Whiner's Woad

Whining, swan dives and other inappropiate topics get moved here.

Return to Whiner's Woad

Possible to have intelligent discussion with a subjective audiophile unless you believe every claim he makes?

66.51.146.3
Posted on October 14, 2009 at 07:21:37
Richard BassNut Greene
Audiophile

Posts: 42
Joined: October 14, 2009
 Any subjective audiophile who believes he has extraordinary listening skills, but can never demonstrate those skills to witnesses, can make any claim he wants about how well he can hear, with no proof.

Is it not intellectually dishonest to claim superior skills that can not be demonstrated or proven to others?

And what benefit is there from you creating a fictional conversation between a subjective and objective audiophile for the sole purpose of criticizing the objective audiophile?

I could make up an imaginary conversation designed to criticize a subjective audiophile, but it would still be imaginary ... like the huge differences some audiophiles claim they hear among wires!
.
.
.



Richard Greene, the rational audiophile
RE: Possible to have intelligent discussion with a subjective audiophile unless you believe every claim he makes?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 20:26:02
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 22053
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 "Any subjective audiophile who believes he has extraordinary listening skills, but can never demonstrate those skills to witnesses, can make any claim he wants about how well he can hear, with no proof."

The issue is not whether subjective audiophiles who believe they have extraordinary listening skills can demonstrate those skills to witnesses. The issue is whether subjective audiophiles who believe they have extraordinary listening skills even exist in the first place.

I personally don't know of one person who has explicitly claimed or even implied such ability. Nor have I come across a single post on Audio Asylum with such claim or implied belief.

You can repeatedly state claims on the basis of beliefs that don't exist in reality, but I think you're wasting your time, because people here realize the basis in itself is false. And I think this is why a lot of people here perceive you as a bully, as opposed to a constructive criticizer.


In Defense of RBNG.............., posted on October 14, 2009 at 20:05:17
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 22053
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 I personally think with the tone of the thread's original post, either the entire thread should have been moved to Whiners, or none at all....... RBNG might not rub everybody the right way, but I do perceive a double-standard here.


Agreed, except I don't consider it a defense of RBNG, but, posted on October 15, 2009 at 08:06:53
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 yes the original post was just a typical BS rant, as odious as anything the nut ever produced, and just another of hundreds of similar posts by the original poster.


Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
And now you're a Stereophile celebrity!!!!, posted on October 14, 2009 at 16:36:15
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 Yep, Art Dudley mentioned you by name! Ok, it wasn't in a flattering way, but what did you expect?

And I think I was mentioned as well, although not by name. What does "...those who share his Garfield-cabiber sense of humor..." mean exactly? I've seen pictures of our long-ago President and he wasn't even cracking a smile!

We all knew that El Nutto would rise to the occasion! -nt, posted on October 14, 2009 at 17:13:20
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 9839
Location: Central boonies
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 rw

How often do you have to repeat this stupidity?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 08:43:30
Bambi B
Audiophile

Posts: 2942
Location: Los Angeles
Joined: March 24, 2005



PAINTING: "Design for a Large Alchemical Clock"

Richard Bass Nut Greene,

When will you accept the most basic metaphysical property of existence: that perceptions are individual and internal processes based on unique senses experience that can never, never be proven or demonstrated to anyone else? Can you understand that- you are a separate person that can never know what any other perceives?

To assume a vicarious metaphysics- that you either already know what others' are feeling or demand others' reality proven to you is psychotic as is the constantly repeatedly demand for this proof is desperation insecurity. Plus fruckin' annoying! -Again, again, again you repeat this stupidity, you're villified, banned for a month, and yet return briefly attempting a moniker change having learned absolutely nothing.

If you can't hear the differences between lamp cord and any other kind of wire, you've saved yourself the time of choosing and the cost. But, in coming to an audiophile site and insist that others' can not hear differences they claim is a perversity and a deliberate and futile provocation.

How perfectly ironic that you claim to be some kind of rationalist- as you're brain seems to be permanently impenetrable to basic rationality on the subject you pontificate upon.

In the unlikely event you ever develop working perceptual apparatus and can open you mind, you may find that judging sound and the technology that makes it involves a combination of subjective and objective judgments.

