Subjectivity......

Reading about Hi-Fi - aside from listening to it - is for me similar to reading philosophy. Great writers can draw interesting conclusions on very abstract phenomena's that affect us all yet either get confused or dismissed. Of course it's a complete minefield but for me that's what makes it interesting when a disposition is held and accounted for as valid - not writ in stone but as a catalyst for discussion.  

Objectivity v Subjectivity looms large over any activity where a worthwhile goal is wanted. That that goal is enjoyment of music listening is as you've observered a very particular thing.

And how many hearabouts have visited a specialist ear clinic to have the latest ear wax suction method used? Clogged up ears are a big problem, and you get used to declining hearing capabilities over time. i go every 6 months for an "aural MOT" and its worth every penny (about 50 quid a time) at a specialist place in Cambridge. Do not assume your local GP has the same equipment, they usually dont. 

Timmo1341 posted:

All I know is that whatever I eventually purchase will be bought on the basis of what I hear, not on what anyone else says.

 

The first rule of buying a high outlay/value item.  If I can't demo something I won't buy it. Happily for me I have a number of good dealers (and one outstanding one) who stock Naim in driving distance.  In some cases it will be possible to sample something from a friend and satisfy yourself that you want it. But since HiFi  is system and room dependent, as well as ear and mood dependent, it's risky to be impulsive. .Some people wheel and deal, pass through and sell on, which is a different model.  Most don't.

Yeah, I hear you Tim!

This is a crazy hobby of ours, we spend thousands of dollars on subtle differences, that the Norm can't detect.

But Remember, we aren't the Norm!

I must admit, sometimes I get carried away with the upgrade game.

The only thing that keeps me grounded, is realizing, and staying true to my end game!

Your System is fine, of course it can be improved:

202, 282, 252, or even a member of the 552 Club!

There's no end, the only thing that really matters is the Why!

That's right, the Music Baby.

Forget about the How, that's just for show, the pecking order etc....

Getting long winded but I will close on this:

Going on two years on the Forum, when I joined I noticed one gentleman had a kick as*** system, of course he has upgraded, and is presently  at the top of the pecking order.

But I would guess, that about a decade or so, he was sporting a 552/3 x 500/Active Briks.

Guess what, he and all the members on da Forum was using NacA5, and it sounded great.

My point, if I had a System, half as good as that gentleman had ten years ago, that would suit me just fine!

Just some more thoughts, to go along with yours.

Allante93!

jon honeyball posted:

And how many hearabouts have visited a specialist ear clinic to have the latest ear wax suction method used? Clogged up ears are a big problem, and you get used to declining hearing capabilities over time. i go every 6 months for an "aural MOT" and its worth every penny (about 50 quid a time) at a specialist place in Cambridge. Do not assume your local GP has the same equipment, they usually dont. 

I would rather not have experienced the suction machine, but following fracturing my skull my ear was full of congealed blood and cerebrospinal fluid. I can vouch that the suction machine certainly works...

You've hit it on the head Tim (or should I say in the ears!).

All the tech talk in the world is only a guide to the individual who is hearing with their own ears and their own brains. It may lead to a particular direction but no-one's opinion or indeed no tech specs can be compared when this weird human listening thing is in the chain.

As a scientifically minded person both in my career and personally I always want objectivity and evidence but where audio is concerned this goes out the window ... the auditory pipeline from ear lobe (yep the shape of that can make a difference) through the biomechanical ear connections to theose little hairs in the cochlea are bad enough but then we have the psycho-acoustics of the human brain tearing in there at the end ... no chance of objectivity IMO.

A little aside that illustrates this ...

I read a paper years ago by a Japanese researcher who took a spoken phrase in a wav file and replaced some of it with silence - you could not understand what was spoken;

then the silence gaps were replaced with white noise and all of a sudden you could understand what was said - I heard this myself, it is not a myth - crazy.

... so what are our brains doing with the sound that comes in our ears ... filling in gaps, processing depending on our mood, etc etc.

Just lie back and enjoy the music that YOU hear and don't worry about all the rest of the world.

