Skip to main content

Topic: Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed? (Read 29743 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
I believe the audiophile hobby has
significantly changed
in the past few decades.
.
Today an audiophile who claims
wires sound best 8” off the floor,
and sells four 8” wire lifts for $40,
may not have his unusual claim
questioned by any audiophiles!
.
There seems to be an unwritten rule
of the “Fantasy Audiophile” group:
- ‘I won’t question your claims
if you won’t question mine,
because we share the same basic belief':
--- Every thing makes a difference,
because that’s what I hear,
and I couldn’t be wrong.
.
Fantasy Audiophiles are annoyed by Objective Audiophiles
who do listening experiments and report that audible differences
among audio components are more difficult to hear than they
had expected, unless the two components play music
at different volumes.
.
Tests annoy Fantasy Audiophiles (FA’s) for three reasons:
.
(1) The results contradict FA beliefs about audio
.
(2) FA’s often invest a lot of money in
expensive audio components, and feel their
purchase decisions are being second-guessed.
.
(2) For FA purchases, the new component was
rarely auditioned at home playing music
at the same volume as the “old” component,
under blind conditions,  as done for the audio tests . 

Objective Audiophiles and Fantasy Audiophiles
have different methods for evaluating electronic
components and wires:
.
- Fantasy Audiophiles don’t care if the brand names are
visible, and the components play music at different volumes
.
- Objective Audiophiles hide brand names and compare
components playing music at the same volume.
.
I believe these different audition methodologies
will have different results, regardless of the participants
involved:  With brand names visible, and no volume-matching,
I believe Objective Audiophiles would usually “hear differences” too.
... That has been my experience as an Objective Audiophile since
the mid-1980's (and a Fantasy Audiophile for almost two decades
before that)
.
Fantasy Audiophiles report almost all
electronic components and wires sound different,
while Objective Audiophiles report they usually
can’t hear differences among electronic components
and wires playing music at the same volume. 
.
Both groups agree that all speakers sound different.
.
What’s changed in the past decade is the ease
of “debating” invisible, and sometimes anonymous
audiophiles,  online:
.
On websites where Fantasy Audiophiles flock,
character attacks on Objective Audiophiles are “tolerated”.
.
On websites where Objective Audiophiles flock,
character attacks on Fantasy Audiophiles are “tolerated”.

There is one big difference between Fantasy Audiophiles
and Objective Audiophiles:
.
- Objective Audiophiles make very modest claims
about their own listening skills, and are willing to demonstrate
their skills in front of witnesses … while Fantasy Audiophiles
make extraordinary claims about their listening skills,
but refuse to demonstrate their claims in any “test”
in front of witnesses.
.
Based on the typical claims of extraordinary listening skills,
that are never demonstrated to witnesses, I came up with
a descriptive name for this group of audiophiles:
“Fantasy Audiophiles”
(one can never know if the claimed listening skills
are a fact, or just imagined).
.
I’m not trying to insult any audiophiles by dividing the
hobby into two groups, and naming those groups,
but I feel Fantasy Audiophiles and Objective Audiophiles
are accurate names.
.
In the “good old days” of audio, prior to CDs,
being an “audiophile” mainly meant you collected
and enjoyed listening to records
.
There were no on-line anonymous “debates”
over audio components. 
.
Do you think the “good old days” (pre-1980)
of audio were better?

  • Axon
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #1
Dude... word wrap is your friend.

I’m not trying to insult any audiophiles by dividing the hobby into two groups, and naming those groups, but I feel Fantasy Audiophiles and Objective Audiophiles are accurate names.

Riiiiiight.

The acronym FA is heavily used as it is. I prefer the term "Beltist".

You're taking a real black-and-white stand on this issue, which I don't think matches reality. JA (and many other audiophiles) disagree pretty strongly with Beltists. Most people leaning towards the subjective persuasion on this issue who are vocal about it are fairly convinced that they are the objective thinkers, not us. Everybody prefers to believe that science is on their side and not on the side of their opponent's.

The behavior which you believe represents a change over the last couple of decades could also be thought of as a natural progression for what has always been the dominant worldview: People looking for better and better sound will go to extraordinary lengths as the technological advances start to diminish in magnitude. Relying on psychoacoustic principles and statistical evidence to influence one's decisions is, in the grand scheme of things, nonintuitive. If you stick any random person off the street or any audiophile from the 1950s in a modern hi-fi store, once that person gets over the culture shock, they're going to behave just like any other audiophile.

