• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Why Are Audiophiles so Bound and Determined to Make Others Waste Money

Frgirard

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 2, 2021
Messages
1,737
Likes
1,040
Plus you need to add that the more people come back with a positive feedback, because "they heard a clear improvement", the more people follow the others and also "hear something".

The snake oil products of the audio industry are on the same level like homeopathic products in healthcare. For decades the advocates of these sugar pills fail to prove that they work beyond the placebo effect, yet people still believe that you can mix an active ingredient (more like some kind of basic chemicals like coal, chalk or even chemicals causing cancer) with sugar, shake it in a specific way (by knocking it against leather), then to thin it down even more by taking a small portion of this "energetic enhanced mixture", mix it with more sugar, again knock the mixture against leather in a specific way, and voila, you have a medicine which one the one side works in a better way than the the undiluted raw chemical but without the negative effects of that chemical.

And people buy this shit. There is a whole industry selling sugar at a the same price like pure silver, and it is big business - just like the one with the cables.

Side note:
If you run across one of these homeo believing persons or even believe in this on your own... what do you do if the sugar fails and doesn't help? Do you take two pills instead of one or to you slice one pill in half and eat less? If you take two, you already have broken the most important rule how these sugar pills should work and you follow the traditional rules of chemistry and physics.


The hifi is a hobby, not a phylosophical path or a therapy. since the dawn of time human beings have invented snake oil.
 

HorizonsEdge

Active Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
223
Likes
315
I love it :cool: I've never seen that phrase before .

Magistrate:- "What is the offence constable?"
Constable:- "A flagrant failure to belief align when challenged Sir".

Is there anything more useless (and consuming) than belief?!
You either know, or you don't.


The world is full of people who do not act in their own self interest.

I have pondered this and come up with the following thesis . . .

Somewhere along the way truth and fact have diverged. Fact applies to everyone whether they acknowledge it or not. Truth on the other hand has become personal; truth is belief.
For example:
Fact: 1+1=2 universally (except maybe inside a black hole?)
Truth: here comes a funny and scary story . . .
Man in my building. Known him for 10+ years. Successful business man. Competent conversationalist. In a casual conversation in the lobby of our building the vaccine came up and he insisted that the vaccine contained microchips that will allow the government to control you via 5G. He further stated that if you have gotten the vaccine, do not hug your children because the microchips can jump from body to body. To cap the announcement he felt sorry for us for falling into the governments trap. This is his belief, his truth.

I had no response. I was stunned. Sadly, the following words crept out of my mouth . . . they say serial killers hide in plain sight.

I used to think I understood the world. Clearly, I have been delusional my entire life (
 

goldenears

Active Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
110
Likes
134
I had no response. I was stunned. Sadly, the following words crept out of my mouth . . . they say serial killers hide in plain sight.

You really said that to him? What was his response?

I'm the same when a particular person at my work talks about horoscopes. I just can't even.

When she starts saying, "oh that's because you're a pisces", or whatever. I understand when people talk horoscopes as just a bit of fun conversation, but she says it like it's a diagnosis to people and even justifies her own actions because of her star sign.

I have to bite my tongue because if I didn't, HR would surely end up involved.
 
Last edited:

HorizonsEdge

Active Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
223
Likes
315
You really said that to him? What was his response?

I'm the same when a particular person at my work talks about horoscopes. I just can't even.

When she starts saying, "oh that's because you're a pisces", or whatever. I understand when people talk horoscopes as just a bit of fun conversation, but she says it like it's a diagnosis to people and even justifies her own actions because of her star sign.

I have to bite my tongue because if I didn't, HR would surely end up involved.

He turned red and walked briskly to the elevator. My doorman laughed so hard he fell out of his chair.
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
The correct question is: what does the science say about X? Instead of: what do scientists say about X?

The latter question should suffice to filter out all responses except those validated by proper data and analysis, but scientists often want to be one of the cool kids, too.

Rick “not immune” Denney

this gets into the question of whether experts can be trusted

in the absence of controlled experiments*, I'd go with an expert everytime over some guy you just pulled off a street corner - US Courts have a specific procedure for whether someone is an expert witness or not

* and note that you also have issues of how far any experimental result can be generalized; as but one example, if I have safety data on a drug where it was tested on US college students, what does that tell me about safety for elderly women in rural India?
 

rdenney

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
2,235
Likes
3,856
this gets into the question of whether experts can be trusted

in the absence of controlled experiments*, I'd go with an expert everytime over some guy you just pulled off a street corner - US Courts have a specific procedure for whether someone is an expert witness or not

* and note that you also have issues of how far any experimental result can be generalized; as but one example, if I have safety data on a drug where it was tested on US college students, what does that tell me about safety for elderly women in rural India?

Having served as an expert witness on numerous occasions, I can speak to the process with some personal knowledge. Expertise in court is qualified on the basis of training and experience, but only to the extent that it persuades the jury (rarely does the judge care beyond that). These often only describe general expertise, not specific expertise relevant the facts at hand, particularly for specialty areas not deeply taught in college. I was in the public sector for many of those cases, and thus was the agency’s representative in addition to being their expert, and was therefore allowed to hear the testimony of other experts. They ostensibly had training and experience just like I did, but the things that emerged from their lips suggested a lack of narrow expertise—or a lack trustworthiness.

But I don’t disagree—I’ll trust an expert over a man in the street. But I’ll still want to see the data and analysis. Eventually, that expert will become trustworthy in my mind (or not) and I’ll take more of what he or she says at face value.