... still fun to discuss HiFi stuff though )

Allan

"Writing about music is like dancing about Architecture ". Wrote someone once.   Well as a teenager I was very good at "The big house. Little house. Sidewalk shuffle."

I have always struggled with much of the terminology used to describe the sound of the music we hear as used in hifi writings, though whether through lack of training, or because my ears are less refined than others, I have no idea - but I know when something sounds better to me, even if I can't articulate with many of the familiar descriptors. So to me reviews on their own are rather sterile and of limited value, but comparisons are great, because whilst I might struggle to relate to some terms, I can understand which sounds better to the reviewer, even if my translation of a particular descriptor into what I hear is rather vague.

But in the end it with comparative reviews or reports a precise recognition of what a descriptor means to one's own ears doesn't matter, as it is possible to glean enough to know if something then sounds worth trying.  However, assuming the purpose of a comparison is to inform others what the author thinks of the items being compared, then of course it must be recognised that the result is always tempered by the author's preferences, in music and its presentation, so it is invaluable to be able to learn something about their tastes and preferences, e.g. from reading what they've written about familiar things.

Timmo1341 posted:

There have been some interesting debates recently on 'timing', 'flow', 'depth', 'imaging', 'foot tapping' etc. ad infinitude. Some debates have ended up as Physics Masterclasses, others with participants displaying entrenched, immovable views? I have to confess to being none the wiser after reading many of them. 

I enjoy my membership of this forum (most of the time!), and enjoy reading of the experiences of those with more experience than me. As has been said many times, we're free to sift out what we each perceive as chaff. I just wish sometimes it could all be kept a little more grounded and accessible to mere mortals like me!

Tim

I'm with you Tim. All I know is when I try a new black box or cable I hear clearer music, less distortion, more like music, less like hifi and also detail I never picked up on before in a track. If not I don't buy.

Perhaps the forum could compile a Lexicon of words and their meanings when referring to musical sound for the benefit of us lesser mortals .

A few starters and some possible interpretations 

Thin - Introductory level equipment and not classic black box thickness

Veiled - dust covers left on speakers

Organic - No pesticides used during manufacture 

Bright - Not Naim black or Olive

Flat - Electrostatic speakers used

Focus - Like in car audio

Laid back - Too much weed man

Agressive - Sound like the Sex Pistols

I'm sure the forum can add many more with correct and or amusing descriptions.

Cheers..............

I haven't got a clue what you lot are on about

I just have a listen and if it sounds better or if I like then that's fine by me. 

Drewy posted:

I haven't got a clue what you lot are on about

I just have a listen and if it sounds better or if I like then that's fine by me. 

Heretic! Burn him, burn him!

Just consider how much a hi-fi forum depends on people who happen to have bought kit and think everyone else must therefore like the same, or seek to show some superiority to justify their purchases. This takes the form of technical waffle, better hearing, claims of being a musician somehow imbues one with better taste in such things, or obsessive tinkering. It's a funny old business, isn't it?  

Drewy,

Totally agree.

A scotsman from another place once said "If it sounds better then it is better" I have held that philosophy for 30 years.

Every person perceives the world in a different way. To some people the colour blue is the blue, but some people can differentiate the subtle variations ie corn flour blue etc.

Our ears are not the same. Although they share the same anatomical structure there is variation in the shape/size/sensitivity etc. 

Each person also has a cosmological energy that defines their core. Apparently there are 10 distinct qualities, for example people born in the same year share the same energy, but they are differentiated by their ancestral lineage and upbringing. We could say that each person resonates with a different vibration because we all desire different qualities. Subjectivity is subjectivity: it is the infinite of the infinite...

A person's perceptions are their reality ...

... until they change their perceptions 8)

tonym posted:

Drewy posted:

I haven't got a clue what you lot are on about

I just have a listen and if it sounds better or if I like then that's fine by me. 

Heretic! Burn him, burn him!

