Count me in.
I'm here for the sharing, not the snobery
Just a quick note. Things around here on Audiogon have been interesting over the past couple of weeks as I've watched a number of trolls shift the tenor of the discussions.
I wanted to say that I fully support information sharing, doing things ourselves, experimentation and ways to broaden who is among us.
The idea that you are or are not an audiophile based on what you have spent, or what exclusive line of products you have purchased is not one I want to support. We should find ways to share, not exclude our passion and grow our dwindling numbers.
Building kits and systems with the younger generation is a fantastic way of getting them into STEM as well as into audio, not to mention builds light years worth of knowledge in very little time. As I've said before, our hobby was built by experimenters, tinkerers and lovers of music much more so than by lovers of spending.
I'll support inclusive, fact based discussions and those who are intellectually curious every time I can.
I wanted to say that I fully support information sharing, doing things ourselves, experimentation and ways to broaden who is among us.
The idea that you are or are not an audiophile based on what you have spent, or what exclusive line of products you have purchased is not one I want to support. We should find ways to share, not exclude our passion and grow our dwindling numbers.
Building kits and systems with the younger generation is a fantastic way of getting them into STEM as well as into audio, not to mention builds light years worth of knowledge in very little time. As I've said before, our hobby was built by experimenters, tinkerers and lovers of music much more so than by lovers of spending.
I'll support inclusive, fact based discussions and those who are intellectually curious every time I can.
94 responses Add your response
@eric_squires: "I'll support inclusive, fact based discussions and those who are intellectually curious every time I can". OK. I'm a creative person-- I have a studio art degree, have played guitar for many decades. I enjoy creative writing, photograpy and cooking. I trust my own aesthetic judgement in these endeavors and that trust extends to choosing audio gear as well. Your comments make me wonder about those of us who build systems utilizing our ears, rather than facts/measurements. Is there a place for us, here, as well ? |
Your comments make me wonder about those of us who build systems utilizing our ears, rather than facts/measurements. Absolutely!! In the end the personal experience is what makes our building and buying choices worthwhile. I have no conflict with this approach at all. What I have conflict with is attribution without backing or poorly informed. Build and buy what you like, but explanations deserve scrutiny. |
Your comments make me wonder about those of us who build systems utilizing our ears, rather than facts/measurements. Absolutely, but don’t be surprised if your not handled with kid gloves when you say how amazing a pair of Wilson Alexia’s sound with a 20w SET Moto: Read and learn how to use measurements and tests also Cheers George |
@stuartk , And, that is absolutely fine for you. The problem Stuart is that hearing is so subjective that it is difficult for anyone to relate to what someone hears especially when they do not really know what they are listening too. Measurements do not tell you what a system sounds like either and in what room? Certain issues are objective and easy to ascertain such as build quality. Sometimes there are obvious physical characteristics that affect a units performance. This is very true for tonearms as an example. Many people actually buy equipment based on what it looks like, not sounds like. I saw this over and over again when I worked selling Hi Fi. My point is relying solely on what some one hears is a mistake. Take it into consideration sure but with a grain of salt. |
The building stuff side of things always interested me. I like to know how something works and why it sounds the way it does. I have DIY’ed lots of vibration control, power conditioners, cables of all types, and more. That may be why I avoid stuff where the advertising seems to unrealistically stretch the boundaries of science. I built my first pair of “higher quality” speakers 45 years ago when I was 19 and still remember the helpfulness of the man at the lumber yard who worked with me to find the right birch plywood, the care I took in adding internal bracing and finishing the cabinets, and the knowledgeable salesman who let me into the attic storeroom of the local stereo shop to pick out a pair of Jensen 12-inch triaxial drivers......I couldn’t afford the ALNICO version unfortunately. Anyway, your point about helping the younger generation build kits and systems struck a chord and reminded me of the excitement of building that first pair of speakers that got me through college and beyond, and the helpful people that made the experience a positive one. Yes, I still have the speakers. |
Measurements do not tell you what a system sounds like either and in what room? No but they'll tell you if an amp is going to struggle or not at different frequencies to drive a certain speakers load. And it doesn't matter what room you have, it can't fix that problem. So you need to "understand and absorb" measurement's and bench tests as well. Just because you you don't understand them, do not write them off, make an effort to learn how to use them. After all every piece of equipment you have was designed using them. Cheers George |
