Article: Audiophile Style State of the Union

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, tmtomh said:

 

Chris, I'm not trying to be evasive - truly - but I can't respond to "link please" because the "link" is the very comment of yours that I was responding to.

 

I don't want to add unduly to the static you are getting, so I will try this - here is what I wrote about the change you have made:

 

"You've given objectivist commentary a space - a subforum. And, gray areas notwithstanding, the granting of that one space is simultaneous with the removal of objectivist commentary from the entire rest of the forum. So the space for objectivist commentary is being reorganized and significantly shrunken, so that the majority-subjectivist experience can proceed without interruption and pushback, enabling "audiophiles to be audiophiles" as I believe you've written in one or more prior comments here."

 

Let me just ask: Do you view this summary as basically accurate or not? If you view it as more or less accurate, then I think we are on the same page. If you do not, then I think we can agree to disagree and, at least for the moment, call it day.

 

Thank you.

Thanks for the follow up and purposeful or not, the refreshing delay, giving me time to sleep on it :~) I have a feeling you and I could discuss this over a beverage and have a really interesting conversation, followed by a lot of fun listening to music. Be that as it may, we are here in the virtual world and must use the tools at our disposal to communicate as best we can. 

 

I certainly see your point and how you arrived at it, but I'm not OK with the wording and characterization. There is much gray area with this and everything in life. Perhaps I can offer an example or two of how I see this working.

 

I also don't believe the description of "significantly shrunken" is appropriate because the Objective-Fi forum could technically contain 10x the quantity of  posts in all other areas. It comes down to usability and aesthetics. I don't want 50 sub-forums for people to weed through, hemming and hawing over which one is the appropriate place to post etc...

 

I really like your comment, "so that the majority-subjectivist experience can proceed without interruption and pushback." Yes, this should be the case for all conversations when the adults involved want it to be this way. I'm guessing you don't derive pleasure from entering a cigar bar and yelling, "You're all gonna die and here's why!" On the flip side of that coin is the space for Objective-Fi discussions where you probably wouldn't derive pleasure from yelling, "Trust your ears you nerds with crappy systems!" 

 

 

 

Example 1: USB Cable Experience Thread

 

This is clearly for those who wish to discuss their listening experience with USB cables. Now, when someone can't help themself from interjecting an objective argument against people's claims, I will just move it to the Objective-Fi forum and include a link in the newly created thread to reference the subjective thread. This separation is the next step after asking people for years to police themselves and stop disrupting grown adult's enjoyment. 

 

 

Example 2: UPnP / DLNA Questions Thread

 

As we saw in the first comment to this article, offering objective information about how UPnP / DLNA works was the perfect answer to the OP's question. The information doesn't need to be moved into the Objective-Fi area because it doesn't make sense to do so. I believe this is common sense, but I also realize we all have different backgrounds and cultural experiences that influence our common sense. 

 

 

Example 3: Bit Identical Files Can't Sound Different Thread

 

In this example, the post should be created in the Objective-Fi forum because it's the best place to have the technical discussion without any belligerence from the far wing fo the Subjective party. It's very simple to point to the sign on the door stating, subjectivity isn't allowed in this one. Such a thread can be referenced forever by anyone who wishes to rehash the old debate again, and again, and again. It's hopefully educational rather than a pissing match. 

 

 

 

We must also keep in mind that many roads lead to Rome and everyone has an opinion. Many of the people complaining haven't tried to be part of the solution, but some have. I am grateful for feedback and potential solutions, but people must also realize that this is what I do all day, every day, every year ... I don't know everything, but I have a good idea what hasn't worked and what has the best chance of working. 

 

 

[Norton]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Given that the UK isn’t in the EU, I’m unsure how his threatened ban would work

GDPR would most likely still apply in the current transition period and even afterwards unless specifically repealed as (I think) it has been adopted as UK law.

Also I think it applies to the citizens of an EU member state regardless of where they live.

 

Having said this, Mans’s posts are probably not the top priority for EU lawyers at the moment, so you’re most likely  safe from any unplanned trips to The Hague.

 

(note I am not a lawyer and some or all of the above may be complete rubbish)

[Bill Brown]

I understand why some think that the new objective forum is them being "pushed away."  I have come to believe, as Chris has said, that this doesn't have to be the case.  I also like that he has said that non-repetitive, non-belittling, non name-calling objective, educational content is welcome in other areas of the forum.