Strictly speaking, the use of blind listening tests is just as "objective" as relying entirely on measurements.

  • DVDdoug
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #2
Quote
I believe the audiophile hobby has  significantly changed in the past few decades.
Yeah, in the vinyl/analog days there were bigger differences between different pieces equipment and there was really something to talk about or read/write about.  Now, the only real difference is speakers (or headphones), and there's not much else for "objective audiophiles" to talk about. 

And, the hobby was more interesting because good sound was rare and harder to obtain!  I remember when I was a kid (late 60's or early 70's) and I heard a good "hi-fi" system for the first time .  I said, "Wow!  Bass and trebble at the same time!  We mostly listened to AM radio and TV sound was lousy from a mono 4" speaker.  Now, everybody's heard good sound, and they can have good sound if they want it...  An iPod with average earbuds has better sound than we had in our house.  TVs come with better sound, cars come with better sound, etc. 

I could never afford the real high-end stuff, but I was always upgrading or wanting to upgrade.  Now, I've got a CD player (and a DVD player and a home theater receiver) and I don't feel need to constantly upgrade.  (I did recently re-build my speakers and add a subwoofer.)

And, I used to read Stereo Review.  As I recall, they were fairly objective.  I don't remember if they did blind tests, but they did make measurements.  If they told you that one cartridge was "brighter" than another, they could back it up with a frequency response graph.  Now, I'm just not that interested in reading about the "latest & greatest" new thing, when I know I wouldn't hear any difference. 


  • carpman
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #3
Assuming for a moment that Richard Greene's two groups are valid, here's my take on what's going on with these kind of threads:

The real problem is that people think they need a reason / rational justification to feel good.
You can look in the mirror one day and think "god, I'm ugly". You can look in the same mirror the next day and think "I look pretty good". Your face hasn't changed and nor has the mirror, but how you feel (and thus how you feel about yourself) has.

So don't underestimate the benefit of feeling good (or underestimate a person's desire to defend such a feeling).

Your "fantasy audiophiles" are not actually audiophiles at all, that's simply the vehicle for them making purchases that make them feel good (they buy audio gear to feel good, not because it makes an audible difference).

The reason they have to believe that the cable makes a difference is that they are worried that someone will challenge their right to feel good (i.e. "why did you buy that?"). So they require a justification and then get into all sorts of trouble. After a while you can end up habitually requiring such a justification, especially if you are often required to justify your purchases. This then develops into a shortcut; i.e. it becomes more convenient to just believe your justification (afterall it's easier to defend something you believe is valid). If, however such people were honest and just said "it makes me feel good to spend money on x, y and z, and sure it's not rational, but it makes me feel good and that makes sense to me", then there's no argument. In fact that's a pretty rational reason for spending money (and in fact it's the real reason why most of us spend money on non-essential purchases, and it's also the reason why adverts are aimed at and talk to our non-rational "feelings" and not our rational intellect).

Furthermore, the more people are pressured to justify such purchases the more they are likely to defend them (and such battles are generally fought on rational ground - because people like to sound sensible and seem reasonable), but really what is being said is "stop pissing all over my feel-good".

Your so-called "objective audiophiles" are truly interested in sound (this doesn't make them better or special, they just have a different interest). Their primary goal is to understand what makes a difference to sound quality. Understanding this probably makes them feel good.

The two groups have almost nothing in common, only the requirement to justify a purchase gives the illusion that one group has something in common with the other (and it riles the other group because they are truly interested in audible differences and thus they focus on the "fantasy audiophile's" justification, but realise that it makes no sense and so want to make that clear, because explaining why that makes no sense makes the "objective audiophile" feel good).

In short, the two groups buy audio gear, but for profoundly different reasons, that's all.

So when you think about "fantasy audiophiles" imagine that instead of hi-fi equipment they're buying roses; then we'd have no need for these "them (whoever they are) versus us (whoever "we" are) debates.

Andy yes, word wrap is indeed your friend.
It's very confusing;
I keep thinking
People are writing
Really
Bad
Poems.

C.
PC = TAK + LossyWAV  ::  Portable = Opus (130)

Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #4
Richard Greene, thanks for an entertaining post. 

