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

[tapatrick]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Great post Jud. So true in every way.

 

P.S. I listened to a Gerry Spence audiobook on CD when driving across the country in college. What a story teller and great mind. 

To date the best post I’ve read on AS. Thanks Jud 😊

[tapatrick]

9 hours ago, vmartell22 said:

Science is not a belief system

There is plenty of philosophical discussion that science is a belief system...

[tapatrick]

35 minutes ago, sdolezalek said:

These days it is hard to find any area in which there is a true consensus, never mind universal agreement. Instead, we have vehement disagreement about almost everything, with the very uncertainty that led us to a tribal view emotionally leading us to defend that view with even more force than if it were one we safely had in hand. 

Which makes this particular thread in a small way so significant...

[tapatrick]

29 minutes ago, vmartell22 said:

 

Of course - that's exactly what I said.  And that is the expression of one side of the argument trying to  change the framework... so they can have an argument... otherwise... well... 

Again, gravity does not care if you don't believe in it... you will fall.

But the reaction to your post if correct - veering off topic - last thing I will say on the matter.

v

No offence meant and I'm not trying to have an argument. I'm not sure what it would mean to veer off topic on this thread! 😱

 

Of course you are correct about gravity, I'll be taking the lift leaving work today not jumping out the window... Context is everything however. In relation to the topic of this thread only I responded to your statement 'Science is not a belief system' as I am genuinely interested in how any belief whether defined by oneself or others as 'scientific', 'objective', 'subjective' etc frames how we see the world and what the motive is when we express ourselves. I have met very few people who are honest about this but maybe I don't get out enough 🤣. Just my thing... which I have spent a life time studying.  

 

In the interest of this thread the arguments over the usual audiophile issues (dare I say subjectivist/Objectivist 😅) are not very interesting to me except the first few times I read them. What I find of interest is that in a conversation in person or online, there are different contexts being held, expressed and offered by each contributor. We affirm, bond with, react for or against whatever is our preference. When we are not understood or listened to seems to raise the thermometer pretty rapidly. Flexibility, openness, not being fixed, not needing to be right is hard won. 

 

I think a question has been genuinely posed in this thread about how to solve the riddle of conflict which is small potatoes on here between individuals in the grander scheme of things but the same underlying issues are of increasing concern in our hyper connected/disconnected world and in larger political social arenas when fuelled by power... Like I said my thing... 🙏

[tapatrick]

2 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

For astronomy forums, that's a big NO. In fact, it's gotten much better since the end of the century. But then, I run a number of them, so I guess it's all due to my amazing moderator skills  The reality is I don't need to moderate any of my forums, I may jump in a few times a year to get a discussion back on track, but that's about it. 

 

Sounds great I think I'll head over there. Why is it so different on astronomy forums? less room for 'subjectivity'.. ?

[tapatrick]

I miss the good days when we used clubs. Bloody Descarte...

[tapatrick]

20 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

How hard did you look?

 

https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9783319438764

I bet my google is bigger than yours...

[tapatrick]

Peace pipe anyone. Bring your own combustibles.  

[tapatrick]

This has been a riveting show folks, competes with ‘Chernobyl’ Over and out. Eats shoots and leaves.  

[tapatrick]

2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

It's that to some degree. I joke that amateur astronomers spend most of the clear nights outside, with a telescope, getting little to no sleep. They are exhausted and have no energy to argue and fight on forums during the day  The hobby is extremely technical and more than frequently -- humbling, so folks help each other whenever they can and rely on building a common knowledge and understanding as a community.

 

There are always some strong subjective opinions, and even snake oil, but these are easily found out and rarely tolerated.

 

Thanks for the update, food for thought.. without being politically incorrect can you tell what the demographic is ? Cheers

[tapatrick]

12 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Similar demographic to audiophiles. Maybe a bit older on average, age spans from early 20s to mid 80s. Average, without any real data to back this up, I'd say around 60. Predominantly male. World-wide.

we get everywhere 😂... cheers

[tapatrick]

14 hours ago, vmartell22 said:

 

Indeed - lemme try to summarize in this context - because you have a point

 

1.- I think the general idea of the editorial is that audiophiles are requesting the same respect that, let's say, the wine hobby/industry - That is, if I hear it (or taste it) then that's it, that is my take on it and I am contributing valuable insights. Because ( and hope I  am not wrong) that seems to be the general aim of the audiophile practice (at least the subjective one, which seems to include most of the industry and its consumers).  Might add, though, that wine industry is also on very iffy grounds: 

 

v

Thank you for your full post, generously written. I understand your position and sympathise with much of the same. There is much value in understanding others point of view (essential in fact). Would love to fill out my take on this subject more fully but just don't have time at present.... have a good day.

