Tweet
Ah, the science of scientism, I love it. Everything has to 100% scientific or it's BS 
Nowhere, I've gone through this arguement a hundred times with a dozen different people. I can already tell that we will never see eye to eye on it. Music is an art, audiophilia is the science used to reproduce music with the least amount of imperfections versus listening to it live. The problem people like you fail to realize is that art and science mix about as well as oil and water, which isn't very well last time I checked. Everything must be backed up with some sort of scientific looking thing so you can scrutinize it and tell people like me that we're full of $#!* in a scientific way, which in your mind makes you more right.
Back to the wine example. There is science behind the making of the wine, but even the best science can't make a great wine. It can help, but in the end it's the wine maker's experience and tastebuds that decide what wine is good. No matter what kind of flavour analysis you do, it don't matter unless the taster likes the wine. Science and art. Audio is the same.
People who presumably know something about science build the component. People hook up the component and give it a listening to and judge whether said component is worth the price they paid. End of story. No measurement can tell someone whether they like what they hear or not. Science and art.
Back to your retort about my experiment. I wasn't out to prove anything to anyone, still aren't, so I apologize that I didn't keep a lab book. If you read what I wrote I said:
Now if that's not a blind enough test for you, then you need to serious go back to school and learn a little more about Mr. Scientific Method.
Jammrock
Nowhere, I've gone through this arguement a hundred times with a dozen different people. I can already tell that we will never see eye to eye on it. Music is an art, audiophilia is the science used to reproduce music with the least amount of imperfections versus listening to it live. The problem people like you fail to realize is that art and science mix about as well as oil and water, which isn't very well last time I checked. Everything must be backed up with some sort of scientific looking thing so you can scrutinize it and tell people like me that we're full of $#!* in a scientific way, which in your mind makes you more right.
Back to the wine example. There is science behind the making of the wine, but even the best science can't make a great wine. It can help, but in the end it's the wine maker's experience and tastebuds that decide what wine is good. No matter what kind of flavour analysis you do, it don't matter unless the taster likes the wine. Science and art. Audio is the same.
People who presumably know something about science build the component. People hook up the component and give it a listening to and judge whether said component is worth the price they paid. End of story. No measurement can tell someone whether they like what they hear or not. Science and art.
Back to your retort about my experiment. I wasn't out to prove anything to anyone, still aren't, so I apologize that I didn't keep a lab book. If you read what I wrote I said:
because I didn't tell them I changed anything, just waited to see if they discovered the changed on their own.
Jammrock
Comment