Relax and enjoy it! Learning that you're absolutely completely wrong about your basic understanding of your own existence is not so difficult as you imagine, we Humans all go through it- only usually it's at age 17,..

Cheers,

Bambi B

But you haven't understood what is being said., posted on October 14, 2009 at 18:53:50
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 7558
Joined: June 20, 2000
 This is motherhood.

Bambi
"When will you accept the most basic metaphysical property of existence: that perceptions are individual and internal processes based on unique senses experience that can never, never be proven or demonstrated to anyone else? Can you understand that- you are a separate person that can never know what any other perceives?"

However, it has nothing much to do with providing reliable advice on equipment. Human perception is unreliable for perceiving small differences. One may have musical epiphanies using Product A and not Product B for various reasons having nothing to do with the performance of the equipment. We see nothing wrong with that--many things influence equipment preferences besides the sound. They may not be the same things which influence me or other people. However, there are some of us who like to know what is likely to make an audible difference.

"Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
Thank you, posted on October 15, 2009 at 05:35:05
tesla
Audiophile

Posts: 1727
Location: San Diego County, California
Joined: October 25, 2000
 for a different and logical post on the subject


"Son, let this be a lesson to you: never do tequila shooters within a country mile of a marriage chapel."
- Al Bundy
Ok, can we get along?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 17:53:56
tesla
Audiophile

Posts: 1727
Location: San Diego County, California
Joined: October 25, 2000
 I will not take a side on this, but your right, Bambi, except I think both sides ought to accept each others rights to their opinions, move on, and especially NOT take the bait. This so reminds me of the pointless schoolyard disagreement on what is better, blondes, brunettes or redheads.

This "one vs the other" has been going one since at least since I joined and that is in 2001. Has anyone's position budged? I doubt it. Has there been many and pointless pages of arguements defending one's position, and attacking other opinions? Yes.

So what is my conclusion, flawed as it may be? (Flameproof suit borrowed from the local firemen is on) Most everyone participating in these discussions seems to enjoy the pointlessness of it all. But, I suspect that many active participants enjoy an arguement for the sake of such. (But not all.) Maybe the discussion should be why? Or, perhaps all of you can schedule a meeting somewhere agreeable to all, (If that is possible) and fight it out. (No weapons allowed)

Actually, it is funny in a sick sort of way that Richard can get so many of you so upset, isn't it? Perhaps that speaks of the mindset that some have that they cannot take anyone else's opinion, and have no sense of humor. No matter how inane you may think someone elses opinion is, you should accept that they have a right to it. If everyone follows what I have said, there will be a lot less arguments. However, knowing human nature, I suspect that my suggestions will go entirely unheeded, and probably scorned.

I guess if you have got this far, you can accuse me of being no better than anyone else in this discussion, and you are right. However, I got it off my chest.

Regards,

Gene


"Son, let this be a lesson to you: never do tequila shooters within a country mile of a marriage chapel."
- Al Bundy
Begone!, posted on October 15, 2009 at 06:19:11
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 Or, at least, stop being so rational and levelheaded. You're in the wrong place, friend. And REDHEADS are the best! :)

Thanks for a nice post. You did miss one thing, though. Neither side really views their POV as an opinion. "My side is fact and YOUR side is opinion". So it isn't a matter of allowing opinions.

The funny thing is that the fact is really in the middle: Not everything sounds different and not everything sounds the same. The latter part is an absolute fact - can't speak to the former since I haven't listened to everything.

By the way, I LOVED this: >Most everyone participating in these discussions seems to enjoy the pointlessness of it all<

In the grand scheme of things, who really cares what anyone else thinks?
Ah... hate to say it but, posted on October 14, 2009 at 10:01:54
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 the thrives on that sort of encouragement. Seriously.


Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
Off-topic, but..., posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:18:58
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 ...where do you find those incredible paintings that you attach to your posts???? I gotta know!!!