I’m all for rational inclusivity. But many people in this hobby have an unfortunate tendency to engage in audio jihad when confronted with something that challenges what they believe to be true in their personal audio belief conjoint. Take speaker cables, for example. If I had just 1/100 of a penny for every word written about the sound (or not) of speaker cables, I would be the planet’s wealthiest human! 🤑🤑🤑 An experiment I’d love to see someone conduct is to measure the inductance, capacitance, and resistance of a specific length of a highly regarded good sounding speaker cable. Next, I’d construct a speaker cable of the same length, using different materials with identical measures of inductance, capacitance,and resistance. Then I’d turn these samples over to the audiophile press to compare against each other. I posit there would be no discernible difference in sound quality between the two cables. I personally believe that there can be audible differences, but I believe this is because an important application of inductors in active circuits is that they tend to block high-frequency signals while letting lower-frequency oscillations pass. Note that this is the opposite function of capacitors. Combining the two components in a circuit can selectively filter or generate oscillations of almost any desired frequency. Ergo, I posit I could measure and duplicate the sound of any speaker cable or interconnect currently being marketed as a good sounding wire. I do wonder why no one has done this? 😳😳😳 |
I've watched a number of trolls shift the tenor of the discussions Why don't you say what you really mean? You don't like the contributors, or you don't approve of the opinions/information? Are you saying anyone who follows their field of interest is a troll? Then I'd suggest it can be used for everyone. Surely anything that introduces new ideas and broadens the mind is a good thing. Seems a bit closed shop. |
@erik_squires Aaaaaaaaamen!!!I entered this forum to get advice and insights from those more knowledgeable. I found rather quickly it turns into insults, political comments, and name calling. Other forums are less like this and I now frequent them more often for advice or to answer a question. Sadly this forum, at times, becomes a megaphone of cacophony. Thanks Eric |
For me, one of the big benefits from reading the discussions, is when people share their first hand experiences with gear. Be that a component or a tweak. Something they tried, how they felt it worked for them and if it was worth the effort, or $$$'s to acquire it. And I agree, there has been much in the way of opinions by contributors who have never tried tweaks or listened to the gear in question. And there are a lot of strong opinions being expressed based on a belief of what they think it should do. Couldn't care less how much, or how little something costs. I do care what someone who has tried it thinks about it, and the context in which it was being used. And there is not much in the way of new ideas being introduced here. How many times have you read the question "Has anyone tried doing A to B? I think, if you do A to B, then C may be a possibility?" But I suspect that is more of a DIY thing. More often than not, there is a strong negative backlash to any approach or tweak that someone has tried. They feel this works for them and they explain what they hear. Then there are the responses. From people who have not tried it, but they know, in no uncertain terms, that its not possible. When asked if they have tried it, some variant of "I don't need to taste dog crap to know it tastes like crap" response generally pops up. Which is the opposite of being open minded. And this, there has been a lot more of lately. |
Right on Erik. Well said. Just ignore the trolls. If you read their comments they become easy to identify . After that you can now enjoy the benefits of the majority of people that support this forum. This has always been a good resource for me and I appreciate the contributions from many knowledgeable people. |
Erik Squires, I could not agree with you more. I thought I was the only one. Some of the put downs and cute remarks makes me feel perhaps you need to be a snob to be an audiophile. What would be funny would be to discover the cute guy doing the put down might be worth 1/10 the amount. I thought this group was created to encourage people to share and learn rather than troll for opportunities to put someone down. It would also be interesting to know who the dealers are. |
Agreed @erik_squires Genuine thanks to all those who share agenda-less, ego-free info. and advice. I’m a relative newbie here, and more of a lurker/learner than a poster/informer, but have benefitted greatly from some of the knowledge here. To the extent anyone cares what one relatively newly minted aspiring audiophile (not sure when the ‘aspiring’ can properly be stricken) thinks, I’ll offer the following: if someone like me can name at least five brand names of various components in connotation with your particular username without glancing at your system details, you’re trying too hard. Just my opinion. |
mijostyn "The problem Stuart is that hearing is so subjective that it is difficult for anyone to relate to what someone hears especially when they do not really know what they are listening to". Yessir-- of course! I didn't mean to imply I disagreed with this. It was the OP's use of the phrase "fact based discussions" that triggered my first post in this thread. I interpreted this as an expression of the same mind-set that insists cables cannot sound different, based on "facts". However, it would appear that I jumped the gun. I apologize to all concerned, especially erik_squires for mischaracterizing his post. There was no ill will intended! |