 

I always open in tabs the forums I want to look at (general, DACs, software, DSP, etc.).  I don't go to the server forum as I don't have one!  I will definitely also open a tab for the objective forum, as I suspect and hope the other "middle-ground" members will.  I still have much to learn and love science.

 

Bill

[PeterG]

17 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I've always looked at what Jude has done with Head-Fi as a great model. He has a huge audience that has maximized its enjoyment of this wonderful hobby. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that in my book.

 

Let's remember that popularity isn't the best measure of success.  I recently bought my first IEMs (spurred on by one of your passing comments, thanks!)  Though the various headphone websites were helpful, they were not nearly as helpful as what I normally expect from AS, Stereophile, and Absolute Sound, just to name a few.  The headphone guys are cheerleaders for just about everything they write about, and all the reviews seem like different levels of ecstasy.  Maybe it's because so many of the reviews note that the reviewer received a free pair of IEMs???

[PeterG]

17 hours ago, esldude said:

Those bygone days were when you asked how to connect something you'd be told use a USB cable meeting spec.  While now the same question with that answer will result in being told you'll need a somewhat expensive cable, and one or two USB cleaners, and maybe some optional power supplies for the cleaners before you can expect good results. 

 

I learned a lot in those days, now you'll mostly be helped to spend lots of money on dubious gear for some pretty simple setups.

 

True--I was thrilled with my $200 DragonFly (CASH List!, and my son enjoys it today.

 

But also true--I was dubious of interconnects and power products until I tried them myself.  I still think some are garbage and obscenely overpriced.  But I also have experienced huge improvements in sound quality and enjoyment from others (that were also obscenely overpriced, haha)

 

The best way to use theses sites is as a source of hypotheses to be tested with one's own ears

[austinpop]

8 minutes ago, PeterG said:

The best way to use theses sites is as a source of hypotheses to be tested with one's own ears

 

Well said! I'd wager >95% of readers approach AS with this attitude, and therefore can interact with one another with courtesy and without drama.

 

Then there's the drama queens...

[kumakuma]

30 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

I understand why some think that the new objective forum is them being "pushed away."  I have come to believe, as Chris has said, that this doesn't have to be the case.  I also like that he has said that non-repetitive, non-belittling, non name-calling objective, educational content is welcome in other areas of the forum.

 

I think those who decided to leave felt unappreciated.

 

I can't help but think that a simple message from Chris along the lines of the following would have prevented much of this unpleasantness and the exodus of good people:

 

"Sorry to hear you've decided to leave. I wish you'd reconsider this decision as you're a valued member of this forum."

 

 

 

 

[Iving]

15 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I think those who decided to leave felt unappreciated.

 

I can't help but think that a simple message from Chris along the lines of the following would have prevented much of this unpleasantness and the exodus of good people:

 

"Sorry to hear you've decided to leave. I wish you'd reconsider this decision as you're a valued member of this forum."

 

I don't agree.

It's not a human right to be appreciated by a forum owner.

Too liable to misinterpretation too. Could add to the drama fire.

On the other hand we can all welcome any friendly friends who want to be here - why not.

Let's take responsibility ourselves instead of looking to Chris.

 

("ourselves" includes dearly departed)

 

[Bill Brown]

35 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I think those who decided to leave felt unappreciated.

 

I can't help but think that a simple message from Chris along the lines of the following would have prevented much of this unpleasantness and the exodus of good people:

 

"Sorry to hear you've decided to leave. I wish you'd reconsider this decision as you're a valued member of this forum."

 

 

 

 

That is probably contributory to their decision and disappointing.  I suspect a lot of the middle-ground lurkers (definitely including me), appreciated and valued their educational posts highly.  I strongly feel there remains a role for those things in this forum and they may find ASR or similar ultimately unfulfilling.

 

On the other hand, many of us were also turned off by the tone as extensively described above.  And many struggled with the "please delete my account" syndrome also described above (can't remember who).  In fact, I did it, and was able to lurk, scroll, not pay attention (including to the fairly radical subjectivists whose content was too far out there for me), and not be able to post when I was getting close to "I have had it."

[audiobomber]

22 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I think those who decided to leave felt unappreciated.

 

I can't help but think that a simple message from Chris along the lines of the following would have prevented much of this unpleasantness and the exodus of good people:

 

"Sorry to hear you've decided to leave. I wish you'd reconsider this decision as you're a valued member of this forum."

 

 

 

 

No, I did not appreciate Ralf11's constant trolling and inane jokes.

