Internet/YouTube experts

[HammersRocco]

There is an interesting discussion over at Hoffman re: CD players vs Streamers, regarding sound quality. Obviously, some voices of reason have chimed in, facing the usual blowback. At some point the following post was made:

Do modern CD players sound better than Streamers?

Not wishing to enter into the 'debate' here, but this is my personal experience FWIW: I've done a lot of testing by myself & with friends on...

forums.stevehoffman.tv

I found it so telling. The mockery of at beginning of the post shows have people have internalized the various arguments re: the improbable claims. It goes on to cite the such authorities as Darko. If you follow the link to the Darko article ( click or copy it from Hoffman, as Darko has banned redirections from ASR ) you will see that comments are disallowed.

And so it goes. There is no way to challenge directly or at least take the discussion to their sites. So these "experts" keep confirming the stated biases for those that share them, and quite frankly, I don't see anything changing. Darko, Paul McGowan, just by the virtue of the number of videos they post are continuously referred to a such and cited as proof of improbable claims.

It is disheartening. Quite frankly I don't see anything else to do but to keep this site going, so those that seek a different approach can find it and refer to it. And try educate those around us that are willing to listen.

I have taken the position of calling our approach, not scientific, given the common argument that what is done around here "is not science". Not that I believe that, but maybe trying a different tack will shake people a bit. I don't call it "scientific".... I call it "realistic"! Not only to avoid the previous argument, but also to contrast with the subjective, nay imaginary nature of the audiophile argument...

All IMHO, of course

 

[Chrispy]

Marketing is what it is. Never found Hoffman interesting enough to visit much.

 

[Petrushka]

A Radio Shack trademark.

 

[HammersRocco]

A Radio Shack trademark.

hehe - but is it right to call it like that ? For their benefit? maybe they will consider it, given that for them there is no science here?

 

[HammersRocco]

Marketing is what it is. Never found Hoffman interesting enough to visit much.

That is a fair assertion - but how to get people to see that? That these people are not experts, that they are, if not salesmen, at the very least, industry advocates, which is closely related?

 

[Chrispy]

That is a fair assertion - but how to get people to see that? That these people are not experts, that they are, if not salesmen, at the very least, industry advocates, which is closely related?

That is the question isn't it? Why are such subjective sites far more popular than the scientifically/objectively oriented ones? I tend to think about it more as people wanting to belong to a club that they can rationalize somewhat with "common sense"

 

[Petrushka]

hehe - but is it right to call it like that ? For their benefit? maybe they will consider it, given that for them there is no science here?

I always thought Realistic was a lame trademark. Sort of like Adequate.

 

[Chrispy]

I always thought Realistic was a lame trademark. Sort of like Adequate.

I think you need to put it in perspective at the time Radio Shack used it, and what Radio Shack was overall....

 

[Jim Taylor]

It is disheartening. Quite frankly I don't see anything else to do but to keep this site going, so those that seek a different approach can find it and refer to it. And try educate those around us that are willing to listen.

To paraphrase Shakespeare ... we hate what we fear. ( "In time we hate that which we often fear." - Anthony and Cleopatra, Act 1)

ASR will continue to be the target of subjectivists who fear logic and science. Get used to it.

Jim

 

[Scytales]

Never found Hoffman interesting enough to visit much.

I think the very dynamic "Music Corner" is worth visiting, especially considering the number of people skilled in the art of recording, mastering and producing music of all kind of natures and genres that post on Steve Hoffman forum. Mr Hoffman is a music producer, after all, and his forum is mostly about music and producing it, even if I acknowledge that hardware topics are of the audiophile flavor.

It is not a technology or science oriented forum, although there is at least one regular poster I have identified despite his will to write under pseudonym that is very knowledgeable and have considerable experience and credentials in the industry (and by industry I mean the corporations at the heart of the inception of digital audio production workflow and optical disc technology, that is Philips and Sony).

 

[sq225917]

Reviewers are in cahoots with the brands, they cycle through product categories claiming one now out performs another so that gullible buyers purchase new gear. It's called product churn.

