Message to golden-eared audiophiles posting at ASR for the first time...

[Sukie]

Now I'm a troll? Any more insults?

Look, I'm not trying to insult you. I answered your initial post with patience, diligence and detail. You did not afford me the courtesy of a response that engaged with the points I made. That gives the appearance of trolling.

I'm trying to work out why you would post what you posted and then not engage with the substance of the reply. That's not really in the spirit of this forum.

 

[Sukie]

A brief synopsis:

How to spot a troll

What’s the difference between a troll and someone who genuinely wants to debate a topic? The differences are subtle, but you can always tell by the following signs:

• Off-topic comments: Disruption is the aim of the game here. A troll deliberately posts irrelevant remarks to annoy and disrupt others.
• Condescending tone and refusal to acknowledge evidence: This one is a dead giveaway that someone wants to argue just for the sake of it. If you notice provoking comments like “Why are you getting so angry?” or “Calm down”, you know it’s a troll trying to dismiss your argument and annoy you further. Ignoring hard facts is another sign of a troll, since they’re not looking to draw any conclusions from their ‘argument’.
• Seeming oblivious: Places like YouTube, news sites, Facebook, and Instagram all have comment sections ripe for trolls to feed on. Certain comment sections can be full of passionate music fans or those with strong political opinions, which gives trolls the perfect opportunity to drag them into a pointless debate with slurs of hateful or controversial

Jim

Wonderful post. I'm usually relaxed about these things but @Judas (interesting name) has rather got under my skin.

I spend a fair amount of time trying to help people on this site and it's my privilege to do this. ASR helped me and I like to give back. When common courtesy is lacking it does get me down.

 

[Judas]

Ad hominem fallacies are considered to be uncivil and do not help creating a constructive atmosphere for dialogue to flourish. An ad hominem attack is an attack on the character of the target who tends to feel the necessity to defend himself or herself from the accusation of being hypocritical. Walton has noted that it is so powerful of an argument that it is employed in many political debates. Since it is associated with negativity and dirty tricks, it has gained a bad fame, …
Wikipedia · Text under CC-BY-SA license

 

[Sukie]

Ad hominem fallacies are considered to be uncivil and do not help creating a constructive atmosphere for dialogue to flourish. An ad hominem attack is an attack on the character of the target who tends to feel the necessity to defend himself or herself from the accusation of being hypocritical. Walton has noted that it is so powerful of an argument that it is employed in many political debates. Since it is associated with negativity and dirty tricks, it has gained a bad fame, …
Wikipedia · Text under CC-BY-SA license

I give up. Thank you for your contribution. I'm not sure where you'll take your membership on this forum but I wish you every success. I shall continue to offer assistance, words of encouragement and words of challenge to those who have ears to listen.

 

[Robin L]

Ad hominem fallacies are considered to be uncivil and do not help creating a constructive atmosphere for dialogue to flourish. An ad hominem attack is an attack on the character of the target who tends to feel the necessity to defend himself or herself from the accusation of being hypocritical. Walton has noted that it is so powerful of an argument that it is employed in many political debates. Since it is associated with negativity and dirty tricks, it has gained a bad fame, …
Wikipedia · Text under CC-BY-SA license

And sometimes a banana is just a banana.

 

[Robin L]

That's very interesting Robin!

Your reference to time and psychology as it relates to listening to music makes me think of how I have often related to listening to the radio.

Especially before digital/streaming took over.

When listening to the radio, say driving, when a song I knew came on, especially if it was a song that was just becoming popular - that second or third time you hear it and it sinks in as a great tune - there was something more special about it. You had no control over what you were going to hear on the radio. And it was broadcast "live" to the public as you were listening. There was a sort of connectedness to the buzz of new popular music. Even if I was driving alone in the car hearing it, I was part of a large audience hearing it at the same time. Sort of like live TV.

So when a song came on that I liked there was a "yay, I LOVE this song" bit of surprise while also being part of a larger audience all listening right then to the same song. It just changes the texture of the listening experience for me, almost a bit more buzz, more live, than just, say, putting a CD on in the car, or from the ipod, or later from an iphone or streaming where you are totally in control and the only one listening to the song.