RE: Off-topic, but..., posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:40:15
Bambi B
Audiophile

Posts: 2942
Location: Los Angeles
Joined: March 24, 2005




"Design for a Puppet Show"





"Double Portrait of Henry Ford"





"Welcome to Oklahoma"





"Design for a Study For Prospero"





"Bayside Flower Delivery, 1928" (Joseph Cornell)

kerr,

Thanks for your interest. The paintings I post are mostly from a series of 35 done in the late 90's. These were all on oil on canvas- fairly large- 30" X 48" was the common size, with a couple on Masonite. "Welcome to Oklahoma is 72" X 16"

If I had any choice of work, it would be as a painter- the absolutely ideal life- if you can sell them,..

Cheers,

Bambi B

Email sent (nt), posted on October 14, 2009 at 10:19:18
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 nt

"deliberate and futile provocation" - isn't that why he's here?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 08:55:04
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 BTW, I don't agree about "futile":

According to dictionary, it means "serving no useful purpose" or "completely ineffective" - and while the former is certainly true, the latter is not, as evidenced by the responses his provocations reliably get in spades.

"deliberate and futile provocation", posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:16:31
Bambi B
Audiophile

Posts: 2942
Location: Los Angeles
Joined: March 24, 2005
 carcass93,

Yes, it's exactly the "deliberate" aspect that I find so annoying. My analogy is of someone who claims to be a nature lover and rushes into the forest with a small, limp stick looking for a grizzly bear to beat while screaming that he absolutely knows that no bear can can discern that different fish have different flavours: if they can- let them "prove" it! Ha Ha! I win! They never have and never will!

I would defend my use of "futile" in the sense of such simple-minded provocation as being ineffective at changing anyone's opinion. In that way, RBNG's rants conform to your dictionary's concept of "futile" as "serving no useful purpose. In discussing complex matters, I feel it's valuable to have a contrarian- someone who will find a a way to object to everything stated- a clever iconoclast is always valuable in philosophy- but RBGN is only intensely egocentric and can never allow discussion- only repetition of an intractable view.


Cheers,

Bambi B

RE: Possible to have intelligent discussion with a subjective audiophile unless you believe every claim he makes?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 08:25:39
Don Till
Audiophile

Posts: 675
Location: Tempe
Joined: February 16, 2009
 "Possible to have intelligent discussion with a subjective audiophile unless you believe every claim he makes?"

There you go doing the same thing the Tom is doing! A subjectivist audiophile should be working harder and taking far more care than an objectivist as he doesn't rely on equipment to confirm his conclusions. Of course, and it's painfully obvious, that most audiophiles who claim to be subjectivists are really slackers unwilling confirm the veracity of anything they claim.

Granted we are all short on time and most of fall far short of applying a comprehensive methodology in our decisions making. And because of this we need to realize our conclusions are simply our own individual personal decisions falling far short in credibility and certainly the veracity of such decisions are worthy of only our particular application. But most of us seem willing to ignore these facts and somehow feel compelled to argue that our own sloppy results or methods are something more than that.

And it's this obliviousness to our own ignorance that is INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST!

"Is it not intellectually dishonest to claim superior skills that can not be demonstrated or proven to others?"

Only if such a claim is used to support some point of contention. We can claim superior listening skills but it only becomes INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST when such an undemonstrated claim is used to bolster some other point of contention. The unsubstantiated claim, or even just the belief, all on it's own may be something one could prove but hasn't or it can written off a naivety or ignorance. On it's own, IMO, it is not INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST, though it does indicate a lack of standard on the part of person making such a claim - ie. it speaks to the veracity of anything emitted from its brain.

Huh?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:30:10
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 4004
Joined: January 8, 2002
 "Of course, and it's painfully obvious, that most audiophiles who claim to be subjectivists are really slackers unwilling confirm the veracity of anything they claim."

You are confusing a lack of interest with a lack of willingness. Some of us just don't care about any sort of confirmation of our perceptions. Perceptions are what they are. You may look to confirm yours. i just enjoy mine.



"Granted we are all short on time and most of fall far short of applying a comprehensive methodology in our decisions making. And because of this we need to realize our conclusions are simply our own individual personal decisions falling far short in credibility and certainly the veracity of such decisions are worthy of only our particular application. But most of us seem willing to ignore these facts and somehow feel compelled to argue that our own sloppy results or methods are something more than that."


