Jump to content
joelha

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

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Certainly in the 80's and early 90's. 

 

In the area of digital audio, right? And has it since slowed because some smaller manufacturers put out some products you feel are questionable (and some I certainly do too), or because we are at a pretty good place now? To reiterate my question, what assaults on the state of the art do you believe remain to be made with products such as amps, DACs, and audio files?


One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> wi-fi to router -> EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> USPCB -> ISO Regen (powered by LPS-1) -> USPCB -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jud said:

@mansr may despair of finding adequate cables, but I've had no such difficulty; just bought some nice light flexible Monoprice Ethernet cables from Amazon, recommended here by a “subjectivist.”

Good for you. In my experience, Amazon is always something of a gamble. Even when buying a familiar brand, you have zero assurance that you're not getting a fake product. Granted, your odds are better than on Ebay, but it's still not great. Buying from Monoprice directly isn't a sane option in Europe as they want nearly $40 in shipping for a $3 cable (checked just now).

 

Now I wouldn't say I "despair" when it comes to cables. I am able to procure what I need. I'd still much prefer if I could simply pop into the store (it's a 5-minute walk) and get them. That I can't is a direct result of the snake oil infestation in the audio industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jud said:

 

In the area of digital audio, right? And has it since slowed because some smaller manufacturers put out some products you feel are questionable (and some I certainly do too), or because we are at a pretty good place now? To reiterate my question, what assaults on the state of the art do you believe remain to be made with products such as amps, DACs, and audio files?

 

Proper multi-channel audio, starting with the recording and ending with the speaker/DSP system would be my ultimate wish. Two-channel stereo is a compromise we no longer have to or need to tolerate as it will never be capable of realistic sound reproduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, wgscott said:

This "editorial" is essentially just another (albeit officially-sanctioned) troll-thread designed to bait "objectivists" and possibly to increase site traffic (and therefore advertising revenue).

 

How else are we supposed to interpret stuff like this:

 

 

The sound of an ethernet cable is like the sound of one hand clapping.

 

What about the sound of a grounding box full of sand?  

 

Where do we draw the line between what should be respectfully accepted on "faith" in the interest of "civility," and what is palpably absurd, or evidence of consumer fraud?

Amazing how you know my intentions better than I do, Bill.

 

My intention has been to try to explain some of the over-the-top behavior on this site and just maybe mitigate that behavior.

 

I'm guessing you know pretty well when to be civil and when not to be. I don't think you need to pose that as a question (rhetorical or not) on this forum.

 

Joel

Share this post


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

Amazing how you know my intentions better than I do, Bill.

 

Aren't you being at least as presumptive about the motivations and beliefs (or lack, thereof) of those who have the audacity to hold an opinion at variance with your own?  


--

Do facts matter?

Share this post


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

 

And you think the major corporations that would have to be involved in such an effort aren't doing so because a few people bought beeswax fuses?

 

Why do you keep bringing up major corporations? These rarely cater to the tiny audiophile market. Mass consumer-oriented companies rarely care about improving SQ, about getting better, more realistic sound reproduction. Give the masses an iPhone with MP3 playback, with some wireless ear-buds and they'll be happy. 

 

Meanwhile, audiophiles are seeking out hires files at ridiculous DSD rates, DACs with 768kHz+ PCM sampling, minimum phase filters, better USB and ethernet cables, and other junk that doesn't translate into anything meaningful beyond a very tiny, placebo-type improvement. And no, it's not just the subjectivists that are doing this. The ASR crowd looking for lower and lower SINAD numbers is doing the same thing, just pursuing a different dead-end.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

Aren't you being at least as presumptive about the motivations and beliefs (or lack, thereof) of those who have the audacity to hold an opinion at variance with your own?  

I absolutely am, Bill.

 

And it's not because their beliefs are "aidacious" pr at variance with mine. I wrote in hopes of trying to explain the behaviors I find offensive.

 

That's it. Honest.

 

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Jud said:

Is it, or is it that they can't make enough margin on inexpensive cables anyway?

Same thing. Why settle for 10% (or 100%) margin when you can have 10,000%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mansr said:

Well, I find your "hit piece" rather offensive.

Please name s single line or paragraph you find as offensive or even close to being as offensive as if I made a personal negative reference about you.

 

Joel

Share this post


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

Please name s single line or paragraph you find as offensive or even close to being as offensive as if I made a personal negative reference about you.

 

Joel

 

The ones I highlighted in bold-face.

 

(Yes, I get that you don't -- or at least pretend not to -- see it that way.  But that, too, is the point.)


--

Do facts matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

The ones I highlighted in bold-face.

 

(Yes, I get that you don't -- or at least pretend not to -- see it that way.  But that, too, is the point.)

Sorry, I'm missing the point.

 

If you want to take me up on my challenge, please do and show me the specific text you're referring to.

 

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, tapatrick said:

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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, joelha said:

Please name s single line or paragraph you find as offensive or even close to being as offensive as if I made a personal negative reference about you.

The entire article is little more than a parade of insults and accusations directed at a caricature of those you disagree with. You didn't name anyone explicitly, but you didn't need to. We all know who you had in mind.

 

My question to you (and Chris) is, what are you so afraid of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, joelha said:

Sorry, I'm missing the point.

 

If you want to take me up on my challenge, please do and show me the specific text you're referring to.

 

Joel

 

The bit quoted here, especially that which I set in bold-faced:

 

But let me add that I am glad you formulated your position in this way, because it gives invaluable insight into how at least one "subjectivist" proponent sees the opposition.


--

Do facts matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

The bit quoted here, especially that which I set in bold-faced:

 

All I get is a link back to the article.

 

Sorry, but I still don't see it.

 

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...