Objectivity vs Subjectivity

[Vineethkumar01]

And it's due to this property of being measurable that today we can enjoy a hi-fidelity music on our portable smartphone using a wired/wireless headphone/earphone.......in addition to the many speakers drivers at home/studio.

Typical "wireless" channels are not completely completely "measurable".
They are orders of magnitude more complex to characterize than the kind of things we are talking about here. So let us not go there.
All I will say regarding it is there are smart people who have devised some methods to come up with probabilistic 'estimates' of its behavior, which work most of the time. Even then sometimes things fail by a mile.
I wont "spill more beans" about wireless because my employer will sue me if I do.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

You guys are missing a very important part. The engineer is listening to the master. You are hearing a compressed version of it on Tidal or on a CD. It’s not going to sound like the master by a mile.

I get this issue, but it’s again decided on in the same studio on the Same gear. So, atleast once they play the CD in their system there.

Even if not a cd or lossless streaming is the best version available to the public. So that’s a totally different issue.

 

[prem]

No they don’t play the CD back in that system. The moment they hand over the digital master, their job is done.

I get this issue, but it’s again decided on in the same studio on the Same gear. So, atleast once they play the CD in their system there.

Even if not a cd or lossless streaming is the best version available to the public. So that’s a totally different issue.

I am not against measurements. I prefer buying a studio dac or a turntable that measures well, a speaker that measures well. When it comes to amp, I try and buy one that has synergy with the speaker. I again use specs to do my initial shortlist. Cables I prefer the studio ones. But at the end of the day, no measurement is going to tell you is the feel and touch of an instrument reproduced correctly, when a singer changes his scale is it captured correctly, is the tone and timbre correct. For that you will have to depend on subjective opinions and feedback.

 

[Enkay78]

My entire childhood was spent listening to live music. I have heard enough masters in studios. I have had digital for over 25 years. Had the best of stuff. I have heard Benchmark which seems to be ASR benchmark umpteen times. When it comes to connecting with music, vinyl is still King. On my set up, the bass that vinyl puts out is exemplary. You must be really joking when you say a vinyl set up is not high end.

Are you sure?

 

[prem]

Enkay 78, if that picture you’ve posted is your idea of a vinyl set up, you’ve seriously lost it. It shows a complete lack of understanding of music on your part.

Vineethkumar01 is the only member who is speaking logically about measurements with good examples. You guys continue on the merits of objective vs subjective. Have fun

 

[Bloom@83]

View attachment 66183
Are you sure?

@Enkay78 : you’ve completely lost it now. Sorry to say.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

After 10000 years

Objectivist :- my speakers don't measure good

Subjectivist :- my speakers don't sound good


Moral of story:- we all need stuff in life to forget we are married

Most objectivists people would be satisfied if they get a pair of monitors , a tool for room correction and once settled in, most don’t look back. Only thing they need on the top of it, is some eq over the years to correct with their hearing.

Again even if he wants some colored sound, he won’t buy new speakers for it, he would just use a eq. Only thing important here is a speaker having distortion levels below 1 percent in all frequencies in the whole band to handle the changes. It’s very hard but several speakers are already there doing it. It’s amazing how new speakers whihcb came up in last two three years are killing it.

 

[DB1989]

Most objectivists people would be satisfied if they get a pair of monitors , a tool for room correction and once settled in, most don’t look back. Only thing they need on the top of it, is some eq over the years to correct with their hearing.

Again even if he wants some colored sound, he won’t buy new speakers for it, he would just use a eq. Only thing important here is a speaker having distortion levels below 1 percent in all frequencies in the whole band to handle the changes. It’s very hard but several speakers are already there doing it. It’s amazing how new speakers whihcb came up in last two three years are killing it.

Interesting. Could you be more specific?

 

[firearm12]

Most objectivists people would be satisfied if they get a pair of monitors , a tool for room correction and once settled in, most don’t look back. Only thing they need on the top of it, is some eq over the years to correct with their hearing.

Again even if he wants some colored sound, he won’t buy new speakers for it, he would just use a eq. Only thing important here is a speaker having distortion levels below 1 percent in all frequencies in the whole band to handle the changes. It’s very hard but several speakers are already there doing it. It’s amazing how new speakers whihcb came up in last two three years are killing it.

It's amazing what mind can do. If it's true for subjectivists, it's true for objectivists as well if they hear with ears.

