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

[Jud]

8 hours ago, plissken said:

 

It's an attempt to answer Jud's initial question as to the why. It's one of many. If you don't want soft targets then some fundamentally impossible positions about how computer audio DOESN'T work could be made verboten here.

 

Not thinking of folks as “targets” might help for a start.

[Jud]

5 hours ago, jabbr said:

Thanks for answering honestly. Seriously. Although I don't dra w the same conclusions from your experiences, I belieive that if people can honestly share the reasons why they believe what they believe that we might collectively be able to more honestly see where people are coming from. I do think that we each should respect the different reasons why each of us have come to our own conclusions and if we wish to convince others of our viewpoint, this should be done respectfully.

 

And this should be so normal it doesn’t need repeating - but who am I kidding, this is the Internet.

 

It’s why an overall sense of community is important, it seems to me.  Otherwise, the unfortunate tradition on the WWW is to treat it like the WWE.

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, Jud said:

It’s why an overall sense of community is important, it seems to me.  Otherwise, the unfortunate tradition on the WWW is to treat it like the WWE.

Or WW2.

[daverich4]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

"No one here on the internet knows if they are typing notes to a dog"

 

I love that sentence. Gave me a good chuckle. So true. 

 

[Jud]

14 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

But that's not what I said. I said

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

 

Just my own thoughts, which no one else, including you, needs to agree with:

 

I see a couple of potential difficulties with this formulation.  First, I can't see many people taking "You're a swell person, but what you say is ridiculous" as a compliment or joke; possibly as a joke if you know them quite well, but I don't think you know any of us that well.  Second, if the person can't perform the difficult or impossible feat of not being bothered about having their ideas called wrong or silly, you disclaim any responsibility for putting them in that difficult situation by saying it's just "a matter of their perception."

 

Not that we need to tread on eggshells, but just for the purpose of having a more effective discussion that doesn't devolve into mere unproductive back-and-forth, I think there are better tactics.  There is putting forth an argument of your own, rather than explicitly calling out someone else's as silly or wrong, which can be done in the same thread or in a separate thread.  (I think a separate thread is especially appropriate, for example, where all someone wants is advice on how best to break in an amp.  Unlike discussions of grounding, there's no danger to be averted.  It is, as the Hitchhiker's Guide says of Earth, "mostly harmless.")  Or there is a tactic I favor and employed very effectively by @esldude in @wgscott's recent long thread, discussing the specific rather than the general.  esldude pointed out that audio presented by another commenter had been done with a single microphone, so the qualities the commenter heard couldn't have been in the audio but rather had to be present in the commenter's mind.  It was simple, quite specific, factual, and was not objected to by the commenter.  This told me far more than the pages of argumentative back-and-forth surrounding it.

[Jud]

17 hours ago, Daudio said:

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 ?

 

 

17 hours ago, rickca said:

I'm so glad someone is here to protect us from the meanies. 

 

Daudio, a fair question.

 

rickca, this isn't about protecting anyone, of course.

 

Daudio, can you point out to me a thread where writing personal comments about someone else stopped the antisocial behavior you're concerned about, rather than having it continue unabated or even worsen?  I agree we'd like a better quality of discussion; I just seriously doubt personal remarks are an effective way to get there.

[Andyman]

I have a friend who has been writing a book for many years. His writing is shit. That does not make him a shit. However I do not tell him his writing is shit.

 

He does not frequent this forum!

[pkane2001]

4 hours ago, master said:

The goal of every audiophile should be to better enjoy music... or at the very least to enjoy music.

 

To me anything/anyone that distracts from that goal would an anti-audiophile.

 

Agreed, but that definition for audiophile may be a bit broad. After all, I'd venture to say that most of the world population enjoys some sort of music, but that doesn't make everyone an audiophile.

 

I would suggest that an audiophile is one that is interested in all aspects of music reproduction, including the equipment and the recording methods used, to achieve a more realistic playback in order to enhance their enjoyment of music.

 

This definition includes the 'equipment junkies' and the 'measurement fanatics' and the 'liquid cable cognoscenti', as well as the 'MQA lovers', etc. For this reason, I find it hard to label anyone here as an anti-audiophile simply because they might have a different approach to achieving our common goal. Even if they are being aggressive in attacking the other side (but only as long as these attacks don't transition into personal.)

