Jump to content
joelha

Article: Guest Editorial: Why did audio stop being about audio?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, ARQuint said:

 

...but Lee S? He's really a gentle and thoughtful person who tried to engage in a serious discussion about the merits of you-know-what, and it took a lot of effort on the part of a dedicated few to get him unhinged enough to emit a bad word.

 

Mr Quint, with all due respect, Scoggins was actively pushing MQA in this forum the way he shilled for Audioquest, Black Cat, and Shunyata over at the Hoffman forum.  You attempting to affix some kind of benevolence or altruism to his intent is just nauseating.  Disingenuousness is disingenuousness, regardless of your continued protestations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

There's the doubling down we expected.

 

So Chris, you believe audiophilia is something more virtuous than consumerism?  If so, how do you reconcile this virtuousness with the inescapable consumer aspects?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, plissken said:

I think the most offensive thing I've posted at AS is something about beating the subjectivist with the generic zip cord of logic. Even Superdad laughed at that. 

 

Also can I change my Forum name to Superdata just to be an unmitigated ass-hole (some already think this so) with every single post of mine?

 

I always thought the kitten in your avatar offset your alleged reputation for being coarse.  Hard to hate on a kitteh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You're no lawyer and this is no court of law, but suggesting you know Lee was lying is a stretch. 

 

Chris, are you suggesting there is an actual distinction between gaslighting and lying?  Aren't they the same thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 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.

 

It pretty much was meant to try to bring the discussion back on topic.  Do you think it's rude to characterize irrational beliefs as such?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 4est said:

Oh come on, you know what I meant. If you are here to just do battle, have at it.

 

I think you were quick to assume my use of "irrational beliefs" spoke directly to your subjectivity when I made no such linkage.  I'm asking what I think is a reasonable question:

 

Do you believe that referring to irrational beliefs as such is, in a very general sense, rude?

Share this post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Can anyone find a real world example where a consumer really wanted to purchase a stereo or pair of headphones, but was so turned off by magic stones that they stopped their pursuit and elected to not listen to music?

 

I can tell you that when I read a statement from the head of Audioquest stating something like, "some of our users report that an interconnect cable replacement (with an Audioquest product of course) outperformed a source unit replacement", and then I saw many of the AQ devotees enthusiastically agreeing with that nonsense that I realized there is really such thing as "the big crazy".

 

I've never spent a penny on anything AQ.  No DACs, no headphones, and or course, no cables!

 

And of course that experience has made me rather suspicious of anyone praising AQ products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...