 

[Enkay78]

Enkay 78, if that picture you’ve posted is your idea of a vinyl set up, you’ve seriously lost it. It shows a complete lack of understanding of music on your part.

Vineethkumar01 is the only member who is speaking logically about measurements with good examples. You guys continue on the merits of objective vs subjective. Have fun

But did I say vinyl?

I said "gramaphone"


I am beginning to enjoy this thread.

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

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?

When we are born, we are born with no experience of this world. Gradually we are exposed to what it offers. In time we come across music (and video) and for those that take a liking to this we explore it further. As we grow older we like it more and eventually some of us want to buy a system to listen to music. It is only when we go to buy a system that we are exposed to any kind of specifications or objective data. Our initial contact with music was subjective and we liked it because of our subjective experience. It is because we liked it subjectively that we went out to buy a system and came across objectivity. So in my mind it is obvious that we are subjective first, objective second (if at all) and this applies to both music and video. The question should be -

Audio being what it is, and products being what they are, can one really be a objectivist without first being a subjectivist?

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.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Just because person A does not agree with the opinion of person B does not mean person B's opinion is not valid. It may even be that person A's opinion is wrong objectively but person A is still entitled to them.

Who decides the merit of opinion? We can decide for ourselves personally but we can not decide on an absolute scale. We also often forget that what we say is also opinion, instead often thinking of our stance as absolute fact.

 

[Vineethkumar01]

Now I am enjoying this thread too.
Just so that all this effort and time doesn't go to waste, I recommend this course to the objectivists among us (and anyone else who is interested) so that we can learn to speak the language that describes all this "objective" fairy dust that is floating around here.
I hope it will put things in perspective and will make one a bit more humble before/while taking things for granted in objective territory.

Amar G. Bose: 6.312 (Acoustics) | Teaching Excellence at MIT

teachingexcellence.mit.edu

It is a basic course on acoustics by the Amar Bose, who was legendary as a teacher.

At least one can read through this book: https://www.tonmeister.ca/main/textbook/index.html

If one is still more interested, here is a course about the current state of the art:

NPTEL IITm

nptel.ac.in

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Interesting. Could you be more specific?

My pick KEF R11;
Why :
Almost flat frequency. - let’s hear the recording without adding or removing much

Excellent directivity - directivity is mostly forward so, less affected from sidewalls like traditional speakers. Placement isn’t going to be a big issue in the room in terms of the sidewall reflection.

Excellent low frequency extension-can work without a sub

Low distortion- now this is where it gets really interesting. If you look at this graph below. This is how we calculate distortion in percentage

THD to dB - convert percent % to decibels dB percentage voltage % vs per cent converter THD+N total harmonic distortions calculation signal distortion factor attenuation in dB to distortion factor k in percent decibel damping - sengpielaudio Sengpiel

Calculate THD and distortions decibels dB to percentage % per cent percent voltage % vs converter and dB signal distortion THD+N total harmonic distortions factor attenuation damping - Eberhard Sengpiel sengpielaudio

www.sengpielaudio.com

We can hear distotion in a different way for different frequencies. But anything with these numbers are close to inaudible. What does that mean, I can push up the loudness levels of several bands here without distortion reaching audble levels. So this speaker can be eqed to literally any other speaker and still will not add distortion doing so.

The soundstage of this speaker is limited to the directivity to the front. So if you remove the shadow flare may be it would work sideways(I won’t do it)

This also means if I play a 40 hz tone, it vibrates equivalent to its time domain equivalent in terms of strokes and low distotion suggests there is no “overhang or swinging” by the drivers meaning in audiophile terms- excellent timing.

4. Coaxial with no problems exhibited by traditional coaxial. It’s very hard to get a coaxial right. Problem is you have a midrange that would vibrate which is the wave guide for the tweeter.

Kef managed to fix this problem with the tangerine waveguide and the ribs on the cone to direct it without any flaws.

Also coaxial means the best possible coherence between mid and the tweeter for accurate soundstage representation. Cymbals won’t sound above or below the vocals if recording doesn’t have it.

To me, there is nothing better than this you can buy under 5 lakhs may be even in 10 lakhs.

The stock sound has some flaws (minor) but with little bit eq it’s tunable to perfection.

Low impedance change with frequency - means it has lower amount of sound change with amp impedance change

High sensitivity- low number of parts in crossover (it’s laughable!) sensibility is high due to less power wastage.

