Is it worth it?

[March Audio]

8 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

My view (yes, subjective) is that there’s little value to have objective discussions here. And I’ve tried. Instead of having an actual discussion you get shouted down, usually by the same small group of individuals who want to ensure that nobody challenges their world view, but who obviously have no interest in understanding the objective approach.
 

If you’re looking to get into a fight, then by all means. If you want to have a meaningful discussion with folks who can truly challenge you and help you grow and understand technology and science behind it — look elsewhere.
 

IMHO and YMMV.

I can only echo these comments.

 

From recent experience it appears that some posters, who are being highly offensive, are allowed to do this without consequence.

[March Audio]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

It most certainly matters ... people want the recordings they play to sound good to them - unless their addiction is to the shininess, and sheer spectacular look of their rig, 😉. So, they will generally spend lots of money, and devote huge amounts of time, to getting it to "sound good".

 

Being purely objective about it has failed ... that is, you can combine a set of components which all have brilliant numbers - and it doesn't pump out, "magic sound". And you know the latter exists, because you have heard such from at least one system you have come across, in your audio journeys ... . Your quest is to replicate the quality of that experience, and you will do almost anything, try almost anything, to make it happen. Which is why we have the great divide between objectivists, and subjectivists, 🙂.

 

"Pretty basic stuff" doesn't dictate, I repeat, doesn't dictate the subjective quality of the presentation - human hearing is incredibly sensitive to anomalies in the sound, and once it hears them, it can't unhear them. It just turns out that you have to be tremendously fussy about everything, to make sure that the flaws in the reproduction are at the lowest levels possible - this is what's necessary to achieve the quality of 'specialness' in what you hear.

 

Interference, no matter how bizarre or unlikely the route is to the key areas of the playback setup, is a particularly pernicious influence - because it dulls, saps the life out of the playback. Trying to explain that this effect "can't possibly be!" is never going to work - because people regularly experience otherwise. No matter how much you want the business of audio reproduction to be a straightforward, push the buttons process, it's not going to be such, until the components themselves, as an overall thing, are engineered and implemented better ...

Frank, your post is reasonable and polite, but doesn't it just exemplify one aspect of what we are referring to?

 

You believe these things but cant present one shred of evidence to support them.

 

"Being purely objective about it has failed ... that is, you can combine a set of components which all have brilliant numbers - and it doesn't pump out, "magic sound" "

 

So show us a component that measures objectively very good and sounds bad.

[March Audio]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

When you can’t get along with others and all of you report 20 posts in an hour, it’s ridiculous. It’s like children who need babysitting. Get over it. Have an adult discussion. 

Chris, with the greatest of respect can you please explain why PeterST was allowed to be repeatedly highly offensive towards me, repeatedly use ad hominem, call me a wanker and a shit?

 

Has any action been taken against this individual?  His behavior was completely against forum rules and I was was restrained in not reaching in kind.

 

That has nothing whatsoever to do with getting along with others, that's myself being blatantly attacked for posting views that are contrary to a subjectivist bent.

 

I wasn't the one who started this thread, it's clear that others are seeing the same problem.

 

I'm not saying this is the case, but it comes across as the subjectivist area is protected whilst in the objective area some are allowed to do as they please and endlessly argue without objective basis.

[March Audio]

10 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Here’s a novel idea, @March Audio and @fas42 put each other on your ignore lists. You never see eye to eye anyway. This will save everyone from reading pages on nonsense. 

That's no good if these individuals (I'm not just referring to Frank) still arrive in objective discussions endlessly posting unsupported opinions and thread crap.

[March Audio]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You’ve tried one approach, and that’s to work harder, not smarter. You can be the mod of any of your threads and one-click remove off topic posts. Pretty simple and works very well. 

I wasn't actually aware of this.  I thought it was something you granted on request, which I think I did in one of the reports I made about PeterST yesterday.

 

Had I known this that thread would worked very well with excellent contributions from several members.

[March Audio]

31 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You run your own business correct? You ever have employees that need babysitting, that just find ways to eat up your time, the always seem to need you to do something? This is the case with you Alan. Sure, I need to go clean up the thread you mention, but it’s a weekend I’d like to spend with my family, not answering your every complaint. 

Chris, with respect that is just not the case.  How am I to blame for other posters behaving in totally unacceptable ways?

 

What PeterST has been doing is completely against forum rules and frankly deserved moderator warnings followed by a ban if it continued.  That level of censure is very much your responsibility and I really don't understand why you didn't, and seemingly haven't, taken action.

[March Audio]

28 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

That thread was a shit show. Your request is likely in the pile with all the ported posts of people complaining about the other guy. 

It was a shit show because 2 particular posters turned it into one.  That was their objective.

 

Again with the greatest of respect, please stop blaming everyone for the behaviour of these individuals.

 

OK, to move on from this because it's not going to progress things in a positive way, can I take it that you are happy for thread creators to take control and moderate their own threads to stop this sort of thing?

[March Audio]

26 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Because all of you guys in that thread reported posts and whined about the other people being mean. I’d had enough of it. I can’t spend all my time on stupid stuff. 
 

It’s amazing how some people here do nothing but contribute without getting into pudding matches. Please follow their lead. 

Is myself objecting to being called a wanker and a shit plus repeated other ad hominems whining?  Are you saying my objection to that unreasonable?

 

It's not.  Its explicitly against forum terms and conditions. 

 

Yes I totally agree, it really is stupid.  I'm really sorry Chris but I just don't understand why you have allowed it without censuring the individual concerned.

[March Audio]

Chris,

 

OK, to move on from this because it's not going to progress things in a positive way, can I take it that you are happy for thread creators to take control and moderate their own threads to stop this sort of thing?

