Subjective vs. Objective

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

RCHeliGuy

Well-known member
MLO Supporter
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
1,611
Reaction score
176
Location
United States
I've seen 'S' and 'O' thrown around a lot lately.

I thought I might explain a few of my thoughts about this in what I hope is a clear and very non-confrontational way.

My wife is a psychologist and I'm an engineer. I've read a lot on this subject because I find it fascinating. As an aside I credit my wife with much of my success in business because of her insights on what drives people.

People are subjective by nature. None of us can truly claim to be objective about anything.

We are so incredibly subjective about everything that is is very difficult to separate what is real from what isn't. That is all of us including me. I am not taking any moral high ground here or claiming I'm different or better than anyone else.

Getting back to audio, your brain is fooled by your stereo to reconstruct a sound stage that doesn't exist.

You know that you have 2 speakers. I can count them. You can count them.

Yet you can close your eyes and pick out instruments in varying positions that can sound like they are in between and even outside the width of your speakers.

There is subtle phasing detail in a well recorded and mastered music signal that your brain interprets as positional information. This is very cool and we like it!

This is the equivalent of seeing perspective where we pick on visual queues that we interpret as depth perception. Our brains do some amazing things very quickly. Visually your brain "compensates" for many variables around you all the time that generally gives you a reasonable picture of the world around you. Your brain adapts to your surroundings and is always compensating and is very subjective about it. Visually it uses relative contrast to determine color and shadows and parallax to determine depth perception. It is very easily fooled because of the assumptions it is making all the time. These assumptions are correct the vast majority of the time and these assumptions work well for us.

I am not going to debate what each of you can hear or not hear. There are far too many factors that influence what you perceive.

What I'm saying is that none of us can trust our senses to be objective ever. That includes me and every human being on the planet. We are very subjective creatures. That is the only reason that I have suggested that whenever we are comparing how two things sound that we can not know which thing we are listening to when making that comparison.

Our brains are so subjective and so prone to make assumptions about everything, that we can't trust ourselves to be objective in any type of comparison.

This is like the wine tasting competitions in France. For years American wine was rated very poorly because of assumptions made before they opened the bottle. The moment that they had to judge the smell and taste of the wines without knowing the source suddenly the American Vineyards scored much better.

In conclusion I'm not suggesting that you can not hear differences between the many devices that you use to listen to music.

I just highly suggest that you be careful trusting your own assumptions when you evaluate something.

Did I succeed in presenting this in a non-abrasive way, or did I upset people?
 
I just highly suggest that you be careful trusting your own assumptions when you evaluate something.

That's exactly why I do not believe in ABX, DBT, or other "short term" tests and firmly support extended listening sessions over several weeks to determine sonic differences and whether those differences are compatible with the rest of my system and my personal biases.
 
That's exactly why I do not believe in ABX, DBT, or other "short term" tests and firmly support extended listening sessions over several weeks to determine sonic differences and whether those differences are compatible with the rest of my system and my personal biases.

I guess I'll add..... what is really wrong with bringing your own subjective biases into the equation.... really? I mean it is my OPINION.... and aren't all reviews etc... opinion based? The fact that it is an opinion - I believe defines it as subjective.... So... I think this is kind of beat into the ground in the audio world in the sense that everyone brings their own biases to the party... who cares really? If you make decisions based on other people's reviews... words.. whatever... without listening ... you have taken a risk... maybe worth it... but none the less a risk in that you are relying on the fact that hopefully your own biases etc.... match the reviewer/word smith etc....

I could care less about DBT etc... let me know what is playing... let me decide if my own biases are satisfied... and if they are... great... I'll purchase and be a happy camper forever more.... Isn't that what it is about anyway? I mean really - there is no 'best'... just differences....and my ear may hear them differently for better or worse....
 
What I'm saying is that none of us can trust our senses to be objective ever. That includes me and every human being on the planet. We are very subjective creatures. That is the only reason that I have suggested that whenever we are comparing how two things sound that we can not know which thing we are listening to when making that comparison.

Our brains are so subjective and so prone to make assumptions about everything, that we can't trust ourselves to be objective in any type of comparison.

Most of what you say is good and true. But it is wise to avoid overstatement. As you also said, "You know that you have 2 speakers. I can count them. You can count them." If you see that I have three speakers and you have two, then you see that I have one more speaker than you do. Does this not count as an objective comparison?

We need to be aware that terms like "objective" and "subjective" have multiple meanings that are easily confounded. We need to be clear and careful when we use them.

Full disclosure: I am a retired professor of philosophy with a special interest in perception, particularly color perception. (Yes, I saw The Dress.)
 
I completely agree that for many things rapidly switching back and forth may not be helpful.