Driver engineering has taken huge steps further hear as I won’t be surprised to see even less parts in the next gen.

 

[Enkay78]

Alright even though my other comment was on ‘gramophone’….I am now pulled into vinyl. Now for the sake of enjoyable discussion, I want to mildly ask the following (please don’t interpret this as objective or subjective)

Using the same vinyl record, which one will sound better:

On this one


Or this one



Or does the cartridge needs to be Ortophon? Nagaoka?

Or the phonoamp be denon? Schit magni?

Are the cartridge system ‘compensating’ some of the analog waves present on the groove or presenting exactly what is on the groove?

Are the phono amps denoising or compensating some of the spectrum which are fed to the power amp? Are they exactly transduction the analog groove signals to electric signals?

How much bandwidth does the physical grooves allows for the diamond needle to vibrate - dynamic range? If without an anti-vibration mechanism the tornarm able to make the cartridge enable the exact interpretation of the physical grooves?


PS: these are some for fun. Don’t take it seriously.

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

Enkay 78, if that picture you’ve posted is your idea of a vinyl set up, you’ve seriously lost it. It shows a complete lack of understanding of music on your part.

Vineethkumar01 is the only member who is speaking logically about measurements with good examples. You guys continue on the merits of objective vs subjective. Have fun

Merits? I thought everyone here knew the score, that no one is convincing anyone and we are passing our time.

Surely no one one ever thought any productive conclusion was coming from this thread?

 

[Enkay78]

A gramaphone can be subjectively pleasing and wonderful. It is analog....in the purest form.


But it is not a hi-fidelity system. The dynamic range is limited, the lows are negligent. The mids and highs are heightened. And we can exactly measures where the problem is .....right from the heights and depths of the audio grooves, to the vibration of the needle/tonearm and the passive amplification of the horn. It was accurate for our fathers/grandfathers.



But now we have gone beyond that. We have evolved into electronics and active amplification. Now music has to be produced/reproduced through a medium. And that is where our modern hi-fi debate lie. Fortunately for all concerned, that medium of electrons, electricity, electric signals and transducers to physical waves are all measurable parameters.

And it's due to this property of being measurable that today we can enjoy a hi-fidelity music on our portable smartphone using a wired/wireless headphone/earphone.......in addition to the many speakers drivers at home/studio.

Just in case, it was lost in translation.

 

[arj]

Alright even though my other comment was on ‘gramophone’….I am now pulled into vinyl. Now for the sake of enjoyable discussion, I want to mildly ask the following (please don’t interpret this as objective or subjective)

Using the same vinyl record, which one will sound better:

On this one
View attachment 66186

Or this one

View attachment 66187

Or does the cartridge needs to be Ortophon? Nagaoka?

Or the phonoamp be denon? Schit magni?

Are the cartridge system ‘compensating’ some of the analog waves present on the groove or presenting exactly what is on the groove?

Are the phono amps denoising or compensating some of the spectrum which are fed to the power amp? Are they exactly transduction the analog groove signals to electric signals?

How much bandwidth does the physical grooves allows for the diamond needle to vibrate - dynamic range? If without an anti-vibration mechanism the tornarm able to make the cartridge enable the exact interpretation of the physical grooves?


PS: these are some for fun. Don’t take it seriously.

You can listen to both and see what sounds better Of course the phono, the cartridge the tonearm are all important and must be matched and needs to be identified depending on your own preference. They will definitely not sound the same

But if so technically proficient maybe you read the specs and visualize how it sounds like Or you could go and listen to some systems whenever you can and figure out what you like

Personally I would not choose either irrespective of the other components.

 

[Vineethkumar01]

My pick KEF R11;
Why :
Almost flat frequency. - let’s hear the recording without adding or removing much

Excellent directivity - directivity is mostly forward so, less affected from sidewalls like traditional speakers. Placement isn’t going to be a big issue in the room in terms of the sidewall reflection.

