Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › You will get sick of head-fi
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

You will get sick of head-fi - Page 4

post #46 of 215

obobskivich,

 

Thank you for your gracious and thoughtful disagreement; however, I would like to assert that the limits of content presuppose an ideological frame onto the discussions on that particular sub-forum.  

post #47 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeEast View Post

obobskivich,

Thank you for your gracious and thoughtful disagreement; however, I would like to assert that the limits of content presuppose an ideological frame onto the discussions on that particular sub-forum.  

Maybe on that sub-forum, but seriously there is no reason for it. It's very much a "lowest common denominator" kind of thing - in the real world of science and engineering, disagreement is not uncommon, and it often doesn't degrade into a "hey buddy screw you, you don't believe my beliefs and you're wrong!" That kind of argument is more common with religious fundamentalists. And the whole "I can be more right than you!" thing is also usually not liked - it's counter-productive.

That's my issue. That objectivity and science are given such a bad name, because they're politicized and used to push whatever person's individual agenda (in the same way as religion), instead of used and treated for what they are.
post #48 of 215

I think that there definitely needs to be some objectivity in this hobby. Without it, all we have to go on is our own subjective interpretation prone to placebo effects and expectation bias.

post #49 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeEast View Post

obobskivich,

 

Thank you for your gracious and thoughtful disagreement; however, I would like to assert that the limits of content presuppose an ideological frame onto the discussions on that particular sub-forum.  

Heh, yeah I know what you mean rolleyes.gif I was just finkin that bud.

post #50 of 215

obobskivich, I like that last point. 

post #51 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by yepimonfire View Post

I think that there definitely needs to be some objectivity in this hobby. Without it, all we have to go on is our own subjective interpretation prone to placebo effects and expectation bias.

Within reason, sure. In other words yes, be objective where possible, but don't miss the forest for the trees. Regarding the second point - that's part of my gripe with the Science Fiction boards, throwing around field-specific jargon willy-nilly as some sort of catch-all dismissal. A long time ago, a Head-Fi'er made a very good point about this (I think it was hirsch), found the original post instead of bothering to paraphrase: http://www.head-fi.org/t/11585/about-cables/15#post_132436

I echo his sentiments - I really don't like seeing clinical or psychological concepts thrown around as a catch-all to explain everything. Also, look at the date on that post; none of the stuff that the current crusaders are drum-banging about is remotely near "new" - there is no major discovery or Truth that has been found here (and in general I get really uncomfortable when people start talking Truth).

Oh, and I love the record-roller avatar Jade! Neat little gadget indeed!
Edited by obobskivich - 10/24/12 at 11:52am
post #52 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post


Within reason, sure. In other words yes, be objective where possible, but don't miss the forest for the trees. Regarding the second point - that's part of my gripe with the Science Fiction boards, throwing around field-specific jargon willy-nilly as some sort of catch-all dismissal. A long time ago, a Head-Fi'er made a very good point about this (I think it was hirsch), found the original post instead of bothering to paraphrase: http://www.head-fi.org/t/11585/about-cables/15#post_132436
I echo his sentiments - I really don't like seeing clinical or psychological concepts thrown around as a catch-all to explain everything. Also, look at the date on that post; none of the stuff that the current crusaders are drum-banging about is remotely near "new" - there is no major discovery or Truth that has been found here (and in general I get really uncomfortable when people start talking Truth).
Oh, and I love the record-roller avatar Jade! Neat little gadget indeed!

I see your point, but in my opinion, if a person hears a drastic difference from one piece of gear to another, there should be some sort of difference showing up on paper somewhere. Of course, just because something sounds better doesn't mean it technically is better, some people think various kinds of distortion sound better, and that's fine. But it does bother me when people start telling newcomers they need to spend humongus amounts of money on cables and amps, regardless of one amp being no better (or in some cases actually worse) than others, or telling them they MUST have an amp for something that doesn't require an amp and can be driven just fine by their source (assuming their source is technically adequate). A good example would be trying to convince someone that their 32ohm (flat across the board) headphones with over 100dB/mw sensitivity headphones will sound bad out of their ipod. They won't. The output impedance is low enough to achieve a stable voltage across the entire freq. range, and they're efficient enough to output quite a lot of sound with minimal distortion from an ipod. Now, when people talk about things like a K701/2 being hard to drive or other similar phones, guess what? They're correct, and it can easily be explained by objectively based on their widely varying impedance, low sensitivity, etc. All i'm saying is that true differences in sound can and will always show up on paper as real differences, and we can explain why it is different along with using that knowledge to decide what it is you need for a particular headphone, sound preference, etc. I don't think subjective debates should be immediately shot down, i think they should be investigated, and yes, DBTed.

post #53 of 215

I think the issue and debates continue because, at a base level, different people hold positions that are just incompatible. On one level it's a question about cables or amps, but push a bit further and you get into more complicated territories- disagreements can be about subjective and objective knowledge, questions of truth, justification, belief, knowledge, and personal values. 

post #54 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by proton007 View Post

I don't know if you've watched the movie 'Contact'. 

