Can we actually discuss What is Best on this forum?

[microstrip]

Mike, I am not bending anything. Besides I started the thread. It is my topic and my narrative. I want to see where it goes. You have your own perspective and travel through your universe at Warp 9 getting the new stuff. Perhaps your approach is more relevant to this forum. (...)

No Peter, you are not debating what is the best - you just wrote a long post on what is your preferred and why you prefer to follow David orientations and how successful you are being in this line. Then you call it the best - OK, I am happy for you.

IMHO considering the diversity and ambitions of the high-end what we individually call the "best" is simply an expression of an individual preference, according to our experience and imagination. If by any reason we want the best to overtake such restricted definition we must make polls, voting systems and real debates.

Again IMHO if by any reason WBF would find a strict convergence on unique products in each category as being the "best" it would be a poor signal - it would just mean that the number of active participants become so reduced that an unanimity was possible!

High-end stereo means divergence, altough we surely can group in these divergent lines.

 

[PeterA]

What Mike and Al are basically saying is to comply or they won’t play with you anymore! This shit is all personal and nothing else.

david

This is a public forum, open to all. I start a thread which some actually stated is interesting to them, and I’m now being told what I can and cannot express.

I am describing the criteria that I use to judge what I think is best and actually naming a cartridge as meeting that criteria. I would be interested if more members did the same. I think this is one way for people to learn things.

 

[microstrip]

For anyone searching for the best here is the german databank from a leading german hifi magazine

Test

STEREO – Alle Tests zu HiFi und Audio: Lautsprecher, Verstärker, Kopfhörer, Plattenspieler und mehr ausführlich getestet und bewertet.

www.stereo.de

You can just click on what you wanna buy and in what price range and you automatically get the best according to them .
You dont even need to read a forum , lol .

Ps The time i still read this nonsense is about 17 years ago

Surely it is a nonsense if you we not understand the list and their scoring system. It is simply an ordered list of the products they reviewed - a very reduced quantity of gear. The problem of these lists is that should never be accessible to people who are not regular magazine readers or at less have full access to the reviews.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Surely it is a nonsense if you we not understand the list and their scoring system.

I didnt bother to open the link .
In my junior hifi years i actually bought these german magazines (and others )
The list then went to 110 points as a maximum , 100 was at a certain time the maximum but as new products came out the 1OO didnt hold off course so it was 110
To improve on that i suppose currently they are at 150 points at stereo or whatever the name is now .

The last thing i need is music to be ranked in some kind of number system , music is an art form the last thing it needs is some scoring table

 

[PeterA]

No Peter, you are not debating what is the best - you just wrote a long post on what is your preferred and why you prefer to follow David orientations and how successful you are being in this line. Then you call it the best - OK, I am happy for you.

IMHO considering the diversity and ambitions of the high-end what we individually call the "best" is simply an expression of an individual preference, according to our experience and imagination. If by any reason we want the best to overtake such restricted definition we must make polls, voting systems and real debates.

Again IMHO if by any reason WBF would find a strict convergence on unique products in each category as being the "best" it would be a poor signal - it would just mean that the number of active participants become so reduced that an unanimity was possible!

High-end stereo means divergence, altough we surely can group in these divergent lines.

Francisco, in my opinion a divergence of sounds in the hobby simply means people are losing their way. If there is a target, a standard, a reference to which one is aiming like real music, I would think progress would lead to the best components sounding more and more similar.

If DACs and digital in general were improving at such a rapid rate, and we presume by improving means sounding more real, then I would suspect that competing projects would sound more and more similar. You seem to be suggesting that if they sound increasingly different that that is a good thing. I emphatically disagree.

What is the argument for the top four or five super DACs sounding very different from each other leading to progress? Aren’t we trying to reproduce an event? Getting closer and closer to being able to do that implies a convergence of sound not a divergence.

Divergence is good for storytelling and selling products. From what I have read, the WADAX, the DCS Apex, the Lampizator Horizon, and the MSB all sound quite different from each other. And then there are the top cables.

 

[microstrip]

Francisco, in my opinion a divergence of sounds in the hobby simply means people are losing their way. If there is a target, a standard, a reference to which one is aiming like real music, I would think progress would lead to the best components sounding more and more similar.

The question is that even the best reproduced music is so different from real music that our listener contribution to make it sound like real is significant and each of us has a different experience and education. Besides your system you educated yourself at David's house, me at my systems and regularly at my distributor 9x6m room, as well a at a few friends top systems.

Also the standard for stereo recording is so loose that we have different recording spaces and times with different recording techniques - at this moment I am not considering listening mainly to recordings of the 60's and 70's. I already listened to it a lot some decades ago.

If DACs and digital in general were improving at such a rapid rate, and we presume by improving means sounding more real, then I would suspect that competing projects would sound more and more similar. You seem to be suggesting that if they sound increasingly different that that is a good thing. I emphatically disagree. What is the argument for the top four or five super DACs sounding very different from each other leading to progress? Aren’t we trying to reproduce an event? Getting closer and closer to being able to do that implies a convergence of sound not a divergence.

