I don't know anything about that (please provide examples) and he also gives no examples what exactly led to his video. In his video he makes a bunch of personal attacks and spreads false information. Amir took the time to address most of it in a few short videos you can find on YouTube. For a meaningful discussion Danny should have made the same and address each "bark" of us "dogs". He did not and he also did not in the last video. That's not how you have a meaningful discussion nor "educate people" (he claims that would be his intention).
And, ASR is not one person. It's not even a group of people that would follow the same ideology. Unless you think science is an ideology. Of course it's not but the term "scientism" does indeed exist and many examples can be given. In any case, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Not really. There's people that see audio reproduction for what it is, an engineering task. Then there's a group of cargo cultists that are fascinated by these "products of science" without actually being interested in science, more like in science fiction – "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (Clarke). Now add the great emotional impact music has on us humans to the mix (pun intended) and the confusion is complete. Such people are easy prey to people like Danny selling them a new crossover for their speaker and explaining the benefits by showing a 1/3 octave measurement because "it's the industry standard". It's not. Time to wake up!
I agree and would like to add some more explanation, why the video is so problematic and divisive. Here is the transcript of what Danny says at the very beginning (automatic transcript by Youtube; emphasis by me):
"and i want to talk specifically about um let's let's call them divided camps in the audio industry
there's there's guys on one side that they
love music they
love talking about it they
try anything to make their system sound better and they talk about differences in cables and speaker cables power cables connectors and what differences they make and how much they enjoyed this over that and it's very subjective
there's another camp out there that's complete opposite that's
completely objective that
don't listen at all they rely on measurements if they don't measure a difference it can't be a difference"
So he contrasts the "music lovers" camp with the "non-listeners" camp here. When you hear that, it's clear that you want to assign yourself to the "music lovers" camp. It would be downright absurd to feel like you belong to the other camp. This characterization is the problem because it distracts from the real point of contention. From my point of view, such a portrayal is just plain destructive and divisive and therefore inexcusable.
With this in mind, I would clearly answer the initial question of the thread for me: No, we don't get along on such a basis.
One basis for getting along with each other would be for me:
If a person knows the measurements and objective facts, for example, that there is no measurable difference between cables, or that differences between most DACs are so small that they cannot be perceptible according to the state of the art in science
- and if the person also knows that there are psychological factors that influence one's perception
- and if the person still thinks that they hear differences and that's why they choose DAC XY and cable XY and spend a lot of money on them,
then I can accept that well and just discuss other topics with the person, e.g. headphones, room acoustics, music, politics, religion or pineapple pizza.
But what is not a basis for getting along:
- If the person without good (scientific) justification questions the state of science or objective facts and creating an alternative or "magic" reality
- When someone (media, Youtuber, dealer) tells exciting stories about magical objects because they sell better, and at the same time present them as if they have a serious background.
- When manufacturers use misleading claims to pull money out of the pockets of people who don't know any better (I'm not accusing anyone in particular here)
- If the publication of measurements is fought because it irritates the "subjective truth" and this is perceived as unpleasant
and, to name a different perspective,
- If someone overestimates the state of science and ignores uncertainties (e.g. concerning the validity of measurements of headphones or the numerous uncertainties about what good room treatment should look like) (ASR/Amir is clearly not meant here)
- when one does not let go of trying to convince certain individuals, even if they know all the arguments but have come to different conclusions for themselves (for whatever reason).