Comments on Profile Post by Entropy

(and generally, more complex decriptions don't translate as well, and are therefor less sensical and less helpful)

this is why periodically I show headphone prototypes to my non-audiophile friends to get their take on the sound.

I’ve heard about this for tasting notes in the wine tasting world. You should use terms that convey the meaning as easily as possible

When was this ever a hot take, though? I feel like most people here've been making an effort at a shared vocab via the glossary and discussions.

Impressions/descrptions by individuals, some on this forum, prompted this. Since some people seemed to disagree via their actions I phrased my post as a question

I used to have a preference in describing the experience rather than the frequency bands. But large sample sizes is useful to narrow down the true average impression. Those specific people you tend to have VERY similar preferences and those you have VERY opposite preferences tend to more valuable to myself these days.

6 moons as an example of complexity not only for its own sake, but to obscure for the sake of (sales) commitment.

Whereof one cannot speak... and all that. Oh, and beetles in boxes, to boot.

Worth re-reading every couple of years, could also apply to translations best being simple: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/politics-and-the-english-language/

You should be able to tell people what you’re hearing without using technical terms, except for the most rudimentary (such as “mid-bass,” “decay”). Macro-this, micro-that—I don’t buy it.

Disagreements and differing opinions are not bad. The point of having a forum at all is to have these discussions, not to have a hive mind that only thinks a certain way (which is totally not what happens in reality, I get it). Ultimately, describing sound is a lot like describing food.