If people get their enjoyment from making up false assertions, then yes, my explanation of the actual facts would somewhat curtail that enjoyment but the definition of an audiophile is someone who seeks or is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound, not someone who just makes up false assertions.
I'm delighted that you're here to give us the actual facts - without your heroism we would all be lost in our false assertions and terribly inaccurate perceptions that lead us to believe there's more to being enthusiastic about about high-fidelity sound than how accurately the audio measures. How foolish of us! What a relief to know accurate measurements and low distortion are the only part of high-fidelity sound that one can be enthusiastic about.
Sure, call any commercial studio and ask them if you can use it for a few days just for the love of it, without charging you.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're even replying to or trying to say here. I asked if you had any evidence that, as you put it, "the commercial studios, engineers, record labels, distributors and the manufacturers of the equipment we use are not hobbyists" and that "most of the technology we use was invented and/or developed by the telecoms industry, which certainly isn’t a hobby," neither of which you gave evidence for. Yes, I agree commercial studios are not hobbyists. But people working and creating at commercial studios, record labels, distribution and manufacturing companies are all individuals who can simultaneously be hobbyists as well as employees, and who might not share your belief that only measurements matter (which, note, is not the same as saying measurements
do not matter and are not a piece of the picture, which is not something I've said).
Assuming they’re professional business owners, then “at heart” they need to at least put food on a table for themselves and their families.
Yes, of course? This still doesn't mean they can't be a hobbyist as well. Some business owners, like Zach at ZMF, started as hobbyists and have remained hobbyists even after making headphones and starting their companies. Some people like him even trust in their own ears, brains, and perceptions enough to put their own artist imprint on the tonality and frequency response of the headphones they make in a way that deviates from what is considered "neutral" or "accurate." And many of these businesses are better off for it, as people who are enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound are drawn to their take on how music is presented, even if it doesn't measure the most accurately.
And incidentally, in order in order to “know how it will be perceived” producers or engineers must also be concerned with how the sound/audio measures.
As I mention above, I've never said measurements
don't matter, and I never would say that. I'm just saying it's only a piece of the puzzle when it comes to how things are perceived. This is something you also concede to by saying "producers or engineers must
also be concerned wit how the sound/audio measures."
Of course it is, sometimes separating “hearing” from “perceiving” is as simple as closing your eyes (
McGurk Effect), other times we need greater levels of controlled testing.
If you're in the business of stating facts, this is not one of them. No matter how controlled a test is, if a human is performing it then the sound is being perceived. There is no such thing as pure hearing without perceiving. We only "hear" sound once it's been interpreted by our brains, so absolutely no one on the planet is ever hearing anything without it being colored by our own biases, brain chemistry, experience, etc. This is
okay and is actually one of the things that make life, and this hobby, interesting.
I just stated/explained some actual facts and politely questioned some false assertions, why is that apparently such a terrible thing to have done here? Is this really only a forum for false assertions and politely questioning them or posting the actual facts is unacceptable? Is that really what an audiophile is supposed to be?
There are no rules against stating facts in this forum, despite what you and others want to believe. The reason rules have been put in place is because the manner in which these "facts" (which sometimes have merit and sometimes don't) are presented is so often rude and condescending and seem to be used as a way to make the pure objectivists feel some sense of superiority to the rest of us. You are not politely questioning false assertions, you are insisting time and time again that people's personal experiences are invalid and that they're being duped. Can't you see how this would get tiring? You clearly have different priorities than some others here when it comes to what matters in this hobby, so can't you just let those others be without telling them they're biased and wrong?
Of course we all have biases. I don't think anyone in this thread is trying to deny that. But we don't need to hear the same arguments over and over again incessantly. It's also strange to me that you feel people who claim to hear differences between DACs might claim so as a way to justify their expensive purchases, but you never mention that perhaps there is also bias on the part of the "objectivists" where they have incentive to hear everything the same to convince themselves they don't need the new shiny expensive DAC that their 'gear acquisition syndrome' might otherwise convince them to buy? If that's the case, I totally understand the desire to form an opinion that will lead to avoiding shelling out a bunch of money on a setup.
