Ashley James:jaxwired:
I'd take that a step further. For one thing, "bettter" is entirely subjective.
"Better" definitely isn't subjective, it's something you can measure and equate to the sound quality that results and I'm sure that we're not alone in a perpetual quest to improve what we do. Therefore you can imagine how frustrated we get when people (shops usually) say that it's "what you prefer" or "what's good for you". It isn't, it's what's best at reproducing accurately and in a non fatiguing way, what has been recorded, so that whatever you choose to play sounds as good as it can and thus allows you to see though your system to music unimpeded by any distortion that a lesser system might add.
With all due respect, "better" IS subjective. "Better" is all personal preference. You have defined "better" as more accurate. Do you think vinyl lovers define it that way? People who are known to enjoy the pops and hiss?
The whole reason we are arguing about "better" is because we all define "better" our own way. Many people prefer accentuated bass. That's not accurate, but to them it's "better". Lot's of people find super accurate treble to be harsh and abrasive. Also not "better" to them. So "better" actually means "
what I enjoy the most" and that my friend is absolutely subjective.
In fact, I feel confident that most people given a choice between 10 great speakers would not pick the most accurate one as the one they'd like to own.
I do agree that "most accurate" is NOT subjective. That can indeed be measured.
Also, I'd like to make the point that you had a mild contradiction in your post because you used the phrase "non-fatiquing" when describing how "better" is not subjective. I think you'd be very hard pressed to measure "non-fatiquing".
Finally, I want to comment on this confrontational business. Ashley, I very much enjoy this debate and your input. Your passion and obvious knowledge is appreciated and respected. Thank you for contributing.