Skip to main content
Topic: Treating new members like... (Read 5601 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #50
Unlike you I have no significant problem with different approaches. So I know that as a pure distribution (playback) format RedBook standard (16/44.1) is OK and that is a fact I do not dismiss.  But as I wrote before, there are quite common scenarios even for the end user where he could benefit from having 24 bit record. That is a difference between us. Not religion here, sorry.

Edit: If we are picky, it would be better to write "some scenarios". The discussion took place in another thread before so I do not wanna do it here now.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #51
Unlike you I have no significant problem with different approaches. So I know that as a pure distribution (playback) format RedBook standard (16/44.1) is OK and that is a fact I do not dismiss.  But as I wrote before, there are quite common scenarios even for the end user where he could benefit from having 24 bit record. That is a difference between us. Not religion here, sorry.

Edit: If we are picky, it would be better to write "some scenarios". The discussion took place in another thread before so I do not wanna start it here now.

And precisely as before, you cannot actually tell us what these "quite common scenarios" are, you just allude to their supposed existence.

This is not a question of different approaches or opinions, this is a question of verifiable fact. And you're trying to argue against it, with no evidence whatsoever.

If you're actually talking about remixing or applying effects, that still doesn't justify 24bit as a distribution format. As long as the processing is done with higher precision, using 16bit sources is perfectly fine.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #52
I talked about them in the other thread, but they were dismissed, not discussed. Not good to repeat them again here.

Edit: Of course using 16 bit source is perfectly fine, especially concerning audibility. But when doing some processing (including resampling or simple effects or even volume changes) which could be in simple form done even on end-user level, the results will be (digitally) better with 24 bit sources, not talking about the neccessity of dithering which disappears in 24 bit. Still: 16/44.1 (RedBook) is OK and I do not want to argue against CD in any way - I have learned things about it, even here.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #53
@KozmoNaut @jumpingjackflash5 Terms of service number 5 talks about keeping threads "on topic" (although i am not innocent in there, as a recent question about foobar and wasapi ended in a talk about discussing coding terminology).

Yet, as we are discussing how to approach controversial topics, let's take your proposed first-hand example:

The community has had previous talks about this 24-bit vs. 16-bit Audio listening test, Succesful ABX of 24/96 vs. 16/44.1, and so far seems that the bitdepth alone is not a factor (there are other factors in those threads).

We try to keep on facts rather than "just in case" scenarios. Whereas no one is limited to choose their preferences, the wording and the suitability is of importance. Like I said in my first post, this is not intended to be a chat, but a scientific discussion, so oppinions or preferences don't add much to the information and are not seen as a good thing. Said that, it is perfectly acceptable to say things like: "i have enough disk space so i don't even compress to lossless" or "i've bought that expensive device because I have other components of that brand". They are simply of no value here.

The problem starts when audible benefits are given to the preference which are not substantiated by evidence. And evidence here is provided from trustable sources or from personal ABX tests.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #54
For example, I continually see ad hominem attacks against other forum members, and I'm talking about veterans who should know better who attack not just newbs but also other veterans. They seem to enjoy being abusive, condescending, and as you just put it, "jerks". There is a very simple word for what they are: bullies. There's absolutely no reason an adult, professionally run forum like ours should put up with this behavior yet we have no explicit TOS which forbids such personal attacks, other than a vague, poorly defined rule that we must converse in an "acceptable" fashion, which can be interpreted differently depending on what one deems acceptable.
Firstly it can be fun teasing such people when they get something a bit wrong. Secondly, if you were to stop posts from such people then what is currently a pretty low posting rate may drop below what is viable for a functioning forum. What seems to matter is consistency. Some forums can work fairly well with a bit of rough and tumble but they tend not to be the overly serious forums.

Treating audiophiles with contempt is a reasonable thing to do if you want them to go away. They are unlikely to respond positively to a reasoned scientific view given what it takes to believe in things audiophile. Unfortunately this will encourage people to come here and wind people up. What proportion of people with opening posts enthusing about audiophile nonsense are genuinely interested in what the regulars here have to say? My guess is not many.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #55
Edit: Of course using 16 bit source is perfectly fine, especially concerning audibility. But when doing some processing (including resampling or simple effects or even volume changes) which could be in simple form done even on end-user level, the results will be (digitally) better with 24 bit sources, not talking about the neccessity of dithering which disappears in 24 bit.

Did you not read what I just wrote?

"If you're actually talking about remixing or applying effects, that still doesn't justify 24bit as a distribution format. As long as the processing is done with higher precision, using 16bit sources is perfectly fine."

Perfectly fine, as in completely audibly indistinguishable.

This is exactly my point, and why I don't think this discussion is completely off-topic. It concerns willingness to accept when one is wrong concerning a subject that has been tirelessly researched and tested.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #56
I know that e.g. repeated craving for high sample rates could be unpleasant to experienced members, but there is always a way to tell it in such a way that the others will understand.
You can even buy 32 bit files if you have such cravings (which seem to be based on emotions, not facts), but as soon as you start making claims about sound quality you should be prepared to provide supporting evidence. It's that simple.

