Article: Audiophile Style State of the Union

[pkane2001]

27 minutes ago, firedog said:

You may think that's what you are doing, and that may be your intent, but it isn't what you are actually doing.

If the OT is "USB Cable Comparisons" and you join in to tell them the whole discussion is baseless and anti-scientific and is a waste of time b/c USB cables can't sound different, you aren't actually contributing, or sharing, or helping them. You are simply interrupting their conversation and pushing it to what they see as off topic and insulting.

 

Such a topic isn't a "newbie" topic and is almost always populated by experienced hobbyists who are paying not insignificant amounts for their setup and all their tweaks you find pointless. Sorry, but it's incredibly arrogant of you to think that with your "objectivist" posts at such a thread your "contributing to their knowledge from your study and experience":
Seriously, why would you assume such people aren't already aware of your arguments? They've also studied and have experience. They are aware of your arguments and have started a thread purposely designed NOT to discuss your position, which they've already considered and rejected. So when you enter such a thread, you ARE essentially just "walking up and forcing your opinion" on them. 

 

I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. But it is apparently just the reason that Chris' new rules need to be implemented, as apparently some people have trouble making this distinction. 

 

And again, if it's a newbie thread or a thread where the OT is obviously open ended, then please contribute from your ideas and study. 

 

Firedog, I'm not your 'strawman' objectivist, so stop painting me as one. I don't jump in to a thread to be arrogant or to say everyone else is wrong. When I join a USB cable comparisons thread, I actually contribute from my own experience. I've measured, built, and listened to many USB cables, using multiple DACs and multiple source formats, headphones, speakers. So you are telling me I should stop posting because this ruins the 'high' for others?  Because I approach the evaluation of these things methodically, and try to be rational in my approach?

 

Here are some examples of my contributions on USB cable related threads. I've stayed out of these more recently. There are others.

 

 

[firedog]

26 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Firedog, I'm not your 'strawman' objectivist, so stop painting me as one. I don't jump in to a thread to be arrogant or to say everyone else is wrong. When I join a USB cable comparisons thread, I actually contribute from my own experience. I've measured, built, and listened to many USB cables, using multiple DACs and multiple source formats, headphones, speakers. So you are telling me I should stop posting because this ruins the 'high' for others?  Because I approach the evaluation of these things methodically, and try to be rational in my approach?

 

Here are some examples of my contributions on USB cable related threads. I've stayed out of these more recently. There are others.

 

 

Sorry, shouldn't have made it sound like you were my typical example, I'm really talking about some of the posts over at the "USB cable comparisons" thread and others of the ilk. But your above examples aren't really relevant of the problem we are talking about: your own thread that's an open one, a bits is bits thread, and one responding to a review where the discussion was about measurements.

And so, no I'm not tellingyou you should stop posting. I specifically said you should post in the appropriate threads. You didn't see that?

[Allan F]

5 hours ago, marce said:

To be perfectly honest, I find it all a bit pathetic and throwing the dummy out of the pram, considering the numerous claims its just a hobby, so many take it so seriously, it brings a smile to my otherwise miserable visage.

If it is a hobby take it less seriously, if its not a hobby then it becomes a religion, dangerous.

Which is it?

 

 

You are complaining about people taking it too seriously!? You really should go back and read your own posts in this thread. Talk about the kettle calling the pot black.

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 hours ago, marce said:

Yes CENSORSHIP that's the way forward so No claim however daft it is can be questioned, and thus the manufacturers get richer....

 

6 hours ago, marce said:

What questioning beliefs that are not backed up by science or engineering...

I could go on about how I have seen hi-fi dwindle from readily available systems in the likes of Curry's, Walmart etc. to where we are now... directional fuses for one...

You comment does say a lot though on where you want this site to go, you claim an open mind, but you language says different...

Again why do the hard core subjective beliefs need so much protection from questioning?

Marce, you just don’t understand how things work. Like minded people with shared interests don’t want to hear from you. They come here to have fun, not have their entire existence questioned. 
 

I believe it’s time for you to move on to a place that encourages confrontation and driving people away from whatever enjoyment they may have had. This isn’t the place for such nonsense. 

[Jud]

6 hours ago, sdolezalek said:

As ones of those who simply stopped posting when the noise started to exceed the signal, I'm not encouraged by the response to Chris' change.  The problem is mostly a lack of self control.  Most abusers know who they are and will behave badly until punished severely enough to briefly get them to start behaving better.  But who wants to run a site where you have to spend a huge amount of your time "getting abusive children to behave?" 

