All we need to do is expose bullshit for what it is, it had nothing to do with subjectivism, that was brainwashing, it worked because over half the industry was duped by it. I was mouthing off against it in the 1980's let alone 2010, but then I was a lone voice looked on as a crank, BUT when I got people just to listen without the whining bullshit in the background then they heard, but the Linn / Naim dealers deliberately didn't stock product that did that or if they did then they rigged the dems, so the poor punter stood no chance. No amount of blind testing or showing specs would have solved that particular problem, because you were given no choice or a rigged choice.
If REAL subjectivism had been applied with a decent selection of product in the comparison process then it would have worked, as it does now in Bake-Offs and Bake-Off Shows.
How you expose the bullshit is what matters.
Shouting a contrary position doesn't really cut it IMO.
Ok you are putting an alternative view to the listener in doing so but you are not actually demonstrating that bull is bull.
Go back to the Linn example.
You enter the demo room and there to the side are the decks to be auditioned, including the Linn. You spend the next hour listening to music on the two decks but all the usual biases of the day are in evidence. You get the body language changes, the running commentary on what the decks are doing, you've got a preamble telling you what to listen for (PRaT) and in all probability you've got their choice of music, so Ben Sidran of George Benson most likely.
Oh and of course you can see both decks, so all that glowing praise about the Linn being the greatest TT in the world that you've read in the press, well that fine machine in sitting right there in front of you.
Many of us have been there and will recognise the above situation.
It was clever and it worked - worked brilliantly.
There were many voices of dissent as you rightly say but it was essentially a battle of the arguments.
The power to influence the result in my example could be swept away with two extremely basic and simple steps.
- The person conducting the dem stays shtum, other than speaking to facilitate the dem at a basic level.
- The TTs are kept out of sight of the listener.
That's it - simple and I cannot possibly see how any can argue that this wouldn't produce a more valid outcome.
What held true for for those days holds true for today.
