Jump to content
  • joelha
    joelha

    Guest Editorial: Why did audio stop being about audio?

    How many forum threads on this site (and others) devolve into heated exchanges about whether people actually hear what they say they hear? Without “proof”, listeners are often mocked, insulted and their experiences discredited.


    Challenges range from assuming the listener has been influenced by expectation bias (I believe it will sound good, so it does sound good) to faulting his unwillingness to rely on measurements or blind testing.


    What bothers me most is reputations are attacked so casually. Everyone from Chris Connaker (one of the most decent people I’ve known in the industry) to reviewers and manufacturers are accused of lying, cheating and taking bribes. People, whom I suspect in most cases haven’t even heard the product they’re attacking, will smear the reputations of others they probably don’t know. Those who are attacked rely on their reputations to earn a living. That’s to say nothing of the personal attacks on the listeners themselves. And the attackers attack anonymously. Unless the case is black and white i.e. I sent you money and you never shipped my product or there are repeated, unresolved product defects, trying to ruin a person’s name is evil. Nothing will undo a person’s life faster and more effectively than giving him a bad reputation. And doing it anonymously and without hard evidence is cowardly and arrogant. In such cases, it’s highly likely the charge is far more unethical than the action being charged.


    Some will say measurements make their case open and shut. But there are too many examples of how measurements fall well short of telling the whole story. There are tube amps with 3% - 5% distortion that sound better to many than amps with far better measurements. Are those products a scam? Vinyl doesn’t measure nearly as well as digital and yet many strongly prefer its sound. Should fans of vinyl be told that turntable, tonearm and cartridge makers are scamming them as well?


    For some of my audio choices, some would say I’m deluding myself. Let’s say I am. If I’m happy with my delusion, why should the nay-sayers care? It’s an audio hobby. Why can’t I enjoy my system and post about my experiences, allowing others to judge? The nay-sayers might say “That’s fine, we’re just posting to protect others from being taken in.”


    Fair enough. But these are not always cases of “I have one opinion and you have another”. Many of the arguments are too heated, personal and frequently repeated to only be about audio.


    I believe these debates are about religion and before you conclude that I’ve lost my mind, consider the following:


    Many claim they have experienced God or have witnessed miracles with little or no evidence. The debates concerning those claims are often very intense and personal. Challenges commonly include: Where’s your evidence? Where’s your data? Only because you want to believe do you believe.

     

    Sound familiar?


    This is why I believe the challengers care so much. Allowing audiophiles to post their subjective conclusions without proof brings them one step closer to accepting those who relate their religious experiences without proof. For them, science is god and a subjective conclusion upends their god and belief system. They fight hard so that doesn’t happen.


    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. But that explains why something as innocuous as describing the sound of someone’s ethernet cable could elicit such strong and often highly inappropriate comments.


    I’m old enough to remember this hobby when people would meet at audio stores to just listen and schmooze. We’ve lost too much of that sense of camaraderie. We may differ on what we like, but we all care about how we experience music.


    Whether I’m right or wrong about any of the above, would it hurt to return to the times when people’s disagreements about audio were friendly? Can we stop assailing the reputations of the people who rely on this industry to care for their families and employees? Can we respect the opinions of those who differ with us by not trying to shut them down with ridicule?


    It’s not about “religion”. It’s just about audio.

     

    - Joel Alperson




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    10 minutes ago, 4est said:

    Not to pick on you in particular, but to me this statement is the gist of what the OP was getting at. I have an engineering background and would love to be purely objective. At present there are not measurements(or understanding of them) that will describe exactly how something will sound. Until such time, I will need to use both ob/subjective methods to determine the quality of playback I achieve, and whether I will do something about it. I, and likely many others, resent being described as irrational because we refuse to relinquish subjectivity until then. As Miska has pointed out, things can measure comparably but sound different.

     

    Well stated.  However, I think you have made an error.  A rational and balanced explication of the real subjective/objective elements of audio is not the "gist" of what the OP was getting at.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, KeenObserver said:

    We have the never ending subjectivist/objectivist argument.

     

    Going back to the beginning of reproduced sound, which group was most responsible for bringing us to the current state of affairs.

     

    I can just imagine:

    Bell: "Come here Watson, I need you".

    Watson: Wow! That sounds like shit".

     

    My understanding of that process is that Watson said "what?" quite a bit before that happened. 🙂

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    30 minutes ago, crenca said:

     

    Yet, even here the stakes are something and not nothing.  For all but oligarchs, the pricing of audiophilia is significant.  The hucksterism and "who cares" subjectivism makes for a poisoned divide.  

     

    Also we must remember the war on Christmas...that's important 😋

     

    This has zero to do with actual pricing and everything to do with your background and point of view. The pricing of audiophilia has never been lower. Go to the Schiit website and have a look. Go to Benchmark's site and see what kind of engineering one can get for his money. Oligarch's wouldn't be caught dead spending this little. Looking through a telescope at only the most expensive items in any category of consumer goods will lead you to your conclusion. This isn't a sound method from which to conclude anything.

     

     

     

    4 minutes ago, crenca said:

     

    Well stated.  However, I think you have made an error.  A rational and balanced explication of the real subjective/objective elements of audio is not the "gist" of what the OP was getting at.  

     

    Based on your comments in this thread, I don't believe you have any idea what the OP was getting at. Please stop suggesting otherwise. 

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 minutes ago, wgscott said:
    1 hour ago, mansr said:

    I'd say lying is making a statement contrary to what one believes to be true.