[tapatrick]

15 hours ago, crenca said:

 

I like how you put all this.  I admit I wish the "live and let live" subjectivism you propose here was a truly neutral ground upon which the "comradery" of audio could be based on.  Even if you don't agree with all the reasons I and others state why it is not, surely the day to day evidence and the existence of the objective/subjective divide makes you question your faith (to use a word  ) in it??  

 

 👍 anyone attempting to introduce a non binary perspective gets my vote. 😊

[tapatrick]

4 hours ago, firedog said:

and observe what I hope will be the growth of a corrective force.

We live in hope... at least I do. 

[tapatrick]

20 hours ago, vmartell22 said:

5. Last, I will get personal. Why do I get into it? Believe it or not, it has to do with the zeitgeist and the current political climate. Lots of anti-scientific thinking right now, from anti-vaxxers  to flat earthers, climate change  denial, etc. This is a direct attack on humanity.  Yes, flat earthers, for example are ridiculous and relatively innocuous. Yet , such promotion of anti-science still has a detrimental effect. It promotes fear of knowledge and education, to the point that in some realms, educated persons and scientists are "an elite" that is not to be trusted etc. And in order to fight against that (because it really needs to be fought) I actively oppose it anytime I see it. And yes, it can be even dangerous, IRL. But because the stakes are pretty high we really need to do it.

 

 

But I will continue and I do promise to try to live and let live.

 

v

I admire your sincerity, passion and care for the world, anyone who doesn't just want suspended animation plus Netflix has to pick their arena of engagement..

 

Getting personal too  - after much consideration, the study of the nature of mind seems to be the only endeavour that makes fullest sense to me. That's the application of science to me! Not in abstraction or isolation but within a hierarchy of value. Hence my mentioning why I find understanding a persons context as being so important.

 

Every posting on a thread like this is not just responding to what is necessarily claimed but contains a constellation of other factors, some overlapping briefly with the topic or recipient - most not. Those that overlap and even meet beyond a previous difference to me are of a higher value.

 

Possibly not the time or place for philosophy but underneath and on top of the discussion I hear the grappling with big issues and ones place in that. Why would so many like yourself mention the state of the world etc and proclamations of fighting for their cause... on a hifi forum!  Badly worded or not by anyone, seriously interesting... 

 

 Jeez, I generally only visit AS in the hope of finding inexpensive tweaks to apply to my system on weekends, so that I can access more dopamine when I listen to music 😂 

[tapatrick]

31 minutes ago, firedog said:

The corrective force quote was ARQ, not me.

understood... 👍

I was responding to the broadest sense of the term and corrective being benevolent..

[tapatrick]

5 hours ago, thyname said:

‘Only to those I mentioned. Not to all objectivists. My post was especially targeted to those who don’t even own an audio system, or don’t even listen to music.

Do people like that exist ?!

[tapatrick]

6 hours ago, crenca said:

For magic pixie dust   

Must be awesome, the best ever.  Where can I get some, and next day delivery of course...

seriously tho’ thanks for posting your system which makes for interesting reading.  

[tapatrick]

49 minutes ago, Middy said:

Has the dead horse got up yet and asked not to be flogged anymore......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who you calling a horse!

[tapatrick]

10 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Lot's in this sort of post around the nature of consumerism.

 

The "unused items...making me blind to my initial desires" is thoughtful.  I would say that they are just reminders of desire, but desire being what it is means that it can't be remembered.

I detect an understanding of Buddhist philosophy 🧐🙏

[tapatrick]

13 hours ago, tmtomh said:

 

For something like a similarly priced DAC from, say, PS Audio, I would steer clear because I've seen at least one multi-thousand-dollar PS Audio DAC that measures horribly considering its price and what such a unit could be capable of - measures sufficiently bad that its deviations from high fidelity could be audible.

Curious about this statement. Is this true of current DACs or one sample and from what year? Your posts carry some authority which I  appreciate, plus I’m a happy owner of a PS audio DAC. 

[tapatrick]

3 hours ago, crenca said:

 

I sincerely upvoted this post because I agree with you, that there is indeed a "trap" in this discussion.  What is beyond the rhetorical, the back and forth comment box wrestling, and the criminalizations?  Whatever it is, it is NOT the "ethical" trap inherent in the subjective/objective divide.  The temptation is to commit to being either a subjectivist or an objectivist, in a "religious" way just as the OP put it, and then work from there.  It is not just in theory that such thinking leads to a trap - these sorts of "civility" threads where both sides accuse the other as not being ethical, denying the golden rule (i.e. treating others as one one would oneself), and the like are the real evidence of the failure of us to get out of the trap.  

 

The OP suggests a religious conversion:  All objectivists agree that the only way audio can be about audio is for them to ascent to subjective understanding of audio, art, and ethics.  Is not subjectivism "innocuous" after all (he says)?  Is not objectivism stubbornly "religious" (he says)?  The OP does not escape the trap.