 

As for the others, the knowledge was welcome, as was their right to express their opinions. The knowledge contributions though were not enough to outweigh the belligerence. Frankly, there are a few others who need to improve their attitudes.

[MikeyFresh]

35 minutes ago, PeterG said:

The best way to use theses sites is as a source of hypotheses to be tested with one's own ears

 

Absolutely, and I've always felt the same regarding TAS, and Stereophile too. They aren't the Bible, and do need to be taken with a grain of salt, but are otherwise enjoyable and at times useful in considering any particular product, either as a curiosity, or towards an upcoming purchase decision.

[4est]

1 minute ago, audiobomber said:

No, I did not appreciate Ralf11's constant trolling and inane jokes.

I never quite understood why he was here anyway.

[Iving]

18 minutes ago, 4est said:

I never quite understood why he was here anyway.

 

It's an Audiophile Forum. If you're not an Audiophile why are you here.

It's OK to ask that question at this time.

Even if you are an Audiophile by your own definition or understanding, there is still a common appreciation amongst us (or ought to be) about what Audiophiles are here for. Whatever it is ...

... it's not to mock others constantly - especially when the attempts at humour are such dunce fails, and the perpetrator is clearly out to prosecute social damage rather than cohesion.

 

Is there any kind of Charter or Rules of Association. If not, it might not hurt for Chris to have such by his elbow.

[kumakuma]

26 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

No, I did not appreciate Ralf11's constant trolling and inane jokes.

 

I wasn't thinking of Ralf11 when I wrote my post as he was banned by Chris.

[davide256]

There is a leadership maxim, make your behavior one of the following

 

1. lead

2. follow

3. get out of the way

 

and then there is the 4th category of those who get in the way but aren't doing any of the above. Hopefully

we won't see as much of #4 going ahead.

 

 

[Blake]

24 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I wasn't thinking of Ralf11 when I wrote my post as he was banned by Chris.

 

Wait, let's be clear:  He was banned for a reason.  The other day you mentioned that instead of Chris creating the new subforum and rules, that he should have simply addressed problems individually and ban the member if needed.  If you followed Ralf's history here and in particular you followed the thread where Ralf was taunting Chris (which resulted in the ban), well then, what should Chris have done?

[kumakuma]

6 minutes ago, Blake said:

 

Wait, let's be clear:  He was banned for a reason.  The other day you mentioned that instead of Chris creating the new subforum and rules, that he should have simply addressed problems individually and ban the member if needed.  If you followed Ralf's history here and in particular you followed the thread where Ralf was taunting Chris (which resulted in the ban), well then, what should Chris have done?

 

I am not in disagreement with you. Please read my last two posts again.

[davide256]

1 hour ago, PeterG said:

 

True--I was thrilled with my $200 DragonFly (CASH List!, and my son enjoys it today.

 

But also true--I was dubious of interconnects and power products until I tried them myself.  I still think some are garbage and obscenely overpriced.  But I also have experienced huge improvements in sound quality and enjoyment from others (that were also obscenely overpriced, haha)

 

The best way to use theses sites is as a source of hypotheses to be tested with one's own ears

I have a rule, anything that gets 3 positive reviews from 3 non manufacturer shill reviewers is worth paying attention to. Sites where every review title has a superlative

adjective get ignored...

[tmtomh]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Thanks for the follow up and purposeful or not, the refreshing delay, giving me time to sleep on it :~) I have a feeling you and I could discuss this over a beverage and have a really interesting conversation, followed by a lot of fun listening to music. Be that as it may, we are here in the virtual world and must use the tools at our disposal to communicate as best we can. 

 

I certainly see your point and how you arrived at it, but I'm not OK with the wording and characterization. There is much gray area with this and everything in life. Perhaps I can offer an example or two of how I see this working.

 

I also don't believe the description of "significantly shrunken" is appropriate because the Objective-Fi forum could technically contain 10x the quantity of  posts in all other areas. It comes down to usability and aesthetics. I don't want 50 sub-forums for people to weed through, hemming and hawing over which one is the appropriate place to post etc...

 

I really like your comment, "so that the majority-subjectivist experience can proceed without interruption and pushback." Yes, this should be the case for all conversations when the adults involved want it to be this way. I'm guessing you don't derive pleasure from entering a cigar bar and yelling, "You're all gonna die and here's why!" On the flip side of that coin is the space for Objective-Fi discussions where you probably wouldn't derive pleasure from yelling, "Trust your ears you nerds with crappy systems!" 