If you believed something sounded harsh compared to something else than you "may" be able to flip back and forth and hear the harshness come and go.

However if you are trying to hear subtle detail it may take a while to hear a difference with multiple source materials that each showcase different things.

I do see blind testing as being critical to knowing if I can hear a difference. It doesn't mean rapid changes between two devices. It just means spending whatever time you need with two devices without knowing which one you are listening to and taking notes.

There is also a honeymoon stage with anything new. I know when I first setup my new system, I was incredibly impressed. The detail, tight bass, and highs were night and day better than my 5.1 system. However in my enthusiasm I completely missed the fact that the whole sound stage was sitting on top of the right speaker. Then I started experimenting with speaker position and seeing how it coupled with my room.

I get excited by any new toy I get and that initial excitement is distracting and takes a little while wear off, for me to settle down and start to pay attention fully. So what I notice changes over time in that way.

So part of calibrating any test I do involves a cooling off / settling out period.
 
Most of what you say is good and true. But it is wise to avoid overstatement. As you also said, "You know that you have 2 speakers. I can count them. You can count them." If you see that I have three speakers and you have two, then you see that I have one more speaker than you do. Does this not count as an objective comparison?

We need to be aware that terms like "objective" and "subjective" have multiple meanings that are easily confounded. We need to be clear and careful when we use them.

Full disclosure: I am a retired professor of philosophy with a special interest in perception, particularly color perception. (Yes, I saw The Dress.)

That dress gets around doesn't it?

Using "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" as a reference, I definitely fall into the beer can shim camp with no reservations about it :)
 
RCHG, you and your wife may find two books I purchased recently (but have yet to read) of interest. They are, "The World In Six Songs" and, This Is Your Brain On Music", both by Daniel Levitin, a musician/psychologist in Montreal.
 
That's exactly why I do not believe in ABX, DBT, or other "short term" tests and firmly support extended listening sessions over several weeks to determine sonic differences and whether those differences are compatible with the rest of my system and my personal biases.

Problem is, you can change Summits for MBLs and hear the difference immediately and unequivocally. But if it takes weeks to determine differences (in cables or whatever), is it really worth expending money (and time) on?

timm said:
I guess I'll add..... what is really wrong with bringing your own subjective biases into the equation.... really?

Not at all. As I said, if the placebo pill cures the headache, who cares? Headache gone.

The problem is, when people are coerced into spending money on something by unscrupulous merchants (USB cables) when there is no reason (or very little reason) to spend that time/money. (ie. It takes weeks to hear the difference)
 
But if it takes weeks to determine differences (in cables or whatever), is it really worth expending money (and time) on?

Valid point Adam.

Normally I can make the call within a week. Problem is if you need to break in the whatever, which finally is done with the K01 (plus getting my reference IC back in the system), I'll be able to make an informed decision.

Having said that and given the opportunity for a longer audition period with no down side, I don't really see an issue other than the extra degree of certainty.

Gordon
 
RCHG, you and your wife may find two books I purchased recently (but have yet to read) of interest. They are, "The World In Six Songs" and, This Is Your Brain On Music", both by Daniel Levitin, a musician/psychologist in Montreal.

I'll check them out. My wife plays piano now and used to play clarinet. She is definitely a music lover. I just got a bunch of John Coltrane for her. However while she says my new Martin Logans are the best speakers she has ever heard, she is not "into" audio.
 
..........................
We need to be aware that terms like "objective" and "subjective" have multiple meanings that are easily confounded. We need to be clear and careful when we use them.
...................................
Yes, it seems that some audiophiles have given a new meaning to "subjective listening test".

On another note:
An 'ABX test' is not a preference test, it's a 'just noticeable difference' (JND) test.
 
Problem is, you can change Summits for MBLs and hear the difference immediately and unequivocally. But if it takes weeks to determine differences (in cables or whatever), is it really worth expending money (and time) on?



Not at all. As I said, if the placebo pill cures the headache, who cares? Headache gone.

The problem is, when people are coerced into spending money on something by unscrupulous merchants (USB cables) when there is no reason (or very little reason) to spend that time/money. (ie. It takes weeks to hear the difference)

To start with, it is very condescending to think that people buy something which have minute differences after spending weeks on them. I have had numberous cables, I had once put up a pic, ranging upto 20k for speakers, found very small differences, if any, and hadn't bothered. I have had one particular power cord make an instant difference. stillpoints were boring, and had hardly any impact. Shun Mooks had tons of positive impact. No one is saying this was anywhere close to a difference between an MBL and a Summit. But just having a Summit with an integrated Krell and Rega brought me no joy. The system sounded to my liking only after I got the Lampi 5 (at that time I had the 5), AR reference, and put the mooks under.