I know that some other people may not have felt the same, and relish their absolute control given by the digital universe. Some of this divide, if there is one, may also be seen between those of us who love going to The Movies to watch a film with a live audience (me!) vs those who are grateful to finally be able to watch movies at home, without the "bother" of other people impeding the experience.

I understand what you are saying. My first experiences of recorded music [more of a "madeleine" than anything I've tasted] are of my father playing Nat King Cole on one of those portable mono record players everybody used to have. By the time I was nine, had a Viscount Portable Pocket Transistor AM radio when I was living in LA in 1964. Had one of those cheap and nasty in-ear earphones, smuggled the apparatus into my elementary school. KFWB, KHJ, KRLA. "The Girl From Ipanema" cheek by jowl with "A Hard Day's Night" and "Everybody Loves Somebody". One could easily sense that something revolutionary was going on, one needed to keep track of chart action, one paid attention to the announcers telling us that "Under The Boardwalk" was creeping up on "Dang Me", "When I Grow Up To Be A Man" was losing out to "Baby Love". It seemed to be a disc competition happening in real time. Once they were "oldies", that kind of energy went away.

And this kind of experience was happening with audio of the lowest quality. No matter how fine the quality of the playback gear, nothing could ever replicate hearing "I Feel Fine" for the first time on LA Radio in the sixties.

 

[Killingbeans]

I'd go so far as to say that anyone who says they can't enjoy listening to music anymore because the 'sound is horrible', where the kit being used has achieved all the basic requirements of decent playback (which as I say can be achieved relatively very modestly), has lost the ability to just listen to and enjoy music, but is in fact indeed listening to the equipment, and hearing huge differences which just do not exist, or at least don't exist in terms of being genuinely unlistenable from a musical perspective.

Exactly. Like somebody pointed out (I forget who): If every single tweak makes a night and day difference, the the initial setup must have sounded like stuffing a handful of angry bees in both of your ear canals. But instead it's always descibed as the best thing since sliced bread. It doesn't take a great deal of logical thinking to see how that doesn't quite hold water.

None of this takes away from the validity of the subjective experience that you have whilst listening to music.

Yeah, I sometimes get the feeling that ASR is seen as some sort of objectivist militia that wants the whole world to accept everything they hear as imaginary, and any enjoyment of music they have as false.

But that's not what this place is about (IMO). All enjoyment is equally real and legitimate. But some of it is caused by physics, and some of it by psychology. If you explore the distinction between the two, it gives you some handy tools to minimize the risk of being taken advantage of, or of tumbling down unfortunate rabbit holes. ASR doesn't want to make a particular form of enjoyment the only legal one. We just want a clear picture of how things actually work, rather than letting innocent dreams of magic be the driving force. All of the prodding and poking might feel personal, but it's really not.

Again, it's important to remember post #3. This tread is meant to be tongue-in-cheek. A bit of bile aimed at those who ever so often feel the need to make a profile on the forum just to announce that we are all full of s¤¤t and that their particular set of ears holds all secrets of the universe.

P.s. Sorry for the rambling. Wrote this at 5:00 AM local time

 

[Judas]

I give up. Thank you for your contribution. I'm not sure where you'll take your membership on this forum but I wish you every success. I shall continue to offer assistance, words of encouragement and words of challenge to those who have ears to listen.

Well my goal is simple. To enhance my enjoyment of reproduced music. T the extent I have some success at that my goal is to share it with others. My problem of course is that I am a consumer not a producer. That it is to say what is produced is influenced by the opinions and standards of others Many hold strong opinions. They if they hold those opinions strongly enough they think they become facts. That then influences what reproduction materials are produced for consumption. Thomas Jefferson said {Let} ..the error of opinion be tolerated." But it must not go unchallenged. The attacks on audiophiles have an impact on what is produced and consumed.
Ultimately it affects the enjoyment of reproduced music, not just for me but for the general public. I am not here to shout anybody down. I wish you well in your pursuit of the enjoyment of music

 

[Dialectic]

It needs to be said that negativity is an important part of ASR. The negativity expressed here is generally directed at either self-proclaimed audio experts who don't know their field or gear that is not well engineered on its own terms. There are no other good venues for criticism of the rampant BS in audio.

