2. misc-audio
  3. 136079-8469

Beware the audio guru

There are a few contributors to these forums who apparently see themselves as gurus. They speak in absolutes, using words such as "always" and "never." They make pronouncements about products or techniques they’ve never heard or experienced, justifying their conclusions because contrary claims are "impossible" or "snake oil." Those who disagree are accused of being "deluded," or suffering some insurmountable bias, or attempting to further some commercial agenda. On occasion, they have taunted detractors with an appeal that they engage in a wager - one guy wanted $25,000 cash up front and an agreement drafted by lawyers. Another offered 5-to-1 odds.

I am not going to tell you who to believe. But for anyone who might be uncertain about sorting out conflicting claims here, I suggest they consider the behavior of experts in other fields. No good doctor offers a 100 percent guarantee on any treatment or surgical procedure, even if medical science suggests success. No good attorney will tell you that you have a case that positively can’t be lost, even if the law appears to be on your side. No true professional will insult you for the questions you ask, or abandon you if you seek a second opinion.

A doctor conducts his own tests. An engineer makes his own measurements. Neither will insist the burden of documentation falls upon you.

These might be details to consider as you sift through the many conflicting claims made on Audiogon. In short: Decide for yourself. Don’t let other people tell you how to think, or listen.
Ag insider logo xs@2xcleeds
trelja
3,223 posts
 
@cleeds, thank you for initiating this thread.  I agree with so very much of your sentiment.

Personally, I found the creepy stalker and his $25K challenge both ridiculous and disgusting, and lamented the several here who engaged him as giving a forum to someone utterly undeserving.

Like me Peter Aczel lived just north and west of Philadelphia.  No one could tell from the black and white of his writings in the newsletter and online that he literally suffered severe and substantial hearing loss.  By that I mean, he could not participate in typical conversation with another human being.  Peter would normally try to appear as scratching his scalp just around the ear as he formed a cup with his hand, as he asked folks to repeat themselves, and still much / most got lost. I'd like to know if anyone who interacted with him continued holding his opinion on audio or anything that involved sound as relevant.

One final thing, as some Buddhist ideas have surfaced, I want to balance this thread, and say that there are some on the other side just as wrong, bull-headed, anti-social, and foul the waters to the same degree.  Hopefully, we can respect each other, and support those who embrace certain technologies and ideas as well as those who don't
supertweak
90 posts
 
People who state things that are highly subjective are not really hoping or expecting everyone to just take thier every word as gospel truth,(or at least lets hope thats the case).Often its just as innocent as sitting on the couch with someone and hearing something and mentioning it to the other person, silently expecting a corroborative response or the opposite.The natural world, (soundwaves included) is way way more complex than our technology of measuring is,so subjective should definitely be the priority and perhaps backed up by measurements when they are sophisticated enough to concur.When dealing with electronics we are always dealing with flow of electrons and even molecules and atoms.I read a while ago the fact, that one drop of water has more molecules than the number of grains of sand on all the world's beaches combined.With unimaginably small minuteness like that, electrons molecules etc.is there anyone who actually thinks that anyone in audio has measuring devices that tell it all? A lot of very experienced designers will tell you that measurements and how something actually sounds is often nill.Or even the opposite.I think our state of the art in measuring and our understanding of it still has many miles to go in 2018.The world is a lot more complex that many people comprehend.The next time you can't hear an FM broadcast until you stand up in a certain spot or have to extend your leg up in the air and hold it, just think of that.

amg56's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
amg56
887 posts
 

Our ears (or what we perceive to hear) are our only way of determining whether we like an electronic combination with speakers. It matters not how much an item costs, or its specifications, if one does not like the sound being heard, then the equipment is not purchased.

Items and spurious addons that have appeared of late that opine to enhance what we hear is subjective and buyer beware. These are not cheap and some take significant effort to reverse.

I find that posts that flood with religious fervour of a "thing" are the worst, and I immediately am on the defensive. Interestingly, it is these posts that charge the air with two sides, the gurus and naysayers.

Human personalities are all different and how we appreciate the information we are given will fuel a positive or negative position. If we keep the conversation civil and centred, these posts will be more palatable and of interest.

whart's avatar
whart
3,037 posts
 
I took the Buddhist thing to mean humility and open-mindedness, not anti-science. To me, the true sign of an expert is someone who is willing to take account of multiple, conflicting views, reconcile them to the extent that is possible and be able to recognize that decisions and judgments are almost always made on the basis of incomplete information (whether we know it or not).  In that respect, our hobby should be a collaborative effort- the sharing of knowledge and information without ego. An ideal, given human nature, I know, but one worth striving for, in my estimation. 
duckworp's avatar
duckworp
257 posts
 
I don’t think that is true. I experimented with different speakers and headphones and am now certain that the biggest factor in hearing Yanni or Laurel is the fidelity of the device you are listening on. The result is based on frequency response. I’m betting that 99% of people would hear the same thing if they listened to the same sound reproduction device.
No, wrong; I was in a room with nine other people listening to a single source.   Five heard it one way, five the other.  And talking to others who had a shared source with simultaneous listening, they had the same result.   
More to discover