We can talk about science (good or bad) all day long but it doesn't matter unless we are listening to theoretical music.
I haven't followed this closely enough to know if others are suggesting the discussion should be restricted to science. But that's not at all my point, and I've said anything that would suggest that. My point is this: Nothing about personal perceptions or scientific deduction can be communicated effectively if there is no established understanding as how to keep some sensible separation between the two.
I'm frustrated with the apparent consequences of this. Just because I'm not an audiophile, doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to learn from those who are with a view to realizing the best sound possible
in my particular circumstances. To use a simple example (although it wasn't always so simple to me), it's important to understand something about the differences between WAV, FLAC and MP3 so I can make a sensible choice
for myself. I got the understanding
I needed from those who explained the objective technical aspects and related measurable differences. From that understanding, I'm supremely confident FLAC is right for me, knowing also I'm extremely unlikely to hear any difference between high quality MP3, FLAC and WAV (or that if I could, that I would care). Endless debates about whether or not it should be possible to hear the difference between FLAC and WAV are of not objective and of no interest to me. I have no objection to someone saying, "I'm not sure why, but I hear a difference..." Understanding the context of such a claim, I might say to myself, "Right. And I may too if I had a $50,000 kit, the gall to use that term, and ears 30 years younger." But if I didn't have the understanding I do, and these claims are being made in a way that implies there is a difference beyond the realm of perception, they're not just unhelpful, they're misleading.
Another beef I have is with all the talk to provide a "pure audio" button (presumably) for audiophiles. What for? Anyone who can't figure out how to configure MC to do the same thing either isn't a true audiophile, hasn't made an appropriate effort to configure the program, or doesn't have due respect for the development work that's gone into it. What about the rest of us? That is, the 80% of us who are not audiophiles, or those who don't care at all about audio. What button do I push help me figure out how to best deal with my crappy SPDIF connection to an average, aging consumer-grade receiver? Or if these are things difficult to make any clearer within the program itself, where's the forum discussion about how to identify the weakest link in such a set of circumstances? I wouldn't expect that to be one discussion. But if they're a bunch of separate discussions, all the more reason why those should try to respect some sort of understanding on how to communicate objective measures of things likely to make a difference to the reader.
So I have absolutely no disagreement with this...
There is really only one thing that matters..... How does it sound to YOU.
Or this...
In the musical realm, if you hear something, it is real.
But I wish these things could be discussed with the small degree of objectivity that would allow me to understand what might make a difference to ME. Sorry to be so blatantly selfish, but that's why I'm here.