Depends which circles you run in hahah.
But yeah it’s not really the dominant theory (or even something that gets much attention), but as said more so various different versions of representationalism and externalism, which are also generally more compatible with the scientific understanding as well.
If I didn’t know better (because there would be more complaints about ill fitting headbands), I’d think that some academic type pointy-headed intellectuals were havin’ a free-for-all in the forum sandbox.
haha yes. But these are interesting thoughts - like how we can do a better job of bridging a gap in discourse that has a tendency to plague our hobby from time to time. Of course, those who just love it when their music sounds awesome can happily ignore all of it hahah.
I do enjoy it - I’m the only 2 B.A. degree dropout from a family of academics. But I’m also a Financial Advisor that likes to do western wear at work - channeling my inner Kinky Friedman. So I spend my time droppin’ th’ talk about PE Ratios, alfa, beta, Sharpe Ratios, Federal Reserve Policy discussions, and just try t’ focus on if people are meetin’ their goals. And help them make goals. Like “sure, we can make sure you save enough for a new Pendant (favorite amp for academics), but first, let’s make sure yer kids ain’t gonna go tuh school barefoot if sumpthin’ unexpected was tuh happen tuh you or yer missus.”
While I do follow the arguments, I think it would be a great challenge to make the same argument in words of one to three syllables. And see if the point ain’t clearer. To put it in subjective against objective terms. After a while ya don’t really need more zeros on the’ part after the decimal point. Ya cain’t hear the difference.
Wow!.. this is heady stuff for an audio forum. The so-called Hard problem of consciousness is an example of the limitations of western philosophy: a purely intellectual, analytical approach is insufficient here. The ‘mystery’ of consciousness is ultimately a spiritual question. In Vedanta and other wisdom traditions, this has been understood for thousands of years. One can learn a lot by participating in a meditation retreat. Meanwhile… my headphones are waiting to be of some use… cheers!
Ah, thanks for clarifying. I think I agree with you.
Like, we don’t have to perfectly explain the qualia to know what’s likely responsible for it, as we can do in other areas.
But it’s certainly a worthy endgoal 
Really hate HydrogenAudio being the best example of being on the extreme end of objectivity. I post samples there were AAC & Vorbis artifact at 175kbps but LAME MP3 at V3 & Musepack standard are transparent, I get nothing but personal attacks. The Microattack issue on Vorbis is so bad that they refuse to add any noise rich music to see how It fares. Apple AAC really seems to struggle with Dark ambient with strong noise/industrial elements where the synths get ruined.
Been using Helix MP3 lately since It is very robust to pre echo without needing 224 ~ 300kbps like in LAME encoders.
The LINA is just crying out for a double-blind test against some high-testing, sub $1K Chi-Fi gear.
Nothing is crying out to be blind tested against any Topping/SMSL gear haha.
Past that $1k mark with those brands, you aren’t buying for measurements. You’re buying gear for synergy and personal sonic preferences. So so many amps measure worse but sound much better. I guess they measure very high for personal enjoyment.
The DAC looks interesting. The breif impressions of the Amp don’t seem super positive. Be keen to hear Torqs thoughts
I only suggest the blind test because DCS goes out of its way to say that there is NO sound coloration. If they’re selling pure solid-state transparency, aren’t they then playing in the same sandbox as the high-measuring Chi-Fi gear? What would a transparent DCS amp do that an A90 would not?
You could do all the blind tests in the world, but to what end?
Or, in other words, who’s the test supposed to benefit?
No matter the outcome, it’s not going to convince someone who’s seriously in the market for dCS gear to suddenly start cross-shopping it against Topping (etc.).
Notwithstanding that the seriously high-dollar gear sells for myriad reasons that have nothing to do with presumed/claimed superior sonic/technical performance.
And then who would you get to do the test? You can’t have objectivists do such a test in this kind of comparison, as there is just too much incentive for them to just say “can’t tell a difference” even if they could. And the more subjectively-biased listeners don’t care in the first place.
A $25 Timex quartz watch is more accurate than a $10K Rolex or $1M Jacob & Co watch. No one in the luxury market cares.