Btw, this placebo analogy gets around a lot on hifi forums and makes no sense. The reason a placebo pill is so different is, you and I have no way of confirming what the actual pill is at the point of intake. How many of us really know medicines? All pills taste the same. If, for example, a real medicine was spicy, and a placebo was sweet, would you not have noticed the difference between the two? At the point of intake, with music, unlike with medicinal pills, we can differentiate the taste. Otherwise you would never have known a Logan from an MBL.

The other point is, bias can come into play the first time you listen to something. But, after a year, of pulling that cable or support in and out of your system, taking it to friends' house, pulling it in and out of their systems, etc, it is really condescending to assume all the guys who hear that difference repeatedly are total fools and you are not. I can appreciate there are some
 
Last edited:
To start with, it is very condescending to think that people buy something which have minute differences after spending weeks on them. I have had numberous cables, I had once put up a pic, ranging upto 20k for speakers, found very small differences, if any, and hadn't bothered. I have had one particular power cord make an instant difference. stillpoints were boring, and had hardly any impact. Shun Mooks had tons of positive impact. No one is saying this was anywhere close to a difference between an MBL and a Summit. But just having a Summit with an integrated Krell and Rega brought me no joy. The system sounded to my liking only after I got the Lampi 5 (at that time I had the 5), AR reference, and put the mooks under.

Btw, this placebo analogy gets around a lot on hifi forums and makes no sense. The reason a placebo pill is so different is, you and I have no way of confirming what the actual pill is at the point of intake. How many of us really know medicines? All pills taste the same. If, for example, a real medicine was spicy, and a placebo was sweet, would you not have noticed the difference between the two? At the point of intake, with music, unlike with medicinal pills, we can differentiate the taste. Otherwise you would never have known a Logan from an MBL.

The other point is, bias can come into play the first time you listen to something. But, after a year, of pulling that cable or support in and out of your system, taking it to friends' house, pulling it in and out of their systems, etc, it is really condescending to assume all the guys who hear that difference repeatedly are total fools and you are not. I can appreciate there are some

I wasn't saying you can't hear a difference on Mooks, Lampis, cables, Krell integrated amps, etc - small or large as those differences may be. I was specifically referring to USB cables (which is how this discussion originated).

USB cables deal with data/bit transfer and nothing else. They are not designed to deal with anything else, and nor is there apparatus or design effort on either end of the USB cable to deal with anything other than bits. The operation of that data transfer can be proven to be perfect. So unless there are some magic fairy-angels circling above, there is absolutely no possible way you could hear a difference with USB cables.
 
I wasn't saying you can't hear a difference on Mooks, Lampis, cables, Krell integrated amps, etc - small or large as those differences may be. I was specifically referring to USB cables (which is how this discussion originated).

USB cables deal with data/bit transfer and nothing else. They are not designed to deal with anything else, and nor is there apparatus or design effort on either end of the USB cable to deal with anything other than bits. The operation of that data transfer can be proven to be perfect. So unless there are some magic fairy-angels circling above, there is absolutely no possible way you could hear a difference with USB cables.

I haven't experimented enough, and what you say might be true, but I still think it's worth trying as one of the last steps in your system. To dismiss it without trying doesn't make sense to me. Try a basic USB, a Totaldac, and Lighharmonic, and if they all sound the same, sure, I won't bother again
 
I haven't experimented enough, and what you say might be true, but I still think it's worth trying as one of the last steps in your system. To dismiss it without trying doesn't make sense to me. Try a basic USB, a Totaldac, and Lighharmonic, and if they all sound the same, sure, I won't bother again

There are so many places where you could at least conceivably have an impact on the sound quality, but this is not one of them. USB is transferring data only and USB does this in a way that guarantees what you put in one end comes out the other exactly the same with no modifications. This is fact. There are many other places where I might say the difference is negligible or you might hear a difference. This is not one of them. It's like saying that there is a difference in the sound of a music file that I store on a USB fob vs. my hard drive. It simply is exactly the same.
 
There are so many places where you could at least conceivably have an impact on the sound quality, but this is not one of them. USB is transferring data only and USB does this in a way that guarantees what you put in one end comes out the other exactly the same with no modifications. This is fact. There are many other places where I might say the difference is negligible or you might hear a difference. This is not one of them. It's like saying that there is a difference in the sound of a music file that I store on a USB fob vs. my hard drive. It simply is exactly the same.

So which usb cables have you experimented with, and on what dac?
 
I'm sorry. I need to bid my farewell before I offend someone.

Thank you to everyone who has offered me help! I sincerely appreciate it. I don't believe I can be a good denizen of this forum so I am going to censor myself.
 
Time out guys. This is a subjective vs objective discussion, and turning it into a cable discussion will have predictable results.
 
