OK, I tried hydrogen audio. It didn't go too well.

[Alice Wonder]

I like it over there, but they are very hard core about claims made without proper testing. That's actually what I like about it over there.

 

That doesn't mean subjective tests and opinions without ABX testing is worthless to me, just that over there, when there is a claim it almost always is backed up with objective testing.

[wgscott]

Personally, I'd like to see some independent statistics that show at least via a simple T-test that "almost always" translates into something more objective than feel-good, self-congratulatory gooey molasses.

[Jud]

Personally, I'd like to see some independent statistics that show at least via a simple T-test that "almost always" translates into something more objective than feel-good, self-congratulatory gooey molasses.

 

Feel-good? Hydrogen Audio?

[wgscott]

Feel-good? Hydrogen Audio?

 

No, the claim quoted here:

 

over there, when there is a claim it almost always is backed up

 

especially the part in bold face. It is an extraordinary claim. It requires at least some convincing, objective evidence, or should be disregarded as subjective expectation bias, which it probably is, i.e., total BS that just makes the poster feel good about himself.

[Jud]

It is an extraordinary claim. It requires at least some convincing, objective evidence, or should be disregarded as subjective expectation bias, which it probably is, i.e., total BS that just makes the poster feel good about himself.

 

To expand on my rather terse last comment: It seems to me Hydrogen Audio commenters have a tendency to regard *negative* ("Apple's DRM sucks") or *null* hypotheses ("high dollar music players offer nothing unavailable with free players") as requiring no proof, though IIRC Apple doesn't DRM music any longer, and you pointed out several things the paid players did that were unavailable with free-as-in-beer iTunes. Anything they can do to negatively jump on and shout down people making even trivially provable factual claims apparently passes for the highest form of "objectivity." I.e., saying stuff to make those with positive claims feel bad makes them feel good. (Wow, I think I've managed to confuse even myself by this point....)

[Jud]

Personally, I'd like to see some independent statistics that show at least via a simple T-test....

 

Oh by the way: One-tailed or two? ;-)

[dave_kiwi]

Oh by the way: One-tailed or two? ;-)

 

Ok, drifting off topic here a bit:

 

Propose that a DBT should be replaced with a BEST.

 

A BEST is - Baby Eating Sucking Test. After watching my young daughter (all of 6 months) subjecting my iPad (gets the whole swipe thing straight off :-)) to her ministrations, seeing if USB cables taste ok, and how fragile they are or not, if head-phone cables can stand repeating sucking while I am using the headphones, I believe the results are "more real-life" than some "mumbo jumbo entirely subjective" DBT.

 

Ok - normal service returned :-).

[souptin]

...my young daughter

 

From your description she may be a little too mature to apply for moderator status over at HA, but could be worth a shot. Being female probably won't help either, sorry.

[The Computer Audiophile]

If you google "computer audiophile" (which is how I just found this site) the number 2 search result is "Banished from Computer Audiophile", which points to "Hydrogen Audio". This tells me that the public has a different view of the relative intolerance of Computer Audiophile vs Hydrogen Audio.

 

The person claiming to be banned was not banned when he wrote the post.

 

Who do you mean by "public"?

[wgscott]

Public :== people who frequent lithium audiophile or whatever it is called.

[wgscott]

If you google "computer audiophile" (which is how I just found this site) the number 2 search result is "Banished from Computer Audiophile", which points to "Hydrogen Audio". This tells me that the public has a different view of the relative intolerance of Computer Audiophile vs Hydrogen Audio.

 

They tolerate me far more here, even though "ideologically" I have more in common with what Hydrogen Audio claims to be.

 

So why is that?

[Paul R]

It probably is more likely to be a result of people from here searching in Google to dig up the facts.

 

I would lay money that the account it is associated with was never banned from here, and the person or persons behind the account did what they did with intention, purpose, and preplanning. They were never banned so far as I know.

 

IMO, etc.

 

-Paul

 

 

 

If you google "computer audiophile" (which is how I just found this site) the number 2 search result is "Banished from Computer Audiophile", which points to "Hydrogen Audio". This tells me that the public has a different view of the relative intolerance of Computer Audiophile vs Hydrogen Audio.

[Jay192]

If you google "computer audiophile" (which is how I just found this site) the number 2 search result is "Banished from Computer Audiophile", which points to ...

 

... quite humourous really ... you "just" managed to find this site, just happened to stumble upon this thread, and just happen to call yourself Diogenes!

[Audio_ELF]

If you google "computer audiophile" (which is how I just found this site) the number 2 search result is "Banished from Computer Audiophile", which points to "Hydrogen Audio". This tells me that the public has a different view of the relative intolerance of Computer Audiophile vs Hydrogen Audio.

Shhhh... No talking!

[Richard Dale]

They tolerate me far more here, even though "ideologically" I have more in common with what Hydrogen Audio claims to be.

 

So why is that?

 

They lack inter-personal skills, and are flat out dead hostile to anyone who disagrees by one iota with their forum rules. They do have wide public awareness (many fellow trolls?), and seem to be perceived as 'sane' relative to all other types of audiophiles.

[Jud]

They tolerate me far more here, even though "ideologically" I have more in common with what Hydrogen Audio claims to be.

