Why Do People Come To Computer Audiophile To Display Their Contempt For Audiophiles?

[AJ Soundfield]

Willie Sutton?

[AJ Soundfield]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

more people on the site would identify toward the "subjectivist"

And as I've said 1000 times, none of those folks know the meaning of that word. Otherwise, there could be no arguments, which is all about objective claims.

A "subjectivist" would not care one whit what the item costs, the purity of materials its made of, how much lower or higher distortion or jitter or whatever electro-acoustic parameter it creates.

The only thing that would matter is that is pleases them more, whether or not is "sounds" different or not, because sound has a dictionary meaning. One does not have to stare at, know about and fondle something for a week or months to determine sound. No "test" is required to determine if one likes the thing or not.

There can be no conflict between true subjectivity and objective facts. Only between those who don't know what they are.

[AJ Soundfield]

13 minutes ago, Jud said:

That's certainly one way to look at it.   

Or this

[AJ Soundfield]

16 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

But for now, I would be very interested in your reply to Jud's opening question 

I did in this form, but it now appears it was removed. You might not understand it either, given your reservations to my dichotomy explanation.

[AJ Soundfield]

2 minutes ago, master said:

 they don't have a leg to stand on.

Playing the eternal poor victim masks this very well.

[AJ Soundfield]

4 minutes ago, master said:

 

I would go so far as to say most audiophiles don't really enjoy music... or even know much about it.

Totally disagree. It's the one thing we all have in common, otherwise I wouldn't be here.

I'm a manufacturer. I've exhibited at around a dozen audio shows. I'm a member of the local audiophile club, with over a hundred members and 2 meets per month minimum.

So I consider myself "immersed" and have been exposed to literally thousands of audiophiles and nearly as many systems. Most a very nice people. With nearly zero technical knowledge and understanding of physics as it relates to electro-acoustics, nor anything related to psycho-acoustics and perception. Yet that is their favorite pass time, "arguing" about electro-acoustics/perception, not just, "hey, this thing sound great to me and I don't care what absurd reason why".

[AJ Soundfield]

2 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 It is my impression that you, along with others, have made a number of recent comments that include humor regarding "audiophiles". 

Guilty as charged...Though precisely because I can immediately see things like loaded questions, I can also separate the person from the "argument". So indeed, I do tend to poke a wee bit of fun at beliefs. That there might be collateral damage, perceived or real, is another matter entirely and most likely based on the eye of the beholder.

Or believer in this case.

[AJ Soundfield]

3 minutes ago, wgscott said:

"Person X at website Y says this slanderous thing about your USB doohickie" thread.

Well, if it were "Person A at website B says this slanderous thing about doohickie X", then the whole thing would be invalid

[AJ Soundfield]

5 minutes ago, Daudio said:

 

before Ignoring you

You're doing a fantastic job. Perceptions must be assumed to be 100% real.

[AJ Soundfield]

5 minutes ago, Daudio said:

Others, including myself, have engineering and technical backgrounds

 

Yes of course, just like you are completely ignoring me, remember? Excellent self perspective. 

[AJ Soundfield]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

However, causing "collateral damage" serious. 

But that's not what I said. I said

Quote

That there might be collateral damage, perceived or real, is another matter entirely and most likely based on the eye of the beholder.

I'm clearly saying while I might poke fun of beliefs, that, by extension to the person holding the belief, is a matter of their perception. Folks often can't discern between the argument and the arguer. Criticizing or poking fun at an argument is not the same as criticizing or poking fun of a person

[AJ Soundfield]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

I see a couple of potential difficulties with this formulation

Thought you might. Do you now see your thread title is a loaded question fallacy? That you fallaciously presumed "People" as guilty of your charge, then asked why 'they" are here?

 

Ok, now on to your next charge.

If I make the general statement that loosening screws on the chassis of a component to improve "sound" is absurd (a very real belief for some audiophiles) and said audiophile reading the general statement is deeply insulted (aka "collateral damage"), you're saying my act of criticism of the belief is unwarranted and unwanted on this forum?

[AJ Soundfield]

4 minutes ago, mansr said:

Maybe they have a screw loose and need their equipment to match.

That's pretty much what Norman Koren was saying.

Anyway, this one's run its course for me

[AJ Soundfield]

1 hour ago, Wavelength said:

The big problem I have with cable companies is that nobody owns the test equipment that I have to test these cables? Why not?

Heck, even I know that audiophile commandment. Because you're supposed to "listen" to the cables (eyes wide open, weeks on end), not perform useless measurements, duh!

 

Btw Gordon, do you notice how much better that measurement equipment works with an audiophile power cord?

 

Ok I swore I would stay out of this one, but damn...

[AJ Soundfield]

I'm wondering if this thread wasn't a ruse by Jud to get the knives vs gunfight fantasy loons to go postal

[AJ Soundfield]

20 minutes ago, firedog said:

the claim being that all those things you listed may exist, but ultimately have no effect on the analog output of the DAC. 

How would your ears detect "DAC" soundwave changes to the soundfield, other than from the analog output of the DAC? Please specify the method of conduction if this is not the case.

[AJ Soundfield]

That sounds like a CPU issue

[AJ Soundfield]

4 minutes ago, firedog said:

The obvious implication is that they are audible effects, otherwise there wouldn't be any reason to be concerned with them.

Bingo, so let's try this again.

How would your ears detect audible "DAC" soundwave changes to the soundfield, other than from the analog output of the DAC? Please specify the method of conduction if this is not the case.

[AJ Soundfield]

5 minutes ago, firedog said:

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to ask. I think my posts were clear.

Yep, you have indeed confirmed why only the analog output (and measures) matters, not all the other hokum.

Thanks.

[AJ Soundfield]

21 minutes ago, firedog said:

The question in the end is not whether a USB device reduces "noise", but whether this reduction is actually relevant to the analog sound produced.

Bingo. I think we are on the same page then

[AJ Soundfield]

4 hours ago, Superdad said:

So I, along with my fellow manufacturers, will just go back to selling our snake oil products with a money-back guarantee while basking in the delusional praise of thousands of unsuspecting, tin-eared, gullible plebeians (most of whom really are educated professionals who've been pursuing audio for decades--but of course that doesn't count).

 

--Alex C.

Do you manufacturers sell product in the million(s) quantities like highly effective Power Bracelets or are we talking a few thousand educated professional buyers here?

[AJ Soundfield]

6 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Throwing shade again?

Trying the determine if there is an actual number for appeal to popularity

[AJ Soundfield]

7 minutes ago, jabbr said:

After educating myself, and speaking with people who I respect and then doing even more reading, I've come to this hypothesis-- that close-in phase error is an important but overlooked factor in digital audio circuits-- ymmv

I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things. I speak to a lot of people, but my primary consultant is myself, and I have a good instinct for this stuff

[AJ Soundfield]

9 minutes ago, Jud said:

I see we are starting to get back into well worn grooves again.  Oh well....

You know Einsteins rumored definition of insanity, yes?

[AJ Soundfield]

1 hour ago, christopher3393 said:

your intent behind the reference to power bracelets as a comparison to usb related devices.

My sincere hope is that no one calls millions and millions of educated folks who experience positive effects of those bracelets, gullible plebeians. It would really reek of hypocrisy to dismiss the perceptions of others, just because one thought something is scientifically absurd and without objective basis, like controlled testing of efficacy.