 

The problem neither this site, nor any website I know of, has been able to fix is that "controversy sells."  if you want lots of web traffic, create controversy.  A friendly helpful site is great, but boring.  I bet a quick analysis would show that heated arguments here get 3X to 5X the number of responses as non-controversial topics.  If you can fix that, you will change the world.

 

Here's hoping you can! 😉 

 

 

 

Thanks, have missed your input (along with that of some of the "objectivists" who used to hang around here, like @goldsdad).

 

As other folks have said, it doesn't seem nearly so much a matter of objective and subjective as it does people who wish to score points versus people who wish to be helpful. Back a few years this all was new enough that I think more of us felt we needed help where we could find it, and had an obligation to provide it if we could. There was more of a sense of being in this together before we all got so damn swaggeringly confident in ourselves.

 

In case you haven't noticed, Chris is kind of at wit's end here, because y'all blew right through the past several ACMs (Asshole Coping Mechanisms). Someone even said "we can be assholes on occasion and you've allowed us to get away with it." News flash, Chris ain't your mommy. My wife works in an after school program with a couple of dozen kindergarteners through fifth graders, and that's plenty exhausting enough. Dealing with adults who want to act like grade schoolers is a little too much.

 

Just be helpful. That means meeting people where they are, not where you figure they ought to be.

[pkane2001]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

And so, no I'm not tellingyou you should stop posting. I specifically said you should post in the appropriate threads. You didn't see that?

 

'Appropriate threads' is the thing that Chris has yet to define, and I asked repeatedly. According to him, it's a 'gray area', so my posts are subject to removal from any thread (other than in Objective Fi, I assume), with no way for me to judge ahead of time if I'm going to be booted or tolerated, and what logic will be used to make this decision. That's what I have a problem with.

[firedog]

11 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

'Appropriate threads' is the thing that Chris has yet to define, and I asked repeatedly. According to him, it's a 'gray area', so my posts are subject to removal from any thread (other than in Objective Fi, I assume), with no way for me to judge ahead of time if I'm going to be booted or tolerated, and what logic will be used to make this decision. That's what I have a problem with.

I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Look at the OP and the context of the thread before you post, and it shouldn't be so difficult to decide what's appropriate to post. Over time it should be pretty obvious what is correct. On the vast majority of threads it won't be an issue at all.
If it really doesn't work, Chris will cancel the setup.

[Jud]

1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

'Appropriate threads' is the thing that Chris has yet to define, and I asked repeatedly. According to him, it's a 'gray area', so my posts are subject to removal from any thread (other than in Objective Fi, I assume), with no way for me to judge ahead of time if I'm going to be booted or tolerated, and what logic will be used to make this decision. That's what I have a problem with.

 

I agree it's far from ideal, but other measures including your suggestion of giving OPs control of threads have been tried and been ineffective, so determined are we to argue rather than help. Notice Chris is only just now trying this after the forum has been running for many years, so for him it's much closer to a last resort than a first instinct.

 

Head-Fi has a similar arrangement. Perhaps, depressing as the thought is, once the number of audiophiles in a group becomes large enough, they all fall to constant arguing unless separated into like minded groups. Could you prove differently by looking at the most active recent threads on this site?

[marce]

32 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Marce, you just don’t understand how things work. Like minded people with shared interests don’t want to hear from you. They come here to have fun, not have their entire existence questioned. 
 

I believe it’s time for you to move on to a place that encourages confrontation and driving people away from whatever enjoyment they may have had. This isn’t the place for such nonsense. 

The funny thing is in all this, is that at the end of the day,

Designing electronics and speakers to replay music is

objective/engineering based, especially the digital side of things.

Anyone remember the old adage, hi-fi amplifier should be like a “bit of wire with gain”.

Nothing added/nothing subtracted for the signal in to the signal out.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, marce said:

The funny thing is in all this, is that at the end of the day,

Designing electronics and speakers to replay music is

objective/engineering based, especially the digital side of things.

Anyone remember the old adage, hi-fi amplifier should be like a “bit of wire with gain”.

Nothing added/nothing subtracted for the signal in to the signal out.

No hobbyist here is designing electronics or speakers. We listen to them to have fun. 
 

Please move on to whatever site wishes to host your crusade. 

[Iving]

39 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Marce, you just don’t understand how things work.

 

7 minutes ago, marce said:

The funny thing is in all this, is that at the end of the day,

Designing electronics and speakers to replay music is

objective/engineering based, especially the digital side of things.

Anyone remember the old adage, hi-fi amplifier should be like a “bit of wire with gain”.

Nothing added/nothing subtracted for the signal in to the signal out.

 

@marce That's not (for present purposes) "how things work"!

