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

[Daudio]

Hmmm... Perhaps some gear-heads and/or pseudo-scientists have a deep seated anxiety that even in all their self-righteousness, they could be very wrong. So to relieve this cognitive dissonance, they mock, dismiss, distract, and actively suppress any subjective talk that triggers that anxiety by getting too real. They also seem to find f-ing with other folks quite entertaining too.

 

Just my opinion...

[Daudio]

12 minutes ago, jabbr said:

did @bdiament just get tired of us?

 

No, he was driven off by @YashN. I witnessed the whole ugly business

 

[Daudio]

1 minute ago, jabbr said:

For the purposes of our discussion here, and specifically how to avoid this is the future, what was your impression about what the cause was?

 

 To be a bit flip - testosterone poisoning !

Otherwise, a campaign of arguing an indefensible position, thru many posts with raising intensity of ad hominem attacks and invective...

Barry simply stopped posting after a while, and I think you can still see the date of his last post by searching for member 'bdiamont'. I could probably find the old thread if necessary.

 

I miss Barry, he was deeply experienced and knowledgeable, happy to share, a true audiophile, and a true gentleman. He graciously helped me get started with DIY vibration isolation, and always a pleasure to talk with. Worth a 1000 of the usual CA rif raf

 

[Daudio]

41 minutes ago, esldude said:

My complaint is when a large enough number of people simply retreat to "I hear" and nothing you can say, do, or demonstrate trumps

 

Then maybe you, and they, would be better off if you didn't say anything, rather then getting into peoples faces, as is your habit.

 

 

41 minutes ago, esldude said:

Going into a  bar where most of the patrons wish to... get into a refreshing bar fight...

 

Funny you should use that example, considering your pugilistic online style

 

[Daudio]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It's a constant balance.

 

I believe that some delegated moderation authority, coupled with some easily accessible posting guidelines could help shift that balance considerably to the positive side.

 

While one could argue that doing so would decrease postings by cooling off the flame wars, I know that a lot of people would feel more free to post without fear of being attacked, so the result would be about even, at least, but probably a longer term increase in traffic as lurkers ventured out of cover, and the word got around that CA is a better place to hang out, and returned, or joined anew.

 

Actually I've had many CA folks tell me by PM that they don't post because of the highly combative environment in the forums 

 

And us CA old-timers recall a lot of folks we just don't see any more (some thankfully , some not) who may have moved on for other reasons, but some we know, or suspect, left for the reasons we're discussing in this thread 

 

I truly hope the CA posting environment gets better soon, because it's really the pits now

 

[Daudio]

4 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

What bothers me is not so much the 'contempt for audiophiles' (I don't really see that)

 

Perhaps that is because you are part of the problem, and can't recognize the water you swim in ?

I see it, and a strong look in a miiror might do you some good.

 

[Daudio]

31 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.

 

31 minutes ago, master said:

it's either about hearing something that's not really there or better still let me hurt you so bad and insult your mama that you ain't going to be back.

 

So why did you come to CA and Display Your Contempt For Audiophiles so Clearly and Blatantly ?

 

34 minutes ago, master said:

just that most audiophiles wouldn't know what to do with The Weeknd

 

You accuse us of not knowing music, and use as an example a R&B artist who's only been performing for 6 years ?!?!?

 

And you expect us to take you seriously ?... NOT !

 

[Daudio]

20 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Guilty as charged...

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.

 

Every post of yours that I saw before Ignoring you (and some later by accident, as here), has been toxic and mean-spirited, taking every opportunity to denigrate anything, and anyone, related to listening rather then measuring.

 

I consider your postings here on CA to be a insidious danger to the CA community as a whole, with no redeeming social (or technical) value.

 

Sorry but I call it like I see it !

 

And you are very germane to the topic of this thread. Where did you come from ? Arriving right after the big contentious Obj/Sub thread got shut down, and not alone either, as a few other new, vocal, blindly 'objective' members appeared about then too.

 

So, are you a terrorist agent sent from Hydro Audio, or some other den of 'righteous' thinkers ? 

 

[Daudio]

46 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

I'm a member of the local audiophile club, with over a hundred members and 2 meets per month minimum...

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.

 

I also belong to a local audio club, with 1 to 2 dozen members, that meets mostly every week. And I've been doing that for decades, some I've known for over 40 years. This is the 3rd audio club I've been lucky to associate with over my life.

 

I don't recognize your description of your club members at all. I think it is tainted by some very fundamental flaw in your views of other people. The audio people I know (and knew) have a range of familiarity with science and technology. Some don't care, and that's fine - yet them enjoy the hobby as they wish (its called freedom). Others, including myself, have engineering and technical backgrounds, even building and repairing electronic audio equipment. Perhaps 30% of group. Some were gear-heads (very first ABX box), and more were balanced between tech and listening. A range of knowledge and attitudes, just like in real life, not an ugly stereotype.

 

So with 4 to 5 times the number of member I expect you to have a significant number of members who knew their way around a soldering iron or Ohm's law.

 

So what's wrong with this picture ? Is it your audio group ? Or your flawed view of your group ? Or maybe a few fudged numbers to support your 'argument' ?

I don't know, and don't care, because I simply do not find you creditable, at all.

 

Over and out.

 

[Daudio]

20 minutes ago, Jud said:

I see someone has taken the suggestion not to get personal about this to heart.

 

While everyone is dancing around saying fine and agreeable things (even some of the worst offenders lying through their teeth) I feel a duty to call out the examples of "Their Contempt For Audiophiles", when it blatantly shows up in this thread.

 

And I'm not making ad hominen attacks, but calling out malicious behavior in the authors own words.