You fail to understand what is the high-end stereo and how high-end gear sounds "better" (preferred by groups of people) and that stereo is a blend of compromises, not a convergence to optimum. Digital is different stereo format with different technical properties and can't be discussed in terms of vinyl -better staying away from DACs.

Divergence is good for storytelling and selling products. From what I have read, the WADAX, the DCS Apex, the Lampizator Horizon, and the MSB all sound quite different from each other. And then there are the top cables.

Surely. Remember that for most of us this is an hobby, not a religion.

BTW, can you nominate one of your favorite recordings that has more complexity, musical and instrumental diversity and realism than my favorite "Routes of l'Esclavage" ?

 

[Audire]

According to Webster’s, the word “best” means, “a person or thing or part of a thing that is better than all the other.” Or, “the absolute finest, the greatest, the foremost.” Notice all the “the’s“; “the” absolute finest, “the” greatest, and “the” foremost. This means there may only be one and only “one“ Best!

So, a simple question.

Have you listened to or own “the“ system “better than all others” in existence - bar none?

If you have heard such a system than please show us a pic and explain what’s in it. I’m sure all of us would be interested.

But if you answer YES (I’ve heard “the“ system of all systems period), then to make such an assertion it necessarily means you have compared your system against every other system in the entire world. Otherwise you couldn't honestly make such a declaration of fact - this is “the best.“ Also you would have to explain why this isn’t a subjective opinion and why it’s an objective fact.

If you answer NO, then this topic has come to an end as you haven't heard the best reference system against which all other systems should be compared. While you may continue to look for the absolute best system, you admit you still haven’t heard it. Therefore “the” best still remains illusive.

Our hobby is a subjective one. We have our favorites - and that is great. We have what sounds best to our ears at any given time - and that’s fantastic as well. But saying our system or component is “the” Best goes too far as there is no way that such assertion can be guaranteed to be factual.

Perhaps I’m mistaken, but I thought part of being an audiophile is about tweaking our systems to make them sound better and better… We’re always talking about upgrades to our systems; this footer, this cable, this, this, this… So, since everyone is making changes to thier systems no one owns the absolute best system of all time, as it would never need to be tweaked.

So, where is this absolute best system at? PLEASE prove it - objectively.

 

[microstrip]

I prefer the Oxford Dictionary version : best - of the most excellent type or quality. It seems to me it is more adequate to our WBF threads!

 

[Audire]

I prefer the Oxford Dictionary version : best - of the most excellent type or quality. It seems to me it is more adequate to our WBF threads!

People are qualifying the word “best” by placing the adjective “the” in front if it. This qualifies its meaning to only one. They also are saying the “world’s“ best. This is another qualification meaning above any other. So they aren‘t using Oxford definition.

 

[tima]

So, where is this absolute best system at? PLEASE prove it - objectively.

I do not understand what this means. Can you describe what counts as objective proof that something is the best, and why does that count as the determinant?

 

[microstrip]

People are qualifying the word “best” by placing the adjective “the” in front if it. This qualifies its meaning to only one. They also are saying the “world’s“ best. This is another qualification meaning above any other. So they aren‘t using Oxford definition.

Surely, people say what they think. I am just telling that IMHO the Webster definition does not apply to stereo and the Oxford definition seems adequate to WBF purposes.

 

[Audire]

I do not understand what this means. Can you describe what counts as objective proof that something is the best, and why does that count as the determinant?

I’m not the one saying that there is “the” best system or component. Some others are. They claim that their claims are not subjective. Thus it must mean they have some objective proof of their claims. I’d like to know what that objective evidence is.

If they don’t have any objective evidence then their claims must be subjective and thus should be qualified as such, ie. this is the very best amp I’ve ever heard, not the best amp in the world, etc.

 

[Audire]

Surely, people say what they think. I am just telling that IMHO the Webster definition does not apply to stereo and the Oxford definition seems adequate to WBF purposes.

I would agree that one should not use the Webster definition for high end audio. IMO the Oxford definition would be better. However, when someone puts the adjective “the” in front of the word “best”, then they (possibly without realizing it) are referring to Webster’s definition.

Something that Elliot stated early on was very wise IMO, “The state of the art is constantly in flux, always has been and always will be. I think the discussion should be of what's really good or excellent and loose the other b word as it really promotes the wrong discussion.”

 

[Tango]

Nobody has claimed that all gear is "equally excellent". I certainly would vehemently deny such notion. Suggesting such a red herring distracts from the discussion if, in view of the subjectivity involved in this hobby, one can categorically name a single thing "the best".

Yes Al nobody. I wrote it. I said it. I did not say anybody else said it.

I do understand very well your opinion. I am really not into debating back and forth when others have a difference in opinion from mine. Everyone is entitle to his/her opinion.