Rick “who has seen a thing or two” Denney
 

Robin L

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
5,211
Likes
7,590
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
Having served as an expert witness on numerous occasions, I can speak to the process with some personal knowledge. Expertise in court is qualified on the basis of training and experience, but only to the extent that it persuades the jury (rarely does the judge care beyond that). These often only describe general expertise, not specific expertise relevant the facts at hand, particularly for specialty areas not deeply taught in college. I was in the public sector for many of those cases, and thus was the agency’s representative in addition to being their expert, and was therefore allowed to hear the testimony of other experts. They ostensibly had training and experience just like I did, but the things that emerged from their lips suggested a lack of narrow expertise—or a lack trustworthiness.

But I don’t disagree—I’ll trust an expert over a man in the street. But I’ll still want to see the data and analysis. Eventually, that expert will become trustworthy in my mind (or not) and I’ll take more of what he or she says at face value.

Rick “who has seen a thing or two” Denney
 

Head_Unit

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 27, 2018
Messages
1,341
Likes
688
the vaccine contained microchips that will allow the government to [track] you via 5G.
I changed to "track" which is what I've heard. To which I replied "They can ALREADY track you. HOW?!?!?" Eventually someone says "our phones" and then I say "yeah and it doesn't even have to be the CIA/NSA/whatever, it can be some schmo at Verizon or whatever stalking you." That pretty much ends that whole stupidity. Actually it is not really stupid, ordinary people are surrounded by technological miracles all the time so why shouldn't they think microchips in vaccines are possible? After all they have them in pets, right? And people don't know those are larger and need a scanner.

The other nutty vaccine thing is people avoiding it due to possible as-yet-unknown side effects. Because they completely do not think about possible as-yet-unknown side effects of COVID! Or the KNOWN long term damage...or the possibility of hospitalization and dying.
 

HereYaGo

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
Messages
59
Likes
31
I'm the only audio gear reviewer without a different headphone on their head every day
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
as to the OP:

individuals often feel safer in groups - in fact, aggregations are a pre-condition for the formation of any society, whether in prey like ungulates, or predators like lion prides

by convincing other audiophiles to "join" your group, you not only satisfy that primordial urge but form a larger group which is more likely to win in contest competition against another group, in this case a verbal argument
 

audio2design

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2020
Messages
1,769
Likes
1,830
On Reddit, in a discussion with a certain user (who insisted that every time they upgraded their amp, their headphones became 'clearer'), I said something to the effect of "if your amp can drive your headphones to the volume you want with no distortion, then there's no reason to get a more powerful one".

Another user came along and complained that I couldn't just let people enjoy their purchases. Why exactly are these people so insistent on their right to lead people to spend loads of money on the back of no evidence at all? It drives me absolutely crazy.

Misery loves company and people want to believe in magic and special powers. Then again, why do we keep discussing this? :)

As a corollary, it is one of the reasons for the vilification of ASR and the people who frequent it. It upsets suppliers because it interferes with their revenue stream, and it upsets a certain group of audiophiles as it hurts their recruitment into the fold. There are some parallels between audiophilia and cults.

You can really go down the rat hole fighting it, so best not to get too emotionally attached to it, and just treat it as a sport. I once got a senior snake oiler so irate that he got himself banned from a major subjective website. I had another senior snake oiler literally offering people money to dox me. I figure it was a lesson for him that Facebook does not appreciate that behavior.
 
Last edited:

Bullwinkle J Moose

Active Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2021
Messages
217
Likes
90
Godel died for your sins
Yes I am tired of audiophiles who always recommend some audiofool crap.
Like Steve Guttenberg Audiophiliac YT video
I'm not sure that you are describing an audiophile

Someone who recommends audiofool crap is more properly defined as a shill

A True Audiophile is generally an A-Hole who knows what he is talking about

An audiophile dealer will try to explain why X is better, but after 30 seconds, the customer "generally" has had enough and wanders into Best Buy and grabs the latest BangPowZoom Player or speakers
 

audio2design

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2020
Messages
1,769
Likes
1,830
But I don’t disagree—I’ll trust an expert over a man in the street. But I’ll still want to see the data and analysis. Eventually, that expert will become trustworthy in my mind (or not) and I’ll take more of what he or she says at face value.

Rick “who has seen a thing or two” Denney

Someone who will go unnamed asked me whether I questioned the expertise of my doctor. My answer is yes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...86982a-189f-11e7-9887-1a5314b56a08_story.html


Expertise is a great inoculation against misinformation, but also appears to be an inoculation against new information :) Early AI work, probably 20 years old now, had a diagnostic technician coupled with an AI diagnostic program delivering results superior to GPs and excuse my fuzzy memory, but on the order of specialists. At the diagnostic end, it amazes me the current penetration of AI in diagnostic medicine. I would say that is a bit of job security.


More than 20 percent of patients who sought a second opinion at one of the nation’s premier medical institutions had been misdiagnosed by their primary care providers, according to new research published Tuesday.


In 2015, the National Academy of Medicine reported that most people will receive an incorrect or late diagnosis at least once in their lives, sometimes with serious consequences. It cited one estimate that 12 million people — about 5 percent of adults who seek outpatient care — are misdiagnosed annually. The report also noted that diagnostic error is a relatively under-measured and understudied aspect of patient safety.

According to previous research cited in the new study, diagnostic errors “contribute to approximately 10 percent of patient deaths” and “account for 6 to 17 percent of adverse events in hospitals.” Graber estimates that the rate of misdiagnosis, although difficult to determine, occurs in 10 percent to 20 percent of cases.
 
Top Bottom