 

[mhardy6647]

I always thought Realistic was a lame trademark. Sort of like Adequate.

The brand name was originally "Realist" but RadiovShack ran afoul of the makers of the "Stereo Realist" camera and changed to "Realistic".

 

[Petrushka]

The brand name was originally "Realist" but RadiovShack ran afoul of the makers of the "Stereo Realist" camera and changed to "Realistic".

I’m thinking here not as a logician, but as a consumer.

The word realistic has sheep’s clothing vibes. It’s like “pious” or “statesmanlike”. When you hear someone say they are being realistic, you want to check your pockets to be sure your wallet is still there.

 

[Beershaun]

Here is a great site that scientifically compares the various available digital formats available. Seems to address the problem posed. https://magicvinyldigital.net/

 

[JaapD]

There is an interesting discussion over at Hoffman re: CD players vs Streamers, regarding sound quality. Obviously, some voices of reason have chimed in, facing the usual blowback. At some point the following post was made:

Do modern CD players sound better than Streamers?

Not wishing to enter into the 'debate' here, but this is my personal experience FWIW: I've done a lot of testing by myself & with friends on...

forums.stevehoffman.tv

I found it so telling. The mockery of at beginning of the post shows have people have internalized the various arguments re: the improbable claims. It goes on to cite the such authorities as Darko. If you follow the link to the Darko article ( click or copy it from Hoffman, as Darko has banned redirections from ASR ) you will see that comments are disallowed.

And so it goes. There is no way to challenge directly or at least take the discussion to their sites. So these "experts" keep confirming the stated biases for those that share them, and quite frankly, I don't see anything changing. Darko, Paul McGowan, just by the virtue of the number of videos they post are continuously referred to a such and cited as proof of improbable claims.

It is disheartening. Quite frankly I don't see anything else to do but to keep this site going, so those that seek a different approach can find it and refer to it. And try educate those around us that are willing to listen.

I have taken the position of calling our approach, not scientific, given the common argument that what is done around here "is not science". Not that I believe that, but maybe trying a different tack will shake people a bit. I don't call it "scientific".... I call it "realistic"! Not only to avoid the previous argument, but also to contrast with the subjective, nay imaginary nature of the audiophile argument...

All IMHO, of course

"authorities as Darko" You're joking, right? This belongs to the 'A Call For Humor' or more likely to the 'Extreme Snake Oil' thread.

Cheers!

 

[Purité Audio]

If only Hoffman would combine his hi-fi and paranormal channels then we could ask Peter Walker did he really use B&Q lawnmower cable.
Keith

 

[mhardy6647]

To paraphrase a US President of yore:
I'm an internet authority and I'm here to help.

 

[HammersRocco]

"authorities as Darko" You're joking, right? This belongs to the 'A Call For Humor' or more likely to the 'Extreme Snake Oil' thread.

Cheers!

HAHA - I forgot the quotes or something else around "authorities" to indicate the context in which the word is used (mockery! I did think it was obvious given the rest of the message).

There is a thread over at Hoffman re: <MOCKERY> how FLAC and WAV sound different </MOCKERY> and there is this member that keeps posting Paul McGowan videos as <MOCKERY> evidence </MOCKERY>

And that is the whole point of starting the thread - people are stuck in a loop of misinformation reinforcement. Sure - can ignore it, live and let live and all... however it seems wrong to just let it go. Sure we can comment here, but that is just preaching to the choir, of course. But then again, if you look a the thread, at https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/thre...n-sound-quality.1208214/page-19#post-35158298
these peeps are just not gonna see it.. EVER! - they are worried about "RAM noise"

[EDIT: this is the peep:

FLAC vs WAV - Any perceptible differences in sound quality?

RAM noise, indeed.:rolleyes: . Since the advent of "hi end" computer audio, the industry (manufactures in conjunction with established reviewing...

forums.stevehoffman.tv

would be funny if it wasn't kind of sad ]