Excellent low frequency extension-can work without a sub

Low distortion- now this is where it gets really interesting. If you look at this graph below. This is how we calculate distortion in percentage

THD to dB - convert percent % to decibels dB percentage voltage % vs per cent converter THD+N total harmonic distortions calculation signal distortion factor attenuation in dB to distortion factor k in percent decibel damping - sengpielaudio Sengpiel

Calculate THD and distortions decibels dB to percentage % per cent percent voltage % vs converter and dB signal distortion THD+N total harmonic distortions factor attenuation damping - Eberhard Sengpiel sengpielaudio

www.sengpielaudio.com

We can hear distotion in a different way for different frequencies. But anything with these numbers are close to inaudible. What does that mean, I can push up the loudness levels of several bands here without distortion reaching audble levels. So this speaker can be eqed to literally any other speaker and still will not add distortion doing so.
View attachment 66185
The soundstage of this speaker is limited to the directivity to the front. So if you remove the shadow flare may be it would work sideways(I won’t do it)

This also means if I play a 40 hz tone, it vibrates equivalent to its time domain equivalent in terms of strokes and low distotion suggests there is no “overhang or swinging” by the drivers meaning in audiophile terms- excellent timing.

4. Coaxial with no problems exhibited by traditional coaxial. It’s very hard to get a coaxial right. Problem is you have a midrange that would vibrate which is the wave guide for the tweeter.

Kef managed to fix this problem with the tangerine waveguide and the ribs on the cone to direct it without any flaws.

Also coaxial means the best possible coherence between mid and the tweeter for accurate soundstage representation. Cymbals won’t sound above or below the vocals if recording doesn’t have it.

To me, there is nothing better than this you can buy under 5 lakhs may be even in 10 lakhs.

The stock sound has some flaws (minor) but with little bit eq it’s tunable to perfection.

Low impedance change with frequency - means it has lower amount of sound change with amp impedance change

High sensitivity- low number of parts in crossover (it’s laughable!) sensibility is high due to less power wastage.

Driver engineering has taken huge steps further hear as I won’t be surprised to see even less parts in the next gen.

I don't have anything to say regarding this speaker with respect to it being the preferred speaker to you.

But claiming that it is the current state of the art w.r.t objective measurements will put objectivists at shame..
I am assuming the measurements are coming from here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...11-quick-measurements-single-vs-bi-amp.20093/
This is an in room response measurement which is valid only in that particular room. For getting an estimate of its raw performance, you need at least quasi-anechoic or free field polar measurements. The set of graphs are exaggerated. Its 'y' axis scaling should show a dynamic range of 50 dB for it to be of any use. Instead it is 70 dB here.

"Almost flat frequency. - let’s hear the recording without adding or removing much"
This is a speaker that is meant to be heard in the far field. How can you say that it has almost flat frequency response at listening position without seeing a full CEA 2034 Spinorama or at least without a 'predicted in room response'? Don't you see the boundary interference related dips around 100 Hz region. The graph itself varies 15 dB between its highest and lowest points. I can assure you it is not flat in that room.

"We can hear distotion in a different way for different frequencies. But anything with these numbers are close to inaudible."

Those THD measurements are useless for the most part. Get the harmonic distortion in terms of the idividual components. then we can talk. If anything is relevant look at the odd order harmonic distortion. For reading more about perception of non linear distortion check, here:
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_I.pdf and http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_II.pdf. This will atleast put things in some context. More important than harmonic distortion (which doesnt correlate much with perceptable distortion) is the intermodulation distortion. Let us look at that and then make claims about low distortion.

"The soundstage of this speaker is limited to the directivity to the front."
No. Can't say without Spinorama. Just looking at KEF R3's spin and making conclusions about this W-W-MT-W-W vertical driver array is useless.

"So if you remove the shadow flare may be it would work sideways(I won’t do it)"
The shadow flare is not there for looks. It is to smoothen out directivity. It could be a bad implementation by KEF. But the idea is this: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ver-full-range-line-array.242171/post-6526244
Better wavefront expansions leads to better directivity.

"This also means if I play a 40 hz tone, it vibrates equivalent to its time domain equivalent in terms of strokes and low distotion suggests there is no “overhang or swinging” by the drivers meaning in audiophile terms- excellent timing."
Dont even think about this. It is really hard to say about perceptible time domain issues with a impulse response and step response available. So predicting timing without that is of no use.

"The stock sound has some flaws (minor) but with little bit eq it’s tunable to perfection"
Diffraction issues are not solvable with EQ because those are linear time/space varying issues. One will screw up the response with EQ

"High sensitivity- low number of parts in crossover (it’s laughable!) sensibility is high due to less power wastage."
Yeah it is laughable. Sensitivity is not high just because of the crossover. The sensitivity comes from the vertical driver array.