The short lines made it seem like poetry.  Once is enough.

Some people may be offended by the "fantasy audiophiles" label but I think it fits a lot of people posting on audio forums.  I didn't agree with everything  you said but some of your characterizations were very telling.

Some comments:

FAs are looking for ways to spend money; OAs are trying to spend a minimal amount of money as effectively as possible.  OAs are delivering an implicit message to FAs: you wasted your money and that's not smart.

FAs are entertained by discovering differences.  No differences, no fun.  OAs threaten to take the fun out of things for FAs.

When an FA stops hearing differences, he has to leave the herd.

Was the golden age any better?  There was far less gold involved.



Bill



  • Soap
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #5
/me loves carpman
Creature of habit.

  • MLXXX
  • [*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #6
Both groups agree that all speakers sound different.

This perhaps is an area where hydrogenaudio can help to a degree, in assessing the merits of emerging loudspeaker technologies, and even identifying value for money.  It's what audiophile magazines ought to be able to be relied on to do.

If I want to buy a new set of speakers, it seems I will need to go to the showroom of a retailer that provides a listening room and [level matched?] switching between speakers, and listen to a test CD of my choosing.  I will be relying on the retailer to have a representative stock of good quality speakers.

  • cliveb
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #7
There is no doubt that many Fantasy Audiophiles (FAs) do genuinely hear differences between two nominally identical soundfields. And like all audiophiles, they seek a scientific explanation for this. The key factor here is that FAs severely limit themselves regarding which branches of science they consider when seeking an explanation. They steadfastly ignore the huge bulk of psychological research that proves beyond reasonable doubt that pre-existing biases will change ones perceptions - ie. expectation is self-fulfilling. These findings provide a perfectly sensible explanation for the differences that FAs hear.

But it seems that FAs in general consider that being susceptible to these factors is some kind of character flaw, and therefore refuse to accept it applies to them. So all they can then do is start inventing crazy quack "science" to try and explain what they hear. And having persuaded themselves that these quack theories are reasonable, they open themselves up into believing all manner of other daft ideas.

Objective Audiophiles (OAs) also hear differences in nominally identical soundfields (when they are doing sighted comparisons). The well-known psychological factors apply equally to them. The difference is that OAs are happy to accept these factors, and don't go looking for other reasons.

  • rpp3po
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #8
The short lines made it seem like poetry.


Yes, until you read that it is not. Then
it just hurts all senses. How
about fantasy typography vs. objective
typography
?
.
Objective typography says
that 60-72 characters per line deliver
optimum legibility for continuous text.
.
Too long lines may get tiring - you
can shorten and match them to your
personal preference by
adjusting window sizes - but these
short wraps are just total
screwball.
.
I'm refusing to
read Richard Greene's
posts for a while now because
of that.
  • Last Edit: 24 October, 2009, 11:56:34 AM by rpp3po

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #9
If I want to buy a new set of speakers, it seems I will need to go to the showroom of a retailer that provides a listening room and [level matched?] switching between speakers, and listen to a test CD of my choosing.  I will be relying on the retailer to have a representative stock of good quality speakers.

That would certainly help, but keep in mind that unlike an amplifier or cd player, the loudspeaker interacts with the room (and objects in it) to produce the soundfield. Unless the showroom has a Harman style shuffler (extremely doubtful), your comparisons will be between those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms.
Imperfect...but the most practical.

cheers,

AJ

p.s. the primary difference between an audiophile and a person in good mental health is:
A person in good mental health listens to music via their stereo, i.e. the stereo equipment is a means for listening to the music.
Whereas an audiophile listens to their stereo via the music i.e. the music is a necessity for listening to the stereo equipment.

Loudspeaker manufacturer

Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #10
If I want to buy a new set of speakers, it seems I will need to go to the showroom of a retailer that provides a listening room and [level matched?] switching between speakers, and listen to a test CD of my choosing.  I will be relying on the retailer to have a representative stock of good quality speakers.