[rickca]

42 minutes ago, Jud said:

rickca, this isn't about protecting anyone, of course.

My comment was meant to be sarcastic.  I don't need someone to tell me who to dislike.

[rando]

Withering humor ahead:

 

I long ago came to terms with the likelihood, aside from being reasonably or unreasonably highly knowledgeable about the technical aspects of this hobby, the majority of people who contribute vast amounts of time to hot button threads like this are fairly well off gentleman of a certain age who get together to yell all the nasty things they could never approach saying to their wives.  Which is fantastic except during a drought.  When fully engaged in, let's be honest here, shitposting most of the rest of the forum operates with almost no interference.  

 

"I've recently found ___ to be enjoyable through introduction to ___ by ___."

 

"That's enlightening given this slightly variant attempt to solve that irksome tendecy with said piece of equipment never sounded right to me."  

[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?

[Jud]

1 hour ago, AJ Soundfield said:

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?

 

Nothing so philosophical.  I felt this had occurred.  Other folks in the thread have already said they didn't think it had.  All very fine.

 

1 hour ago, AJ Soundfield said:

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?

 

I'm saying there are various ways to make known your thinking that this is absurd.  Some of them are more effective for you than others, if your object is to persuade those reading that you have something cogent and credible to say on the subject.  Some of them are better for my goals in reading this forum than others.  My general goal is to be able to learn.  This I feel is aided by specific goals, such as trying to have friendly discussions that hopefully feature various users providing what they believe to be supporting information, which I'm then able to evaluate as I like.  Heated arguments that approach infinite length reduce the signal to noise ratio below that which makes it convenient for me to find what might be interesting and worth a further look.

[Jud]

By the way: When I suggested starting one's own thread, that can work for both people who want to have subjective discussions and those who want to keep things objective.  It's a big, big forum.  There have been various successful long threads where the OP has suggested keeping discussions along certain lines and that's been respected.  On the other hand, there have been threads started by both subjectivists and objectivists where people just could not keep themselves from diving in and spoiling the type of discussion the OP wanted to have.  (There's the recent amp break-in thread I've already mentioned, as well as a couple of @esldude's threads I can think of, the mere existence of which various subjectivists decided to treat as a personal affront.  @wgscott's recent thread can also be fairly seen, I think, as a request to answer an objective question that became hopelessly embroiled in useless argument.)

[rickca]

5 minutes ago, Jud said:

that became hopelessly embroiled in useless argument

That's why I started the following thread

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/32091-pointless-discussion-and-pithy-retorts/#comment-674818

 

[Lebouwsky]

27 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

This I feel is aided by specific goals, such as trying to have friendly discussions that hopefully feature various users providing what they believe to be supporting information, which I'm then able to evaluate as I like.  Heated arguments that approach infinite length reduce the signal to noise ratio below that which makes it convenient for me to find what might be interesting and worth a further look.

 

My credits to you, your writing style is open, friendly and respectfull. It's the only way to keep doors open and therefore a progressive way of communicating. At least that's how I interpretate it.

 

[rickca]

2 hours ago, rickca said:

My comment was meant to be sarcastic.  I don't need someone to tell me who to dislike.

My earlier comment about someone protecting us from the meanies, and this quoted post were both directed at @Daudio, not at @Jud.    I agree with @Lebouwsky on Jud's even tempered contributions to CA.

[Albrecht]

8 hours ago, master said:

 

The goal of every audiophile should be to better enjoy music... or at the very least to enjoy music.

 

 

Is it possible that you're building a little bit of a false dichotomy here? Setting up a bit of a straw man? If you count a smart phone, how many people own just one music playback system? What defines a music lover? I can understand you very well if you would've said, - audiophiles can possibly get over-obsessed with playback equipment, engaging in the law of diminishing returns for minute changes: -  losing sight of the pleasure of listening. What each of us calls equipment that brings "better sound" can enhance the listening experience. The listening experience is enhanced more by my big main system than it is by my bedroom system, and then again the kitchen system, and then again the car system. Isn't it possible to appreciate both music and the gear that enhances the experience?