Well, there you may have a point. Most people on both sides of the aisle seem to want to believe there is more universal truth to their perceptions than is really there. But it goes both ways. Go check out Hydrogen Audio and see that many, including the main moderator, firmly believe that suceptability to bias effects is a mental disorder and they have been cured of it by believing in and participating in ABX DBTs. I'm not making this shit up!

"And it's this obliviousness to our own ignorance that is INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST!"

I'd say it's just ignorance. If the "great debate" has done anything it has sustained this ignorance. Who wants to learn about what they utterly distrust? Maybe if more objectivists offered a better, more comprehensive perspective on bias effects instead of using it as a weapon to discredit perceptions they don't like there would be less distrust on the subjectivist side and less misinformation running through the objectivist side.

Ironic..., posted on October 14, 2009 at 08:59:02
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
Only if such a claim is used to support some point of contention. We can claim superior listening skills but it only becomes INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST when such an undemonstrated claim is used to bolster some other point of contention. The unsubstantiated claim, or even just the belief, all on it's own may be something one could prove but hasn't or it can written off a naivety or ignorance. On it's own, IMO, it is not INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST, though it does indicate a lack of standard on the part of person making such a claim - ie. it speaks to the veracity of anything emitted from its brain.


If we substitute your claim regarding power cords for claim superior listening skills that paragraph fits you to a "T".

LOL





Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
Please refresh me on my "claim regarding power cords"., posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:24:20
Don Till
Audiophile

Posts: 675
Location: Tempe
Joined: February 16, 2009
 I think the only claims I've made about power cords is that I've heard them make a sonic difference AND that whatever it is that they are doing to achieve this sonic difference could be implemented on the circuitry of the audio component.

Now maybe I'm missing something here but what the heck is INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST about my claim regarding power cords?

Are you suggesting that the communications and test equipment industries haven't been designing and delivering, for decades, very sophisticated analog and digital componentry that works essentially free of the same nasties audiophiles are now noticing with their audio equipment?

Really bjh what is your point? I'm equally willing to back up my claims as I am willing to back off my claims or adjust them accordingly of given a reasonable explanation that something is wrong with them.

You continually popping in on me to call me names, be it INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST or a boneheaded dolt or whatever it is you fancy at the moment doesn't inspire me to move in either direction and really is IMO another example of the INTELLECTUALLY DISHONESTY that is runs wild on these kinds of audio site.



RE: Please refresh me on my "claim regarding power cords"., posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:29:04
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 Oh, have you forgottent your thesis, that if a prower cord makes a component better (i.e. the sound of thre system in which it is used) then the component is flawed?

I suspect you haven't forgotten, in fact now I expect you to basically repeat your argument, and yes, repeat it again with absolutely nothing to back it up!

LOL
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
I'll stand behind those comments!, posted on October 15, 2009 at 14:06:44
Don Till
Audiophile

Posts: 675
Location: Tempe
Joined: February 16, 2009
 And I'll even go so far as to propose a situation where I would be wrong. And that's when the supplied power cord doesn't work properly - you know like when it's cut or damaged in such a way that the wall voltage isn't supplied to the power supply of the components.

You're the one who complained about the "harsh" sound of Bryston amps until you heard them with an enhanced power cord. Do you really think Bryston would release an amp that sounded as you say "harsh"? Do you think you have trained or special hearing and am picking up on something they can't hear? I say of course not to both questions and would suggest in their plant and when they test this equipment it sounds and measures just fine.

In your real world listening environment the amp is effected by some external factors not present in their test environment. You discovered a relatively affordable fix for the issue. The ludicrity of your position is that you don't seem to get it when I say whatever that new cord is doing to make the circuitry sound "better" (and I would say as it should) Bryston could implement themselves - whether they did it on the supplied power cord or in the power supply circuitry would be up to them.

I suppose you agree with that other guy who claims that the more susceptable to external noise a component the greater it's resolution. Oh yea he'll say it this way - the more improvement one can get with a power cord the greater the resolution of the component. That's completely hilarious!!!

Or maybe you agree with that other guy who claims it's some advanced physics at work, beyond the conception of EEs, that's at play here. Yea that hardly holds water the cost of great improvements with a new PC is quite low - not typical of new or exotic implementations of advanced physics.