[marce]

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

No hobbyist here is designing electronics or speakers. We listen to them to have fun. 
 

Please move on to whatever site wishes to host your crusade. 

I have never had a crusade as you put it...

[marce]

4 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

 

@marce That's not (for present purposes) "how things work"!

Its how music reproduction works and recording, the kit is all engineered at the end of the day.

 

[Guest QAwdeermteyiouion]

21 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Don't you think it's obvious in most cases? Serious question. 

 

Even if it is in most cases (more than 50%) or many of them, the remaining cases will still (potentially) contribute to the problem.

[tapatrick]

45 minutes ago, Jud said:

it doesn't seem nearly so much a matter of objective and subjective as it does people who wish to score points versus people who wish to be helpful.

well said

15 minutes ago, marce said:

The funny thing is in all this, is that at the end of the day....

There are people involved too, it's really not that difficult to understand..

[marce]

10 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

No hobbyist here is designing electronics or speakers. We listen to them to have fun. 
 

Please move on to whatever site wishes to host your crusade. 

Don't worry Chris I will be moving on, your recent attitude has been somewhat biased...

I do know what provoked this recent inquisition, I am sure you will all be happy with no opposing views or only technical input that supports the viewpoint...

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, marce said:

Don't worry Chris I will be moving on, your recent attitude has been somewhat biased...

I do know what provoked this recent inquisition, I am sure you will all be happy with no opposing views or only technical input that supports the viewpoint...

Goodbye. 

[Allan F]

10 minutes ago, marce said:

I have never had a crusade as you put it...

Would you prefer "mission", "hobbyhorse", "evangelism"...?

[kumakuma]

Just now, Allan F said:

Oh, would you prefer "mission" or "hobbyhorse"?

 

Give it a break, Allan!

 

You guys won. You've convinced Chris to drive out the undesirables in order to create your nice warm place where everyone is a friend, no opinions are challenged, and nothing of any lasting value to anyone is created.

 

[Allan F]

58 minutes ago, Jud said:

 News flash, Chris ain't your mommy.

Thank you.

[Jud]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

 

You guys won.

 

Unfortunately no one did. Because this wasn't some battle or contest, it was a bunch of folks trying to enjoy their music more who couldn't get along well enough to learn from each other and make it work.

[Iving]

4 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

You guys won. You've convinced Chris to drive out the undesirables in order to create your nice warm place where everyone is a friend, no opinions are challenged, and nothing of any lasting value to anyone is created.

 

Well - I wouldn't agree with the last bit.

[Tone Deaf]

22 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

I agree it's far from ideal, but other measures including your suggestion of giving OPs control of threads have been tried and been ineffective, so determined are we to argue rather than help. Notice Chris is only just now trying this after the forum has been running for many years, so for him it's much closer to a last resort than a first instinct.

 

Head-Fi has a similar arrangement. Perhaps, depressing as the thought is, once the number of audiophiles in a group becomes large enough, they all fall to constant arguing unless separated into like minded groups. Could you prove differently by looking at the most active recent threads on this site?

 

Head-Fi's Sound Science forum does keep most of these "issues" bottled up inside it.  Unfortunately, the Head-Fi Sound Science forum doesn't seem to be a particularly friendly place for non "Science" folks to visit.  Science threads can frequently be condescending (insulting?) to non "Science" folks, but the most egregious threads do tend to get locked relatively quickly.  The result seems to be that Head-Fi has "locked" the objectivists inside, and it is understandable why objectivists wouldn't want a similar forum here.

 

I would hope the Objective-Fi forum would be more inclusive than the Head-Fi version, and there is definitely an opportunity for the objectivists at AS to make it so.  Less winning, more courtesy.  We'll see - I'm not particularly optimistic that it will become so.

[Allan F]

36 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

Give it a break, Allan!

 

You guys won. You've convinced Chris to drive out the undesirables in order to create your nice warm place where everyone is a friend, no opinions are challenged, and nothing of any lasting value to anyone is created.

 

Sadly, you and others who have posted similar comments just don't get it. It has nothing to do with winning. The "undesirables" are the are the product of their own behaviour by repeatedly interfering in threads where it has been made very clear that their "challenges" are unwelcome and contribute nothing positive to the topic under discussion. Those interventions are what create nothing of value, lasting or otherwise. No one is preventing you from expressing your opinions in other threads.

[Guest QAwdeermteyiouion]

19 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Liking something is subjective.

But the question can you tell the difference between the sound of an instrument that is being recorded and the reproduction of the sound is an objective one. If you can hear the difference, your reaction to the difference is of course subjective.