That would certainly help, but keep in mind that unlike an amplifier or cd player, the loudspeaker interacts with the room (and objects in it) to produce the soundfield. Unless the showroom has a Harman style shuffler (extremely doubtful), your comparisons will be between those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms.
Imperfect...but the most practical.

cheers,

AJ

p.s. the primary difference between an audiophile and a person in good mental health is:
A person in good mental health listens to music via their stereo, i.e. the stereo equipment is a means for listening to the music.
Whereas an audiophile listens to their stereo via the music i.e. the music is a necessity for listening to the stereo equipment.


you say "unless the showroom has a Harmon shuffler." How would a Harmon shuffler change the fact that "your comparisons will be between those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms.?"

Seems to me the Harmon shuffler would only make for quicker switching and will not change the fact that the comparisons will be between "those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms." That is true of the situation at the HK facility.

  • MLXXX
  • [*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #11
That would certainly help, but keep in mind that unlike an amplifier or cd player, the loudspeaker interacts with the room (and objects in it) to produce the soundfield. Unless the showroom has a Harman style shuffler (extremely doubtful), your comparisons will be between those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms.
Imperfect...but the most practical.
I would not remain seated while listening.  I'd move around the listening room to some extent.  Yes, the comparisons would be "imperfect", but hopefully adequate to help get a "practical" impression of broad differences in the sound emanating from the various speakers. 

P.S.
I am not sure a "fantasy" audiophile should be contrasted with a person "in good mental health".  A person can be eccentric, or unwilling to submit some of their beliefs to practical measurement or verification, but that does necessarily imply the person is not in a state of good mental health.  The person may perhaps be poorly informed, opinionated, and/or lack show little respect for (or understanding of) scientific method.

Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #12
Of course the hobby has changed, it has turned decadent. Audio is no longer selling to real people, it's either audiophiles selling to other audiophiles, or occasionally selling expensive bling to what's left of the rich list who want 'the best'. Most of the latter are either not buying because their investment portfolio is 1/100th the size it was 18 months ago, or consider B&O to be 'the best' and are not buying high-end audio any more.

So, in the main, the audio industry is now a bunch of audiophiles selling audiophile products to a bunch of audiophiles. Unless there is a new generation of audiophiles to replace them, that means an ever-decreasing number of consumers, even if they were in their 20s, because people leave a hobby for myriad reasons. And there is no new generation of audiophiles; they are typically late-model boomers and older, which ultimately means audiophiles are dying off as well as leaving the pool of consumers.

The end result is those audio manufacturers, magazines and retailers trying to survive will try anything to keep consumers as consumers. It's going to be a tough call convincing that pool of audiophiles last year's amplifier is completely undermined by this year's model (because in reality such fundamental changes stopped happening about 30-40 years ago), so the accent is placed on the supporting cast, in the hope that the audiophile who isn't likely to buy a new pair of loudspeakers for another five years or an amp this side of 2020 can be enticed back into the stores to buy a cable, table or power conditioner that will 'transform the sound' of their existing equipment. To help that happen, manufacturers will make increasingly wild claims about their products (and make increasingly wild products) in these categories, magazines and retailers pass off these wild claims as fact... and the audiophile buyers will soak this up at face value in the hope that the equipment really does sound better.

There must come a time when those on the selling side of things discover that - as they can't sell to new people anymore and those they sell to today are taking EVERYTHING at face value - it's better to jump on board the loony train than watch it rattle on past and take what's left of your customers with it. You could legitimately point the finger at any one of the members of this declining business as being the root cause of the shift away from sanity, but all are equally complicit.
  • Last Edit: 26 October, 2009, 04:40:34 AM by Gag Halfrunt

Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #13
I liked your post and think audio companies are also selling highly styled audio gear, which may have nothing to do with the sound but is a reason for some people to buy high-end components.

I'm sorry I offended any audiophiles here who did not like reading the short sentences in the original post that started this thread.  I find it easier to type and read narrow columns (as in newspapers) and type a newsletter in that style.  Without the ability to set up two columns and use justified type, the result here was only roughly like a newspaper column, but I thought it was easy to read.  It was for me, because I have poor vision.   

A Moderator wrote me an e-mail with a harsh tone, saying: "Please stop inserting hard line breaks in your posts and stop using periods between paragraphs.  If you cannot conform to a standard posting style please go elsewhere.  If you continue to post in this fashion you may find that your posting privileges will be curtailed."

That e-mail seems rude in response to what was only an attempt to make my long-winded posts easier to read (why would I expend extra effort typing that way if I thought it reduced readability?).

