Guest Editorial: Why did audio stop being about audio?

Hi @joelha - Thanks for the guest editorial. It makes me think / feel a few things.

First, I really wish I would've been around in the days of meet-ups at audio stores to schmooze about all things music and HiFi. When my HiFi friends and I get together, many memories are made just by playing music and talking shop. It's a great way to get away from everything else that's going on in one's life.

Second, you and I have talked about religion in the past. Our beliefs are nearly opposite (I say nearly because I'm not sure how to calculate what 100% opposite would be), yet it's a blast to hear your thoughts. I was very interested to read your editorial and how it brought HiFi and religion together in a way I hadn't thought about in the past. 

Last, I'm as far from a religious guy as one can get, but I don't subscribe to the mandatory A/B/X tests and measurements. I want to make sure readers see your words for what they are and don't equate your sentence, "If my audio assessment matters that much to you, I’m guessing you’re anti-religion and/or anti-God." with the faulty logic of all anti-religion and/or anti-God folks must be in the camp of demanding A/B/X etc... I know that's not what you said and I want to double-down on that fact. 

Thanks again Joel for putting yourself out here with an honest editorial.  I hope the adults here can remain adults and keep the discussion civil. If this happens, an interesting conversation will no doubt ensue. 

Interesting read. I think it is just the meanness of our time.

I don't think a person's beliefs about religion, science, or audio are nearly as important as simply being a decent human being.

I know of people whose beliefs about religion are used to denigrate others. The same happens in science (e.g., William Shockley's or James Watson's views on race and gender, or The Bell Curve). And the same happens in audio. Some folks simply can't allow contrary views (what an uninteresting world that would be) without starting personal arguments, or impugning motives, competence or reputations.

But I have also seen decent human beings who were religious use what they have been taught to try to uplift people and live by the Golden Rule. Science, of course, has helped billions of us to live better (or in the case of medicine, to live at all). And audio can be a wonderful way to get to know great, interesting people around a shared passion for the best possible music listening experience.

So which will it be? Endless arguments or maximization of enjoyment?

The attorney Gerry Spence had a story he used to tell jurors. A man came to a great sage, showed the sage a bird, then put the bird behind his back. The man then said to the sage, "If you are so wise, tell me whether the bird is now alive or dead." The sage replied "I do not know. The bird is in your hands."

It's in our hands.

1 minute ago, Jud said:

I don't think a person's beliefs about religion, science, or audio are nearly as important as simply being a decent human being.

 

I know of people whose beliefs about religion are used to denigrate others. The same happens in science (e.g., William Shockley's or James Watson's views on race and gender, or The Bell Curve). And the same happens in audio. Some folks simply can't allow contrary views (what an uninteresting world that would be) without starting personal arguments, or impugning motives, competence or reputations.

 

But I have also seen decent human beings who were religious use what they have been taught to try to uplift people and live by the Golden Rule. Science, of course, has helped billions of us to live better (or in the case of medicine, to live at all). And audio can be a wonderful way to get to know great, interesting people around a shared passion for the best possible music listening experience.

 

So which will it be? Endless arguments or maximization of enjoyment?

 

The attorney Gerry Spence had a story he used to tell jurors. A man came to a great sage, showed the sage a bird, then put the bird behind his back. The man then said to the sage, "If you are so wise, tell me whether the bird is now alive or dead." The sage replied "I do not know. The bird is in your hands."

 

It's in our hands.

Great post Jud. So true in every way.

P.S. I listened to a Gerry Spence audiobook on CD when driving across the country in college. What a story teller and great mind. 

The world's greatest cultural achievements in music, art and architecture were inspired by beliefs I find odd.  Some of those same people contributed incredible scientific insights.  It isn't either/or.  

I don't go around telling my devout friends not to teach their kids their beliefs.  I wouldn't have any friends left.

An article that connects believing your ears to believing in god is not what I was expecting to read today.

"This is audio folks. Whether I think I hear something or not isn’t that important. If my audio assessment matters that much to you, I’m guessing you’re anti-religion and/or anti-God. That’s fine."

Yeah, I'd second/third/forth the suggestions by others that religion and audio preferences as rather separate. I know of audiophiles who are objective and religious (perhaps even yours truly 😉).

The key for me when it comes to hardware adjudication is the fact that audio equipment is built on scientific principles, and designed with engineering principles in mind. While any one of us can speak of what "sounds good to me" subjectively, there is no doubt the existence of an important correlation with physical properties that can be measured and evaluated objectively helping us appreciate the concept of "fidelity" in the product.

Impossible to not think about science/engineering whenever a product reads and converts digital to analogue for example. Likewise, all the scientific principles that have to go into properly reproducing vinyl (eg. tonearm geometries, capacitance, quality of RIAA EQ in the preamp...).

Good to find balance.

Internet brings the worse side of people who fail to tame their inner beast.

I'm perfectly willing to accept what anyone else says they hear. My only issue is when they present their individual experience as somehow applying more generally, or as "proving" something. Just as I'm willing to accept what they hear, I expect them at a minimum to acknowledge that they may be subject to expectation bias during sighted listening. 

I think I've succeeded in the more recent past in not arguing with anyone's perceptions, but rather with how the personal perceptions are presented in some cases. That at least is my intent. 

