Vote

I am a fun-jectivist. I like the sound that is the most fun.

If something measures poorly on the simple performance parameters that are typically measured, it may indicate a poor design that could affect sound quality. But it doesn't matter how well a component measures if it doesn't sound good. If objectivists knew all there was to know, there wouldn't be a market for cables.

If it sounds good, what else is there?? Does an Objectivist buy on spec sheets alone? Do the measurements affect the perceptions of the Objectivist when they're evaluating equipment?

I use a 34-year old Sansui tube receiver with Mission 700S speakers. The imaging is holographic, with superb depth. I have heard solid-state amplifiers, but they always sound flat and harsh, despite much better technical specifications.

I have NEVER heard a subjectively good, accurate system that measures badly. I have heard systems with "fantastic measurements" that sound unlistenable. After 30 years I have concluded that matching components properly can make both camps happy. Incidentally, I listen to live, acoustic music at least once a week, attempt to record it about once a month, and am amazed at the inaccuracies inherent in most "hi-fi" systems. Have the hi-fi salesman ever heard a set of drums, acoustic guitar or violin?? Have their audiophile customers?? Makes you wonder about the industry doesn't it!

All I have to do is read the spec sheet and the price tag, and I know what to buy.

The use of "objectivist" is highly misleading. Human beings are incapable of being objective. We are subjective by nature. "Scientists" and "engineers" and other priests of the Church of Reason are subjective despite their claims to the contrary. All we have to work with is subjective experience. Even "objective" measures are ultimately subjective in scope, depending on whaever parameters have been discovered by science at that time, since the elements we have not discovered or determined how to measure are missed. Anyone who says they are "objective" is fooling themselves.

As a physicist/engineer it is important to me that things are well designed/made. But I buy what sounds good to my ears. They are the final judge. That is why I listen to vinyl and McIntosh autoformer amps.

The taste is also Objective! A good sound is absolutely a good sound.

If there's one thing I've learned from Stereophile, it's that having an opinion is way more valuable when deciding on a home entertainment system. If it hadn't been for Kimber Kable, I would probably still be listening through the latest Kenwood rack system, blissfully unaware of the goosebumps my current system can give.

The only thing that matters to me is what I hear and see....not what someone tells me I should be hearing or seeing.

If it measures great, but sounds like crap, it is crap. If it sounds great, and measures poorly, we measured the wrong things. It is about music. If the box can make music, it has value to me. Most gear that can make great music measures well, but not always.

If I can't hear it, it doesn't matter - AT ALL. When picking between two products that I have deemed acceptable I have never chosen based on "the measurements". The deciding factor have been ergonomics, features and build if no audible differences are detected.

The relationship between all audio equipment and the enviroment it is being used in is the last step in the listening proccess. The type and quality of the supllied power, room size, room dynamics,and the equipment itself, will all effect the sound enviroment. As we all know each and every one of these parameters is different for each and every one of our systems. Therefore the finger print of each system will be differant and the only true way to measrure this is through the subjectivist's veiwpoint. The quality of the equipment needs na objective measurement at the source or manufacturers level. A kind of baseline we can all start from.

It's always nice to have bench measurements to back up your subjective experience, but if you can't rely on your gut (or in this case, your ear), go find another hobby.

Ultimately, most people seem to hear things slightly differnently and "listen" for different things in a recording or component. It used to fascinate me how different mags in reviewing the same equipment often came to different conclusion as to what was best. Leaving yours truly to decide for himself by using his own ears and trusting his own judgement and never mind anyone else's!

Leave the objective testing to the companies that manufacture the products. I listen subjectively to products I am interested in buying to hear how effectively they reproduce music. I listen to music for the experience, not for the specs.

I want to be subjective. I should be subjective. I try to be subjective, yet there is still a small part of me that always turns to the spec sheet when looking at a component, and it would be dishonest of me to deny it.

I don't know about _equal_ amounts, but ultimately, it must be subjective, albeit taking into account things like mood, hearing what you want to hear, etc.

In human terms, there is no such thing as an Objectivist. Those who claim they are Objectivists either do not give credit to themselves for interpreting data and assigning it meaningfulness, or they are too cowardly to interpret the data for themselves and, instead, rely on the testimony of "experts" to assign the data dimension and weight. Data requires a human brain to assign it meaning, and THAT is the essence of the Subjective. You cannot remove the measurer from the measured, the subject and object are infinitely intertwined.

Years ago I started listening to systems and individual compontents rather than numbers. First the numbers can be adjusted ie power rating then and now Surround system power rating. I started trusing my ears with a Linn LP 12 and Rogers LS3/5A's and for long term musical enjoyment they have not failed me.

Subjectivity should be quantified with Objectivity.

The only reality is attitude. Everything we perceive is colored by our experiences, perceptions, and beliefs. And this is true about music and audio systems, too.

When I used Apogee Stage speakers and a Classe Amp, anything that was changed in the rest of the system changed the sound. I borrowed three CD transports from local dealers one weekend. They all had different qualities, but one seemed just right. The same goes for cables. After changing to NHT 2.9 speakers to save floor space, the changes don't seem to make quite as much difference. You gotta have good engineering to get quality, but I don't much care about specs. It's what I hear in my system that counts to me.

I'm the oldest of all the "ist's": Baptist. Every audio experience must held up to the light of truth and specter of eternal damnation. The joy of every purchase must be tempered by the fires of guilt and pain. Yea, I say unto you, brethren, judge not lest you be judged. Cast away that which does not ring true. Gird thy loins and strap onto thyself the breastplate of righteousness. Whoops, flashback.

I don't use test gear, except for a level meter, and I've been at this for 35 years. It's all about music, not measurements.

I've got to hear it to believe it.

I think you need a good balance of both. You have to hear things for yourself and if you can, why not back things up with some measurements? It's fun if you can. I am also not too sure we have enough understanding to measure all we can hear. It's hard enough to put some things into words at all, let alone describe analytically what we hear. Can we correlate all we can hear with measurements? I have some basic tools I use for set-up, such as an SPL meter, test CD, and a poor man's RTA, but I am lucky if I find the time to sit down and enjoy the music. So, measurements be damned! Let someone else do them; I will be happy to read about them.

Stereophile has always tried to bridge the gap between the subjective and objective evaluation of audio components. That is how their reviews are structured: a combination of technical measurement and subjective listening. However, I think a lot more work still needs to be done in order to explain why vinyl can sound better than CD, or tube amps better than solid state. Stereophile has only scratched the surface of those mysteries so far.

I work in a shop that sells midfi and I don't understand the need for numbers. Sometimes I ask the customers if they even know what those funny numbers mean, and of course, many do not. Even so, many feel the need to compare distortion levels and other specifications of all sorts. So does this mean that the bigger the number, the better? Or is it the other way around? I'm very not sure. I often ask that they listen to the equipment and judge for themselves . . . After all, the manufacture and the reviewer are not buying the product the customer is looking at.