There is a long standing conflict between two schools of thought in the hi-fi world, objectivist vs subjective.  The war has always existed but today the battle rages over the Home Theater market that has brought new inexpensive digital technologies to the masses.  What used to be an exclusive endeavor of the wealthy, building a component audio system for your home, has become inexpensive and spread to just about any home.  In the new mass market Home Theater and Hi-Fi scene we’re seeing this struggle play out between the traditional elite audio buffs who follow a highly subjective idea of sound quality and the hi-fi objectivists who want to apply specifications to good sound.  A lot can be learned by looking at both sides, I’ll try to break it down as objectively as I can (irony intended). 

A hi-fi objectivist is someone who lets numbers, specifications and double blind testing demonstrate what an audio component is capable of.  Generally the hi-fi objectivist is uncomfortable with a lot of the adjective laden audio reviews you might see in magazines like Stereophile.

Objectivist +

+    Double blind testing between components to determine which sounds better is the bottom line, make no mistake. 
+    Counters the snake oil salesmen who think putting a $500 rock under you amp will make music sound better, not to mention many more scandals.
+    Backs up claims with hard science that cannot be refuted.

Objectivist –

- Often lacks the passion for the hobby, bereft of the desire to find creative ways to make things sound better.
- Too often simply has no appreciation for the sound of music, more interested in specs than music.
- Stats and specifications rarely tell the whole story.  We know this if we so much as follow the evening news.
- “Meter Heads” (as they’re affectionately known) often like to getting hung up on certain specs at the expense of the whole picture.
- Taking the extreme Objectivist approach leads to Consumer Reports as the end all review of audio components.  If it’s guaranteed to last a lifetime; what else is there?

On the other side is the hi-fi subjectivist.  At worst the subjectivist is the poor slob who lives their whole lives sadly believing they’re just that one more $10,000 component or $700 cable away from the “complete” system.  They’re subject to unnecessary “upgraditus” in a vain effort to find the fulfillment possibly lacking in other areas of life.
 
Subjectivist +

+    A bit of snobbery in any serious undertaking is healthy, they’re called standards and they’re good for you, try them in other areas of life and you won’t be disappointed.
+    Closing your eyes and really listening for sound quality and trying to find words to describe the qualities you’re hearing isn’t just an endeavor for the insane, it’s food for your mind.
+    Finding creative ways to make components “sound” better is fun, a part of hi-fi the subjectivist hasn’t forgotten.  Often there is scientific reason for a seemingly superstitious improvement, even if it only feels right.  Trust your instincts.

Subjectivist –

- Buying into acoustic snake oil is stupid.  Selling acoustic snake oil is evil and will adversely affect your chances of making it to heaven. 
- Subjectivists often natter to each other about acoustic qualities they supposedly hear in components and it’s rarely consistent.  No two subjectivists will tell you what speakers match well with what amp, they’ll always report a variety of reasons and qualities.
- “veiled sound”, “liquid highs”, “slow bass”, “harsh mids” (subjectivists claim to hear) rarely stand up to objective double blind testing and worse still those Stereophile reviews, full of colorful adjectives are just plain dishonest if they don’t give you a full analysis of the room in which they were playing said component and detailing all other components in the system.  For this reason, highly subjective “liquid highs” individual component reviews are practically worthless.

That near audiophile sound quality has been made cheaper by digital technologies has only served to exacerbate the age old battle between these two schools of thought.  New scams suck in would-be subjectivists are constant; such as expensive replacement power cords made from some exotic material that is supposed to improve the sound from your component… Yes, a freaking power cord that plugs your unit into the wall!  Too often the subjectivists unduly take the rap for the scams.  Perhaps the worst scam of all is the $30 DVD from WallMart.  Whosoever is happy with the performance from a $30 DVD player might as well not have bothered upgrading from VHS, yet they sell like hotcakes.

The controversies between the two schools of thought are endless.  Is digitally stored media as pure as their analog forefathers?  Can truly high quality sound come from a compressed source?  Can transistorized amplifiers create sound as good as tube amps?  The debates go on and on. 

Suffice it to say there are no awards for taking one side or the other, you get no cookie in the mail for taking sides.  I generally consider myself an objectivist in life, so it follows I am a hi-fi objectivist as well.  But I have no problem learning what I can by studying at the old master’s (subjectivist) temple in the misty mountains to meditate on the sound of one hand clapping.  It’s best to learn from both.  The subjective will steer you clear of mass market components and will reason that you should spend as much as you can possibly afford on a hi-fi system, generally sound advice (pun intended).  Where you have to draw the line is when subjectivists start talking about superiority of tube amps and high-end cables.  Using double blind testing between two sets of cables, no “high-end cable” audiophile has ever been able to identify their cables.  Tube amps are an old technology that has been replaced by a superior one.  The transistor is so good that it can actually mimic the tube amp (mosfet output transistors found on Pioneer Elite systems) giving the same “warm” qualities sought by aficionados of the tubes.