 

I haven't changed my main system except to replace a MacMini since 2003. I have over 40,000 songs now in the DB. But I don't consider myself any more of a "music lover" than someone who is crazy wild about the collective works of Beethoven and plays the music constantly, jumping around the room with passion.....

 

As a songwriter and musician, I find things in both music and in the gear that enhances the listening experience: I appreciate content choices in songwriting in composition, even ones that I don't like personally, - but the writing choices. I am often amazed by the skills and abilities of a musician, - even though I might not like the song/composition. I also can appreciate some equipment that isn't "right" for me and my favorite music, but would work better for someone else's music, in someone else's room.

[Albrecht]

54 minutes ago, Jud said:

By the way: When I suggested starting one's own thread, that can work for both people who want to have subjective discussions and those who want to keep things objective.  @esldude@wgscott

I think that I understand what you're saying. I would humbly posit for your consideration on your thoughts on respect that the scales are often tipped to the point where the word audiophile calls up all kinds of negative connotations wherein it seems to be just a given that an audiophile is an idiot.

The act of writing, recording, & playing back music is A SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE. There is no certainty, no right, no wrong. There's no universalizable objective argument that a Yamaha Violin is worse sounding than a Stradivarius. There's no objective argument that a tubed Manley Stingray sounds better than a Mark Levinson 383, or even any different through a pair of NHT stand-mount speakers. There's no objective argument that Frank Zappa is any "better" than Barry Manilow. 

Even the individual choices of parts are subjective choices, do Vishay resistors with a much tighter tolerance rate allow the overall amplifier or speaker to "sound better?" Why does Gilbert of Blue Circle pour his own capacitors?

We all have differing opinions & perspectives on what is "good." What is the only way to tell if the sound of a Stradivarius is better than a Yamaha?  What is the best way to tell if two different speaker cables cause the same speaker to sound "different?"

Yet there can be so much intolerance and derision towards listening experiences, and (scientific) listening tests. This is especially the case when the so-called objective testing methodologies cannot elucidate how a certain component sounds, and especially, - the much more complex interplay between 3 or more components and their cables and room interactions. The act of applying the scientific method is qualitative. A poor test is still science, just worse than a better test. Jabbr put it quite well when he said that measurements help us explain what we heard during the listening experience/tests.

Chris also wrote something really important that I took to heart, - you are not going to change anyone's mind about anything here. So for those that are certain that people are lying to themselves and it is merely a "belief" that a Cardas Clear speaker cable can make an Avalon Eidolon sound "different" or "better" than 10 gauge Home Depot lamp cord: why would anyone want to come here? Shouldn't everyone own the same $350 Sony DAC?

 

 

 

[Albrecht]

1 hour ago, Lebouwsky said:

 

My credits to you, your writing style is open, friendly and respectfull. It's the only way to keep doors open and therefore a progressive way of communicating. At least that's how I interpretate it.

 

+1

[jabbr]

3 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

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?

 

Are we having a fellacious focus??

3 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

 

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?

 

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.

 

Now if this is indeed the case, I'd say do a proper vibration isolation, rather than screw around but y'know maybe what folks are hearing is real...

 

You are a speaker manufacturer? Surely you pay attention to box stiffness or is stiffness just fallacious?

 

[Jud]

27 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Shouldn't everyone own the same $350 Sony DAC?

 

My DAC cost $375.  Maybe that was $25 too much?

 

I'm interested in lots of things, particularly in knowledge that can help me get better sound for less (or no) money.  

 

So while I tend to pay attention to people with subjective preferences that match many of mine, I also pay close attention to people who provide objective knowledge that can help me attain that better-sound-for-less goal.  For example, I'm planning to get a calibrated mic and use it to help set up the listening space in my new home that's currently being built.  The mic and a stand together might cost me less than $100, and the software to use with it is free.  I've also already purchased an isolation transformer used for not a lot of money (2.4kVA for $400) for the new home, and had extensive information on its proper wiring ready to provide the electrical sub when he asked.  These things wouldn't have happened without several members thought of as "objectivists."