 

 

 

Example 1: USB Cable Experience Thread

 

This is clearly for those who wish to discuss their listening experience with USB cables. Now, when someone can't help themself from interjecting an objective argument against people's claims, I will just move it to the Objective-Fi forum and include a link in the newly created thread to reference the subjective thread. This separation is the next step after asking people for years to police themselves and stop disrupting grown adult's enjoyment. 

 

 

Example 2: UPnP / DLNA Questions Thread

 

As we saw in the first comment to this article, offering objective information about how UPnP / DLNA works was the perfect answer to the OP's question. The information doesn't need to be moved into the Objective-Fi area because it doesn't make sense to do so. I believe this is common sense, but I also realize we all have different backgrounds and cultural experiences that influence our common sense. 

 

 

Example 3: Bit Identical Files Can't Sound Different Thread

 

In this example, the post should be created in the Objective-Fi forum because it's the best place to have the technical discussion without any belligerence from the far wing fo the Subjective party. It's very simple to point to the sign on the door stating, subjectivity isn't allowed in this one. Such a thread can be referenced forever by anyone who wishes to rehash the old debate again, and again, and again. It's hopefully educational rather than a pissing match. 

 

 

 

We must also keep in mind that many roads lead to Rome and everyone has an opinion. Many of the people complaining haven't tried to be part of the solution, but some have. I am grateful for feedback and potential solutions, but people must also realize that this is what I do all day, every day, every year ... I don't know everything, but I have a good idea what hasn't worked and what has the best chance of working. 

 

 

 

Thank you for the thoughtful and detailed reply, Chris - informative and much appreciated. (And I too am confident that we'd have lots to talk about in real life 🙂.)

[bluesman]

4 hours ago, Foggie said:

This whole ordeal is a way bigger then any group of individuals on this or any other forum.  It's really about self accountability and acting like a adult with the ability to carry on a conversation without acting like a petulant child.  Move on, scroll on if you cant conduct an ADULT CONVERSATION or disagreement. 

 

There is a certain level of intelligence on how converse, talk to people of varying levels of personalities.
Self-awareness.
Self-regulation.
Motivation
Empathy
Social skills

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/emotional-intelligence

I applaud your use of Goleman's Emotional Intelligence as a framework for your post and thoughts, Foggie.  It's a wonderful book that's relevant today (and will be tomorrow) even though it's 25 years old - I strongly suggest that everyone read it before throwing more fuel on this fire.  I see his concept of an emotional IQ as a kind of social equivalent to a handicap in golf.  No matter how great the disparities among people's knowledge, beliefs, and personalities, they can all interact enjoyably and productively if their EIQs are sufficiently high.

 

His basic premise that we do best in life when we learn to temper the rational with the emotional (and vice versa) is a perpetual key to success on many levels.  If everybody took Goleman's approach to heart and developed the sensitivities embodied in EI, the world (which includes AS and every other internet forum) would be a much more pleasant and productive place.  Perhaps the best reason to adopt it is that it helps people who differ greatly on issues get along better and more productively.  I'm paraphrasing Goleman to illustrate your bullet points in what I hope may be a more obvious and inspirational way:

• Self-awareness: understanding personal moods, emotions & drives, and their effect on others.
  •  manifests as appropriate self-confidence, realistic self-assessment, sense of humor about yourself, knowing & controlling your own emotions.
• Self-regulation: managing disruptive impulses and moods, suspending judgment, thinking before acting.
  •  manifests as trustworthiness, integrity, comfort with ambiguity and being open to change.
• Internal motivation: being driven by passions that go beyond money and status, by the joy of learning and doing.
  •  manifests as drive to achieve, true optimism, and ability to commit to ideas and efforts.
• Social awareness: sensing and understanding the emotions of others, and interacting appropriately to achieve the best outcome
  • manifests as empathy and awareness of / respect for the hierarchy of relationships in groups & organizations
• Social skills: managing relationships, finding common ground, building rapport.
  •  manifests as ability to lead change by persuasion and intelligent discourse rather than brute force.

This great discussion around EI in the Harvard Business Review that says it very well "Don’t shortchange your development as a leader by assuming that EI is all about being sweet and chipper, or that your EI is perfect if you are — or, even worse, assume that EI can’t help you excel..."  (not that sweet and chipper wouldn't go a long way toward smoothing some of our most contentious posts and threads 👁️ )   A high emotional IQ can help students learn and teachers teach. Those here with sound knowledge of a subject can be mentors, coaches and inspiring leaders for us all by adopting Goleman's approach to relationship management rather than berating those who don't agree with them.