 

So why is that?

 

Maybe because Computer Audiophile doesn't "claim to be" much of anything - especially authoritative. It's just a place where folks can enjoy chatting with each other, even if the chat can sometimes get pretty spirited.

 

I've found places that put the emphasis on fun are much better atmospheres for learning (yes, even "objective facts") than places that put the emphasis on the One True Method of Knowledge (Which Is What We Damn Well Say It Is, Punk).

[Jsmith]

To me a lot of this stems from the word or label Audiophile.

 

Do I want a perfectly flat frequency response? Possibly if it makes my music sound good. Do I want the highest quality digital recording and production? Only if it is my music.

 

My point is this is music, and no matter what the numbers, specs, or anything else say; if it does not move me I don't care. If the term audiophile really means totally accurate reproduction, then I am not an audiophile. If it means someone who loves music and is willing to invest insane amounts of time and money to make it sound good to me, than I am in.

 

Now to bring this back to the original post, from what I briefly read it seems that the other site is in the camp of completely measurably accurate. For the most part on CA, I do think the members are music lovers first and foremost and that is what would draw in some of those (wgscott) that would even claim to be more aligned with the other camp.

[Paul R]

There is always the dictionary definition! It may serve as the default. It certainly isn't what the loudest detractors of the hobby claim it is.

-Paul

 

 

World English Dictionary

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR=class: tr1]

[TD=class: td1, colspan: 2]audiophile (ˈɔːdɪəʊˌfaɪl) [/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=colspan: 2] [/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: tr2]

[TD=class: td2, colspan: 2]— n[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: tr3]

[TD=class: td3n1, width: 1%, align: right][/TD]

[TD=class: td3n2]a person who has a great interest in high-fidelity soundreproduction[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition

2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins

Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009

Cite This Source

Etymonline

Word Origin & History

 

audiophile

1951, originally in "High Fidelity" magazine, from audio- + -phile.

Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper

Cite This Source

 

 

 

 

To me a lot of this stems from the word or label Audiophile.

 

Do I want a perfectly flat frequency response? Possibly if it makes my music sound good. Do I want the highest quality digital recording and production? Only if it is my music.

 

My point is this is music, and no matter what the numbers, specs, or anything else say; if it does not move me I don't care. If the term audiophile really means totally accurate reproduction, then I am not an audiophile. If it means someone who loves music and is willing to invest insane amounts of time and money to make it sound good to me, than I am in.

 

Now to bring this back to the original post, from what I briefly read it seems that the other site is in the camp of completely measurably accurate. For the most part on CA, I do think the members are music lovers first and foremost and that is what would draw in some of those (wgscott) that would even claim to be more aligned with the other camp.

[souptin]

There is always the dictionary definition!

 

Hang your head in shame! For a true subjectivist words can mean whatever you damn well want them to mean, and they should thank you for it too!

 

Back to HA, I had another look at wgscott's adventures in Hydrogen Audioland and perhaps my first reaction was a bit unfair to them. Maybe the banjo music prejudiced me. I even found a different topic discussing 'audiophile' music players which listed the same benefits (e.g. sample rate detection) and even theorised about possible reasons why they might sound better (ironically no proof of hypothesis or proposed testing method). Though it did reinforce the impression that newbies are not so much seen as welcome but more as things to be monitored and disciplined until they learn what their opinions should be. Perhaps there's a secret handshake or herculean labour to be performed before you become accepted.

[wgscott]

They lack inter-personal skills, and are flat out dead hostile to anyone who disagrees by one iota with their forum rules. They do have wide public awareness (many fellow trolls?), and seem to be perceived as 'sane' relative to all other types of audiophiles.

 

When I started to read this, I though you were talking about me.

[spdif-usb]

I've found places that put the emphasis on fun are much better atmospheres for learning (yes, even "objective facts") than places that put the emphasis on the One True Method of Knowledge (Which Is What We Damn Well Say It Is, Punk).

It is my objective observation that you are correct.

[Part-Time Audiophile]

As for double-blind tests, they are resorted to when nothing better is available. They are quite helpful in determining things like the efficacy of drugs. I think it would be wrong to dismiss the utility of such a thing out of hand. But in many fields of science, there is no need for such a primitive approach. All good experiments are designed to test hypotheses. Double-blind tests are useful for testing a null hypothesis. But they can't take you much further.

 

I'm stealing this.

 

But I'd suggest this discription for many forums:

 

"Internet Forums are uglier than most things. They are normally perceived as some kind of cruel and shallow money trench through the heart of the Internet, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs, for no good reason. There's also a negative side."

[wgscott]

Who was it who whined about my Hunter S Thompson sig quote and suggested I remove it? <sniff>

[Paul R]

Freedom shines a very bright light indeed - the brightest light of all perhaps. The brightest light creates the darkest shadows.

Anonymous

 

I'm stealing this.

 

But I'd suggest this discription for many forums:

 

"Internet Forums are uglier than most things. They are normally perceived as some kind of cruel and shallow money trench through the heart of the Internet, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs, for no good reason. There's also a negative side."

[the_bat]

Who was it who whined about my Hunter S Thompson sig quote and suggested I remove it? <sniff>

 

I thought it was from Bob Dylan.