This thread is a great set-up for the mother of all flame wars! adamslim must be the kind of guy who enjoys watching people tear each other limb from limb :-) Here's hoping that the Audiophiles forum here doesn't end up like rec.audio.opinion.
But while I'm here, let's get into the Nomex and put my head on the block.... <hypothesis> Listening to an audio system involves the ear/brain interpreting the soundfield generated. But in addition to the soundfield, there are other, non-auditory, influences. Those non-auditory influences can *genuinely alter what the listener actually hears*. A person's various senses don't exist in isolation, but influence one another. The visual and/or tactile satisfaction afforded by the look and/or feel of a component can cause the auditory system to register an improvement in what it hears.</hypothesis> Here's an example: I used to own a Micro-Seiki CD-M100 CD player. This was a seriously breathed-upon Marantz CD94. It did sound good. But it was also a beautiful piece of furniture. Listening to it was a joyous experience, and I am convinced that my appreciation for the exquisite look and feel of it made it sound better than it did. What does this have to do with the objective v. subjective argument? Well, it seems to me that the subjectivists, when making sighted comparisons of audio gear, genuinely hear differences that may not be anything to so with the soundfield on its own. This is not a character flaw: it's human nature. Where *some* subjectivists seem to go wrong is in assuming that to admit that the improvement they hear might not be anything to do with the sound would indicate some kind of self-delusion, and so they start speculating about all kinds of extremely implausible mechanisms as to why they hear a difference. On the other hand, *some* objectivists seem to refuse to acknowledge that it's entirely reasonable to enjoy an audio system more - indeed genuinely hear a better sound - just because it has certain non-auditory attributes that make you feel good. They argue that because you can't distinguish them in a blind comparison, it's stupid to prefer one over the other. I'll sign off by saying that (once I've persuaded my wife) I will almost certainly buy a Transporter. And almost certainly it will sound better to me than my SB2. But I'm happy to acknowledge that this *may* be mainly to do with the non-auditory aspects of the device. It really is OK to prefer something just because it's sexier (and I'm not only talking about women). -- cliveb Performers -> dozens of mixers and effects -> clipped/hypercompressed mastering -> you think a few extra ps of jitter matters? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28368 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