I also realize that very few of us can reliably conduct a DBT or even an SBT at home; so the most practical fallback is to audition stuff in the best way we can and then make a decision on what we hear. That's what the vast majority of us do most of the time. And if that's expectation bias coloring our perceptions, that's also okay. After all, just like the placebo effect can sometimes cure disease, what we hear and enjoy is what we in reality are hearing, no matter the reason. 

My problem in the more recent discussion here is not so much with listeners as it is with manufacturers. Many audio manufacturers make claims about their devices that defy known engineering and scientific principles. Could they be telling the truth? Yes, and certainly some of them genuinely believe they are. But those extraordinary claims should be backed up by more than anecdotal sighted evidence. If you want me (us) to spend big bucks on a device that costs 2X, 5X or 50X, the price of a "conventional" equivalent, shouldn't you have an ethical obligation to base those claims on more than sighted and - by definition biased -listening?

Isn't that, for instance, one of our gripes about the MQA fanboys and their claims of vastly improved sound - that all those claims are based on sighted listening, manipulated shows, groupthink, etc? Why is it okay to doubt those claims, but not the claims made about "Device X", when the claims about "Device X" are fairly outlandish, according to accepted engineering/scientific norms? But that (MQA directed) skepticism isn't seen  as something illegitimate, for some reason. 

And as far as manufacturers measuring devices, I also get that some of these very small operations can't reasonably be expected to shell out multiple tens of thousands for testing equipment - at least not until they've been in operation quite a while. But they could pay a much smaller fee to someone else to measure/test their products. (And if they didn't like the results they could always not publish them, anyway). 

So I find it very telling that we almost never see such measurements. Even from some of the bigger operations that certainly know how to do them and can afford to. Again, get some testing that backs your claims up and publish them - it will only enhance your reputation and increase your sales. Doubters, and maybe even some of the ASR crowd will buy your stuff. 

For measurements, it is not clear to me that there is a set of practical measurements a consumer can look to that determines that the SQ of one good DAC, pre-amp or amp is better than another.  For speakers, yes.  I am also not saying that there is not a set of such measurements that can be made.  And, there are nice looking tube amps from one of the suspect countries that that distort badly.

For listening tests, they are not the horrible time-eater that they are made out to be.  They are quite easy and require only a willing 2nd person -- and a wife or gf is often delighted to debunk your hearing claims.

Science is not a belief system, and comments to that effect above are not correct.

For religion, I like to "ride side-saddle on the golden calf"

8 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

One of the problems with running a forum is that it is no longer just like minded individuals trading information. There are people and machines whose job it is to influence internet users.  They are paid, or are programmed, to promote products or ideas that they have no real belief in.  They are simply following a script.  There are giant corporations now that are paid huge amounts to influence people.  These are who you may be arguing with.  It is no longer a matter of having a difference of opinion with someone.  It is a matter of someone wanting to sell you a product or an idea. It is no longer friendly conversation, it is business,  and the direction can get heated.

But do you think that's what's going on here? It doesn't appear to me that the arguments here have much to do with the commercial interests of the posters. Most are just hobbyists having a discussion. 

1 minute ago, firedog said:

But do you think that's what's going on here? It doesn't appear to me that the arguments here have much to do with the commercial interests of the posters. Most are just hobbyists having a discussion. 

If the people having the arguments are paid influencers, I think they're making way too much.  😀

In the process of moving electrons and photons around in order to move air around in a room, there are far too many variables to test for. Both subjective listening impressions and hard data testing have a place in this hobby. I accept that some things may test well but not sound right to some and the corollary that some things may test poorly and sound very good to some and everything in between. But, this is a hobby and part of the fun is being able to experiment and sometimes succeed and create a little magic and sometimes fail and loose some money and above all learn in the process.

3 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 

How many times did the MQA shills post the same inane and untrue bs talking points over and over?

See... perfect example of what the OP is about.

2 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Measurements are critical,  but in the end. we listen to music.

 

The problem is that a computer can post a million posts that say: "The dogshit speakers are the best speakers I have ever heard".

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you. 😉

6 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 

How many times did the MQA shills post the same inane and untrue bs talking points over and over?

Yes, but that's about the only thread here like that, AFAIR.

40 minutes ago, Archimago said:

"This is audio folks. Whether I think I hear something or not isn’t that important. If my audio assessment matters that much to you, I’m guessing you’re anti-religion and/or anti-God. That’s fine."

 

Yeah, I'd second/third/forth the suggestions by others that religion and audio preferences as rather separate. I know of audiophiles who are objective and religious (perhaps even yours truly 😉).

 

The key for me when it comes to hardware adjudication is the fact that audio equipment is built on scientific principles, and designed with engineering principles in mind. While any one of us can speak of what "sounds good to me" subjectively, there is no doubt the existence of an important correlation with physical properties that can be measured and evaluated objectively helping us appreciate the concept of "fidelity" in the product.

 

Impossible to not think about science/engineering whenever a product reads and converts digital to analogue for example. Likewise, all the scientific principles that have to go into properly reproducing vinyl (eg. tonearm geometries, capacitance, quality of RIAA EQ in the preamp...).

 

Good to find balance.

Hi Archimago - I love your closing line - good to find balance. 

How do you rationalize the fact that people get so heated about another's opinion. It can go both ways, objective <> subjective, but for now let's focus on the objective attacks toward subjective opinions. It just seems like something else is at play when people fall all over themselves to make points that often aren't invited.