It has been my experience that the vast majority of audiophiles base their opinions on invalid subjective testing that is fraught with error and which leads to them making false assumptions about the causes of what they hear that differentiates tested components.

Basic protocols, such as level matching devices under test or ensuring testing is conducted blind and in a timely fashion, are rarely, if ever, implemented by audiophiles. Ask yourself .... is this you? The reality is that, sadly, only a select few audio journalists, reviewers and retailers bother to follow such basic protocol either. And they opine on audio matters negatively influencing readers and buyers in the process.

Heck, we can’t even reach consensus on definitions for the host of subjective terms that are bandied about in this industry.

There really is nothing quite like seeing audiophiles, retailers and reviewers using words with different meanings to describe differences they hear in components that haven’t been properly subjectively tested.

If that’s not enough ……. given that not one of us has, in place, even the most basic comparative fundamentals of (identical systems, setup in the same room, with the same music being played at the same volume levels) any subjective comparison on what any us can or can't hear, even if subjectively tested properly as per above, lacks a true reference and is nothing more than an exercise in futility.

So, what is the answer?

In the absence of such reference I think doing a valid ABX * test, or even a null test, at least brings some commonality to the testing process in an attempt to eliminate the issues above and bring into the fold some element of objectivity which can be referenced by everyone. Even if these processes, themselves, have some issues (and they do) …. surely they are a vast improvement over the highly ineffective subjective processes noted above?

Better yet is to do objective measurements. Yeah, this isn’t for everyone but should it not be? If only to avoid the subjective mess spoken about above! I mean, we all spend oodles of time talking amongst ourselves, in audio clubs and in forums such as these, all in an attempt to find out all we can about gear that we may one day wish to buy. Once content with what we have been told, we spend thousands, many tens of thousands of dollars even, going out there and buying such gear (hopefully not based on the subjective mess spoken about above). Yet barely any of us thinks it wise to spend some portion of our audio $ and buy measurement gear and, if needed, take the time, energy and effort to learn how to measure what it is that we are, or are not, hearing so that the purchases we make are sensible. This is one of the many things that boggles my mind about many of us audiophiles.

As an added bonus. What objective measurement can allow for is … very accurate analysis of what distortions and/or frequency response may be responsible for the subjective preference(s) you may enjoy, or even detest. You could then administer a process which allows you to include components which output these preferred errors so that you are listening to the distortion/response errors that your ears prefer.

Anyhow, for me it boils down to this:

1. All devices under test that objectively perform with measured errors in distortion, noise and frequency response that are below human hearing threshold ** will sound identical to any listener who does a valid listening test.

2. If devices under test are shown to sound different (in a valid listening test) then such sound differences can clearly be demonstrated by using instruments which allow for taking proper objective measurements so that you can visually analyze the results.

* For clarity sake my proper ABX test of electronics is one that is done blind using my switchbox which allows instantaneous switching between compared devices that are level matched to around 0.1 dB.

** There are numerous references to the finite hearing ability of humans insofar as hearing limits. Giving human hearing the benefit of the doubt .... the consensus is that human hearing threshold is as follows:

• Distortions (individual harmonic, alias, modulation, & crosstalk) all below –90 dBFS with their total sum below –80 dBFS (0.01%)
• All noises below –110 dB with total sum below –100 dBFS
• All jitters below –110 dB with total sum below -100 dBFS
• All over a linear fr (20Hz – 19 kHz within +/- 0.1 dB)

Obviously, I am presumptuous and believe that current measurement processes and instruments can measure all things that determine sound quality ***. I freely acknowledge the possibility that components and elements of psychoacoustics (a study of science I have only cursory knowledge of) may well alter & impact hearing in ways that the above criteria can’t explain but, in the absence of science, or even 1 measly controlled listening proof, that refutes the limits, I am certainly not in a position to question it. Not when the overwhelming evidence supports that there is no demonstrated audible difference that isn’t measurable. Could there come a time when this could change? Sure, but that's more a philosophical question which could be debated till the cows come home.

*** applicable only to voltages of electronic devices (none clipping amps, CDPs, DACs, etc) and not so of transducers since speakers output sound waves which can’t be accurately measured in a room.

Stated another way:

• If I can hear it, and measurements suggest I shouldn’t be able to hear it, then I believe that what I hear may be real or imaginary but I side with imaginary and wonder if I should go see my shrink.
• If I can hear it, and measurements agree that I should be able to hear it, then I believe that what I hear is real and I grab another drink.
• If I can't hear it, and measurements suggest I should be able to hear it, then I change up my system.
• If I can't hear it, and measurements suggest I shouldn’t be able to hear it, then I grab another drink.

Cheers ....................
 
Just a thought.

This is so typical and the back and forth banter so predictable regarding this topic, which is probably why it should be banned from this and any other audio forum.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top