 

 

How about that. I read this thread and expect it to be a general complaint about stuff going on on headfi currently and find potentially a great movie recommendation. 

 

proton007, is this movie good??

 

 

P.S

I don't get sick of headfi. There are certain threads to avoid, certain posts to skip, certain topics to avoid all because they would give me a bit of that 'sick' feeling. But I know this place well enough to filter through that stuff and find what I like.

post #55 of 215
Contact the movie is awesome. A favorite. The book - Carl Sagan - is worth reading too. A little long in places, better than the movie in others. Btw, Sagan had a role in producing.
post #56 of 215

Brilliant, I'll definitely watch it soon.

post #57 of 215
Good points. And yes it should show up on paper. But it gets on paper in the first place because there's a theory that tells us to take certain kinds of measurements (glossing over the chicken/egg aspect for the moment).

So, if differences are heard - even if only by some people and only under certain conditions - it may be they are deceived. Equally, it may be the theory is inadequate.

The scientific position is not to ignore data. It's to investigate this data, and build new theory if necessary. Then, we might get something new on paper.

Personally, it does seem to me our current account is inadequate. But this is just speculation. The science way is not to speculate or debate, except for the purpose of hypothesis formation and testing (i.e. experiment).

And so, back to my real work. biggrin.gif

JadeEast I agree with your last post. Obobskivich, we're on the same page. And I've read a number of Hirsh's posts, all very good. I didn't realize before - we have similar backgrounds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yepimonfire View Post

I see your point, but in my opinion, if a person hears a drastic difference from one piece of gear to another, there should be some sort of difference showing up on paper somewhere.
post #58 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post


+1. And I think that was the intent in creating that board, to try and contain the flames to one oven.
There's nothing wrong with science, the scientific method, objective data, measurements, etc - the problem is that at least a reasonable number of people basically want to turn this into a religion, and go on an inquisition to root out non-believers. It gets tiring very quickly that the discussions usually degrade from "here's the measurement data from [wherever] about this headphone and I'm curious what this feature means?" to the proselytizing of scientism through a passive aggressive psuedoskeptical tone. Thankfully that's all contained in one place that is easily avoided for the most part.

 

Oh yeah, baby!

I fully agree!

It's "The Inquisitors" who drive me to drink!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post


I would disagree - conflicting viewpoints exist all over Head-Fi and remain quite civil. You don't have to ideologically frame disagreement either, unless you're in the Science Fiction board. tongue.gif

 

Yep, conflicting but civil viewpoints exist all over Head Fi..........................unless you are in the Sci Fi Fo

Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeEast View Post

obobskivich,

 

Thank you for your gracious and thoughtful disagreement; however, I would like to assert that the limits of content presuppose an ideological frame onto the discussions on that particular sub-forum.  

 

Oh man, can someone please break this down for me?

I cheerfully admit this looses me..................confused_face_2.gif   I'm an engineer, not a philosopher.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

Contact the movie is awesome. A favorite. The book - Carl Sagan - is worth reading too. A little long in places, better than the movie in others. Btw, Sagan had a role in producing.

 

Oh yeah, baby!

Contact movie & book are very high on the awesomeness scale! Probably an 11 on a scale of 1 to 10.

Have you seen Prometheus yet?

Ooops, you're in New Zealand, it won't make it there until 2013! LOL!

 

P.S.

I live in Canada, please forward all Canadian insults and jokes to me!biggrin.gif


Edited by Chris J - 10/24/12 at 4:16pm
post #59 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post
I cheerfully admit this looses me..................confused_face_2.gif   I'm an engineer, not a philosopher.

Sorry, I'll try to break it down Canuck style. 

"the limits of content presuppose an ideological frame onto the discussions on that particular sub-forum."

The rules of hockey create the expectations that players will behave in certain ways. 

post #60 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeEast View Post

 

"the limits of content presuppose an ideological frame onto the discussions on that particular sub-forum."

 

 

I'll put it this way.

When discussing "science", there need to be some ground rules. 

 

I'm directly quoting this from Wikipedia:

 

 

Quote:
The belief that all observers share a common reality is known as realism. It can be contrasted with anti-realism, the belief that there is no valid concept of absolute truth such that things that are true for one observer are true for all observers. The most commonly defended form of anti-realism is idealism, the belief that the mind or spirit is the most basic essence, and that each mind generates its own reality. In an idealistic world-view, what is true for one mind need not be true for other minds.

 

So, when you start talking about Perception, you're already drifting away from Science. They do not tend to mix well.

 

What is out there (sound waves) is *real* (they're the same as physically explained by a Scientific Model) until they enter your ears (they're perceived differently).

 

It can be argued that there will be a statistical mean to this "perception".

Still, its not Science, because I cannot establish a relationship, or a model that can predict the preference of a listener with 5/6 Sigma certainty.


Edited by proton007 - 10/24/12 at 7:09pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › You will get sick of head-fi