6 ms·

Yeah, OP swerves towards subjectivism there at the end, which the audio industry loves because it's not quantifiable or easy to compare.

• beat 9y ago
  I'm swinging to subjectivism not because I'm buying audio industry fluff (frankly, the self-styled objectivists are far more guilty of that), but rather because it at least covers the observed data. I'm listening with my ears. Making up important-sounding quasi-science "objective" data (like the ever-popular THD) is an industry marketing ploy. People are insecure and want the "best", so pretend-science lets them think they're buying "best", rather than actually listening and judging subjectively, which is scary and hard and full of weird biases.
  • PatentTroll 9y ago
    That's true too, good points. And let's face it, this whole endeavor is about entertainment and artistry, so the subjectivist viewpoint is totally valid!
  • nkozyra 9y ago
    > Making up important-sounding quasi-science "objective" data (like the ever-popular THD) is an industry marketing ploy. People are insecure and want the "best", so pretend-science lets them think they're buying "best", rather than actually listening and judging subjectively, which is scary and hard and full of weird biases. To be fair, the far more common trap is when people believe they're getting a better experience via the price-quality relationship. Or due to false authenticity. Or general brand marketing, etc. Often these things fail the sniff test, and people who swear their $500 headphones are noticeably better will pick the cheaper headphone in a blind test. The entire "audiophile" industry is more quasi-quality than quasi-science, though there's a healthy dose of whatever it takes to make the people with $ spend $.