"Driver engineering has taken huge steps further."
Finally I agree with something. Because drivers like these are there: https://purifi-audio.com/ptt6-5x08-nfa-01/

Conclusion. Many objective parameters don't mean what we think without formal acoustics training. Even then it is a bit hard. Acoustics is bit counter intuitive. Instead of learning everything like this one can just go audition, decide and be happy..

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

H

I don't have anything to say regarding this speaker with respect to it being the preferred speaker to you.

But claiming that it is the current state of the art w.r.t objective measurements will put objectivists at shame..
I am assuming the measurements are coming from here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...11-quick-measurements-single-vs-bi-amp.20093/
This is an in room response measurement which is valid only in that particular room. For getting an estimate of its raw performance, you need at least quasi-anechoic or free field polar measurements. The set of graphs are exaggerated. Its 'y' axis scaling should show a dynamic range of 50 dB for it to be of any use. Instead it is 70 dB here.

"Almost flat frequency. - let’s hear the recording without adding or removing much"
This is a speaker that is meant to be heard in the far field. How can you say that it has almost flat frequency response at listening position without seeing a full CEA 2034 Spinorama or at least without a 'predicted in room response'? Don't you see the boundary interference related dips around 100 Hz region. The graph itself varies 15 dB between its highest and lowest points. I can assure you it is not flat in that room.

"We can hear distotion in a different way for different frequencies. But anything with these numbers are close to inaudible."

Those THD measurements are useless for the most part. Get the harmonic distortion in terms of the idividual components. then we can talk. If anything is relevant look at the odd order harmonic distortion. For reading more about perception of non linear distortion check, here:
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_I.pdf and http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_II.pdf. This will atleast put things in some context. More important than harmonic distortion (which doesnt correlate much with perceptable distortion) is the intermodulation distortion. Let us look at that and then make claims about low distortion.

"The soundstage of this speaker is limited to the directivity to the front."
No. Can't say without Spinorama. Just looking at KEF R3's spin and making conclusions about this W-W-MT-W-W vertical driver array is useless.

"So if you remove the shadow flare may be it would work sideways(I won’t do it)"
The shadow flare is not there for looks. It is to smoothen out directivity. It could be a bad implementation by KEF. But the idea is this: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ver-full-range-line-array.242171/post-6526244
Better wavefront expansions leads to better directivity.

"This also means if I play a 40 hz tone, it vibrates equivalent to its time domain equivalent in terms of strokes and low distotion suggests there is no “overhang or swinging” by the drivers meaning in audiophile terms- excellent timing."
Dont even think about this. It is really hard to say about perceptible time domain issues with a impulse response and step response available. So predicting timing without that is of no use.

"The stock sound has some flaws (minor) but with little bit eq it’s tunable to perfection"
Diffraction issues are not solvable with EQ because those are linear time/space varying issues. One will screw up the response with EQ

"High sensitivity- low number of parts in crossover (it’s laughable!) sensibility is high due to less power wastage."
Yeah it is laughable. Sensitivity is not high just because of the crossover. The sensitivity comes from the vertical driver array.

"Driver engineering has taken huge steps further."
Finally I agree with something. Because drivers like these are there: https://purifi-audio.com/ptt6-5x08-nfa-01/

Conclusion. Many objective parameters don't mean what we think without formal acoustics training. Even then it is a bit hard. Acoustics is bit counter intuitive. Instead of learning everything like this one can just go audition, decide and be happy..

Every single thing you explained has a hint of science in it and some links in it just enough and long text just enough to make people think you know what you are talking about.

Honestly you have some idea about everything on surface but no in depth knowledge to analyze anything. At this point you are just discarding things just because you don’t understand it.

Please read more on everything you linked yourself but I think it’s hard to digest if you had been living without them for the most part. Sorry that’s what I felt from every single reply with links. Honestly most of them are things anyone would find on a simple google search.

 

[Vineethkumar01]

H

Every single thing you explained has a hint of science in it and some links in it just enough and long text just enough to make people think you know what you are talking about.

Honestly you have some idea about everything on surface but no in depth knowledge to analyze anything. At this point you are just discarding things just because you don’t understand it.

Please read more on everything you linked yourself but I think it’s hard to digest if you had been living without them for the most part. Sorry that’s what I felt from every single reply with links. Honestly most of them are things anyone would find on a simple google search.

I am going to be blunt. I honestly tried to get out of this discussion before. But just couldn't handle objective mis information that you were spreading. So reacted to it. you can believe what you believe and move on till that fairy dust settles in your head. Goodbye