 

There may be a key to a kinder gentler AS in this simple approach: present your opinion, support it with what you think is the best available evidence, welcome dissent, and be sensitive to emotional cues that suggest the need to back off and/or take a different approach.   Whether you think the best available evidence is objective or subjective doesn't matter - there's room in the world for us all, and there is no winning or losing.  Believe what you wish, support it as best you can, and live with it.  If your emotional IQ is high enough, you'll always be open to change if presented with new evidence you accept - and you'll be better able to convince others of the wisdom of your own opinions.

[firedog]

34 minutes ago, bluesman said:

I applaud your use of Goleman's Emotional Intelligence as a framework for your post and thoughts, Foggie.  It's a wonderful book that's relevant today (and will be tomorrow) even though it's 25 years old - I strongly suggest that everyone read it before throwing more fuel on this fire.  I see his concept of an emotional IQ as a kind of social equivalent to a handicap in golf.  No matter how great the disparities among people's knowledge, beliefs, and personalities, they can all interact enjoyably and productively if their EIQs are sufficiently high.

 

His basic premise that we do best in life when we learn to temper the rational with the emotional (and vice versa) is a perpetual key to success on many levels.  If everybody took Goleman's approach to heart and developed the sensitivities embodied in EI, the world (which includes AS and every other internet forum) would be a much more pleasant and productive place.  Perhaps the best reason to adopt it is that it helps people who differ greatly on issues get along better and more productively.  I'm paraphrasing Goleman to illustrate your bullet points in what I hope may be a more obvious and inspirational way:

• Self-awareness: understanding personal moods, emotions & drives, and their effect on others.
  •  manifests as appropriate self-confidence, realistic self-assessment, sense of humor about yourself, knowing & controlling your own emotions.
• Self-regulation: managing disruptive impulses and moods, suspending judgment, thinking before acting.
  •  manifests as trustworthiness, integrity, comfort with ambiguity and being open to change.
• Internal motivation: being driven by passions that go beyond money and status, by the joy of learning and doing.
  •  manifests as drive to achieve, true optimism, and ability to commit to ideas and efforts.
• Social awareness: sensing and understanding the emotions of others, and interacting appropriately to achieve the best outcome
  • manifests as empathy and awareness of / respect for the hierarchy of relationships in groups & organizations
• Social skills: managing relationships, finding common ground, building rapport.
  •  manifests as ability to lead change by persuasion and intelligent discourse rather than brute force.

This great discussion around EI in the Harvard Business Review that says it very well "Don’t shortchange your development as a leader by assuming that EI is all about being sweet and chipper, or that your EI is perfect if you are — or, even worse, assume that EI can’t help you excel..."  (not that sweet and chipper wouldn't go a long way toward smoothing some of our most contentious posts and threads 👁️ )   A high emotional IQ can help students learn and teachers teach. Those here with sound knowledge of a subject can be mentors, coaches and inspiring leaders for us all by adopting Goleman's approach to relationship management rather than berating those who don't agree with them.

 

There may be a key to a kinder gentler AS in this simple approach: present your opinion, support it with what you think is the best available evidence, welcome dissent, and be sensitive to emotional cues that suggest the need to back off and/or take a different approach.   Whether you think the best available evidence is objective or subjective doesn't matter - there's room in the world for us all, and there is no winning or losing.  Believe what you wish, support it as best you can, and live with it.  If your emotional IQ is high enough, you'll always be open to change if presented with new evidence you accept - and you'll be better able to convince others of the wisdom of your own opinions.

The problem with internet forums in this context are that: a) it's anonymous, therefore no real accountability; and b) we are missing face to face interaction and visual clues, which leads to less ability to properly understand the other person and also a weakening of social restraints which we generally employ in face to face contact in order to minimize conflict. 

Makes it more difficult to employ EIQ, and apparently some people don't have enough for this context. 

[bluesman]

59 minutes ago, firedog said:

The problem with internet forums in this context are that: a) it's anonymous, therefore no real accountability

With all due respect, I don't think this is a problem with internet forums per se - I think it's largely a problem with people.  Anonymity and accountability are not mutually exclusive.  But each of us has to hold himself or herself accountable and behave accordingly, even if anonymous.  One can (and should) have integrity and be trustworthy, open to change, and comfortable with ambiguity whether on a soapbox in the town square or hidden behind an internet pseudonym.  We hold ourselves accountable by accepting reasonable limits, recognizing and apologizing when we unintentionally cross them, and displaying a self-deprecating sense of humor (for which we have smileys 😁 ).  It's true that there can be no accountability without consequences - but accepting responsibility for a faux pas, apologizing, and actively trying to learn from the encounter are consequences even if no one but you knows you have to do it.