Just consider how much a hi-fi forum depends on people who happen to have bought kit and think everyone else must therefore like the same, or seek to show some superiority to justify their purchases. This takes the form of technical waffle, better hearing, claims of being a musician somehow imbues one with better taste in such things, or obsessive tinkering. It's a funny old business, isn't it?  

Iron Cobra posted:

Drewy,

Totally agree.

A scotsman from another place once said "If it sounds better then it is better" I have held that philosophy for 30 years.

 

It was a light hearted comment but that is pretty much how I see (or hear it). Of course I understand completely why we feel the need to somehow put into words the sort of sound we're hearing. When I added a 300dr to my SU I suddenly understood what people meant when they refer to "inky blackness", "lower noise floor" and "control".

I think it was a great comment. The thing that amuses me more than most is when somebody says 'I'm an electronic engineer' in order to justify a view that is often distinctly dubious. 

There have been a few instances recently of two or three people having an endless technical debate that is completely incomprehensible to normal folk. It's a bit like top trumps, getting more and more complicated. 

I have very little idea about Hifi speak, most of which seems to me to be complete twaddle. All I look for is if something gets me more involved with the music. Though I do like the inky blackness  of the DR power amps with SL leads - the way music appears from total silence. It's rather beguiling. 

+ 1.....................oops, sorry!

Hungryhalibut posted:

I think it was a great comment. The thing that amuses me more than most is when somebody says 'I'm an electronic engineer' in order to justify a view that is often distinctly dubious. 

There have been a few instances recently of two or three people having an endless technical debate that is completely incomprehensible to normal folk. It's a bit like top trumps, getting more and more complicated. 

I have very little idea about Hifi speak, most of which seems to me to be complete twaddle. All I look for is if something gets me more involved with the music. Though I do like the inky blackness  of the DR power amps with SL leads - the way music appears from total silence. It's rather beguiling. 

+1........................oops, apologies! 

I do agree wholeheartedly though, in particular, with paragraph 2, as I always thought it was, to quote, "all about the music".

tonym posted:

Drewy posted:

I haven't got a clue what you lot are on about

I just have a listen and if it sounds better or if I like then that's fine by me. 

Heretic! Burn him, burn him!

Just consider how much a hi-fi forum depends on people who happen to have bought kit and think everyone else must therefore like the same, or seek to show some superiority to justify their purchases. This takes the form of technical waffle, better hearing, claims of being a musician somehow imbues one with better taste in such things, or obsessive tinkering. It's a funny old business, isn't it?  

Agree with you Tony.Its a pretty bonkers being an audiophile.Normal people would be appalled if they knew the money spent on say a cartridge.

I suppose that's what the makes the Q B and Muso such nice products they produce great sound for non audiophile s.

Back to the original thread I suppose with the resolution we hear with our systems it does produce a wow factor which puts a smile on your face if the music touches you on an emotional level.I don't tend to analyse the science to much on hearing.But it's interesting  reading the scientific side which members like Huge post.Also John Honey balls and Hungry Hallibets  comments on ear syringing have got me thinking about some extraction.

Interesting post Timmo thanks for posting 

If the music makes you grin or (more often in my case) brings tears to your eyes, then the music reproduction system is doing something right.

Anything which detracts from that feeling is a waste of money; anything which enhances it - subject to cost - is worth considering.

For me, I described the quality in speakers which I needed as 'transparency'. I know - subjectively - exactly what that quality sounds like to me, because I have heard it enough times now, but I too found and find it very difficult to describe it to others.

By the by, when asking the forum for speaker recommendations before buying my current speakers, I was firmly told that I was wrong to want 'transparency '. Which, I generously think, rather proves the point.

Allan Milne posted:

 

You've hit it on the head Tim (or should I say in the ears!).

 

All the tech talk in the world is only a guide to the individual who is hearing with their own ears and their own brains. It may lead to a particular direction but no-one's opinion or indeed no tech specs can be compared when this weird human listening thing is in the chain.

