Jump to content
joelha

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

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 

Yes indeed.  The world would be so much more civilized if everyone just agreed with you.  You are, after all,  the Senior Writer for The Absolute Sound.

I believe you're hurting your own cause with little quips like this. At no point did he say anything like that and in fact said the opposite. 


Founder of Audiophile Style

Share this post


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

I believe you're hurting your own cause with little quips like this. At no point did he say anything like that and in fact said the opposite. 

I don't know if I have a cause other than hoping the MQA scam is never implemented.  There may indeed be uncivil people here, but I take offense to Mr Quints passive-aggressive lumping of everyone who disagrees with him as being uncivil. It is labeling.

Share this post


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

but I take offense to Mr Quints passive-aggressive lumping of everyone who disagrees with him as being uncivil. It is labeling.

I haven't read all his posts, but sure hope he didn't do as you say. That would be preposterous. 


Founder of Audiophile Style

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Teresa said:

 

Archie Mago maybe?

 

vs.  

 

5 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

"Hello, may I speak to Mr. Archie Majo, please?"

 

It's like Led Zeppelin all over again.


--

Do facts matter?

Share this post


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

 

Hey, look, the OK Rando button got implemented!

 

 

 

I thought it was superseded by the UltraRando ??


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

smugmanimous comes to mind too...


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

"Good Sound" is more likely with good Scotch, and the state store had a very rare sale today.

 

Therefore...

BUT you need a good cigar to with that scotch plus ones subjective sense of Good Sound

Share this post


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

I haven't read all his posts, but sure hope he didn't do as you say. That would be preposterous. 

 

No, that's pretty much it.  He does not understand MQA though his understanding is besides the point.  I think he generally wants to understand why there has been a consumer reaction against it, but like a drunk sitting at the bar wondering why anyone would think one more would be a problem, he is too deep into the mythos of Audiophiledom to ever really "get" a skeptical, critical attitude toward it.

 

You and @kennyb123are going to make me cry with your dreamers dream of "why we can't just get along"!  Well, not really 😉  I still think until there is an honest accounting of the real nature of subjectivism vs objectivism, then civility is going to be difficult.

 

Interesting what you say about how you are certain that you would have seen MQA for the scam it is sooner if the tone was different.  I recall your reluctance, your "giving the benefit of the doubt" 2, 3, 7 times against all evidence.  Thing is, the culture of audiophiledom sets the tone  - short of almost herculean efforts on the part of individuals.  The tone of audiophile culture being "The Big Crazy", well skeptics and objectivists are always (always always) going to be more or less "uncivil" because the culture and most of those in it want to go along with the stream - going along (often confused with getting along) is easier.  Not going along is a war on Christmas, a war on pleasure, a war on music, and a war on "live and let live", and truth be told there is a certain truth in this reaction.

 

Consumerism is about desire.  Desire of the audiophile for pleasure, reinforcement, etc.  Desire on the part of "the industry" to fulfill that desire and make $money$, and to control/direct the consumers desire.  But this sort of self-evaluation (on the part of everybody) is hard, and "live and let live" is easy.  Hard things don't happen all that often, easy things do.  This is why the objective subject divide and its side skirmishes around "civility" will remain the status quo...


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

Share this post


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

 

Hey, look, the OK Rando button got implemented!

 

Hindsight is (‿|‿)   In your case so is forethought.  Secondhand pop culture references are usually Ralf's bailiwick.  I think you'd be kidding me saying you two didn't work 'Ok Rando' out together.  Especially since I've made it clear in the past when one or both of you were engaging in ageism.

 

 

Predicate to this discussion was the suggestion that far from lacking any social skills.  Mans perhaps was still in a working mindset and was being ribbed to finish clocking out before he missed/discouraged too much fun in here.  He wasn't the only one being asked to loosen up, just the closest.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you are objective with your subjective assessment of sound quality, I don’t think anyone would criticize that. Problem is they started talking about a product based on objective attributes and concludes about its sound quality subjectively. That is fine as long as you are able to demonstrate your preference consistently. 
 

I have a habit of making a playlist for each visitors listening session in the JRiver. I also make a copy of all settings in the Reaper project. In this way, I could replay the exact sound they liked or disliked in their previous session in any other occasions. 
 

During their follow up visits, I will play the previous list and then compare their subjective assessment of their previous listening and current one. Either these so called audio connoisseur are lying or simply not consistent. A track which they claimed lacking bass is now deemed to be adequate or overwhelming. A blurred centre image is now a rock solid projection. 

 

Nothing changed in between but same sound with different verdict from the same listeners. This inconsistency also applies to me and no one is exempted. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, STC said:

As long as you are objective with your subjective assessment of sound quality, I don’t think anyone would criticize that. Problem is they started talking about a product based on objective attributes and concludes about its sound quality subjectively. That is fine as long as you are able to demonstrate your preference consistently. 

This line of thinking interests me. 

 

Why is it a problem that, "they started talking about a product based on objective attributes and concludes about its sound quality subjectively?" And, why should they be able, "able to demonstrate your preference consistently?"

 

They aren't producing a drug for epilepsy. They are having fun in their own way.

 

What's the worst that can happen if they are allowed to discuss their listening impressions unchallenged?


Founder of Audiophile Style

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, crenca said:

You and @kennyb123are going to make me cry with your dreamers dream of "why we can't just get along"!  Well, not really 😉  I still think until there is an honest accounting of the real nature of subjectivism vs objectivism, then civility is going to be difficult.

 

 

 

I think you’re right.  I do think when we look at the real nature of objectivism we may find that persons who make broad sweeping generalizations like “there’s no way that audiophile power cords can improve the sound of your amplifier” shouldn’t really be called objectivists because they don’t seem inclined to apply data in a meaningfully objective way.   


Digital:  Innuos Zenith Std Mk2 > Shunyata Alpha USB > Chord Hugo M-Scaler > Wireworld Gold Startlight > OPTO DX > Shunyata Alpha S/PDIF > Chord Hugo TT2 

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali power conditioner, Shunyata Alpha power cords, Shunyata Alpha interconnect, MIT Matrix HD60 speaker cables, GIK bass traps, ASC isothermal tube traps

Share this post


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

And, why should they be able, "able to demonstrate your preference consistently?"


If this hobby is about taking pictures of stars using long shutter speed and the discussion is revolving around cameras and sharpness of the pictures, would it be so wrong if someone suggests to use a tripod?  What is so wrong of telling that your understanding could be wrong? 
 

The object is high fidelity and bystanders are just going going to swallow hook, line and sinker based on false belief if they do not have access to the differing views. 

 

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

They aren't producing a drug for epilepsy. They are having fun in their own way.

 

What's the worst that can happen if they are allowed to discuss their listening impressions unchallenged?


 

Share this post


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

We always provide space for differing views. It just can't be done where it isn't wanted. Most people like to read all views, but they want to do it at their own pace and at the time of their choosing. We even recommend people with opposing views start their own thread and put a link in the original thread. It's a great way to keep both threads focussed and let people chose what they want to read. 


I fully agree to that.

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...