    What if one believes something false to be true?

    Then stating the opposite is still (morally) a lie, even though the statement itself is (factually) true.

     

    20 minutes ago, wgscott said:

    I think there has to be intent to mislead or deceive.

    Sure, it could be sarcasm.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, mansr said:

    It seems like a lot of people are misunderstanding the article. Perhaps the OP should have expressed himself better.

    There is always room for that, but I wouldn't doubt some are purposely misunderstanding him and others have zero interest in understanding him. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

     

    Similar demographic to audiophiles. Maybe a bit older on average, age spans from early 20s to mid 80s. Average, without any real data to back this up, I'd say around 60. Predominantly male. World-wide.

     

    more likely to own a tent, camper, RV, tripod, camera system...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    24 minutes ago, crenca said:

     

    Well stated.  However, I think you have made an error.  A rational and balanced explication of the real subjective/objective elements of audio is not the "gist" of what the OP was getting at.  

    Respectfully, the OP has intimated that you do not seem to understand the gist of what he was attempting to convey. I was speaking to what I think he was trying to say. Perhaps I am off too? Regardless, it is my opinion that we would all get along together better if put more effort into how we as individuals communicate. It is not place to define anyone but myself. Labeling someone else(as irrational or most anything) is bound to cause problems. We were taught that in grade school.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    25 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    Oligarch's wouldn't be caught dead spending this little

    spacer.png

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, 4est said:

    Respectfully, the OP has intimated that you do not seem to understand the gist of what he was attempting to convey. I was speaking to what I think he was trying to say. Perhaps I am off too? Regardless, it is my opinion that we would all get along together better if put more effort into how we as individuals communicate. It is not place to define anyone but myself. Labeling someone else(as irrational or most anything) is bound to cause problems. We were taught that in grade school.

     

    And respectfully as well, this statement could be summarized as "just ignore irrationality and everyone will get along".

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, crenca said:

     

    Since you bring up Schiit, Jason Stoddard (co founder/owner) disagrees with you.  He said this just yesterday:

     

    "...Someone once wrote that we should decouple ourselves from "the big crazy," which I believe is a great phrase for all the magical-thinking stuff. The problem is that "the big crazy" has been extremely influential in the business (a reviewer actually used Vidar with $20,000 cables--not kidding). But perhaps it is time to start the decoupling. Because I'm really really tired of having to hold my tongue when I'm shown yet another fuse that costs more than a Magni, ethernet cables that cost more than an Yggdrasil, or magic box that connects to nothing but somehow is supposed to improve the sound....Sorry to continue the derail, but this is an excellent point: the big crazy is holding audio back.  As soon as you start talking about cables/power supplies/stones/quantum resonance machines (or, for that matter, $20K preamps, $50K amps, and $500K speakers), sane people check out. You're crazy. And they're gone...."

     

    https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/magni-3-and-magni-3-heresy-released.8604/page-7#post-282025

     

    The inescapable, sky is blue, cold hard fact is that this subjectivism we have been discussing is a fundamental part of "the big crazy".

     

    Yet the OP and to a certain extent yourself believe that "the big crazy" is "innocuous" (to use the OP's description) and not only that, the "the big crazy" is the very ground of audio (and its civil discussion) itself.  

     

    I should add that thread is about the "radical objectivism" of Amir and ASR, the use and abuse of measurements, etc.  It's a "both/and", etc.  At the risk of offending certain objectivists here, I agree with this, @4est, etc.  Still, the overwhelming status quo in audiophildom is not objectivism, but an off the rail "big crazy" subjectivism for all the known reasons...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, 4est said:

    Respectfully, the OP has intimated that you do not seem to understand the gist of what he was attempting to convey. I was speaking to what I think he was trying to say. Perhaps I am off too? Regardless, it is my opinion that we would all get along together better if put more effort into how we as individuals communicate. It is not place to define anyone but myself. Labeling someone else(as irrational or most anything) is bound to cause problems. We were taught that in grade school.

     

    As I said initially, the OP's thought is confused and confusing.  That said, he clarified his essential "radical subjective" gounding when he affirmed that it and only it is "innocuous" and the ground of civility in audio, so I don't know what more effort needs to be put in to see that there is a fundamental disagreement here.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    If someone believes Santa Claus...

     

    So, this forum is not the place to disabuse someone of the belief that Santa Claus actually exists?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

     

     I can see how one would be turned off by the mention of religion.  

     

    That isn't the issue.  The real issue is false equivalence - that science is somehow another type of religion.

     

    It isn't.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    45 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

     

    Someone pissed in your Cheerios, hunh?

    is that your Keen Observation?

    I think it pales in comparison to the 6 or 7 troll posters whoe are constantly venting their envy, and rage, against high performance audio manufacturers and the folks who are interested in improving the listening experience through better performing playback gear. Or otherwise, - whining on the internet....

     

    "hunh?"

    Is that darling? sweetie? or huh?

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    It isn't OK to follow a Muslim around and constantly tell them Muhammad isn't real every time they enter a masque.

    What a crazy thing to do. There's ample evidence that Muhammad was a very real person.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

    I think it pales in comparison to the 6 or 7 troll posters whoe are constantly venting their envy, and rage, against high performance audio manufacturers...

     

    I've been waiting for the "skeptics are envious peasants" trope to rear its ugly head, and there it is.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

     

    I've been waiting for the "skeptics are envious peasants" trope to rear its ugly head, and there it is.

     

    He even worked in the "folks who disagree with me are trolls" argument.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now




×
×
  • Create New...