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

[Albrecht]

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I've been waiting for the "skeptics are envious peasants" trope to rear its ugly head, and there it is.

nothing left to say beyond that (subjective) speculation on your part is way off base.....

[crenca]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Thanks for the admission. I always find it useful to continue reading an editorial, even when I find something reprehensible, especially if the time expenditure is little. No worries though. I can see how one would be turned off by the mention of religion. I'd prefer the word God be removed from US currency, but that's a "real" issue and it is used just to show my position on religion. I still enjoy reading opposing views and have even had a great conversation with the OP about religion at RMAF over breakfast one year.

 

Given our incredibly wide variety of backgrounds, cultures, languages, etc... someone could, and likely has, reached that conclusion. I disagree, but that's OK. 

 

The solution isn't just to STFU, it's to be respectful. If someone believes Santa Claus dropped off a 10% distortion amp and that it's the highest fidelity available today, let them live with their belief. It isn't OK to follow a Muslim around and constantly tell them Muhammad isn't real every time they enter a masque. I say the same isn't OK to follow audiophiles around and say they are delusional ever time they say they are enjoying a new component you don't believe in. 

 

There's a time and place for everything.  

 

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??  

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

10 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

So, this forum is not the place to disabuse someone of the belief that Santa Claus actually exists?

Shhhh. It's December 11.

 

7 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

That isn't the issue.  The real issue is false equivalence - that science is somehow another type of religion.

 

It isn't.

I didn't get that from reading the OP's article. 

 

 

6 minutes ago, mansr said:

What a crazy thing to do. There's ample evidence that Muhammad was a very real person.

Yes, I should've used a better example. My lack of belief and knowledge in religion is showing. 

[Ralf11]

5 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I've been waiting for the "skeptics are envious peasants" trope to rear its ugly head, and there it is.

 

You are assuming Discussion Symmetry.  As physicists have shown, it does not exist nor is it conserved (not even parity is conserved).

 

We are all required to practice Discussion Assymmetry - realistic claims or approaches (even if laborious or requiring a scientific or engineering education) are fair grounds for snivility.

 

However, crazy statements - especially if impossible under well-understood physical laws - require great civility and must be accorded absolute respect.

[4est]

7 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

And respectfully as well, this statement could be summarized as "just ignore irrationality and everyone will get along".

That is not at all what I suggested. Be an adult about this. In a recent thread you stated that you were interested in trying HQPlayer at DSD512 using the EC modulator. Perhaps I am wrong, but the measured differences between EC vs nonEC or DSD256 vs 512 is likely below the threshold many objectivists might say is audible. Would you accept being labelled as irrational for your interest and/or the ability to distinguish them? That is not to mention that calling someone irrational is different than stating they made an irrational decision in you OPINION. There is not proof that we have learned all that there is to know. By extention, that means there MIGHT be something in some of these things labelled as inaudible.

 

As to the religion reference, I see this less like believers vs non believers, and more Protestant vs Catholic. I cannot come up with a proper atheistic metaphor. LOL

[KeenObserver]

10 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

is that your Keen Observation?

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 and the folks who are interested in improving the listening experience through better performing playback gear. Or otherwise, - whining on the internet....

 

"hunh?"

Is that darling? sweetie? or huh?

 

My guess is that something that Archimago posted cast shade on a product that you have a vested interest in.  Did you refute the claims on a scientific basis, or did you attempt to shoot the messenger?

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes 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??  

 

 

I don't believe you wish to live in a live and let live anything It wouldn't enable you to be yourself it seems. Why would anyone want to piss in the punch bowl? I ask because you do it quite a bit.

 

I don't agree with your reasoning on much because it's wild subjective speculation, and I think it's wrong. 

 

I don't question anything like you mention in your last sentence. I question why I enable people to take part in this site for pure sport  and to argue about everything. It isn't fun for anyone except the person who thinks this is a game. 

[crenca]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I like Jason but disagree with him. 

 

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 think this is the easy scapegoat for people. Only those of us who are deep into HiFi know about magic stones and the like.

