So This Is Where You Guys Are Hiding Now? Lol

Yea but you are TEH KING LEMMING...so its ok .

 

As for the first statement I quoted...
To the contrary! I think the "mob mentality" is a bad thing, that's exactly my point, in fact.
I think it not only stifles individual thought (which I value highly), and individual goal development (which I value highly), and individual personalization (which I value highly), but also encourages those who flock and seek comfort and power in numbers over those who may come in with new ideas.

I don't like the thought that creative people would be stifled for going against the grain.

It's one thing if someone has a creative or successful idea so great that lots of people want to emulate it - because they understand the value in it.

It's another thing if someone feels like they have to conform to an idea because if they don't, people will criticize them.

As for the second statement I quoted...
I couldn't agree more... that's very much in line with my point.
Lots of us here have different backgrounds, different products, different installs, differeng goals...
That's something to be celebrated and enjoyed - for exactly the reasons you stated. B)

That was the point of my entire first post.... that's why I commented.

 

audiomobile is the best company on the market. if you dont run their siht, you are retarded and dont want good or loud sound.

eric :blow:

*edit* this comment is meant in jest... :lmfao:

 

I believe you misunderstood my point in this part, because i agree fully with what you said in response....

Mobs are indeed bad, but what i'm saying is, it doesn't take a mob of people for someone to take a stand and try and discredit others. Not everyone needs a mob of people backing them up...this can be good and bad.

I wish everyone did feel as if they would be ok by going against the grain, its just that i haven't really found a forum yet where EVERY member encourages or agrees with that. Chances are, if i were to come on here and say that i thought Pyramid made the best products on the market....SOMEONE would flame me . That person would not respect my opinion, and thus, they would directly challenge it.

Does that make more sense? We're both on the same page on this issue i believe...

 

Oh, I see.

Well, I'd like to think that if people came in here, they would flame you for touting "Pyramid"... depending on what you were saying about it, that is... for the same reasons both you and I are arguing FOR, I believe.

What we are really saying here, after all, is that people here (on CAT) are objective, and know what best suits their needs and tastes - heck, know what their needs and tastes even are, is a good thing, compared to many forums! :lol:

There's a great thread going on CAF right now... started by Warbleed..
Basically, my favorite points in that thread are that they pointed out people often can't separate the subjective "This sounds good... to me" from the very objective "This more accurately reproduces the signal", or "this produces less distortion", or "This has the potential to get louder".

So...
If you came in saying you thought your Pyramid sounded better than anything else that you'd heard, who can dispute that?

I would be motivated to ask you what you were comparing it to - so I could understand your statements... and maybe ask some leading questions as to what you like or look for in a subwoofer, or how you'd describe "sound quality" - because I'd be seeing if you truly were making the simple, objective statement, or if you believed this was something objective.

Because I could (and should, IMO) debate you on if you thought it was a more accurate subwoofer... or a louder subwoofer (and again.. in the scope of potential, not a particular install), etc.

Maybe I should qualify my original statement...
We should celebrate the fact that we've all got different gear that we can all have mutual respect for... that there's a high enough level of understanding - of the gear, of people's goals, of the installations, or even of temporary setups pending time or money - that all these different installs and different setups actually lead people here to mutual respect, rather than feeling that one person's setup is "inferior" to anothers, and flaming wars ensuing...

We've got it good here! B)

 

And here in lies the problem. Personally, i do not care what a piece of paper says my speaker will or won't do... This is where i run into problems with people. As i've said before (and here comes another flame from Seth...), the Brahma is not my type of sub, even if it is the best at reproducing it's frequency range without distortion. The facts on paper make no difference to me, the sound itself is is not as good as say... a W7, or an IDQ, but that's MY PERSONAL OPINION . As you've seen in my recent posts...i end up getting into a flame war with Seth over these type of comments.

If people would separate subjective from objective, and question people who are making objective comments instead of flaming them or aggressively opposing them, there would be no need for forum mods .

 

***Walks away whistling and kicking a can***
:unsure: :bag: :no:

 

***Walks away whistling and kicking a can***
:unsure: :bag: :no: [/b][/quote]
Why you worried? I'm not trying to start a war here...i'm just using examples, and Seth happened to be one of em.

 

That's exactly my point...

Statements with regard to how much you enjoy the sound of a particular speaker -
Subjective.
No one should really dispute that, although it might be understandible to voice some surprise, if you understand what I mean.

However, statements regarding what a speaker is capable of...
Objective.