I've been criticized on here for my purchases. Some ASR users do not like the Dutch & Dutch speakers because of their Pascal amplifier modules and the appearance of their internal circuit boards. Some (incorrectly) think BACCH is a sham. Some have insinutated that I'm getting paid for saying I like certain products. I still respect most of those users and have learned from them. In the rare cases of emotional disturbance or a gross mismatch between a user's knowledge and his belief in his own expertise, I use the "ignore" button.

If you feel "bullied", "triggered" or otherwise injured because someone criticized the Devialet/Wilson/Abyss/Totaldac/Schiit product that you bought or because someone poked fun at audiophiles or "golden ears," get some help. If you are just a buyer or user of audio gear, what anyone says about audio on a forum should not affect your emotional health or self-worth.

 

[Robin L]

It needs to be said that negativity is an important part of ASR. The negativity expressed here is generally directed at either self-proclaimed audio experts who don't know their field or gear that is not well engineered on its own terms. There are no other good venues for criticism of the rampant BS in audio.

I've been criticized on here for my purchases. Some ASR users do not like the Dutch & Dutch speakers because of their Pascal amplifier modules and the appearance of their internal circuit boards. Some (incorrectly) think BACCH is a sham. Some have insinutated that I'm getting paid for saying I like certain products. I still respect most of those users and have learned from them. In the rare cases of emotional disturbance or a gross mismatch between a user's knowledge and his belief in his own expertise, I use the "ignore" button.

If you feel "bullied", "triggered" or otherwise injured because someone criticized the Devialet/Wilson/Abyss/Totaldac/Schiit product that you bought or because someone poked fun at audiophiles or "golden ears," get some help. If you are just a buyer or user of audio gear, what anyone says about audio on a forum should not affect your emotional health or self-worth.

I got here looking for data to confirm that the 33 & 1/3, Long Play record album is a broken and unrepairable design/concept. I found plenty of data here in large part because there are people in this forum who have designed turntables and related gear and there are people at this forum who know how to measure audio gear and know what to look for in those measurements. But I have also encountered LP diehards here who know all of that and are willing to cop to that, while reminding me of all the [good] reasons I'm owned/disowned around 10,000 LPs. Info is info, it's either true or not. And there is an unfortunate amplification on forums like these, due to the unfiltered nature of the internet, of stuff that just ain't true and deserves to be shot down in no uncertain terms.

I think it is safe to say that Arim is a leading expert on the data that determines sound quality. He's got nothing to sell his but his expertise. What goes on in other forums is because the folks who are overseeing those forums have something to sell. I'd say the Hoffman Forum [spent the better part of a decade there] exists because Steve Hoffman has something to sell. There are reasons, good and bad, to buy his products. There is also a lot of misinformation there that is taken as gospel. The situation is far worse at Analog Planet, where any suggestion that LPs are anything less than manna from heaven---that IGD is baked into the formula, that multiple, additional, transducers in series will inevitably increase distortion, that all LPs are off-center [it's just a question of degree], thus making LP playback a few bits less than SOTA---is shot down by the proprietor of that site as rampant heresy. I remember responding to someone at Analog Planet asking if a CD of Creedence Clearwater Revival at Woodstock would sound better/worse than the two LP set made of that performance. I noted that the source tape [like the other tapes from Woodstock] would be subpar anyway, might as well save the money and get the CD. Mikey responded by asking what the hell I was doing on Analog Planet. What I was doing was giving a simple question an honest answer.

But that kind of abuse of the truth doesn't happen [or at least isn't supposed to happen] here. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and lays eggs like a duck, the quantum stabilizer between your server and DAC is not about to be called useful 'round these parts. ASR pushes against the internet's endless stream of BS posted about audio.

ASR is the Snopes of audio.

 

[Sukie]

It needs to be said that negativity is an important part of ASR. The negativity expressed here is generally directed at either self-proclaimed audio experts who don't know their field or gear that is not well engineered on its own terms. There are no other good venues for criticism of the rampant BS in audio.

I've been criticized on here for my purchases. Some ASR users do not like the Dutch & Dutch speakers because of their Pascal amplifier modules and the appearance of their internal circuit boards. Some (incorrectly) think BACCH is a sham. Some have insinutated that I'm getting paid for saying I like certain products. I still respect most of those users and have learned from them. In the rare cases of emotional disturbance or a gross mismatch between a user's knowledge and his belief in his own expertise, I use the "ignore" button.

