Why Is Audiophile Bashing Such A Grand Sport?

135

Comments

  • Hilbert
    Hilbert Posts: 316
    edited September 2008
    Is this possible: some people splurge on audiophile equipment (I'm thinking LSis or the equivalent) and, failing to appreciate the need for an amp, proper speaker placement, room treatment, etc, are disappointed by the result. They conclude that audiophile equipment is a scam and audiophiles are idiots.

    I have no idea if this makes sense, just tossing it out there.

    Now I'm going to listen to Monk's Music on my LSi9s :).
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dkg999
    dkg999 Posts: 5,647
    edited September 2008
    Many people do not realize that synergy in your components is very important. Buying a pair of LSi's and then powering them with a low powered, low quality receiver is not going to result in the optimal performance of the speaker. Although, some people may be perfectly happy with that setup, and they shouldn't be looked down upon for it.
    DKG999
    HT System: LSi9, LSiCx2, LSiFX, LSi7, SVS 20-39 PC+, B&K 507.s2 AVR, B&K Ref 125.2, Tripplite LCR-2400, Cambridge 650BD, Signal Cable PC/SC, BJC IC, Samsung 55" LED

    Music System: Magnepan 1.6QR, SVS SB12+, ARC pre, Parasound HCA1500 vertically bi-amped, Jolida CDP, Pro-Ject RM5.1SE TT, Pro-Ject TubeBox SE phono pre, SBT, PS Audio DLIII DAC
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Erik Tracy
    Erik Tracy Posts: 4,673
    edited September 2008
    Cuz of voodoo, blackmagic, "you must be deaf and unable to hear true audio",
    snake oil shucksters peddling stuff like:

    magic pebbles taped to your cables for the ultimate improvement!
    http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm

    magic liquid for your CDs:
    http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i...?topic=52185.0

    special one-way cables:
    http://www.usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/3429.asp

    ANY hobby/pursuit/passion needs to be approached with an open mind and a boatload of skepticism. :D

    H9: If you don't trust what you are hearing, then maybe you need to be less invested in a hobby which all the pleasure comes from listening to music.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • reeltrouble1
    reeltrouble1 Posts: 9,312
    edited September 2008
    If someone trys a tweak and feels it helps their system then they do, no need to ridicule anyone or any vendor because you cannot fathom how this might help SQ.

    Remember though, PT Barnum said it many years ago. One born every minute.

    RT1
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Erik Tracy
    Erik Tracy Posts: 4,673
    edited September 2008
    reeltrouble1 wrote: »
    If someone trys a tweak and feels it helps their system then they do, no need to ridicule anyone or any vendor because you cannot fathom how this might help SQ.

    Remember though, PT Barnum said it many years ago. One born every minute.

    RT1


    But that's precisely the point - when the reasons given are not credible, aside from the strawman argument that it is 'unfathomable' to the lowly masses.

    I'm not out to poke anyone in the eye, but I remain a skeptic with my ears open :)

    H9: If you don't trust what you are hearing, then maybe you need to be less invested in a hobby which all the pleasure comes from listening to music.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • steveinaz
    steveinaz Posts: 19,538
    edited September 2008
    Some tweaks have a sound basis in theory, and are worth a try. Others are just out there in space. If I don't see common sense reasoning for how something may be effective, I don't bother with it. Of course the other extreme of that thought process is the "bits is bits" crowd. Over-simplification of something they don't really understand in depth.

    Some people feel they need to have extreme knowledge in something before buying off on it's ability to change audio---cables are an example of this. I don't know "why" cables sound different to me, I mean I can't explain it scientifically; I just know that I'm hearing a difference. I have reasons based on theory that support what I'm hearing--and they seem feasable in a common sense sort of way, that's about it.

    I definitely prescribe to the idea of diminishing returns; and I personally feel you get there alot quicker (cheaper) than many audiophiles would agree--but hey, that's my opinion.

    Bottom line, who cares what non-audiophiles think? I mean really.
    Source: Bluesound Node 2i - Preamp/DAC: Benchmark DAC2 DX - Amp: Parasound Halo A21 - Speakers: MartinLogan Motion 60XTi - Shop Rig: Yamaha A-S501 Integrated - Shop Spkrs: Elac Debut 2.0 B5.2
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cfrizz
    cfrizz Posts: 13,415
    edited September 2008
    This makes perfect sense. And most of it comes down to a lack of adequate research. When they finally find this forum and get told they need to spend even more money on more power they tend to get mad.

    But if you want to do it right the first time around it ain't cheap!
    Hilbert wrote: »
    Is this possible: some people splurge on audiophile equipment (I'm thinking LSis or the equivalent) and, failing to appreciate the need for an amp, proper speaker placement, room treatment, etc, are disappointed by the result. They conclude that audiophile equipment is a scam and audiophiles are idiots.

    I have no idea if this makes sense, just tossing it out there.

    Now I'm going to listen to Monk's Music on my LSi9s :).
    Marantz AV-7705 PrePro, Classé 5 channel 200wpc Amp, Oppo 103 BluRay, Rotel RCD-1072 CDP, Sony XBR-49X800E TV, Polk S60 Main Speakers, Polk ES30 Center Channel, Polk S15 Surround Speakers SVS SB12-NSD x2
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DarqueKnight
    DarqueKnight Posts: 6,765
    edited September 2008
    Hilbert wrote: »
    Is this possible: some people splurge on audiophile equipment (I'm thinking LSis or the equivalent) and, failing to appreciate the need for an amp, proper speaker placement, room treatment, etc, are disappointed by the result. They conclude that audiophile equipment is a scam and audiophiles are idiots.

    I have no idea if this makes sense, just tossing it out there.
    cfrizz wrote: »
    This makes perfect sense. And most of it comes down to a lack of adequate research.

    It makes perfect sense, but some people do complete a significant amount of research. Unfortunately, there is a widely held view among some Internet "audiophile gurus" that wire and electronics don't matter much because everthing is uniformly good these days. These "gurus" say that the only significant sonic improvements will come from the areas of speakers and room acoustics. A lot of people new to the hobby keep running into that and start believing it.
    Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cfrizz
    cfrizz Posts: 13,415
    edited September 2008
    Very true DK! The yahoos over at Audioholics is a perfect example!
    DarqueKnight wrote: »
    It makes perfect sense, but some people do complete a significant amount of research. Unfortunately, there is a widely held view among some Internet "audiophile gurus" that wire and electronics don't matter much because everthing is uniformly good these days. These "gurus" say that the only significant sonic improvements will come from the areas of speakers and room acoustics. A lot of people new to the hobby keep running into that and start believing it.
    Marantz AV-7705 PrePro, Classé 5 channel 200wpc Amp, Oppo 103 BluRay, Rotel RCD-1072 CDP, Sony XBR-49X800E TV, Polk S60 Main Speakers, Polk ES30 Center Channel, Polk S15 Surround Speakers SVS SB12-NSD x2
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited September 2008
    Being an audiophile is like being a Catholic (in my case, insert any religion you like). Audiophiles believe in one truth and if you work hard to cultivate that truth into your system you will be rewarded. As an audiophile, you believe so perfectly that this truth exists despite rarely seeing any scientific proof.

    Is it crazy? To some, but A'philes see the signs, the truth trying to break through the music. For A'philes it's not blind faith at all. Audiophiles don't need science, they are smart enough to listen to what their senses tell them.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WilliamM2
    WilliamM2 Posts: 4,775
    edited September 2008
    SolidSqual wrote: »
    Being an audiophile is like being a Catholic (in my case, insert any religion you like). Audiophiles believe in one truth and if you work hard to cultivate that truth into your system you will be rewarded. As an audiophile, you believe so perfectly that this truth exists despite rarely seeing any scientific proof.

    Is it crazy? To some, but A'philes see the signs, the truth trying to break through the music. For A'philes it's not blind faith at all. Audiophiles don't need science, they are smart enough to listen to what their senses tell them.

    This is a perfect example of why audiophiles get bashed. Audio is not a religion.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Erik Tracy
    Erik Tracy Posts: 4,673
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    This is a perfect example of why audiophiles get bashed. Audio is not a religion.


    Then what is it?

    Because some claims border on 'faith' and those who question certain claims are vilified as 'unbelievers'.

    The most cited counter arguments are that certain psycho acoustic experiences are not 'measurable' (and only noticable by 'the golden ears of audiophiles)- which again puts it in pseudo-realm of 'faith'.

    H9: If you don't trust what you are hearing, then maybe you need to be less invested in a hobby which all the pleasure comes from listening to music.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Kex
    Kex Posts: 5,194
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    This is a perfect example of why audiophiles get bashed. Audio is not a religion.
    I agree, it is, IMHO (like I said before), more like appreciation of art, litterature, haute cuisine, ... Some get it, some don't, but there is truth in the appreciation, not just blind faith (no offense meant against religion of any persuasion).
    Alea jacta est!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ben62670
    ben62670 Posts: 15,969
    edited September 2008
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nD3Hhzgqkrc
    Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
    Thanks
    Ben
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • reeltrouble1
    reeltrouble1 Posts: 9,312
    edited September 2008
    I think its because people like to do it. I think they like to do it because they just need to do it. Which means its Nike's fault, cuz they just do it.

    RT1
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    This is a perfect example of why audiophiles get bashed. Audio is not a religion.

    Awww god, nevermind. I didn't say it was. Audiophiles get bashed like everyone else who dedicates their lives to something. People want to take it out of context and make it seem fanatical.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WilliamM2
    WilliamM2 Posts: 4,775
    edited September 2008
    SolidSqual wrote: »
    Awww god, nevermind. I didn't say it was. Audiophiles get bashed like everyone else who dedicates their lives to something. People want to take it out of context and make it seem fanatical.

    You sure did:
    Being an audiophile is like being a Catholic (in my case, insert any religion you like).

    I didn't take anything out of context. I didn't need to:
    Audiophiles believe in one truth and if you work hard to cultivate that truth into your system you will be rewarded. As an audiophile, you believe so perfectly that this truth exists despite rarely seeing any scientific proof.

    Is it crazy? To some, but A'philes see the signs, the truth trying to break through the music. For A'philes it's not blind faith at all. Audiophiles don't need science, they are smart enough to listen to what their senses tell them.

    Audiophiles believe in "one truth"? How much more religious can you get? I also love the complete disregard of science, even though without science, you wouldn't even have an audio system.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 19,029
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    Audiophiles believe in "one truth"?
    Maybe in your mind. I don't "believe" in jack **** when it comes to sound. I trust what hits my ears and make an observation based upon what hits my ears.

    I either know or I don't. There is no "belief". Please stop lumping all audiophiles together with what you "believe". It is simply wrong, misleading and just not true.
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    You sure did:



    I didn't take anything out of context. I didn't need to:



    Audiophiles believe in "one truth"? How much more religious can you get? I also love the complete disregard of science, even though without science, you wouldn't even have an audio system.

    All I did was draw a comparison. I didn't discount science, I was referencing the fact that science has trouble proving why some gear sounds better than others. If you want to portray me as a religious fanatic go ahead. I'm far from it. The one truth is basically the absolute sound, not to knock off the magazines name or anything.

    If anything, you're a prime example of reading what isn't there.

    Man I am laughing in my seat right now. This feels like a conversation with Candyliquor.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited September 2008
    treitz3 wrote: »
    Maybe in your mind. I don't "believe" in jack **** when it comes to sound. I trust what hits my ears and make an observation based upon what hits my ears.

    I either know or I don't. There is no "belief". Please stop lumping all audiophiles together with what you "believe". It is simply wrong, misleading and just not true.

    Whatever floats your boat. Just trying to contribute to a conversation by offering my own take. If you want to shut it down because you disagree then go ahead.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WilliamM2
    WilliamM2 Posts: 4,775
    edited September 2008
    treitz3 wrote: »
    Maybe in your mind. I don't "believe" in jack **** when it comes to sound. I trust what hits my ears and make an observation based upon what hits my ears.

    I either know or I don't. There is no "belief". Please stop lumping all audiophiles together with what you "believe". It is simply wrong, misleading and just not true.

    Re-read the post bright boy. I never said what I believe, I quoted someone elses' post. I was commenting on just his post, I lumped no one together. Try a little reading comprehension.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    Re-read the post bright boy. I never said what I believe, I quoted someone elses' post. I was commenting on just his post, I lumped no one together. Try a little reading comprehension.

    Did you just get blamed for my dumb quote being over-analyzed???
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 19,029
    edited September 2008
    Um, I was referring to Williams post. He has said many a time that we "believe" that certain components of one's system work. I was just stating that for me, there is no "belief". I either know if they work or I don't. Why would I have something in my rig if I only "believed" that it worked or not? That's ludicrous. Things only stay in my rig if I know that they work.

    Sorry if I was misleading.
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited September 2008
    treitz3 wrote: »
    Um, I was referring to Williams post. He has said many a time that we "believe" that certain components of one's system work. I was just stating that for me, there is no "belief". I either know if they work or I don't. Why would I have something in my rig if I only "believed" that it worked or not? That's ludicrous. Things only stay in my rig if I know that they work.

    Sorry if I was misleading.

    Oh wow, yeah that's a whole other meaning. By chance when you know something sounds good is it also a step towards that "one truth" or absolute sound?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 19,029
    edited September 2008
    JHC, post #78. Check it out and reread what you wrote William. My reading comprehension is fine.
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WilliamM2
    WilliamM2 Posts: 4,775
    edited September 2008
    treitz3 wrote: »
    JHC, post #78. Check it out and reread what you wrote William. My reading comprehension is fine.

    You mean this?
    Audiophiles believe in "one truth"?

    Did you notice the question mark? This means that I don't agree that all audiophiles believe in one truth. Your reading comprehension is poor.

    And you don't really "know" ****, because you are afraid to find out for sure. You completely ignore over 100 years on the study of human perception, and how it can influence what we think we, hear and see. It all hogwash to you because it conflicts with your beliefs.

    Yes, you have beliefs, we all do. No one can control the subconscious mind, maybe that's why they call it subconscious? Nah, couldn't be...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ben62670
    ben62670 Posts: 15,969
    edited September 2008
    Play nice guys. I believe some can hear a difference, and some can't. Science can't prove what people hear.
    Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
    Thanks
    Ben
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WilliamM2
    WilliamM2 Posts: 4,775
    edited September 2008
    ben62670 wrote: »
    Play nice guys. I believe some can hear a difference, and some can't. Science can't prove what people hear.

    Absolutely. Science cannot prove what people hear. But it has done an excellent job of proving what people can't hear.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ben62670
    ben62670 Posts: 15,969
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    Absolutely. Science cannot prove what people hear. But it has done an excellent job of proving what people can't hear.

    Bill I agree to disagree:) I think we have had this discussion before:D
    BTW your statement kinda contradicts itself;)
    Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
    Thanks
    Ben
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited September 2008
    WilliamM2 wrote: »
    Absolutely. Science cannot prove what people hear. But it has done an excellent job of proving what people can't hear.

    :D uhhhh, ok Beavis.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter