Pharmaboy
Headphoneus Supremus
Here's what's so bonkers about this little argument breaking out here: the person who said this ("I don't understand why people don't trust their own hearing. My other dac is a Chord Mojo. I listened to all three inputs in the context of MY system. Why did I not like coax? I have no clue...but it was pretty easy to hear.") is not drawing "technical conclusions." He's just stating what he hears in his system. Sure, it's totally subjective. What's wrong with that?
Hearing is one of the human senses; it need not play by empirical rules unless for some reason that that becomes situationally desirable--ie, an audio reviewer should butress subjective opinions by citing technical factors; a headphone designer has to "voice" the product to appeal to potential buyers, while reproducing music with some degree of fidelity.
When I state a sonic preference based on how I hear this or that, I'm not dictating that anyone else should perceive the same thing. I'm also not judging others who hear things differently. But here on Head-Fi & elsewhere, those who assert "objectivist" arguments (involving physics, electrical, or acoustic technicalities) very often do imply those factors give their perceptions greater weight--or that those who fail to factor in "objective" factors are somehow whistling through their paper hats.
Moreover, how I hear something (and explain what I hear) is not comparable in any real way to medicine, where we require "objective" input of highly trained medical professionals to help us prevent or recover from illness. It's also not comparable to rocket science, particle vs wave theory, and any number of other things. Why should it be?
I'm very comfortable saying the coax input sounds better than USB IMS. It's just an opinion. I'm not signing an affidavit on the topi; this isn't the Court of the Hague.
Hearing is one of the human senses; it need not play by empirical rules unless for some reason that that becomes situationally desirable--ie, an audio reviewer should butress subjective opinions by citing technical factors; a headphone designer has to "voice" the product to appeal to potential buyers, while reproducing music with some degree of fidelity.
When I state a sonic preference based on how I hear this or that, I'm not dictating that anyone else should perceive the same thing. I'm also not judging others who hear things differently. But here on Head-Fi & elsewhere, those who assert "objectivist" arguments (involving physics, electrical, or acoustic technicalities) very often do imply those factors give their perceptions greater weight--or that those who fail to factor in "objective" factors are somehow whistling through their paper hats.
Moreover, how I hear something (and explain what I hear) is not comparable in any real way to medicine, where we require "objective" input of highly trained medical professionals to help us prevent or recover from illness. It's also not comparable to rocket science, particle vs wave theory, and any number of other things. Why should it be?
I'm very comfortable saying the coax input sounds better than USB IMS. It's just an opinion. I'm not signing an affidavit on the topi; this isn't the Court of the Hague.