 

What's beyond the trap of (largely unconsciously) of committing to either objectivism or subjectivism and then accusing the other side of ill will?  My personal take is to look at audio in terms of consumerism and desire, manipulated by ourselves and "the industry".  I would welcome other takes however.  

 

That said, even in a discussion that transcends the trap, the divide will always be in the background since it is rooted in a deep divide of our western culture...

 

The Daniel Craig move is the third take on this book, the re-re-make no?  I say the (Swedish I think) origninal subtitled in English years ago and thought it quite good.

 

 

Cool post 👍

[tapatrick]

14 hours ago, crenca said:

What's beyond the trap of (largely unconsciously) of committing to either objectivism or subjectivism and then accusing the other side of ill will?  My personal take is to look at audio in terms of consumerism and desire, manipulated by ourselves and "the industry".  I would welcome other takes however. 

Thanks for a thought provoking post and a genuine offer for reflection on this complex and troubling issue.

 

I see that this issue is made from a constellation of factors, arranged in a hierarchy of value, many of them expressed and scattered throughout these threads. You have mentioned a key one - 'consumerism and desire' for sure drives all of us as that is how society is structured and where we find our place.

 

I suggest that 'identity' is one of the primary motivations and needs serious scrutiny. Labelling oneself or being labelled, being told what one can or can't do hear or say elicits strong tribal responses but only when the walls have been accepted or forced up on us. Why not hold the categories of identity lightly and see what is around the corners of our projected self. Personally I refuse to be labeled and I find this makes for a more interesting and enjoyable journey. Cheers..

[tapatrick]

7 hours ago, crenca said:

I would be interested tapatrick how you think 'identity' escapes the trap. 

I’m responding to the specifics of what you wrote to aid understanding of each other:

What's beyond the trap of (largely unconsciously) of committing to either objectivism or subjectivism and then accusing the other side of ill will? 

This kind of conversation.. 

 

My personal take is to look at audio in terms of consumerism and desire, manipulated by ourselves and "the industry”.  
Please expand

 

I would welcome other takes however. 

You are also welcome

 

I would be interested tapatrick how you think 'identity' escapes the trap.  

Identity doesn’t escape the trap, but can be the trap. My understanding is that right relationship to identity/ies can lead to escape. Perspectives give rise to identities, I choose to see  identification as non separate from that which is seen.

For clarity I understand identity as a fluid and ephemeral process depending on deeper motives conditioned by all kind of factors, whether examined or not..

 

Normally (and certainly in our modern 21st century context), 

Okay I’ll take your definition of normally

 

'identity' falls squarely under subjectivism - who "I" am is my own:   

Not if you make subject object

 

I am my own subject, my own will, my own value and authenticity and meaning, and in the case of audio my own ears and evaluation.  

No, if that is assumed then everything else is down stream. But I will agree that my and mine is closer to I than you or anything else.

 

I suppose there is an objective 'identity' that would emphasize all the ways you are not your own:   You are a human organism born from a long and very specific evolutionary path, on this particular third rock from the sun.  You are small and limited, living a short and insignificant life that is largely determined by the conditions of your existence.  Your will and self-determination is almost nothing as what it does influence and control does not add up to much.  In audio, the mechanism of your hearing is already determined and limited (i.e. 20hz-20khz, brain perceptually limited, etc. etc.), 

I would add that this is also a (profound) materialist perspective, a category with boundaries giving rise to everything that is not included

 

while you can try to refuse this "labeling" all you want, 

I do not refuse this

 

it is reality and is what it is 

It appears to be real and definitely is part of what is

 

and to claim to "see around the corner of it”

This was poetic licence - ‘it’ being self, which in my hierarchy of values is the subject/object most worthy of understanding due to it’s primacy 

 

indulge in mysticism, delusion, or both.

This sounds full of what you know or believe which I don’t fully understand, so for the sake of this conversation will pass

 

Yes yes indeed, the issue is "a constellation of factors” 

Yes and today I would add to this - as a dynamic kaleidoscope of shifting hierarchies

 

and when I think of 'identity' I think of what @tmtomh points to here:

Helps to understand your perspective. @tmtomh’s 1-5 points are helpful, illustrative, and make sense.

 

"But if we throw discernment out the window and make no distinction between the remotely possible, the plausible, and the probable - and in particular if we do so because we refuse to question ourselves by considering things like confirmation bias and poor auditory memory - then we are lost: we have no meaningful way of communicating with each other. “

Beautifully written, navigated and considered - I have selected this para which I take to be the main point he is making.

 

What is the difference between a good subjectivism that "sees around the corners" in a helpful way and a bad subjectivism that insists on hearing the "sound" of digital communication (such as ethernet to which the OP refers) and other such very (very very) implausible assertions?

One is good and one is bad by your definition

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

[tapatrick]

2 hours ago, bluesman said:

But maybe we can create a modern version by remembering and embodying at last some of what I describe above. 

Thank you @bluesman