 

With respect to price, I don't decide to stop driving because Rolls Royce released the $13,000,000 Sweptail. If I want a car, I find one I can afford. If someone decides to stop driving, I think they have larger issues that auto manufacturers best not try to solve with lower prices. As a rational person, I look at the Sweptail and think it's a feat of engineering and luxury that I wish I could afford, then I head to the Subaru dealer and get a car loan for the Impreza I can afford. 

 

I'm all about choice. Right now we have options from an Apple dongle to a full digital stack at over $100,000. What a time we are living in. 

 

Please stop telling me what I believe. It's getting old. 

To circle back to Samuel's suggestion, consumerism is not neutral and/or an expression of radical choice.  The big crazy has real consequences and is not a mere "scapegoat".  It effects the "how" - how people inform themselves and how "the industry" informs the consumer.  It also affects the "what" - the information that's available, what products are made available, if they can compeat, etc.  Magic stones exist because of a generalized "big crazy" which effects everything.  It's basic culture, economics/markets, and psychology.  Consumerism is always tied to a culture and an industry and its culture.

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

However, crazy statements - especially if impossible under well-understood physical laws - require great civility and must be accorded absolute respect.

It seems like you guys think your saving the Earth from the next great plague. I'm all for calling out anti-vaxxers because people are literally dying. HiFi is entertainment. There hasn't been a death yet.

[Ralf11]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

<false equivalence of science & religion>

 

I didn't get that from reading the OP's article. 

 

 

 

 

Did you read the entire article???

 

"I believe these debates are about religion  * * *

Allowing audiophiles to post their subjective conclusions without proof brings them one step closer to accepting those who relate their religious experiences without proof. For them, science is god "

 

I also have never seen any of the 3 attacks on you that he lists.

[Ralf11]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It seems like you guys think your saving the Earth from the next great plague. I'm all for calling out anti-vaxxers because people are literally dying. HiFi is entertainment. There hasn't been a death yet.

 

you have erected the wrong strawman

[Samuel T Cogley]

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.

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, crenca said:

To circle back to Samuel's suggestion, consumerism is not neutral and/or an expression of radical choice.  The big crazy has real consequences and is not a mere "scapegoat".  It effects the "how" - how people inform themselves and how "the industry" informs the consumer.  It also affects the "what" - the information that's available, what products are made available, if they can compeat, etc.  Magic stones exist because of a generalized "big crazy" which effects everything.  It's basic culture, economics/markets, and psychology.  Consumerism is always tied to a culture and an industry and its culture.

 

 

 

Theory is great. Please give us examples of how HiFi has cause objective information to be unavailable to the consumer and taken choice away from the consumer. If anything, I believe the opposite. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It seems like you guys think your saving the Earth from the next great plague. I'm all for calling out anti-vaxxers because people are literally dying. HiFi is entertainment. There hasn't been a death yet.

 

With due respect Chris, and I understand it's your prerogative, but you're trolling here.

[Iving]

On Topic interest?

https://www.dannybrown.me/2014/01/07/social-media-bullying-and-the-growing-lynch-mob-mentality/

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

 

4 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

you have erected the wrong strawman

 

No. What's the risk in letting people enjoy whatever HiFi they wish?

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

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.

 

I don't believe that's Jason's argument. You elected to not purchase from a single manufacturer. We all do this in every industry. But, you didn't see the AQ quote and decide you no longer need music in your life. You moved on to a brand you deemed trustworthy. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

3 minutes ago, Iving said:

OT interest?

https://www.dannybrown.me/2014/01/07/social-media-bullying-and-the-growing-lynch-mob-mentality/

 

 

Danny posted here right after Lavorgna was banned.  Danny was firmly in the "Lavorgna was unjustly banned" camp.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

With due respect Chris, and I understand it's your prerogative, but you're trolling here.

I understand you might think this. No worries. 

 

However, I'm not. The intensity with which some people rail against HiFi, and the demands for products to be pulled form the market as if they were Thalidomide, is no different from those trying to stop global warming. 