 

As a scientifically minded person both in my career and personally I always want objectivity and evidence but where audio is concerned this goes out the window ... the auditory pipeline from ear lobe (yep the shape of that can make a difference) through the biomechanical ear connections to theose little hairs in the cochlea are bad enough but then we have the psycho-acoustics of the human brain tearing in there at the end ... no chance of objectivity IMO.

 

A little aside that illustrates this ...

I read a paper years ago by a Japanese researcher who took a spoken phrase in a wav file and replaced some of it with silence - you could not understand what was spoken;

then the silence gaps were replaced with white noise and all of a sudden you could understand what was said - I heard this myself, it is not a myth - crazy.

... so what are our brains doing with the sound that comes in our ears ... filling in gaps, processing depending on our mood, etc etc.

 

Just lie back and enjoy the music that YOU hear and don't worry about all the rest of the world.

 

... still fun to discuss HiFi stuff though )

Great Fun!!!!!! 

Allan

Hi Allan, sounds good, +2! 

However, once in awhile, the science can take over, and even the members of the Forum can't dispute it. 

Point and Case, one of your older post, why do I need a pre-amp.

As usual the members were hard at work, bickering and avoiding the obvious.  

Even to the point of one's Understanding of your post. fortunately you cleared the misunderstanding and pointed out that was exactly you view, and what you were trying to convey. 

But the obvious Statement that everyone was avoiding was from HM:

HALLOWEEN MANMEMBER

Hey Allante93, get off my back

... perception is reality and my perceptions change every day - who said anything about being consistent

I just had some stuff back from my dealers after firmware/software upgrades and have no idea if it sounds better or not, I can't remember what my perceptions were yesterday, never mind a week ago )

... but hey, the sound is certainly not worse and, of course it is better 'cause I did this upgrade and my expectations influence my perceptions and become reality !!!

Yep, you're right, just enjoy the musical reality; the HiFi stuff is the hobby for imagining what might be if only ...

Objectivity is for the lab, subjectivity for real life.

ATB,

Allan

tonym posted:

 

Just consider how much a hi-fi forum depends on people who happen to have bought kit and think everyone else must therefore like the same, or seek to show some superiority to justify their purchases. This takes the form of technical waffle, better hearing, claims of being a musician somehow imbues one with better taste in such things, or obsessive tinkering. It's a funny old business, isn't it?  

You’re not wrong there.

 I find the threads where people are talking out of there arse are far more entertaining/interesting than those where people are talking total sense.

 In fact, I actively seek them out and participate where possible.

I think some moderation of views in these posts might be in order;

I would point out that it is also subjective as to whether someone is "talking out of their arse" or "talking sense".

Allante93 posted:

Point and Case, one of your older post, why do I need a pre-amp.

As usual the members were hard at work, bickering and avoiding the obvious.  

Even to the point of one's Understanding of your post. fortunately you cleared the misunderstanding and pointed out that was exactly you view, and what you were trying to convey. 

But the obvious Statement that everyone was avoiding was from HM:

HALLOWEEN MANMEMBER

8/27/16 3:37 PM 

"yes, the hugo has its own internal preamp\volume\voltage control. it cannot be bypassed. connecting it to a second preamp will degrade transparancy, even if it was the best preamp ever made."

Hugo/250DR, out performs Hugo/S1/250DR! 

But as you say, the Mind is a powerful organ, Perception is reality! 

So I guess, If one perceives it, the Hugo /S1 Statement/Amp would outperform the Hugo/Amp!

After All, one must justify their brand new Dac/282,252,552/Amp.

Allante93!

Here's an interesting/similar point.  I'm at this Linn demo last year at which there was a fully loaded LP12 being played through an all Linn digital system and the output from the LP12 was actually being converted from analogue to digital and back again yet people were claiming that the sound was better from the LP12 than the Linn streamer.  That makes no sense at all - surely?

Regards,

Lindsay

Allan Milne posted:

 

I think some moderation of views in these posts might be in order;

I would point out that it is also subjective as to whether someone is "talking out of their arse" or "talking sense".

 

Sort of, but a bit of fun is required sometimes. Hifi is fundamentally dull when it comes down to it.