Out of curiosity on this subject of cannot claim what is the world's best due to all the reasons popularly made in this thread. Only if you care to answer Al. Would it create less agitation or less opposing argument if we say something like " The World's Best 50 Dac?" One best seems difficult to accept. What about 50, 70, 10, 5? Where should we draw the line? CNN is using 10 for the World's Best Restaurant out of how many millions restaurants in the world. Out of billions different tongues. They must have gone through all the restaurants to say this. Is 10 too big or too small. Would 10 be neglecting someone's best to his preference. Too small would probably not cover all the preferences and variables in the audio world I believe. Obviously we have difficulty accepting one best. How many is more comfortable for the best dac, the best cartridge, etc.

kind regards,
Tang

 

[Joe Whip]

Frankly, unless you have heard everything in audio, claiming anything is the best is frankly foolhardy. The only thing we can ever say with any degree of certainty is that something is the best we have heard, enjoyed, tasted, etc. until the next best thing comes along. Taste is subjective. Find something you really enjoy and.…enjoy it to your hearts content.

 

[Al M.]

Yes Al nobody. I wrote it. I said it. I did not say anybody else said it.

I do understand very well your opinion. I am really not into debating back and forth when others have a difference in opinion from mine. Everyone is entitle to his/her opinion.

Out of curiosity on this subject of cannot claim what is the world's best due to all the reasons popularly made in this thread. Only if you care to answer Al. Would it create less agitation or less opposing argument if we say something like " The World's Best 50 Dac?" One best seems difficult to accept. What about 50, 70, 10, 5? Where should we draw the line? CNN is using 10 for the World's Best Restaurant out of how many millions restaurants in the world. Out of billions different tongues. They must have gone through all the restaurants to say this. Is 10 too big or too small. Would 10 be neglecting someone's best to his preference. Too small would probably not cover all the preferences and variables in the audio world I believe. Obviously we have difficulty accepting one best. How many is more comfortable for the best dac, the best cartridge, etc.

kind regards,
Tang

Tang, I think Joe just said it best (pun intended): "The best I've heard", that's good enough. And that's 1 thing, not 5 or 50. It still doesn't mean it's THE ONE "best".

No need to torturously try to quantity things with the best 5 or best 50, or whatever. And if you want to cast a wider net with a longer list that might capture more tastes: How could you capture everyone's preference, when you can't even stand in anyone else's shoes, only your own? Yes, you might know the general sonic direction that others prefer, but how do you know what's "best" for them?

And of course, what's best for any given person in the real world is "the best" they can afford. Few can afford a million dollar system, but every audiophile wants to listen to great reproduction of music. No need for anyone to be snobbish about anything.

Some of course want to be on top of the food chain and like to think they own THE best -- whatever. If it makes them happy, be my guest.

 

[MadFloyd]

Wow. This whole 'DDK is god' thing has grown so old. Peter, wake up. Think for yourself.

 

[tima]

Can you describe what counts as objective proof that something is the best, and why does that count as the determinant?

I’m not the one saying that there is “the” best system or component. Some others are. They claim that their claims are not subjective. Thus it must mean they have some objective proof of their claims. I’d like to know what that objective evidence is.

If they don’t have any objective evidence then their claims must be subjective and thus should be qualified as such, ie. this is the very best amp I’ve ever heard, not the best amp in the world, etc.

Thank you - yes, I understand you want objective proof using objective evidence. My question is a little different and I think it applies to the overall discussion of what counts as best -- even if one does something like Tang mentions and says 10 best or 25 best.

I'm asking what counts as objective evidence and what counts as objective proof? We need to know what counts as an answer.

My second question is a bit more difficult. You have divied things up into subjective and objective. Isn't that arbitrary? Why should we adopt objective proof with objective evidence as the determiner of what is best? Why can't we say that the top N contributors to WBF define what is best?

edit: spelling

 

[Robh3606]

How do you determine What's Best in a subjective hobby?? There are so many factors involved. One of the reasons I do DIY speakers is I simply don't have deep enough pockets to purchase the originals so I tend to clone designs I can get enough information on. Really is it digital or analog?? Do we really on measurements or subjective impressions??? Seam's like a question we all can't agree on for an answer???

Rob

 

[Audire]

Thank you - yes, I understand you want object proof using objective evidence. My question is a little different and I think it applies to the overall discussion of what counts as best -- even if one does something like Tang mentions and says 10 best or 25 best.

I'm asking what counts as objective evidence and what counts as objective proof? We need to know what counts as an answer.

My second question is a bit more difficult. You have divied things up into subjective and objective. Isn't that arbirary? Why should we adopt objective proof with objective evidence as the determiner of what is best? Why can't we say that the top N contributors to WBF define what is best?

IMO it’s those claiming that they’ve experienced “the best” that need to show us objective evidence of the same. Since they are the ones claiming their decision isn’t subjective but objective it’s up to them to explain why this is so.