MUSINGS: On imagination, fantasies, transcendence, and balance in audiophile play. And an AI-assisted analysis of audio hardware discussions in September 2026.

Since I started this blog, I've used the tagline "A 'more objective' take for Audiophiles" (later adding the word Rational). This was intentional because back in the early 2010s, the environment was quite different than today. At that time, computer audiophilia was primarily about playback of local music libraries on hard drives (collapse of NAND flash drive prices for SSD in mid-2012 soon allowed 500+GB SSDs), prior to the massive expansion of online streamed audio (Spotify launched in mid 2011 in N. America, lossless Tidal not until late 2014). In those days, we also didn't have anything like the expansive high-fidelity "Chi-Fi" hardware options we have today. These products have tremendously brought down the cost of literally everything in the audio chain. While DACs have been high performance devices for ages already (some history here), others like reasonably priced Class D amps (Hypex UcD launched 2003, nCore 2011, very inexpensive TI TPA32xx "chip" amps by 2016) came out later, and today are ubiquitous (like this, and this, and this). The availability of Raspberry Pi and similar devices have made bit-perfect digital end-points easy and cheap to build. These products have commoditized high fidelity in ways I think should be welcomed by all audiophiles.

Not only has availability of hardware changed (and concomitantly necessary software), but I'm glad to see that in the last decade, the modern audiophile who's getting started in this hobby now has easy access on the web to a lot of information including better objective analyses and subjective opinions/preferences. I think the environment today is a much better mix of technological understanding that can be used to quite easily refute nonsensical mysticism while at the same time rationally discuss human subjective preferences.

Compared to the early 2010's, the media landscape has changed so significantly from what used to be mostly unchallenged narratives driven by the old "magazines of record" like Stereophile and The Absolute Sound; nowadays these sites have sheltered themselves with no discussion forums to leave comments on, and even old comments accumulated over years have been purged (changes as recent as 2025)! As far as I can tell, the magazines these days have little ability to offer deep insights beyond articles acting as proxy advertisements.

With these changes, the "more objective" part of my tagline I think has already become much of mainstream audiophile discourse and culture. And so I was contemplating the other day whether we're already at a comfortable balance now between subjectivity and objectivity among hobbyists.

As humans, it seems like balance is one of the hardest things to achieve. I see audiophilia as a safe microcosm to view other aspects of life like politics. As in politics, it's all too easy to be drawn to extremes. In fact, the modern liberal freedoms we enjoy and the progress we've made have been based on the "dynamic equilibrium" as a central defining pillar. For us audiophiles, balance likewise is a necessary foundation to satisfy questions surrounding what devices we buy and also why we choose the audiophile hobby as our area of interest in the first place.

Visit to a "more subjective" leaning friend. And something like Synergistic Research "Transducers" (HFT, GCT, ECT...) to try.

Hey everyone. I'm still waiting to finish the measurements and write-up of the USB DDC boxes discussed last time (a few things I need to double check on!). In the meantime, I thought I'd share some thoughts and pictures with you of a visit I made to a friend, Paul's, place. You'll see that he is much more of a "subjectivist" than I am.

Above, we see his listening room which is capable of multichannel playback as well for music and movies. He's a multichannel enthusiast who values the immersive experience and has a large library of surround content in PCM and DSD - great to see!

Clearly, Paul is a Linn fan with almost an all-Linn system. He has front Linn Akubarik Exakt (Katalyst) active speakers, an Akurate 225 center channel, and a pair of Akudoriks as rear/side channels. Over the years, he has been experimenting with Linn Space Optimisation and wrote an article about his experiences (he contacted me after he saw my tests with Linn SO last year).

Frustration of the Euphonophile Salesman. Audiophile evaluation methods & intentions.

Through February 2025, and with today's third post of the month, I've been exploring the current audiophile culture with videos from contemporary YouTube channels. While never exactly the same among participants, we can see "archetypal" characteristics shared among personalities in this hobby.

We've talked about the technical channel that presented facts but also blurs boundaries into unusual beliefs to make sales and justify products, the subjective-only hobbyist channel willing to do listening tests (great!), and today let's talk about the audiophile who appears to insist on purely subjective-based evaluation, rejects objective measurements, and is a salesman in the Industry.

I'm talking about OCD Hi-Fi Guy who's quite an entertaining fellow. He calls it like he sees it - "no BS" - I can respect that to a point. His name is Mike "Mikey" Powell and he runs a company called 11 Stereo. His followers are known as the "HiFi Tribe" and in the videos, we see promotions of the companies and products that he represents including Playback Designs DACs and Fischer & Fischer speakers, prominently mentioned among others. 

Every once awhile you'll see on my blog a reference to something on his channel that I found entertaining - like this post addressing the interview with Machina Dynamica guy. His use of diction suggests an intelligent fellow but I suspect he comes across a bit "spicy" in his language for many audiophile gentlemen and gentleladies. At other times, some of his viewpoints around politics and towards other cultures might be unpalatable.

If you watch his videos, I think it becomes quite clear that his moniker is inaccurate because he is neither "OCD" (his answers are far from perfectionistic), nor is his philosophy towards audio particularly "Hi-Fi" (high fidelity). Let's have a deeper look at this with a recent video that's entertaining, yet highlights the frustration that I think some salesmen might experience online these days as they try to assert unsubstantiated beliefs.