 

What else would you have me do ? Shut up and let the antisocial behavior continue to drag this forum down, stifling speech*, and inhibiting traffic ???

 

I think not, but what say you ?

 

 

* not only in violation of the CA Forums Terms of Service, but unconstitutional in the USA

[Daudio]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

The constitution has nothing to do with a private forum. The 1st Amendment only protects you from the Government. 

 

Fair enough, but I was trying to make a point. And since you bring it up, the CA Terms of Service IS your concern, IIRC 

 

[Daudio]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

I believe it is the job of measurements to explain subjective sensory phenomena, rather than explain them away  

 

I knew there was something about you that I liked ! Great quote

 

 

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

That and folks like @wgscott have had threats that someone would go to their employer ..(!)

 

I remember that situation playing out on these pages years ago. and it revolved around a posted picture of him. I can't say I know everything about it, but my strong take-away from back then is he descended into an almost pathological fit of paranoia (I was shocked), talking all kinds of wild 'what-if's', and refusing to let it go, which is probably why that myth still hangs around 

 

 

[Daudio]

42 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

there is no such need, and the premise of Jud's initial question is false - people do not come here to do that

 

You live in a fantasy world 

[Daudio]

33 minutes ago, jabbr said:

I am curious. I have fun explaining things... perhaps, just perhaps loosening screws affects the transmission of vibration to components. So if we are talking tube amps ... I could see this having an effect

 

Exactly...

 

What I see you saying here is that it is better for the audiophile (and more of a scientific attitude IMO) to be open minded about these reports. There is no need to judge them true/false immediately (or ever), and throw away good data. Collect all this data to get smarter. Some may lead to problems or improvements, some may just be due to wishful thinking, and most will probably remain undecided. Being able to hold contradictory information in ones head, is a skill well worth cultivating if one wants to be truly 'scientific'.

 

This reminds me of subscribing to a small cheap weekly magazine called "Science News" a couple of decades back. It had maybe a dozen pages filled with small articles (some just paragraphs). The articles were just little reports of this study, or that study, and what they might imply in their particular field. Just data really, a digestible stream of it, week by week.

 

The wonder of it was that as time passed, I could see different studies of the same/similar thing with differing results, none definitive, but together they painted a picture of the evolving nature of scientific thought, based on multiple views of all kinds of evidence,

 

Throwing away any evidence, 'subjective' or not, is foolish and clearly unscientific !

 

[Daudio]

5 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Well, think about it. Every time you use a dust cloth, it wears down the dusted surface just a tiny bit, like water flowing over rocks.

 

Atoms vs bits, and Waaaaaaay Off Topic !  Please take it somewhere else.

[Daudio]

13 minutes ago, esldude said:

Maybe digital files have a break-in period. You have to play them enough to smooth the rough edges off.

 

Anyone else notice a flurry of silly, OT, distracting, posts following one that might be a little unsettling to those 'Righteous' keepers of the objectivist, pseudo-scientific, flames ?

 

[Daudio]

Just now, esldude said:

Nope.   Do you have any examples?

 

Huh ? And here I thought you had me on 'Ignore' and thus it was a question for all.  But since you ask, Yes, I do. Two of them involve you blasting me with 3 or 4 clearly OT replies, one right after I started a new thread expressly stating the type of content desired in it.

 

Oh, sure, you can claim plausible deniability, but the pattern is clear, and you've been around this place long enough (but not quite longer then me) to develop a finely tuned ability to go right up to the line, without crossing it, to survive without being banned.

 

And that point is known by more then just me.

[Daudio]

 

35 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

44 minutes ago, wgscott said:

When we had the down vote capability, he stalked me and down-voted everything I posted.  

 

Even the Grateful Dead stuff? C'mon. He voted down JERRY?

 

 

Of course not, that's just Scott's usual paranoid exaggeration. Yes, I did Down vote a number of his posts, for (IMO) rude behavior and ridiculous statements, in 'open' threads. So what, I get my share too. Is he too much of a snowflake to take it ?

 

And the 'stalking' thing is just a damn lie ! For well over a year, I have refused to click into any posts, in any thread started by wsgscot or esldude, much less post. I might see snippets in Unread Content, through.

 

To be honest, I did break my rule a week back in one of his 'troll trap' threads to add a link to a DAC review by G. Graves, I'd just seen and thought was a very good candidate for testing the question the thread posed. I made no comments and he totally misunderstood it, since he wasn't really interested in the question, but how he could control the outcome of the thread. Then later in the thread, DJ Soundfuck, posted so big a boo-boo, I couldn't resist the temptation to call him on it.

Yeah, my bad, I guess. I've meant to PM Scott explaining all this, but didn't get around to it til just now, when it became unavoidable.

 

All just tawdry shit  move on...

 

P.S. he has done his share of stalking of me BTW, adding a bunch of distracta-posts to those of esldude's in one situation.

 

[Daudio]

16 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

Festivus

 

Hey, I was attacked, and had to defend my reputation against lies. What would you do ? And then you join in on the trashing 

 

I've never quite figured out where the hell you're coming from, but I never liked what you've had to say about this forum and its members. Happy to formally Ignore you now...

[Daudio]

1 minute ago, Jud said:

Why stop there?

 

Et tu, Brute ?

[Daudio]

2 minutes ago, esldude said:

Silo-ed knowledge?

 

look it up, genius

 

[Daudio]

Having fun, children ?

[Daudio]

17 minutes ago, Jud said:

You just appear to have a dislike for so many people on the thread

 

Are you so... distracted... that you can't see the difference between liking/disliking a person, and calling out their rude and malicious behavior ? And there is a shitload of that around here, recent past and just now, to call out !

 

And after all, that kind of behavior is what this thread of yours is about.