Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

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?

""My guess is that something that Archimago posted cast shade on a product that you have a vested interest in"

That would be entirely incorrect.....

""Did you refute the claims on a scientific basis,"

(Of course) But no one has to, and that's the beauty of good science. Either you're following the principles of good scientific investigation and the scientific method, - or you are not. If you are not, - then you're not conducting a good investigation, and not doing good science. If you've produced good evidence, and preponderance thereof, - your conclusions will have more validity.

It only takes a cursory examination of Archimago's processes and extremely narrow sampling of test subjects, and out of context tests, and poor measuring tools: to conclude that his conclusions are inconclusive at best, and downright manipulated at worst.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You may not believe it, but many grown adults are equally as astute as you and can decide for themselves what to purchase and what causes them to enjoy HiFi more. You likely have more "real" HiFi options in the world than magic stones. Your fear of losing real HiFi is unwarranted.


It's not out of fear, but out of joy that I point out the errors of the radical (though "libertarian" works in your case) subjectivism, because you are right in that even though big crazy subjectivism is bad for audio, the consumer does now have access to better information/product than perhaps ever before.


It is true that Big Crazy Audio is pushing back in a number of ways such as trying to swamp the signal with noise, FUD, etc. but I think things are improving.  This is despite many audiophiles being "ok" with subjectivism, not because of it.   

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:


You pretty much are required to defend Scoggins now as his new position pretty much demands that you do so.


I've met Scoggins myself at some shows, but he didn't know it was me.  In my experience, he is the polar opposite of a consumer advocate.  He seems to take pleasure in seeing consumers misled and manipulated.  Payroll you say?  In my experience, Scoggins' goal is to establish enough of a relationship with manufacturers that he can refer to the principals by their first name.  And he does this ad nauseam.  I like the term "first-name dropper".


And please, take your pro-MQA gaslighting somewhere else.  You motives are crystal clear and you're not converting anyone.



"...pro-MQA gaslighting?" Really??  Now that's a great example of inventing a narrative to suit one's purposes. My sole interest in MQA for more than two years now has been the bad online behavior it's associated with. I've written a couple of editorials about that subject and you yourself have accused me of "finger-wagging". I have very little, if any to saything about the technology itself (for example, I mentioned that one of the three SACD players I reviewed in the December issue was MQA-capable and left it at that.) I don't own a DAC that decodes MQA and I'm certainly not losing any sleep over it. I've never met Bob Stuart or any of the other MQA principals.


As far as "converting anyone" to my cause, I think that a wonderful thing about Joel Alperson's editorial is that it has brought people out of the woodwork who are similarly weary of the uncivil tone of so much discourse in enthusiast communities, specifically ours. No converting is required—plenty of AS forum members are already believers, when it comes to addressing rude and aggressive online behavior.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Norton said:


Except, there is no divide, because in practice (as opposed to a theoretical construct for fuelling online arguments) there is no such thing as audio “objectivism”.  I’ve never seen any self-described objectivist actually explain the process (with the supporting data) whereby their objectivism resulted in them making system choices that they wouldn’t have made had they adopted an subjective approach.


Using myself as an example, I disagree.


My approach is that I'm always on the lookout for new audio tech outside the realm of the Establishment Audiophile Media.  The new DACs coming from China are a good example.  Some of the headphone amps found over at Drop (previously Massdrop) perform quite well and are quite affordable.


There's no shortage of people who will heap accolades onto established "mainstream" gear.  That's typically an indication to me that I should avoid the product.


Hard example: I had my eye on an iFI iDSD Pro for years while it was in development.  I nearly purchased one until it became clear that IFI was "all in" with MQA.  So I did some more research and settled on Benchmark DAC 3 B based 1) their reputation for good sound and 2) their opposition to MQA.  I think the DAC 3 B was a great choice and to me, it sounds great.


It wouldn't matter how many people said the iDSD Pro sounded good, I still wouldn't buy one.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Albrecht said:

Who is a journalist? And what is the definition of a "journalist?" I am questioning whether or not you understand that no one who writes for Audiophile Magazines or writes reviews or product announcements for any type of music playback equipment is a "journalist:" but an audio "enthusiast." Think music or film reviewer.


Agree completely.

Hopefully, an enthusiast with experience and expertise.


2 hours ago, Albrecht said:





Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, crenca said:


Sometimes I wonder, are you really this hard core?  Victim shaming by the confidence man?!  Can the trade publication machine really be this anti-consumer?  You don't want civil "enthusiast communities", at least not ones that are not cuckold to your purposes.


Sorry, I really don't know what you're talking about.


Andy Quint

Link to comment
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...