The difference is that trade journalists are telling us that in the case of DCS, a Rolex tells better time than a Timex. If the articles about the products said things like “this is the coolest looking stack with the best-feeling knobs” rather than “this is the best your headphones will sound” then no problem. We’re simply dealing with a pure luxury proposition, and caveat emptor. But as someone who doesn’t have $30K to spend on a headphone rig, those sorts of blind tests would immensely benefit me. As much as people on forums mock Zeos, and certainly he has his own bias, I did appreciate his test of the Holo May. There are times when we have to rely on the veracity of reviewers to make informed choices, and I prefer as much data as possible. No, I can’t arrange for a blind test, because I can’t afford the LINA to begin with. That doesn’t mean that such a test would be of no value. I disagree with the premise that because a possible methodological flaw exists, there should be no further investigation. There is a pervasive elitism in the audiophile arena which assumes that people who look at measurements are somehow devoid of soul or perception, but perhaps it’s just people who want to make sure the money they spend on gear is being spent on performance rather than luxuriousness.
If you’re wondering if $10K+ DAC’s sound better than a D90, find a dealer and go listen to one, and decide for yourself. It pretty much doesn’t matter what brand you pick, while quality doesn’t always follow price there is a general trend from what I’ve listened to.
If you don’t hear a difference great you can stop listening and enjoy what you have.
I may not always love a presentation, but you can usually clearly hear the technical differences between price points.
He’s my 2C having A/B’d DAC’s in my own systems, both deliberately and accidentally (when my switching setup was complicated) for the most part I can’t hear any change in frequency response on a quick change between almost any pair of DAC, but a few seconds of listening to familiar material is enough for me to easily know which DAC I’m listening to, and I might even describe those changes in terms of FR, though it’s mostly about presentation and perceived resolution.
Almost all DAC’s have flat FR curves where is matters and distortion low enough it’ll be swamped by everything else in the chain. But in my experience they can significantly alter the overall presentation of a system.
So, ignore them - no one is forcing you to read/listen to/watch them.
I spend more on audio gear than most … and “trade” reviews (and I include ALL YouTube audio reviews in that) are the very last place I look for information. And I say that as someone that’s written them.
Reviews are, at best, appetite-wetters.
A good personal maxim should simply be to ignore gear you cannot hear/compare for yourself. Especially if it is not something you can afford/or would buy, in the first place.
If you can’t buy the thing anyway, what does it matter how it tests, measures, or fares in a blind test? What is the benefit you get in this case?
The only reasons I can think of, off hand, that people who can’t afford something want to see it tested against things they can afford (or are willing to spend, which is quite often a very different thing) is so they can feel good about what they’ve bought, or it’s a FOMO thing.
That’s fine, but doesn’t require anyone else think the same way for it to be valid on a personal level.
So … again … how is it of value to you?
Beyond entertainment or self-satisfaction, that is?
Yes, we often are. Veblen goods (aka hard to obtain pricey status symbols) abound. I visit local audio stores but don’t hear much value in most luxury stuff to be honest. Yes they can generate massive, instant bass. Staging…not much different than mainstream gear. Mid range…not much different. High range…typically cleaner and more defined than mainstream products but not always.
Watch the scrolling images here: http://jsaudio.com/ I’ve been in their demo room with a $600K 2-channel setup. The Wilson stacks were 6 or 7 feet tall, but one driver was slightly misaligned on the left so the image was huge but by no means the best I’ve experienced.
The milled metal chassis of a D’Agostino preamp costs more than most home stereo systems by a wide margin, but it’s just a very fancy switch box.
Oh boy yes! Some of us can spend for luxury but don’t, others enjoy the luxury experience, others want to communicate “mine is bigger than yours,” and some blur their emotions with their perceptions (placebo effects). It’s surely possible to execute double-blind perceptual tests – and I’m personally qualified to sketch the method – but there are so many variables that it’s often not time or cost effective. Some buyers in the luxury market buy with their eyes rather than their ears, and luxury goods are priced very, very randomly. Luxury is never about value for money, and it’s often quite the opposite. Some buyers value exclusivity and style, and enjoy the feeling of having more money than others and the “pain” of spending/sacrificing to get it.
Fortunately I am not so afflicted. I like to get the best sound I can for the least dinero possible. Cheap like that LOL…
A voice of reason, thank you
That’s the thing – the DAC that intrigues me most is the Holo May, which doesn’t have dealers! So I’d have to buy on faith. And I may do that someday.
Sounds more sensible than cheap!