 

It's so much easier to get information I appreciate from the folks here when I don't restrict my attention in accordance with subjectivist or objectivist labels.

[master]

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

Is it possible that you're building a little bit of a false dichotomy here? Setting up a bit of a straw man? If you count a smart phone, how many people own just one music playback system? What defines a music lover? I can understand you very well if you would've said, - audiophiles can possibly get over-obsessed with playback equipment, engaging in the law of diminishing returns for minute changes: -  losing sight of the pleasure of listening. What each of us calls equipment that brings "better sound" can enhance the listening experience. The listening experience is enhanced more by my big main system than it is by my bedroom system, and then again the kitchen system, and then again the car system. Isn't it possible to appreciate both music and the gear that enhances the experience?

 

I haven't changed my main system except to replace a MacMini since 2003. I have over 40,000 songs now in the DB. But I don't consider myself any more of a "music lover" than someone who is crazy wild about the collective works of Beethoven and plays the music constantly, jumping around the room with passion.....

 

As a songwriter and musician, I find things in both music and in the gear that enhances the listening experience: I appreciate content choices in songwriting in composition, even ones that I don't like personally, - but the writing choices. I am often amazed by the skills and abilities of a musician, - even though I might not like the song/composition. I also can appreciate some equipment that isn't "right" for me and my favorite music, but would work better for someone else's music, in someone else's room.

 

Yes, it could certainly be interpreted that way. But let me "attempt" to put things in a different way.

 

Apart from audiophiles, we also have videophiles (I suppose I'm one of them too with a dedicated home theater, room and all). But there is a difference between a videophile and someone who loves cinema (similar analogy).

 

Marco Polo was the first TV show I saw in 4K and it was nothing short of spectacular. John Wick (the first one) was the first movie that I watched in Dolby Atmos... again truly spectacular and out of this world in terms of sound effects. Avatar remains a benchmark for the SFX and the detail it introduced to us. I enjoyed all of them a lot.

 

But I also enjoy most of the Duke's movies, and James Stewart's movies, nevermind they are not available in 4K or even FHD... to me as a lover of cinema they are a must watch... even if they are only in Standard Definition. I've even watched Kurosawa without any subtitles and not knowing a single word of Japanese and still enjoyed them immensely... Hidden Fortress was my first intro as a young kid.

 

That said I've also met folks who refuse to watch such gems because they are not redone in color, are not high definition, come with black bars even on the sides, are in crappy Standard Definition, are only available on DVD, are only in mono, etc. To me (in such instances) the difference between a videophile and a movie lover is a very obvious one.

 

When the equipment or the format (I know one guy who refuses to listen to anything not on DSD) becomes the predominant factor, you would wonder where has the love gone.

 

PS: Don't get me wrong... even I love to have the best equipment... but I also enjoy mp3s in 128 kbps (Spotify is still anathema to many self professed audiophiles), and low bit-rate video. Picket Fences was never released on DVD, and certainly no high definition version, and all I could find was a bad 240P version of the show... but I still watched it and enjoyed it immensely.

[mansr]

6 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.

 

Now if this is indeed the case, I'd say do a proper vibration isolation, rather than screw around but y'know maybe what folks are hearing is real...

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

[Albrecht]

1 minute ago, master said:

 

Yes, it could certainly be interpreted that way. But let me "attempt" to put things in a different way.

That said I've also met folks who refuse to watch such gems because they are not redone in color, are not high definition, come with black bars even on the sides, are in crappy Standard Definition, ad on DVD, and certainly no high definition version, and all I could find was a bad 240P version of the show... but I still watched it and enjoyed it immensely.

Hi,

Thanks for this response. I really appreciate it. Coming from a songwriting background, I know too well how one can be obsessed with gear and get lost in minutiae of "detail" of the sound to the point where they're not enjoying the music. I've learned the hard way and now will never buy music that I don't like because it was "well recorded." And, I think that many of us know musicians who "listen for content" on crappy stereos and enjoy themselves immensely. I can tell you as recording "co-producer" I felt like I had to be obsessed both with instrument tone & writing and playing content.

[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