I disagree...I think it's extremely important to not only spend your brains out on your gear and mention your other expensive hobbies (at least one gifted listener here has described how much money he has), but to pontificate at length about how smart you are and how impeccable your taste is because you are, in fact, superior to other lesser people. Otherwise, how would they learn? |
+1K, Erik...*s* I like the 'thoughtful' threads...wading through the rancour gets tiresome. On an un- or relative related physical graffiti seen today, 12" all caps mounted on the side rails of a ped bridge: ALL FEET STAND BENEATH THE STARS ....we all need reminding of this marvelous fact....;) ...as we all 'face the music' in our own ways 'n means... ...and simple civility can be an act of a gracious mind. ✌🤞, J |
| Post removed |
I appreciate @erik_squires comment. Not sure if some responses are immaturity, "know-it-all", arrogance, or just condescending to us "lessers". A while back I posted a similar thought: dreas18 posts04-17-2021 9:08amTo the simple question @kingbr posed I prefer XLR. On a side note, this thread illustrates the best and worst of forums. While I truly respect (and I believe most do) @millercarbon and others who are far more knowledgeable, decorum might suggest another way to join in / reply. And yes, I may be inviting a host of sarcasm and hate. I've yet to meet anyone who has audio-omniscience. One reason I enjoy Hans Beekhuyzen is that while he occasionally employs mild sarcasm, he tries to educate and explain. I think we all (?) enjoy learning, reading, listening, exploring, and enjoying different aspects of audio. I continue to learn from experts and a lot of personal experience buying, A-B testing, "upgrading", etc. To me, this is all part of the enjoyment. I've got a very nice headphone system: dac connected to 2 different amps. I tested (A-B) with RCA and XLR. I'm no millercarbon but I could tell a significant improvement (BTW using 2 different balanced openback headphones and 1 IEM, all with balanced cables) with XLR over RCA and the cost wasn't that much steeper than good RCA cables. Additionally, my main stereo is all XLR balanced and I can also tell a difference. As Hans closes his YouTubes videos, "...and whatever you do, enjoy the music". :-) While not about RCA v XLR, Han's latest is a perfect e.g. of decorum, imo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqBYB6kEKec |
+1 OP I’m in an argumentative field, and it’s very tricky to have discussions where someone wants to argue for something (prove their point) while also remaining civil. As we've seen in the wider world, without trust no fact can stand and no argument can win. Trust and care for others' dignity is the one indispensable ingredient to constructive dialogue. Debates and arguments remain civil in my field when people remain intellectually and emotionally open to the idea that they’re wrong, they missed something, or there’s an entirely other way to frame or approach the question. It also helps to be as explicit as possible about what the goal sought is; that way, people are not arguing at cross purposes (i.e., for different goals). (I don’t really understand @oldhvy’s post about not needing to "prove" things. Anyone who gives or asks for reasons is engaged in proof. His issue, I suspect has to do with people aggressively or relentlessly insisting that they’re right. Which is different.) |
I think one thing that's important to get a handle on when discussing with others is objective vs. subjective. We need to give more people latitude when they make a subjective statement, as personal taste and value systems can't be argued. "I like amps with meters" - Can't be argued. "Amps with meters improve the sound because of the way they slow the photons as they cross the NP junction in the transistors" - well, that is completely arguable!! We also need to understand the difference between measurement and science. Science advances and discovers new connections. Scientists create new models to explain experience. Measurements and technicians do not. They repeat old methods to put a dot on a chart. Don't confuse measurement with experience, or cause and experience. Those two are rarely tied well enough together in our field, with certain actual scientists and organizations rare exceptions. |
Isn't "objective vs. subjective" (in the sense of 'measurable' vs. 'experienced') a false dichotomy? There certainly are (objective) ways to test or measure subjective experience. The simplest would be ABX testing, which I would think those who argue in favor of particular subjective differences ('A sounds better to me than B' or 'I can distinguish A from B even though your testing equipment cannot') would welcome. The results of such tests would be completely 'objective'. (One might dispute their validity, of course; but if a 'subjectivist' [it's a bad word, but I think here everyone knows what it means] were to claim that no test of their experience is valid, then they wouldn't really belong on a board that devotes 99% of its discussion to material 'things' like amplifiers, cables, electric current etc.) |
Desiderata Go placidly amid the noise and the haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story. Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit... Max Ehrman 1948 For the complete poem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desiderata Regards, barts |