[crenca]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Theory is great. Please give us examples of how HiFi has cause objective information to be unavailable to the consumer and taken choice away from the consumer. If anything, I believe the opposite. 

 

Easy  - the thread that @austinpopruns here (forget the name).  The signal (true objective information) to noise (endless subjective testimony) ratio is so bad it's hard to parody.  From the opposite end, how many folks have been swayed by Amir's radical objectivism and believe that distortion measurements are the end all and be all of sound, and that after a certain point "every amp sounds the same".

 

How is the consumer supposed to weed through all subjectivist prattle in the trade publications and find the truth of MQA, digital audio, analogue audio, or anything else.  

 

Information is not "out there" in a context-less void - it's always found amongst and in a culture, which is a human reality.  I find it ironic that the very comradery that the OP and yourself are concerned about is not supported but undermined by subjectivism

[mansr]

11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It seems like you guys think your saving the Earth from the next great plague. I'm all for calling out anti-vaxxers because people are literally dying. HiFi is entertainment. There hasn't been a death yet.

Maybe there haven't been any deaths (yet), but some of the crazy products are actually fire hazards and probably illegal to sell.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

I understand you might think this. No worries. 

 

However, I'm not. The intensity with which some people rail against HiFi, and the demands for products to be pulled form the market as if they were Thalidomide, is no different from those trying to stop global warming. 

 

But are any of those things actually happening in this thread?  Aren't you stirring the pot unnecessarily?  And why in the world would you throw in "global warming" if not to stir the pot?

[Iving]

2 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Danny posted here right after Lavorgna was banned.  Danny was firmly in the "Lavorgna was unjustly banned" camp.

 

Sorry - I don't know that history.

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, Iving said:

OT interest?

https://www.dannybrown.me/2014/01/07/social-media-bullying-and-the-growing-lynch-mob-mentality/

 

Yes, very interesting. 

 

In my opinion some objectivists can be similar to the #HashTagHeros of cancel culture. If a product is made that they don't agree with it must be removed from the market and nobody should ever purchase from the manufacturer again. This, despite many people enjoying the product(s). Perhaps this is even worse than the mainstream cancel culture because there people actually cause harm with their actions in the first place. The lady's tweet about Africa and AIDS is harmful. Listening to HiFi isn't. 

[crenca]

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I understand you might think this. No worries. 

 

However, I'm not. The intensity with which some people rail against HiFi   High End, and the demands for products to be pulled form the market as if they were Thalidomide, is no different from those trying to stop global warming. 

 

This is a strawman to those who reject the "big crazy" because we reject the underlying subjectivism of "who cares if no deaths are involved".  For example our wallet's are involved - not as important as death but still important.  Our real (as opposed to some suggestable subjectivist haze) enjoyment is also involved - we want real "HiFi" and not the "High End" house of mirrors.

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Easy  - the thread that @austinpopruns here (forget the name).  The signal (true objective information) to noise (endless subjective testimony) ratio is so bad it's hard to parody.  From the opposite end, how many folks have been swayed by Amir's radical objectivism and believe that distortion measurements are the end all and be all of sound, and that after a certain point "every amp sounds the same".

 

How is the consumer supposed to weed through all subjectivist prattle in the trade publications and find the truth of MQA, digital audio, analogue audio, or anything else.  

 

Information is not "out there" in a context-less void - it's always found amongst and in a culture, which is a human reality.  I find it ironic that the very comradery that the OP and yourself are concerned about is not supported but undermined by subjectivism

 

So, you managed to "weed through all subjectivist prattle" but the mere HiFi peasants have no chance?

 

You examples weren't examples of anything ask for. 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

But are any of those things actually happening in this thread?  Aren't you stirring the pot unnecessarily?  And why in the world would you throw in "global warming" if not to stir the pot?

 

This topic and thread is about the larger picture. I also don't believe global warming should stir any pot. We're all adults and can look at the earth's temperature graph over time and see it happening.