In Reply to: Why do most present-day audiophiles hate science? posted by middleground on January 27, 2003 at 19:50:13:
i think you need to give specific examples where you think really clear science is rejected by audiophiles because no defense is going to apply to every situation.some thoughts, some as devil's advocate:
1. a lot of audiophiles aren't scientists and don't understand the scientific method. people often disregard what they don't understand, but everyone can understand what they hear.
2. on the other hand, people who think they're scientific really don't always do a good job applying science. correcting them isn't necessasrily being anti-science, but maybe even being more scientific. it could be that the scientific method, properly applied, actually shows uncertainty or is not capable of settling the issue.
i see that you're a lawyer - i'm sure that you often get frustrated when people try to tell you how the law works and how it's so obvious that X is the case. your lawyerly analyis might find that there's a lot of complexity in the issue, but it's not a rejection of rationality. similarly, how right do you think a man of letters is telling a scientist it's so obvious that X is the case? can you be so certain that some of these issue are so scientificly clear cut?
3. you have to admit that there's a lot of unknowns in audio. again, i guess we need to flesh out what sort of issues you think are pretty clear cut.
4. it's not just audiophiles. manufacturers, who presumably are much better versed in science, certainly seem to disagree just as much as people posting here. i'm thinking of the "upsampling" debates as an example.
5. what's the value of the scientific approach in this hobby? at the end of the day, the end game is what you hear, and then it's a matter of finding the "pleasing". that just doesn't sound like science to me. if it is, then please build me the perfect stereo!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- what science? - TA 01/27/0320:37:38 01/27/03 (2)
- Re: what science? - middleground 06:29:20 01/28/03 (1)
- okay - TA 08:41:04 01/28/03 (0)