SUMMER MUSINGS: Defining "subjective" and "objective" audiophile evaluations.

Hey everyone, I thought I'd make a "quick" post in response to this comment in the recent "SUMMER MUSINGS: On the perils of subjective opinions in High-End Audio (dCS v. GoldenSound)" article:

SY 24 July 2024 at 13:07

Could I beg and plead with you to join me in refusing to misuse the term "subjective" to mean "uncontrolled?" Something can be subjective and absolutely valid and rigorous (e.g., subjective reactions made with basic ears-only controls) or subjective and absolutely invalid (e.g., subjective reactions made with peeking, preconceptions, and non-auditory inputs).

Subjective =/= uncontrolled. So much fuzzy thinking has arisen because of that conflation of terms.

Greetings SY,

Sure! I agree with you that "subjective" (when referring to audio hardware reviews specifically) is simply a reference to the form of evaluation and does not imply whether the evaluation is valid or invalid, nor whether controls were applied or not. Certainly some subjective opinions are clearly valid if the difference is obviously detected by the listener. I trust no audiophile worth his street credibility would have difficulty telling the difference between AM mono and FM stereo sound quality for example and will accurately point to the stereo FM playback being of higher fidelity.

Indeed, subjective reviewers listening under controlled conditions also can produce highly valid reports. I hope I have not confounded that over the years. For clarity, let me expand the position in some (pedantic) detail for those who like reading this stuff. 😉

SUMMER MUSINGS: On the perils of subjective opinions in High-End Audio (dCS v. GoldenSound).

Every once awhile here in audiophile-land we see our share of drama.

There was MoFiGate a couple years back when vinyl collectors panicked about DSD256 data corrupting their precious analog remasters, Tekton (Eric Alexander) v. Erin recently due to legal threats for calling into question a speaker design, we've seen silly hyped Pono/Neil Young claims a decade ago, and of course the painfully prolonged MQA episode which was just a mess (as summarized years ago).

Well, in the last week we have something a bit different; the dCS v. GoldenSound lawsuit threat due to unhappiness about a YouTube DAC review from late 2021. I'm not going to rehash the stuff here because there were clearly many missteps in dCS's communications as explained in GoldenSound's video and here's the dCS response where the company "fully acknowledge that some of the emails shared by GoldenSound were unacceptable and we addressed and acknowledged this in subsequent communications".

I trust they'll figure it out between the various players on the two sides. As with the domestic conflicts of others, I'm not particularly interested in the details as to who said what unless personally involved. Likewise, some of the technical details regarding the external clock, DSD resampling, seem to be side distractions from the concerns around the review; no need to spend time with these minor digressions.

Instead, I was more curious about that original dCS Bartók DAC/headphone amp YouTube review by GoldenSound that came out on December 31, 2021. What was it that made dCS or their representatives so upset? Is there something about the review itself we can/should learn from?

MUSINGS: On Hardware Audiophilia and Wine Tasting.

Across the years of audiophile discussions, we sometimes will see parallels drawn between the world of the oenophile (wine connoisseur) and hardware audiophile. While both pursuits involve a strong subjective component since the ultimate intent is enjoyment, there are also clearly differences when we take the time to compare them. I actually don't think many of the heated debates among audiophiles have meaningful analogues within the wine-tasting world.

Recently, in this thread on Steve Hoffman Forum about "snake oil", J-Flo made a nice comment on this; let's have a look at his post and I'll add my observations and thoughts with some opportunity to expand upon the ideas.

A Psychoacoustic Rationale for the Subjective Evaluation of Stereophonic Sound Systems by Reviewers and Audiophiles (Ralph Glasgal)

With the discussion of ambiophonics ("ambio") and crosstalk cancellation (XTC) last time, I came across a number of fascinating writings from Ralph Glasgal in the Ambiophonics Facebook group. The one below is one of them I think worth considering that I had not seen before, explicitly written as copyright-free. I've made some mild formatting edits and wording substitutions/additions for clarity as well as emphasis in areas I felt of importance. I trust this mildly edited version retains the full meaning and intent of the original found at the group above. A copy of this has been sent to Mr. Glasgal but I'm not sure if he's reviewing his E-mails or active in audio discussions these days in his 90s.

A Psychoacoustic Rationale for the Subjective Evaluation of Stereophonic Sound Systems by Reviewers and Audiophiles

By Ralph Glasgal, BEP, MSEE, AES, IEEE

glasgal@ambiophonics.org

(original text posted on Facebook - October 15, 2015)

The oft repeated assertion that high end components of stereo systems can only be truly evaluated by listening rather than by measurement or blind A/B testing by listening panels has been argued for decades now. The following text will, I believe, provide a psychoacoustic explanation of why this position is largely correct and not a question of practicing voodoo audio.

Very few audiophiles will want to read what follows since it is rather long, too technical, and not what they are used to reading in Stereophile or The Absolute Sound. But this article is for the record, for discussion forums, and to have it available for future debates. Anybody is free to use or forward this text. It is not copyrighted. Supporting technical references by a variety of authors are available at ambiophonics.org (mirrored).