If you feel "bullied", "triggered" or otherwise injured because someone criticized the Devialet/Wilson/Abyss/Totaldac/Schiit product that you bought or because someone poked fun at audiophiles or "golden ears," get some help. If you are just a buyer or user of audio gear, what anyone says about audio on a forum should not affect your emotional health or self-worth.

The funny thing is that your username "Dialectic" is the concept that comes to mind. Thesis, antithesis and synthesis. The idea that we should live in a happy bubble when nobody is challenged is a terrible dystopia. Out out of the negative that challenges our positive comes a greater truth. If we get upset/offended/defensive every time that we're challenged then we never grow, learn or develop.

 

[BDWoody]

If we get upset/offended/defensive every time that we're challenged then we never grow, learn or develop.

Very true.

I'd also say that beliefs (of all kinds) can be challenged in ways that are designed to let the person think and work through the ideas, and it can be done in ways that are designed to put them in an immediately defensive position, no matter how indefensible it may be.

There are loads of very helpful, knowledgeable people here. Sometimes the ankle biters chase new people (with the same damn questions!!) away before they get a chance to even get to know what the place is about, or even what they are asking.

However... Some people come in as walking (typing?) parodies of the entire high end 'thing,' here to help us fools out, but we aren't talking about that. They generally deserve what they get.

 

[Judas]

The funny thing is that your username "Dialectic" is the concept that comes to mind. Thesis, antithesis and synthesis. The idea that we should live in a happy bubble when nobody is challenged is a terrible dystopia. Out out of the negative that challenges our positive comes a greater truth. If we get upset/offended/defensive every time that we're challenged then we never grow, learn or develop.

I know nothing of your position on audio. The "truth" that you think needs to be challenged may be mine. That notwithstanding I could not agree more.
If you are in search of support for your preconceived beliefs you will find it.

 

[Judas]

I think we can discuss the shortcomings of digital as a storage medium without even mentioning LP. The problems of course is the transition to to digital was thrust upon as perfect. Stiff competition has forced digital to improve.

 

[BDWoody]

I think we can discuss the shortcomings of digital as a storage medium

What do you see are the current shortcomings of digital as a storage medium?

 

[Sukie]

I know nothing of your position on audio. The "truth" that you think needs to be challenged may be mine. That notwithstanding I could not agree more.
If you are in search of support for your preconceived beliefs you will find it.

Not just your "truth" but mine as well, and all of our "truths". That's the excitement. We all challenge each other and, with genuine dialogue, a new truth emerges (only to be challenged again). A sort of ASR-according-to-Hegel approach.

 

[Judas]

What do you see are the current shortcomings of digital as a storage medium?

To many and to complicated to list here. Sampling rate is a hot topic for one.

 

[Sukie]

I'd also say that beliefs (of all kinds) can be challenged in ways that are designed to let the person think and work through the ideas, and it can be done in ways that are designed to put them in an immediately defensive position, no matter how indefensible it may be.

I agree. I think one of the problems centres around the belief, sometimes held on here, that people who hear differences in DACs are some how deluded or lying to themselves. This implies mental impairment or dishonesty. This is simply not true. A person hears what they hear. The interesting thing is to ask why do we hear what we hear and does this involve cognitive bias?

To say that a person does not hear what they hear is rude, dismissive and (in fact) unscientific. The differences that people hear might not originate in a DAC, or amp (or cables!!!) but they are real and observable phenomena.

 

[Feelas]

To many and to complicated to list here. Sampling rate is a hot topic for one.

So try doing three, for starters.

There actually are some problems with digital tech & studio recordings (mentioned e.g. by Steve Albini on one of his speeches), but none of these are connected with digital sounding worse.

 

[Robin L]

I agree. I think one of the problems centres around the belief, sometimes held on here, that people who hear differences in DACs are some how deluded or lying to themselves. This implies mental impairment or dishonesty. This is simply not true. A person hears what they hear. The interesting thing is to ask why do we hear what we hear and does this involve cognitive bias?

To say that a person does not hear what they hear is rude, dismissive and (in fact) unscientific. The differences that people hear might not originate in a DAC, or amp (or cables!!!) but they are real and observable phenomena.

But they might be due to: