Audiophile Priorities and Recent Topics


I'm increasingly fascinated by the number of threads that have been created lately by OP's who have joined over only the last 2 months with less than 30 posts that all seem related to the importance of wires and tweaks. While I'm not dismissing the notion that everything matters in hifi (including digital cable), it seems that these topics vastly overwhelm thread topics that clearly would have more influence to hifi audio sound such as discussions of the sonic characteristics of various amplifier topologies, the importance of simplifying the signal path, and identifying fantastic speaker/amplifier synergies, etc...

If some unsuspecting newbie were to stumble onto this forum they would likely come away thinking that a fuse or a piece of wire are the most important elements towards obtaining wonderful hifi sound. This is unfortunate. For example, my discovery of listening to a SET circuit years ago paired with speakers possessing a high and flat impedance greatly outshines any joy derived from identifying the finest digital cable produced by man. I'm simply questioning the hifi priorities that this forum seems to be obsessed with lately.

Is it just me?
128x128three_easy_payments
Late to this thread, so apologies if this has been mentioned, but the number of posts a member has made, or the length of time a person has been a member of Audiogon does not necessarily show whether that person is, or is not a “newbie”. It is possible that someone (like me) has been around this hobby for many years (decades!), and frequents this forum, but chooses not to comment too often. It is also possible that some folks who have been involved in this hobby for years haven’t felt compelled to ‘join’ Audiogon. I just wanted to point this out. I enjoy reading the forum, and I appreciate those members who contribute regularly (well, those who are helpful and constructive without being insulting), but usually I  pop in after someone has made a comment similar to something I’d contribute, and I don’t see the need to be repetitive, so I don’t post. Another reason I keep my comments to myself is that there are people who just seem to enjoy being argumentative. I love a good argument, but I prefer mine face to face 😉. End venting. 
Post removed 
@danager

I read somewhere that the act of pulling a record off the shelf, removing it from its sleeve, cleaning it, placing it on the turntable, clamping it down, dropping the needle on the groove and settling into the armchair is akin to making the bed before making love.

I’m not inclined to disagree.

As to the format with the most value, us vinyl types figured that would be the case all along. It just sounds better. And since few artists record in analog anymore, the LPs that are AAA (as opposed to ADA, or DDA), are becoming rarer and rarer. I can tell, without checking the liner notes, when an LP has been mastered or remastered digitally.
@tvad Thanks for lucid thoughts on this as always. If nothing else, the input on this thread over the past 4 pages validates your premise that far and away forum members are applying tweaks as tweaks - not expecting them to be the cornerstone of one’s system.

One of the more negative, and long-running aspects of the tweak threads is how they always tend to devolve into a "who is right?" argument. (Sometimes they don't devolve - they start right out of the gate guns-a-blazin’). It would be so refreshing just to simply share our experiences and allow all to absorb and consider - as opposed to taking a position to "argue". It seems years ago that Audiogon had more of a spirit of comradery. Now some posters just resort to name-calling, Youtube-linking, and use of a 12 yr-old’s codes for shaming as a method of showing dominance in a discussion. Hopefully we will see this behavior dissipate and we all take individual ownership of making this a better place by acting more friendly. This is certainly my intention.
The controversy around priorities and putting topics like cables and floating the cables on little feet etc in their proper context with corollary importance (or lack thereof) and to what degree complexity lends itself to obfuscation rather than understanding reminds me of a scandal from the 1990s that occurred in the upper echelons of cultural theory.

Alan Sokal, a professor at NYU and London’s University College, submitted an article to “Social Text”, an academic journal of postmodern cultural theory (that I also happened to read myself from time to time). His submission was meant to test the journal’s intellectual rigor, and to investigate whether "a leading North American journal of cultural studies - whose editorial collective includes such luminaries as Frederick Jameson and Andrew Ross - would publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if it sounded good and if it flattered the editors’ ideological preconceptions."

The article, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", was published in the journal’s spring/summer 1996 "Science Wars” issue. It proposed that “quantum gravity” is a social and linguistic construct. Three weeks after its publication in May 1996, Sokal revealed in the magazine “Lingua Franca” that the article was a hoax.

The “Sokal Affair” - as it came to be known - caused controversy about the scholarly merit of commentary on the physical sciences by those in the humanities; the influence of postmodern philosophy on social disciplines in general; academic ethics, including whether Sokal was wrong to deceive the editors and readers of “Social Text”; and whether “Social Text” had exercised appropriate intellectual rigor.

At that time, the journal did not practice academic peer review and it did not submit the article for outside expert review by a physicist.

Needless to say, peer review and the analytical discipline that accompanies it is nowhere near to being A Thing in audio. Is it any wonder that audiophiles rarely agree on much?