[limpidglitch]

I know that I know what I know,
that is all i know.

 

[money4me247]

lol if someone thinks brussels sprouts tastes 'poisonous' to them, I don't think it's not really something you can argue. it's a personal preference type deal. it is a fact as it is true that this person feels that way and experienced this, but not an universal 'truth' that can be applied to everyone.
 
I don't think there is anything wrong with subjective type impressions about your headphones & preferences. Only issues I see is that some people get blinded by their own biases when making recommendations for others or arguments about headphones start because one person really personally like XYZ headphones and can't understand that someone else might have a different experience.
 
Difference preferences in frequency response curves can factor greatly into the wide range of opinions on headphones. Remember not everyone is pursuing the pair of headphones that measures the most accurately or sounds neutral. Some people are just looking for what sounds best to them that's what makes this hobby more interesting.

 

[bigshot]

Someday, someone is going to create a first class portable digital equalizer and the whole headphone market will take a nose dive. Instead of buying five or six sets of cans and swapping pads and modding them to try to shove them in the right or wrong direction, people will buy one set and EQ it exactly the way they want it to be.

 

[sonitus mirus]

I do want accurate sound, but typically I listen at very low volume levels with headphones, and I have found that I prefer a v-shaped frequency response.  With speakers, which I usually listen to at higher volume levels, I want a flatter frequency response.  I can listen to classical music on my speakers, but because the music almost always has a much larger dynamic range when compared to other genres, the sound signature of my headphones just doesn't cut it, since I have to increase the volume level.
 
Though, I'm certain that the issue regarding Brussels sprouts being poisonous or not has been pea reviewed.

 

[liamstrain]

  lol if someone thinks brussels sprouts tastes 'poisonous' to them, I don't think it's not really something you can argue. it's a personal preference type deal. it is a fact as it is true that this person feels that way and experienced this, but not an universal 'truth' that can be applied to everyone.

 
The equivalent argument would be that regardless of how it tastes to them, it is NOT poisonous. One is a subjective descriptor (how it tastes) the other a factual claim (poisonous).

We can certainly apply a universal truth to that second point (allergens, or individual medical conditions not-withstanding, it is not a poisonous vegetable).
 
And that's all I'm getting at - people can claim they hear things or don't - but some things can be tested and shown to be factually based. Their experience may not change, but the claims they can make about it must. 

 

[money4me247]

  Someday, someone is going to create a first class portable digital equalizer and the whole headphone market will take a nose dive. Instead of buying five or six sets of cans and swapping pads and modding them to try to shove them in the right or wrong direction, people will buy one set and EQ it exactly the way they want it to be.

 
there are already many software EQ options out there, but people seem to prefer multiple pairs of headphones or modding over EQing. kinda weird if you think about it, but maybe new toy syndrome & the gratification of putting effort towards personally 'improving' your headphones? EQ is free! hahah.
 
i think it might be in the audiophile hobby culture to have that kind this mind-set of multiple pair of headphones for specific listening needs & hacking your headphones for  more improvement. would sound very impressive & 'audiophiley' to other people if you start talking like that hahah.

 

[money4me247]

  The equivalent argument would be that regardless of how it tastes to them, it is NOT poisonous. One is a subjective descriptor (how it tastes) the other a factual claim (poisonous).

We can certainly apply a universal truth to that second point (allergens, or individual medical conditions not-withstanding, it is not a poisonous vegetable).
 
And that's all I'm getting at - people can claim they hear things or don't - but some things can be tested and shown to be factually based. Their experience may not change, but the claims they can make about it must. 

hahah. lol obviously. brussel sprouts =/= poison. but that is a silly example as an obviously unrelated quality is applied to brussels sprouts as if someone else made such a nonsensical claim as fact. classic straw man argument. maybe something a 4 year old would say. so sure, if you define poisonous as being actually toxic to the human body, the example is worthless as that is obviously not a property of brussels sprouts and who would ever say that. but if you view it as "poisonous" as a personal, subjective description, the example has some value. 
 
A more pertinent example is if someone says brussels sprouts taste 'bad.' this is an subjective impression, but you cannot argue with that person's experience regardless of what objective facts you pull up about its nutritional value or vitamin content.
 
Claims people make about the sound are all based on a hypothetical personal "ideal sound." The bass sounds over-emphasized. ...over-emphasized compared to what? compared to this ideal that I have in my head about how the song should sound. By that very nature, it is all preferential and subjective without some sort of universal standard.

 

[bigshot]

I insist that Brussel Sprouts are poison. It's my opinion and it is just as good as any other opinion. If you disagree, either you are deaf or your stereo system is too cheap to reveal the poisonousness of Brussel Sprouts. If you persist in insisting that Brussel Sprouts are not poisonous, I am going to get emotionally distraught and notify the mods and they will lock this thread. So it's better for all of us to just agree that Brussel Sprouts are poison.

 

[sonitus mirus]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/man-overdoses-on-brussels_n_2347448.html

 

[money4me247]

  I insist that Brussel Sprouts are poison. It's my opinion and it is just as good as any other opinion. If you disagree, either you are deaf or your stereo system is too cheap to reveal the poisonousness of Brussel Sprouts. If you persist in insisting that Brussel Sprouts are not poisonous, I am going to get emotionally distraught and notify the mods and they will lock this thread. So it's better for all of us to just agree that Brussel Sprouts are poison.

yes, you do make a point. that kind of attitude is ridiculous. applying an objective property to an item that can be easily objectively disproven is silly. And you are right, there are many people with that kind of mentality that is very frustrating to deal with. however, I feel like most claims people make about certain headphones are more personal subjective opinions.
 
just think about the term 'audiophile.' it means lover of audio. it is totally an subjective view as people can love or hate the same objective sonic property. i do agree there is a place for objective measurements on sonic performance and that the pursuit of accuracy over other personal subjective sonic criteria is probably the easiest/best way to reach an enjoyable sound. I think objective criteria is very helpful (esp with the over-inflated prices of mediocre headphones), but there are many aspects of this hobby that is simply what you personally find to be most pleasing. This hobby is inherently subjective. 
 

  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/man-overdoses-on-brussels_n_2347448.html

hahaha!!!! rotfl too funny

 

[OddE]

Someday, someone is going to create a first class portable digital equalizer and the whole headphone market will take a nose dive. Instead of buying five or six sets of cans and swapping pads and modding them to try to shove them in the right or wrong direction, people will buy one set and EQ it exactly the way they want it to be.

-No, they won't. 'Regular' folk couldn't care less. (Why would I want a thingy like that, my earbuds look just fine the way they are?)

Audiophiles, on the other hand, would in general be outraged that anyone could even suggest that EQ may be beneficial... Oh, the horrors.

 

[liamstrain]

  but if you view it as "poisonous" as a personal, subjective description, the example has some value. 
 

 
Back to the definitions problem. Basically, if you ignore the actual definitions of things, and apply words however you wish, then we cannot objectively measure things because we cannot know what to measure (they are making up the terms and what they mean). But when you do have them defined - e.g. poisonous or audibly transparent - then we can test it. And make predictions based on test results. Science! Don't want science, then don't make testable claims without evidence. 

 

[limpidglitch]

I wonder what the LD₅₀ is of Brussels sprouts.

*heads over to Web of Knowledge*

 

[money4me247]

Back to the definitions problem. Basically, if you ignore the actual definitions of things, and apply words however you wish, then we cannot objectively measure things because we cannot know what to measure (they are making up the terms and what they mean). But when you do have them defined - e.g. poisonous or audibly transparent - then we can test it. And make predictions based on test results. Science! Don't want science, then don't make testable claims without evidence.

Dude, you totally missed how that was a straw man claim made sarcastically by big shot. It's not a definition problem, the initial statement is just ridiculous. It makes no sense if you define poisonous objectively. As a food item, bussels sprouts is inherently not poisonous. Basically like saying the food is poison. Or headphones are shoes. The statement is just blatantly false and does not typify normal subjective audiophile opinions. It is a poor example. Something like a specific food tastes bad would be more pertinent to the discussion of the subjective nature of experience. And ithink that is perfectly reasonable.

Edit: You can have an objectively measured "linear bass" on the FR graph, but someone can think that the bass is lacking. That is because they aren't seeking audibly transparent or audiophile neutral. They just want what sounds good to them. There is no way to objectively measure people's personal preferences. If you look at it from that mentality, I think that the subjectivity inherent to this hobby becomes apparent.

edit2: bigshot does make a good point about how some 'audiophile claims' are simply ridiculous and i agree that the whole idea of golden ears and attributing phantom qualities to certain headphones are silly. I think that objectively measured data and sonically-perceivable differences via ABx testing would be great for this hobby that is already fulled with random expensive junk that does not actually improve performance or myths about sound. However, personal preference is a big part of the hobby, so totally discounting personal experiences would be a mistake as well imo.

 

[Strangelove424]

  Someday, someone is going to create a first class portable digital equalizer and the whole headphone market will take a nose dive. Instead of buying five or six sets of cans and swapping pads and modding them to try to shove them in the right or wrong direction, people will buy one set and EQ it exactly the way they want it to be.

If audiophiles won't accept free digital EQ on the desktop, why would they accept a portable version just because it's encased in a fancy box, and more expensive? Wait a second... nevermind. 
 
I wouldn't mind having a portable DAC/EQ combo for the right price I think. A neutral setting with measured accuracy, and then a bypass EQ setting with 12+ physical sliders that adjusted bands in digital before going into analog. Could be nice for traveling.