How accurately a speaker can reproduce the a signal?
That's objective.

How much displacement and sealed-box output potential a speaker has?
That's objective.

How much ported-box output potential a speaker has?
That's objective.

And that's not to say that all these speakers are going to be rank-ordered... many might be simply lateral moves... very similar in capabilities, if not literally than functionally, as our hearing tolerances make it so that fairly large differences in quality are needed to perceive the change in quality.

But there definitely is a difference between objective and subjective.

If you came in and said "I love the way my Pyramid sounds", you might get some chuckles, but no disputing your preference.

However, if you came in and said "My Pyramid plays the music with less distortion than your Brahma", we could most definitely objectively dispute that one... and we should.
That's my point. B)

VERY VERY VERY big difference between:
"I like the way this sounds over that one"
and
"This is more accurate than that one"

 

well I am moving this to pointless posts, because that is what it is


ohh and where are the "flame wars" threads at? here or another forum?

 

That basically sums it up right there...not everyone knows the difference. Even still, i don't think you can say one speaker is more accurate than another. If an individual percieves the sound to be better regardless of what the paper says, can you say they're wrong? If i like the cymbal crash sound of a morel tweet better than a scan speak...knowing that the scan is on paper the better tweet, would you still say i'm wrong because i believe the morel is more accurate?

.

 

Yea, sorry we got a little OT there Mike.

The wars are at another forum... caraudioplanet.com. If you'll notice, i don't think Seth will respond to any posts i make on this board .

 

No one is flaming here, you big baby!
Take your flame accusations and shove them...
Now, I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food-trough water! I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
Now go away before I taunt you a second time.
:blowup:
And I can't think for the life of me where the flame forum was...

Oh, possibly Soundhertz?

 

No one is flaming here, you big baby!
Take your flame accusations and shove them...
Now, I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food-trough water! I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
Now go away before I taunt you a second time.
:blowup:
And I can't think for the life of me where the flame forum was...

Oh, possibly Soundhertz? [/b][/quote]
You're the worst flamer i've ever seen geo :lol:

The war i'm speaking of was on caraudioplanet.com.

 

Ah, see.. now YOU are confusing it.

The paper can only give you clues as to the objective parameters of the speaker... it can (if you have the right specs and plots) tell you which one should be more accurate than another, unless they are simply too much in the same ballpark to call.

However, only you can determine which one you like the sound of better.
That is subjective, and has nothing to do with how accurate something is.

Consider even in a live environment, the musicians are playing through amplifiers, wires, mixing boards, and arrays of loudspeakers of who-knows-what design... all of which will impart coloration and distortion on the music.
And it still sounds wonderful, enjoyable.

Begs the question... so what IS "perfect" sound?
Very personal. Based on YOUR standards, and has nothing (repeat-nothing) to do with accuracy - at least not directly. Not unless your point of reference is very "accurate". B)

Bear in mind also, frequency response plots aren't generic... they are always with respect to a particular installation / position / listening environment. Even "generic" ones... they do show multiple axis angles, which is nice... but are supposed to reflect (maybe a bad word to use here :lol: ) an anechoic listening space - which a car, or even a room, is not - and you can't factor out the mounting surface, power source or other potential colorations.

 

Hah, no confusion, but i see your point. I'll agree with that.

 

well That is good then


But it is pointless to talk about sound quality


when there are millions that thing Britney Spears is actually talented, and SOUNDS GOOD, there will always be a market for Pyle Subs.....


I am sure this has been said, but I will say it anyway


SQ to person A, is how the speaker,Source,or whatever sound to their ears

SQ to person be, is how accurate the Speaker can reproduce a Given Source


So person A has SUBJECTIVE sound Quality

Person B has OBJECTIVE sound Qaulity

and you can not compair the 2

Just because the Source is Reproduced in 100% accurate manner does not mean it will sound good, or "right"

Hell Remeber tube amps -- they place more distortion than any amp on the market, yet they are still called "sq amps"

 

Well, I've got a strong interest conceptually in how accurate products can be, technologies that push that envelope are simply cool.

But I tend to find lots of stuff that is "different" interesting too...
And that means different sounds, different experiences.
I tend to not try to rank different things as 'better' or 'worst' ... just different.
Cones, planars, horns...
Transistors, tubes, live acoustic...
Small club concert, stadium concert, psychadelic rave...
Reference room, car audio, headphones...
It's all enjoyable, in different ways. B)

I don't believe it would even be as enjoyable, if they were all so "perfectly accurate" that they all did truly sound the same. :no: