prateekatasniya
Well-Known Member
You need to see things from a broader perspective.
Objectivity vs Subjectivity
- Thread starter Passive_audio_enthusiast
- Start date
lowpoweraudio
Member
The Subjectivist Audiophile Screenplay:
ACT 1
Friend:
" Woooooh... dude what is going on? (Looks at large pile of wire and speaker parts) Didn't you just buy these speakers?"
Subjectivist Audiophile
"Yeah! But I'm going to make them better so I tore them apart."
Friend:
"You were just telling me how there was over five years in the R&D and they designed them utilizing the latest high speed computational fluid dynamic modeling in a virtual anechoic chamber with 3D printing because the guys brother works at DARPA?"
Subjectivist Audiophile
"Yep."
Friend:
"~And you're going to make them.... better?"
Subjectivist Audiophile:
"Yeah, see I'm replacing all these OEM teflon capacitors with the latest HoneyCombPaperMonkeyWaxFoil capacitors by DuumDORF."
Friend:
" DuumDORF?" "But all these look to be the SAME Values as the original caps?"
Subjectivist Audiophile:
"Yeah BUT the monkeywax SOUNDS BETTER!"
Friend:
"But, (Rolls Eyes) there're the SAME VALUES."
Subjectivist Audiophile:
"Sounds better."
Friend:
"Remind me of Ohm's Law again?"
Subjectivist Audiophile:
Who?
Friend:
"I thought so."
END ACT I
--
Passive_audio_enthusiast
Well-Known Member
Now , can you do one with both?
Such a lovely question that's lead to an eminently readable thread.
To be honest, I did want to wade in quite a few times, but thankfully let it be since I did not want to flaunt my ignorance/add fuel to fire in a casual way.
So, I went back and gathered all my thoughts on whatever I have read in response to this question.
(Might have missed some; and let us all agree to let ASR be for a while)
And I have a simple question:
Audio being what it is, and products being what they are, can one really be a subjectivist without first being an objectivist?
Would be grateful if everyone who participated in this thread, including OP, answers this.
I asked myself this question, and I know what my answer to that question is, and who knows, your own answer might well answer it for you, while allowing all of us to understand each other better.
And it is a serious question. Just so we are clear, am not taking the micky out of you. And it may even be an ignorant question. But please be assured it is asked in good faith and I would be grateful if you, or anyone, could answer:
What are the differences between a music recording and a movie soundtrack?
If there are so many variables in a music soundtrack that reproducing it is so nearly impossible, how do moviemakers so confidently go about their work knowing that people across the world will hear the same thing?
Just if you don't mind sharing, what you bought and how has it let you down?
Not only would it enable experienced FMs to try and sort it, but it will also help a lot of new buyers make up their mind.
Regards
To be honest, I did want to wade in quite a few times, but thankfully let it be since I did not want to flaunt my ignorance/add fuel to fire in a casual way.
So, I went back and gathered all my thoughts on whatever I have read in response to this question.
(Might have missed some; and let us all agree to let ASR be for a while)
And I have a simple question:
Audio being what it is, and products being what they are, can one really be a subjectivist without first being an objectivist?
Would be grateful if everyone who participated in this thread, including OP, answers this.
I asked myself this question, and I know what my answer to that question is, and who knows, your own answer might well answer it for you, while allowing all of us to understand each other better.
Sir, Sorry to butt in in an ideological/philosophical thread, but would love to understand something from you. (of course, others are also free to answer this question, but I do want to hear Vineeth sir's answer)
And it is a serious question. Just so we are clear, am not taking the micky out of you. And it may even be an ignorant question. But please be assured it is asked in good faith and I would be grateful if you, or anyone, could answer:
What are the differences between a music recording and a movie soundtrack?
If there are so many variables in a music soundtrack that reproducing it is so nearly impossible, how do moviemakers so confidently go about their work knowing that people across the world will hear the same thing?
Sir, this makes eminent sense.
Just if you don't mind sharing, what you bought and how has it let you down?
Not only would it enable experienced FMs to try and sort it, but it will also help a lot of new buyers make up their mind.
Regards
Last edited:
Enkay78
Well-Known Member
I used to listen and give merit to this guy. But with my evolving knowledge about audio in particular (mind you I didn’t say music) I came to understand reviewers like him and how much he sells BS to sell ….or advertise the gadgets he reviews. I still feel much of the debate and confusion is happening with the interchanging concepts of audio(objective) and music(subjective).
I mean precision matters. And measurements goes towards making the production of audio precise. And yes research is still ongoing how we can define the curves and graphs of human hearing and preference in music.
Just suppose two audiophiles wants to compare what they hear…..that they hear same …..how will they do it? How will both substantiate that what they hear is same? Can the subjective descriptions of slam/forward/punch/laid back etc be understood and compared as unique quantified data points? And if they hear any difference then how will they know?
A fellow FM has suggested to listen to many systems, preferably high ends, to have an idea about good sound and educate oneself. This way one may find our what one prefers. But this is an unnecessary process. Audio research are out there showing this common preference. We just need to understand and interpret what all these researches mean. Popular consumer audio products just didn’t become popular.
To me the debate is very clear: (and here I am not trying to insinuate subjectivism is bad or having an agenda against subjectivist) measurements are the fundamental for our hearing. We have well defined auditory spectrum. And there are load of research on the preference curves of this spectrum. Our audio gadgets and technology are precisely being developed and evolved to produce/reproduce what we exactly hear. And this physics is science and objective data.
What I hear as ethereal in music can be studied. Is being studied. Everything is measurable in this universe. It’s a question of time and evolution of technology. In 1901, it would be hard to imagine a 5G smartphone. Copernicus would never have grasp the technology of James Webb space telescope.
So rest assured those of us who feels there are things unmeasurable, our grand children will know. Some researches will happen using MR neuroscience collating with FR and study how our auditory cortex in the temporal lobe works with our frontal lobe of logic/reasoning cortex.
prateekatasniya
Well-Known Member
No .. i mean there are a lot of aspects involved..
And first of all a speaker isn't manufactured without knowing the measurements of the driver.
And first of all a speaker isn't manufactured without knowing the measurements of the driver.
@Enkay78, I fully respect your position on the subject and agree with many of your sentiments expressed here.
I seem to have lost track of what we are arguing about at this point in this thread.
While trying to recall and make sense of the discussions in these 12 pages (yes, 12!), It seems everyone has in different ways mentioned that:
- both objective and subjective approaches are valuable
- sometimes they diverge widely on a piece of audio equipment- we don’t know why always.
- both are being used to various extents while making decisions on purchases
- The science involved in both approaches is constantly evolving
- some prefer to put more faith in one approach than the other (personal choices)
- it is pointless to argue one approach is superior to the other
- It is impossible to change anyone whose mind is set (waste of time)
- we should declare the horse dead and bury it
Of course and no one , irrespective of the camp might risk a component which has not been made from specced components irrespective of how it is voiced.. drive to capacitor/resistors...lets just leave the cable out
I guess unless we do not have a measure of Music itself ie why does a song by Lata sound better than the same one by say Anuradha poudhwal. ( I think the old T series cassettes used to have them) both are technically competent but the emotional connect that lata had was something else and you get that from a average LP itself which might have all the rollofs.
AP might not be the best example as she is a good singer on her own, but I always felt her music lacked emotional connect.
Its something similar with the components ( technical component specs) and the sound output ie the connect a singer is able to get which is similar to how a speaker has been put together.
I just took an example am sure there are so many more that we know of. the power of music to evoke an emotional response is what is the one of the key elements why one needs to go by the ear.
Last edited:
Arj, it's kind of an unfair comparison na?Of course and no one , irrespective of the camp might risk a component which has not been made from specced components irrespective of how it is voiced.. drive to capacitor/resistors...lets just leave the cable out
I guess unless we do not have a measure of Music itself ie why does a song by Lata sound better than the same one by say Anuradha poudhwal. ( I think the old T series cassettes used to have them) both are technically competent but the emotional connect that lata had was something else and you get that from a average LP itself which might have all the rollofs.
AP might not be the best example as she is a good singer on her own, but I always felt her music lacked emotional connect.
Its something similiar with the components ( technical component specs) and the sound output ie the connect a singer is able to get which is similiar to how a speaker has been put together.
I just took an example am sure there are so many more that we know of. the power of music to evoke an emotional response is what is the one of the key elements why one needs to go by the ear.
Composers composed music and wanted LM to sing, which am assuming means, they must have at some point thought of her in their head singing their pieces.
AP was merely covering, irrespective of what we ourselves feel.
Can't be a fair comparison, na?
I actually felt bad for AP while writing it but then Lata was at a different level and i dont think this should take anything away from AP . She has sung songs by Lata in the past.
Enkay78
Well-Known Member
Fair enough.
Actually I am not flogging the horse ...nor am I looking for brownie points.
Rather my perspective is sharing our opinions, knowledge, experience towards this issue.
But I do notice some strong opinions which has neither the science nor the merit of opinion. Let's say my angst is towards those opinion.
Sorry to butt in, NK. But I fully get your point.
Which is why I asked: Can someone be a subjectivist without first being an objectivist.
In other words, if I were to reframe my question as a statement, it would be:
so one can be an Objective Subjectivist or Subjective Objectivist ...or maybe just an Objector with a twist
Last edited:
liverpool_for_life
Well-Known Member
For pursuing science of audio reproduction, one has to be a pure objectivist.
For buying or upgrading gear to enjoy music , one need not be an objectivist at all.
For troubleshooting said gear when it does not sound right , one has to be bit of both.
And please continue with the flogging.
I am dead serious sir!!!The poor (not to mention) dead horse would like to ask if you're being serious
Check out our special offers on Stereo Package & Bundles for all budget types.
