it seems this doesn’t lead anywhere so let’s just agree to disagree.

>If the average person (in a properly conducted listening test, which is hard to do) prefers a sound, then by definition it is neutrum, meaning it leans neither in one direction nor in the other direction.

This doesn't sound right to me. As far as I understand, neutral sound means that all frequencies are perceived at the same volume. i.e the sound doesn't lean toward one nor in the other direction.

Preferring a sound doesn't make it neutral.

For example. If a person likes their foods sweet then it doesn't mean that sweet is neutral. Sweet is still sweet and neutral means not too sweet nor not too bitter.

To me it seems that you made a mistake and instead of having the courage to admit it, you doubled down.

that’s a good point. It all depends on what are you using as the standard or so called “true neutral”. I’m not too experienced in audio matters myself but i felt that i have to point it out, even if it’s wrong. I don’t have the money to invest in some nice cans but i’m an avid ultrabudget iem enjoyer lmao. and a good example imo would be the sony MH755 vs moondrop chu, where MH755 is tuned to the harman target and chu is more of a “true neutral”. for me MH755’s sound signature is a tad bit more enjoyable because i like the boosted subbass. Yet they’re both good iem’s for the money and it all comes down to personal preference.

I think you’re confusing neutral with popular. If a V-shaped frequency response is the preferred sound signature of most people, then it still isn’t neutral because the bass and treble are amplified.