 

59 minutes ago, firedog said:

b) we are missing face to face interaction and visual clues, which leads to less ability to properly understand the other person and also a weakening of social restraints which we generally employ in face to face contact in order to minimize conflict.

Sure, visual clues like facial expression and body language help us assess others' reactions to us.  But the critical cues are those that herald developing discomfort, insecurity etc in a response - and I think they're most often there.  It's a rare thread that goes off the rails without some indication of impending trouble before the crash, no matter how subtle.

 

Sensing, understanding and reacting productively to the emotions of others is the heart of emotional intelligence.  When you sense that someone is becoming uncomfortable or feeling insecure / threatened, you have to help them get back to a more comfortable position before you can continue the primary interaction.  This is where that self-deprecating sense of humor can be invaluable: "I didn't mean to offend you with my opinion   .  I don't agree with yours, but I recognize that it's as valid and important to you as mine is to me.  Please help me understand why you feel the way you do. If there's common ground, let's find it."

 

You may make a breakthrough and go on to a great interaction.....or you may get flipped the digital bird.  But your EIQ makes you try, and that's all you can do.  Then you just gotta decide when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.

 

FWIW, I didn't make this stuff up in my head.  I've been a Six Sigma Master Black Belt for about 12 years and am trained and certified in Design for Six Sigma, Lean, and Change Management by GE.  I was associate chief medical officer at a 1000 bed academic medical center for about 15 years and found this approach to be very helpful in managing medical staff behavior and solving problems.  After 38 years of medical staff and hospital leadership, I'd much rather have to deal with audiophiles than doctors, Chris!  

[Don Hills]

6 hours ago, tapatrick said:

...

... if I can go to the sub forum and follow technical discussions and advice without having to wade through pages of snark and repetition of fixed positions then this will be appreciated by myself and I imagine many others too. ...

 

Good point. Maintain and expand the objective area as a repository of factual, science based information. People set in their beliefs will avoid it. Those who wonder whether what they hear is true will take a sneaky peek to find out if their beliefs are founded in reality.

 

Part of the problem is that beliefs without much scientific basis, such as USB cables sounding significantly different, are part of the enjoyment of this hobby. I enjoy driving my car more after I've just cleaned and polished it. I feel it goes faster and handles better. Objectively, I know it performs no better but I enjoy it more. So it is with system tweaks and listening.

 

So let people enjoy their tweaks and heard differences. The differences could be real or imaginary but the enjoyment is real.  And let there be somewhere they can go to find out whether the reason for the difference is real or imaginary. Don't try to educate some "poor, deluded fool" in a subjective based thread. But equally, don't accept "but I can hear the difference, it's night and day. If you can't, you have cloth ears / your system is rubbish" in the objective sub-forum unless it comes with, for example, an independently repeatable test result.

 

[audiobomber]

38 minutes ago, Don Hills said:

Part of the problem is that beliefs without much scientific basis, such as USB cables sounding significantly different, are part of the enjoyment of this hobby. I enjoy driving my car more after I've just cleaned and polished it. I feel it goes faster and handles better. Objectively, I know it performs no better but I enjoy it more. So it is with system tweaks and listening.

I don't accept your analogy. USB cables sound different in my system, and also to most audiophiles. Polishing my car does not make it feel faster or handle better. Obviously not much point in debating it here,  but I didn't want to let it slide.

 

That kind of statement is the basis for most of the disagreement and rancor on this board. Since there are engineers and scientists who disagree with you, it is clearly not an established fact that only audiophiles believe that USB cables can sound significantly different. 

[Bill Brown]

51 minutes ago, bluesman said:

FWIW, I didn't make this stuff up in my head.  I've been a Six Sigma Master Black Belt for about 12 years and am trained and certified in Design for Six Sigma, Lean, and Change Management by GE.  I was associate chief medical officer at a 1000 bed academic medical center for about 15 years and found this approach to be very helpful in managing medical staff behavior and solving problems.  After 38 years of medical staff and hospital leadership, I'd much rather have to deal with audiophiles than doctors, Chris!  

 

Great post!  Also, if you could get doctors to work together and with staff peacefully as we came through the age of "disruptive behavior" (not that I, ummm, ever engaged in it), you are indeed gifted!