 

Can you explain how this is done?

[March Audio]

7 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Just ask Chris and he'll do it.

I did, but it looks like he missed it.

[March Audio]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

March Audio’s situation is different. Ever since he joined there have been tons of issues. Before him, we had plenty of objective discussions that didn’t end up worthless. Now, he can’t avoid trouble. 

No it isn't Chris and your assertions here are somewhat offensive.

 

It's quite demonstrable that a couple of individuals have gone out of their way to thread crap threads I have been involved with.

 

I think it's up to you to explain why you haven't censured individuals that have been personally offensive and broken forum rules that would get most people permanently banned.

 

I didn't start this thread, it's clear others are seeing the problems.

[March Audio]

23 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I haven’t moderated those posts because it’s over and out of my mind for now. The thread is locked. There are bigger fish to fry than doing that at this moment. 
 

 

Sure, thats fine, the individual concerned has only done himself a disservice by behaving in this way and loses any  credibility.  However, dont you think you need to have words with a that individual to ask him not to any continue with that sort of behaviour?  Its clear that if some are unable to behave like adults then I'm afraid thats where you have to step in.

 

Anyway, as it appears that if I can have control of future threads, if I see this sort of behaviour again I can moderate and stop the protagonist myself so you wont need to get involved.  So to a large extent the problem is solved.

[March Audio]

16 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

I'm telling you, putting frank on ignore was one of the best things I ever did and has significantly increased my enjoyment of the site.

I have been doing the sames most of the time. However, and this is applicable to anyone not just Frank, those posts are still made even if you do ignore them.  They divert from and dilute the real conversation that's happening and others do still respond perpetuating it.

[March Audio]

4 hours ago, Racerxnet said:

In an objective forum, why are the subjective opinions allowed to continually spam away without any factual basis. Your audio equipment does not function on subjective engineering. I wouldn't want to stifle the ideas people present, but the theory should be presented in an objective manner with some actual testing and trial to either prove or dispel the idea. 

That has certainly been happening.

 

Howver Chris says the OP can have moderation privileges so it can be dealt with.  He doesn't have time to police everything.

 

My only concern with this is the real possibility of over zealous moderation turning threads into little more than an echo chamber.

[March Audio]

18 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

No two people are alike, everyone has different opinions on all and every subjects. Why should there be no end to resentment and complaining from your side? What is wrong with you? Why take everything so personally? Is your life in danger?

Those points have nothing to do with "differing opinions".  They were referencing a member who was blatantly and repeatedly breaking forum rules with offensive personal attacks.  So yes I do take that personally.

 

Otherwise It was an objective thread where unsupported subjective opinion and speculation was being spammed.  Not just my view, Im not the OP of this thread.

[March Audio]

13 hours ago, idiot_savant said:

@firedog- I agree with the thrust of your post in general, but from my point of view I’ve never accused a “subjectivist” of not hearing what they’re hearing, or expressing a preference - it’s all cool here, but what I do object to is that preference then being ascribed in very objective terms - “less noise”, “less electromagnetic interference” and so on, that I feel should be challenged - not for the benefit of having an argument, or changing that persons mind, more for the silent majority who *dont* post, and maybe if that makes them think, if only for a moment “hmm, maybe there’s more ( or less ) to this than I thought” then that’s got to be good, right?

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot 

Its not just those always nebulous pseudo "objective" descriptions, its the lack of objective evidence that supports the assertions and implied effects. Also the fact that effects need to be demonstrated (for example) in the output of the dac.

 

In an objective thread "i heard it therefore it is" counts for nothing.

[March Audio]

2 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

It wasn't about opinions, it was about endless complaining. Usually people who complain endlessly are severely lacking, in the final case, security. Hence the question, is your life in danger? It is about audio, stay relaxed, no danger.

Who was complaining?  We were just discussing (trying to before it was spammed to death) how or if a piece of software did what it claimed.  Turns out it didn't.

 

Your interjections arent even vaguely relevant or meaningful to that, or this thread.

[March Audio]

1 hour ago, AnotherSpin said:

Ah, I see, you didn't bombard Chris with endless complaints. He must be exaggerating. Well, it happens... 😉

I reported every post that was an ad hominem attack, or a foul mouthed personal insult.  All of which obviously completely against forum rules.

Chris has said he has subsequently had words with the individual in question, so obviously agrees the behaviour was unacceptable.

 

So can you stop disrupting this thread with your of topic  spam?

 

[March Audio]

10 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

First, it's a fun. Secоnd, I am merely reflecting... 🙃

So you admit are trolling.

 

I have just reported you.

[March Audio]

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Peter is one of the very few who understands how pernicious this noise/interference thing is - nearly all rigs, no matter how ambitious, how expensive, have lots of audible artifacts in the sound; experience allows one to almost instantly identify these degradations - but, unfortunately, this is a long, long way from getting them fully under control ... some means of measuring it happening is but a tiny part of actually solving it ...

In an objective forum thread that "understanding" has to be demonstrated to have an actual effect in the audio output (dac/amp/whatever).

 

As I mentioned earlier saying "I hear it therefore it is" counts for nothing.

[March Audio]

11 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

So, if I stated that I believed that noise was degrading the audio output in some way, to a point where it was audible, how should I measure it?

Im actually going to start another thread that sort of covers some of this. There are a number of measurement techniques, but it depends what you are looking for what you might do.  On some measurements we can actually dig way below the levels of audibility.

 

However, the first and most fundamental thing to do is establish if are you actually really hearing something?  That means, as far as possible, removing those bias inducing clues and factors.  Putting controls in place so that you are not influenced by price, brand, aesthetics, what the reviewer, your mate or the "technical expert" said etc, etc.