You post is so full of BS, posted on October 16, 2009 at 09:23:47
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 that ignoring it is the only sensible option.
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
Sounds like a good idea for you not to respond...., posted on October 16, 2009 at 10:06:40
Don Till
Audiophile

Posts: 675
Location: Tempe
Joined: February 16, 2009
 as like I said I've got tons more to back up my contribution and you've failed miserably at supporting yours which btw is nothing more than telling me I am full of BS.

And also I don't hold myself in such high esteem - surely someone (including me) in the know (not really me) could shoot some holes in my proposition. And the truth of the matter is I'd actually appreciate it - unfortunately there's not many around here capable of doing it.

Thanks for your input.
But anyone who would give a serious response to your guff, such as ..., posted on October 16, 2009 at 10:38:37
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 "Or maybe you agree with that other guy who claims it's some advanced physics at work, beyond the conception of EEs, that's at play here. Yea that hardly holds water the cost of great improvements with a new PC is quite low - not typical of new or exotic implementations of advanced physics."

is a fool! ... proabably not as much so as the fool that produces such guff in the first place but surely close!

LOL
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
In a literal sense..., posted on October 14, 2009 at 10:24:21
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 >if a prower cord makes a component better (i.e. the sound of thre system in which it is used) then the component is flawed<

...he's correct. If a component is flawless, it cannot be improved upon. Then again, there are no flawless components that I know of!

Sorry if I missed something from the original discussion. I'm just taking a literal approach.

If it works for you, posted on October 14, 2009 at 11:02:13
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 go with it.

:)
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
Not me, posted on October 14, 2009 at 11:09:49
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 For some unfathomable reason, I've never had a power cord make one whit of difference in the sound of my system(s). In my previous house, I ran a dedicated powerline but not in my current one. I can't figure it, but I'm not complaining.

"I could make up an imaginary conversation designed to criticize a subjective audiophile", posted on October 14, 2009 at 07:54:55
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 4004
Joined: January 8, 2002
 yes. We know that very well.

Ha Ha, posted on October 14, 2009 at 08:09:27
Richard BassNut Greene
Audiophile

Posts: 42
Joined: October 14, 2009
 Scott, your resume should include all three:
(1) Professional make-up artist
(2) Hydrogen Audio objective audiophile instigator
(3) Audio Asylum comedian
.
Richard Greene, the rational audiophile
A couple of small but crucial corrections, posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:15:49
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 >(2) Hydrogen Audio objective audiophile instigator<

(2) Hydrogen Audio non-objective anti-audiophile cultist instigator.

Ahh... much better!
Glad you enjoyed it, posted on October 14, 2009 at 08:20:34
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 4004
Joined: January 8, 2002
 you gotta admit you lobbed that one up there for someone to hit out of the park.

How was the vacation?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 07:34:01
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 I noticed you spent some of your leisure time from PHP on H/A. That's like being from Detroit and vacationing in East St Louis. :)

Told ya - he won't like it there. And honestly - who could blame him?, posted on October 14, 2009 at 08:18:16
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 RBNG thrives on controversy, and needs at least semi-intelligent readers to be emotionally engaged in the fight - not much of either over there. Where's fun in preaching to dumb humorless "scientists", infesting that swamp?

Actually, posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:15:06
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 4004
Joined: January 8, 2002
 I think Ethan kinda handed his ass to him on a silver platter when they were debating room acoustics. Sat what you want about Ethan, he does know room acoustics.

I thought the funny part was AJ, posted on October 14, 2009 at 09:39:34
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 9839
Location: Central boonies
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 giving Whiner the business over his bi-amped JBL speakers using a kilowatt of Crown amps. :)

rw

Hydrogen Audio, posted on October 14, 2009 at 07:39:15
Richard BassNut Greene
Audiophile

Posts: 42
Joined: October 14, 2009
 Those are the real Propeller Heads.
However I did have the pleasure of telling bass trap designer Ethan Winer that my cat could beat up his cat in the "Scientific Discussions" forum.
.


Richard Greene, the rational audiophile

Page processed in 0.141 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ] [ Go Green ] [ Take5 ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]