I've got to scratch my head and wonder why audiophiles can be so rude to each other on-line for no reason ... which I guess WAS the subject of my post.  At Audio Asylum, my Objective Audio post would typically be attacked with two to six Fantasy Audiophile character attack responses -- the attackers were never banned, but this Objective Audiophile finally was (after over six years of posting).  After six years I finally asked the one question that even I had been afraid to ask: On their Critic's Corner Forum (sort of a Stereophile Forum) I asked a series of questions about the qualifications for audio component reviewers in the high-end magazines.  These writers influence many purchase decisions of expensive gear.  The Forum Moderator soon asked me not to post in that forum again!  But there was good news too -- he didn't attack my typing style.

I apologize in advance if my post includes too many paragraphs, or has some other 'format error' that offends someone. 







  • JustJoe
  • [*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #14
If I want to buy a new set of speakers, it seems I will need to go to the showroom of a retailer that provides a listening room and [level matched?] switching between speakers, and listen to a test CD of my choosing.  I will be relying on the retailer to have a representative stock of good quality speakers.

That would certainly help, but keep in mind that unlike an amplifier or cd player, the loudspeaker interacts with the room (and objects in it) to produce the soundfield. Unless the showroom has a Harman style shuffler (extremely doubtful), your comparisons will be between those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms.
Imperfect...but the most practical.

cheers,

AJ

p.s. the primary difference between an audiophile and a person in good mental health is:
A person in good mental health listens to music via their stereo, i.e. the stereo equipment is a means for listening to the music.
Whereas an audiophile listens to their stereo via the music i.e. the music is a necessity for listening to the stereo equipment.


Love the PS line! So true. The fantasy audiophiles are in love with hardware for its own sake.
Just Joe

  • krabapple
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #15
I've got to scratch my head and wonder why audiophiles can be so rude to each other on-line for no reason ... which I guess WAS the subject of my post.  At Audio Asylum, my Objective Audio post would typically be attacked with two to six Fantasy Audiophile character attack responses -- the attackers were never banned, but this Objective Audiophile finally was (after over six years of posting).  After six years I finally asked the one question that even I had been afraid to ask: On their Critic's Corner Forum (sort of a Stereophile Forum) I asked a series of questions about the qualifications for audio component reviewers in the high-end magazines.  These writers influence many purchase decisions of expensive gear.  The Forum Moderator soon asked me not to post in that forum again!  But there was good news too -- he didn't attack my typing style.



FYI your banning from Critic's Corner on AA has made the audiofool news -- that smug windbag Art Dudley writes about it in his column in the current Stereophile

Fair and balanced it ain't.





  • Axon
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #16
OT: Most browsers nowadays have really good zoom features; have you gave them a shot? Just hit ctrl + a few times. (and ctrl 0 to reset).

  • Woodinville
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #17
Observer bias.
Everyone has that problem.
Even those who don't.
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston

  • 2Bdecided
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #18
p.s. the primary difference between an audiophile and a person in good mental health is:
A person in good mental health listens to music via their stereo, i.e. the stereo equipment is a means for listening to the music.
Whereas an audiophile listens to their stereo via the music i.e. the music is a necessity for listening to the stereo equipment.
That's not necessarily true. I'm certainly not a fantasy audiophile, but I get a kick out of good recordings, and/or stylised recordings (e.g. something that sounds so 1960s or 1980s, not just because of the music, but because of the way it was recorded and the technology that was available at the time), played back on something good enough to hear the quality of the recording.

This is above and beyond and separate from the enjoyment of the music.

Let's be honest - if you enjoy "modern" music, you've got to get over the sound quality and listen to it on your car stereo or kitchen radio or whatever. Most if it is going to be very disappointing on a decent stereo (or even/especially, IMO, on a decent mp3 player with decent headphones!).

Whereas I can listen to an "audiophile" (in the good sense) recording of something that's not musically interesting to me, and appreciate how you can hear the singer, instruments, and recording location really well. And I can listen to something from the 1960s which may or may not be to my taste, and may be the "best" that could be achieved back then (e.g. something from Abbey Road Studio 2 on a good day), or the worst (early Rolling Stones!) and actually enjoy the sound of the thing for what it reveals about the era the recording was made in.*

I'm not a snob about how I hear it - if it's been transferred properly, then vinyl, CD or Spotify is just fine - the "sound" of the recording will be there.

(But I'm a rare non-fantasy audiophile obsessive kind of person when it comes to audio - not unique though I think!)

Cheers,
David.

* - and don't get me started about what you can hear about where and how 1930s recordings were made just by listening to them. You know when you hear the vocal come to the front of the orchestra and the whole sound balance change that there was some guy dressed in a white coat (the kind of look people have in medical labs today!) turning one of three huge dials on what looks like power-station control equipment just to mix the feeds from 2-3 microphones onto the disc in real time live recording.

  • rpp3po
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #19
In my opinion these are great times for audiophiles! Compare 2009 to 1969 and realize what gorgeous fidelity you can buy on a budget nowadays! The iPod in your pocket carries a week worth of music and its quality beats 99% of the equipment you could buy for any amount of money 40 years ago (I just heard the wolves howling in pain in audiophile wonderland). We got such beautiful things as Westone and Shure IEMs for the roads and affordable HD 595s for our homes. High quality DACs are commodities, amps also - money can be focused onto speakers and actually buying beautiful records. Optimization work can be focused onto placement and room correction. High fidelity was never as affordable as it is today!

And fuck the loudness war! Hundreds of excellent records still get released each year. Hundreds of lossless out-of-print "audiophile" masterings are just mouse clicks away waiting to be downloaded "for free" (don't wag your fingers - 1. you probably do not know what you are missing out on and 2. how much I spend for records on the other side). I really almost could not imagine better times!

The rest is just your usual elitist personality disorder bullshit. Neither character nor taste scale proportionally with the inflow of money, to great regret of those affected. But that's not limited to audio and never has been, but there are shitloads of very expensive but laughable art, furniture, home entertainment systems with abysmal user interfaces, architecture, fashion, jewelry, and even cheese waiting to raise your eyebrows.


That e-mail seems rude in response to what was only an attempt to make my long-winded posts easier to read (why would I expend extra effort typing that way if I thought it reduced readability?).

I never wanted to allege mean intentions. It just looks as if you hadn't put much thought wether your concept of readability is really universal. Why not just use floating wraps and let everybody decide themselves by adjusting window width and/or font size? That's all.
  • Last Edit: 26 October, 2009, 07:20:58 PM by rpp3po

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #20
you say "unless the showroom has a Harmon shuffler." How would a Harmon shuffler change the fact that "your comparisons will be between those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms.?"

Seems to me the Harmon shuffler would only make for quicker switching and will not change the fact that the comparisons will be between "those speakers in those positions interacting in those rooms." That is true of the situation at the HK facility.

Do yourself a favor. Look up what a Harman shuffler is, what it does and for what reasons. Then compare it to "the showroom of a retailer that provides a listening room and [level matched?] switching between speakers"(objects).
Try to figure this out on your own.
When you can't, come back and ask questions. I'll be here to help you Scotty.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #21
I would not remain seated while listening.  I'd move around the listening room to some extent.
When evaluating stereophonic loudspeakers with your favorite cd's?
We must have very different criteria and demands from loudspeakers you and I.

I am not sure a "fantasy" audiophile should be contrasted with a person "in good mental health"
I am.

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #22
Observer bias.
Everyone has that problem.
Even those who don't.

I read your post and found it to be quite biased. But I'm not sure if that is conscious or subconscious.

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • Woodinville
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #23
I would not remain seated while listening.  I'd move around the listening room to some extent.
When evaluating stereophonic loudspeakers with your favorite cd's?
We must have very different criteria and demands from loudspeakers you and I.

I am not sure a "fantasy" audiophile should be contrasted with a person "in good mental health"
I am.

cheers,

AJ


Well, one must certainly worry a bit about the folk who put little strips of shiny foil on their wires and use various goos on the outside of equipment in order to field their morphs, or morph their fields, or something like that.

I think the term "beltists" is a bit too personal, but still descriptive.
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston

  • Woodinville
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Fantasy Audiophiles vs. Objective Audiophiles: Has the hobby changed?
Reply #24
Observer bias.
Everyone has that problem.
Even those who don't.

I read your post and found it to be quite biased. But I'm not sure if that is conscious or subconscious.

cheers,

AJ


Ambiguity
It deflects one's reasoning
So what did you mean?
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston