Why do you seem to feel so threatened?
I'm not. I responded to them in a fine, nice enough way. What's the problem?
I find that fairly strange.
On one hand you continually used "Subjectivist" and "Objectivist," even pointing out this forum is essentially a reaction against the "subjectivist" camp in audio.
And then say that if we should actually try to discuss or clarify what we MEAN by the terms you are using, doing so is "dirty worthless gossip?"
Can you clarify your point, as it seems to me at this point kind of incoherent. Thanks.
Are we getting totally different readings of what I meant with the line you bolded?
'Also I hardly find a deep semantic debate about what subjectivist or objectivist mean and how to categorize people by their belief or decision making systems to be dirty worthless gossip.'
I hardly find xxx to be xyz means I don't really find xxx to be xyz (IOW I don't find xxx to be xyz). If I had a big problem with semantic debates about meaning of subjectivist vs objectivist as terms I wouldn't have started this thread in the first place.
Some people outside of ASR hate ASR. Some people in ASR hate people outside ASR. Par for the course. Not surprising and I don't think ASR is uniquely outward looking in is vitriol or anything like that.
Audiogon denizens do it it all the time, even accusing ASR of
provoking suicide.
This is probably going to be another one of the times where subjectivists come in to try to poke holes, and when we respond to their points they just disappear. :|
For years we have been led to believe that in order to get better quality audio,
(a) you have to keep climbing the price ladder, and
(b) hi-fi components must be in a similar price range (e.g. the speakers, amp & source must all be in the $2,500 - $5,000 region).
ASR helps consumers (at least it has helped me) understand that performance does not necessarily have to come via climbing up to the next price bracket.
With excellent DAC offerings from Octo, Topping, Gustard, and SMSL all under $1,000, why would someone ever want to spend more? Only if you want more facilities / inputs but that is not performance related.
Similarly, with excellent amps based on Hypex and Purifi modules, why spend silly money on mega-buck amps?
You can save money with the above and spend it on better speakers and room treatment.
This is the value of ASR for me.
Absolutely. It was just 'spend more money' with money being the metric for how good a system is going to sound. I could spend some of the saved money on other things even. Food, friends, other hobbies, making speaker area look better with designer furniture, etc. If I'm spending extra I want to know I'm getting *something* beyond just brand. Reliability? Better specs even if inaudible? Features? Something.
I agree except, when you once again listen sighted you probably will again prefer the "wrong" speaker. And in real life you own and listen sighted.
Not really the way I look at things but I have no issue with that view either. If a person says 'x sounds better sonically blind but the experience of speaker y is such that I actually like the sound more', that seems perfectly valid to me.
I'm more curious about whether anyone disagreed with my original point about controlled testing or if actually some of the people I see as subjectivists have been agreeing with me with that point the whole time. That's not to say I wouldn't have very different ideas about what measurements actually mean for preference/etc down the line but perhaps there's more common ground than I give credit for sometimes. or not, who knows.