the sidelines with popcorn.

[gwurb]

11 hours ago, Steffen said:

In an actual magic show the vast majority of the paying audience knows they’re being fooled...

WHAT?!?! It's not real?! Do I cry or become outraged?!

[gwurb]

I voted 4 because a wild ride can be fun  Ah, the errors of my earlier years. 

[sir sanders zingmore]

I’m guessing there are precious few speakers that have undergone blind testing. So it’s almost impossible to score a one

[Ittaku]

2 hours ago, sir sanders zingmore said:

I’m guessing there are precious few speakers that have undergone blind testing. So it’s almost impossible to score a one

Pedantry will get you everywhere. No need to be that literal, but some people buy things on specs alone and reviews that say "this is inaudibly different" according to some allegedly reputable source.

Edited July 25, 2020 by Ittaku

[allthumbs]

If I could deconstruct my system to its constituent components then I might have a vote in all categories.

 

I have spent some time over at Audio Science Review trying to get a better handle on measurements and their implications but as with all measurements I have to take some things on trust such as the Kippel system and the way it is implemented is correct. 

 

From what I gather it is and is widely used by a lot of manufacturers in test and development for speakers for example.

 

Even the reading of measurements in the Hi-Fi press can be subject to question, as the discrepancy from the results in ASR to what is published elsewhere are literally worlds apart and this for world famous and audiophile endorsed brands and models.

 

For speakers I'd be happy with established science and reliable measurements.

 

For amplifiers I'd be happy with the product being developed with established science and measurement  categories being met and a rider if the manufacturer is "voicing" the amplifier to be upfront about that and to qualify and quantify those variations and blind testing results supplied.

 

I am not always in a position to  be able to evaluate gear in the real world, but like buying a car and taking a 20 test drive isn't going to tell you much either,  I do tend to rely on established science and rigorous testing and regulated standards and test procedures etc etc.  But even then massive product recalls in the auto industry are not unheard of, nor the outright falsifying of results  of emission testing fro example?

 

Boeing Max 737 anybody?

 

[davewantsmoore]

20 hours ago, Ittaku said:

I'm actually a level 3 subjectivist.

I would be surprisd if this didn't include almost everyone.

 

1 and 2 are difficult to do... and why they get such a "bad name".

 

People love to talk about 4.... but really, most manufacturers (especially at "price possible" products) are building things to established science, and providing some level of verifcation of performance......  unsurprsingly, because that is what sounds good (and why the "established science" ... is, "established").

 

 

 

I am #1 (I design speakers) .... but only "testing" in so far as often a "compromise" needs to be made around cost, or size, or shape .... or something needs to be traded (you can fix this, but hurt that).... and in those cases you need to answer to questions - is it really audible?... and which do you like better? ....  Blind testing is very helpful for that when done in a very controlled way.

 

If it were not for this "which version of not-perfect do I like least" issue.... I would be #2.    No serious subjective "testing".    (Yes, a great number of audio people will find this shocking and horrifying).    I can often hear if there is a problem..... but that doesn't lead to subjective testing of what is better/different to what.    It result in a reassessment of engineering, and to figure out what is broken, and fix it, using obervation (measurement) of the problem and solution.

[rantan]

16 hours ago, Ittaku said:

You belong on the sidelines with popcorn.

Should I bring on the oranges at half time?

[Telecine]

I think that the poll is a bit narrow in scope. Personally, I favour a scientific approach backed up by subjective listening but in selecting what components to shortlist I consider matters such as who the designer is, reputation, reviews and the ongoing viability of the company and product.

[rantan]

^^^^^^^^

 

What he said.

[Ittaku]

5 minutes ago, Telecine said:

I think that the poll is a bit narrow in scope. Personally, I favour a scientific approach backed up by subjective listening but in selecting what components to shortlist I consider matters such as who the designer is, reputation, reviews and the ongoing viability of the company and product.

It's meant to be narrow to make it easier to get a ranking. I don't think any of those things you mention affect where anyone ranks in the list.

 

I'll repeat again, whether you do subjective listening to make your final decision or not is irrelevant to the ranking.

[Ittaku]

You're all trying to make it harder than it needs to be. I think you're all over-interpreting and I suspect the reason is that many of us wish to believe we're more objective than we are. The rules are simple.

 

Here they are again in reverse order:

 

4. Do you buy things that the laws of physics stipulate it should have no effect but you found it sounds better?

3. Do you buy things that the laws of physics stipulate it will behave differently but measures the same but you found it sounds better?

2. Do you buy things that measure differently but existing science says we shouldn't tell them apart but you found it sounds better?

1. Do you only buy things that measure differently and consensus science says they would sound different?

 

Note the "found it sounds better". At some stage we'll eventually be listening to our equipment, and that's when you make your final judgement. Sometimes we buy things unseen/unheard but that doesn't define us.  If you bought a fancy power cable because you wanted a fancy power cable but didn't find it changed the sound that wouldn't push you up.

[rocky500]

I want pick number 4, but I do not ever go on manufacturer claims.

Just pick things that sound good by listening to them.

 

eg. If someone brings around a tweak device or something and it sounds good in my system, I may consider buying one. 

If there are a whole lot of posts on these forums of positive user impressions, I may consider that too. 

 

ADDED: Actually I don't think in the end science really ever comes into for me for my choices, just my emotions.

Edited July 26, 2020 by rocky500

[Guest DrSK]

I prefer the science of subjective testing. 

[pwstereo]

Design and make it to produce sound as accurately as possible.

Choose from the equipment that achieves that by listening.

Edited July 26, 2020 by pwstereo
spelling