OK, time to bring it home. Here are my feelings on eric’s "I’m here for the sharing, not the snobbery" thread. I have been on this website for 20 years, and in the last two or so there have been a couple of members join who post incessantly that are functional, verbally fluent, but otherwise unbalanced, manipulative, self absorbed and craftily nasty. I wouldn’t give a s**t and would just ignore them but their presence is on virtually every other post. One of them even went out of his way to insult Almarg until he realized how popular Al was. Until they go away this website will not be what it once was. Before you think I am some kind of pansy, I don’t mind a little or even a lot of controversy, I had absolutely no problem with geoffkait and frankly wish he was back. |
As one who has recently posted a "controversial" thread I have lurked with this discussion since, for me, is kinda like saying water is wet. Everyone says they want civility when in deed, they want total agreement with their opinion. IMO, This is one of the reasons for this posts’ popularity & mostly lack of division (and Lord knows we need that now!) So, Thanks @erik_squires for your thread. One of the problem on any forum or discussion is "facts". Everyone is interested in the "FACTS" But facts actually say nothing until their interpretation. There is where the disagreement starts. I may seem somewhat new here because I haven’t posted that much until recently. But I was pretty active here and AA since I started here in 2000. I’ve seen A’gon change formats, owners and posters. There has always been some sarcasm, banter, etc but it was mostly civil & well intentioned IMO. . And there has always been "troublesome" know it all who is totally dogmatic in his view and cannot agree to disagree. But they were a vast minority and were not encouraged. However now we have had an influx of these types recently. As in the Bible & most religions, there are commandments and personal convictions. There are some pretty hard and fast rules. But there is personal preference too. I suggest there is far more of the later than the former. When people cannot agree to disagree on these personal preferences, we will have a lack of civility. |
| Post removed |
It's easy to see the problem just looking at some of these posts. It's easy to agree to disagree on personal preference it's only when some think personal preference are commandments or universal. I can't agree to disagree on the premise that measurements and science are mutually exclusive. Science uses measurements to explain not just theorize. I assume we all know the current working theory for gravity is Einstein's Theory of Relativity but Newton's laws are sufficient to explain phenomena on Earth and get us to planets in the Solar system. Science uses those measurements all the time. We know the frequency range of human hearing, we know how the ear works, we know the physics and electrical laws and theories to build electronics. We can't know what each individual "perceives". We can use models and tests to get an idea of what "most" like but not all. Ignoring what science can do with a general dismissal "we don't know everything so we know nothing" leads to a lot of these conflicts. |
@cleeds I'm in philosophy. @artemus_5 "One of the problem on any forum or discussion is "facts". Everyone is interested in the "FACTS" But facts actually say nothing until their interpretation. There is where the disagreement starts." Excellent point. Sometimes it starts even earlier, since the question of *which* facts are relevant is an interpretive move which precedes the selection of facts. In conversations about religion this is sometimes called "proof texting" or, more generically, "cherry-picking." It's not about whether something is or is not a fact; it's about whether (as the Brits pointed out about US foreign policy a decade ago) the facts were being selected to suit the policy. @erik_squires "We need to give more people latitude when they make a subjective statement, as personal taste and value systems can't be argued." I have seen my own value systems argued against here and it has helped me. I said, at one point, that I valued a lot of clarity in the upper end. People questioned whether I liked "brightness" or "accuracy." I realized that I was not clear in my own mind about what I actually valued. So, them questioning me about my own senses and what I thought I valued helped me reconsider my own subjective "certainties." They were, it turns out, wrong. The result was that I got clearer about what I should value, instead. That was a lesson for me, both about vocabulary and fineness of sensations. That's the hard part for a lot of people -- there IS such a thing about arguing about taste, at the very least, to help someone else discover what they sense, what they call it, and how that experience should factor into a larger, composite experience. (Just watch a parent try to get a kid to enjoy a vegetable. Part of the challenge is to get them to abandon certain predilections about what food *should* taste like. They are just too narrow and their tastes need to be expanded. As an audio correlate, look at posts about how many, less expensive B&W speakers are bright; this quality helps make a fast impression, but for those who know more, it lacks some of the "sophistication" of other (better) speakers. That is about the sugar-high of brightness being taken as (subjectively) better than the air, clarity, non-fatiguing implementation of other speakers. |