As I've mentioned before, this is the opposite of many audiophile places where everyone lives in his own little bubble and there are threads and even postings within the same threads that are completely contradictory, completely nonsensical, based on pure ignorance ... but are still celebrated by others. When the same tweak, that is actually useless, results in a bass boost for one group of people and a treble boost for the next one then you know it's BS. People hear what they want to hear, and if they spent a lot of money they want to hear an improvement - so they do.

See, these people do not care if there actually are audible differences. Many just seem to seek acknowledgment of their purchases, seek attention by showing off their purchases and publishing their "knowledge" based on biased opinion and flawed comparisons, seek others who agree with their opinions. If you try to (they have various defenses set up) burst their bubble you get silenced at best.

Here it's the other way around.
"I hear it when I see it."

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #57
I know that here it is different and that is why I am on this forum even if not being treated kindly sometimes.

I also know that on some other forums the approach "I have paid XXX USD it must be better" or "this SW audio player has much much better sound colorization and spacing" prevails and I am not a big fan of those.

I do not crave for high sample rates because I respect physics and agree to the findings of the Nyquist-Shannon theorem. I know also that human hearing dynamic range is below the "capacity" of a RedBook format. But I still get the benefit of 24 bit digital audio format to the end user.

In this sense the problem is simple to me.





Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #58
I do not crave for high sample rates because I respect physics and agree to the findings of the Nyquist-Shannon theorem. I know also that human hearing dynamic range is below the "capacity" of a RedBook format. But I still get the benefit of 24 bit digital audio format to the end user.

But you don't "respect" the physics regarding signal/noise ratios? So what exactly is the benefit of 24bit digital audio to the end user?

Please spell it out in detail, and don't leave anything out, to avoid misunderstanding. Because you have continued to harp on about 24bit audio as a distribution format being beneficial to the end user, but you have provided absolutely zero actual reasons for why you believe this.

If I may be so blunt, it is time to put up or shut up.

I'm beginning to feel that this is simply a case of you not wanting to admit that you're completely wrong.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #59
But I still get the benefit of 24 bit digital audio format to the end user.
Yep and as a unchangeable true believer, you should be "welcomed with a more friendly and helpful attitude" here at HA, since that has proven over time, again and again to be far more effective results wise, than "rude and snide".
Sure.
Loudspeaker manufacturer


Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #61
Certain people are just incredibly toxic. Too toxic to maintain a discussion.
Modify profile - Buddies/Ignore List - Edit Ignore List. That's all I will say about that.
"I hear it when I see it."

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #62
@xnor : I am confused now. Isn't this specific thread about not doing what you have just done? I think @jumpingjackflash5 has behaved accordingly moving the discussion to the correct thread and in that thread the post is reasonable (debatable, but reasonable). Where is the "Toxicity"?

Also, why do you suggest using the Ignore List?  Should moderators use the Ignore List so that the forum runs unmoderated? (because the mods don't see the noise). Should normal users use ignore list to just see the comments they want to see?
Back then on the glory days of IRC or IM, ignoring could make sense to avoid being attacked, but i'm not really seeing the use-case on a forum, especially on threads (PMs are a different issue).


Edit: @ajinfla : I don't understand your comment. Is that sarcasm?
We are debating how to react to these type of posts. As such, I would like you to classify your comment:
Is it helpul? Does it conduct the conversation to a good end? What is the destination of the comment, the argument, or the person?  Overall, does it meet what we are proposing here, or what we are trying to avoid?


Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #63
I wasn't talking about @jumpingjackflash5 but aj's continuing toxic behavior with just rude, bad and sarcastic remarks here and elsewhere.

Why do I suggest the ignore list? Because of this ^. I guess it's not toxic enough for the mods to do something about it. To me it is. Personally I don't care that some people are just rude, but others certainly do and that makes it incredibly disruptive.

edit: Oh good, you have noticed it too. Of course such replies are not helping, that's why he's posting them and why I suggested the ignore list.
"I hear it when I see it."

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #64
Edit: @ajinfla : I don't understand your comment. Is that sarcasm?
From me?? No never, never.
I love reading about 24bit disorder "fretting" and why controlled perceptual testing is pure folly, etc, etc. here on HA.
I think those beliefs should be welcomed with friendliness and helpfulness. Don't you?
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #65
So, ajinfla, do you want to contribute to this thread? If so, then, please, reply to the questions i asked, else we will not be able to continue.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #66
Still trying the the golden silence way of things and it seems to get better. I already wrote less as i wanted.
If i get better at it i may even have no need to post anything at all.
Thanks for your efforts.
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #67
@Wombat: That is actually part of the proposed solutions.
If an user feels that no response will be better than the response he wants to make, such user is actually helping both, the community and himself.
That is not to mean that "no response" is better than "any response". In the interest of increasing the quality and attitude of the community, we should educate ourselves to behave in a good way, and try first the constructive way or, at least, to stop the destructive way at first.
Moderation will always be needed, and any user can act as a moderator (using the relational meaning of the word) if a real moderator is not present.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #68
So, ajinfla, do you want to contribute to this thread?
Do you have me on ignore (like my friend...who somehow continues to see my posts)?
I am posting to the thread as well as others.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #69
@ajinfla : You've been busy in the More misinformation thread, with posts like this, this, this or this.

Meanwhile, you did not reply to my questions in this thread about the quality of your comments. You actually added more comments to judge (the ones i've posted above).

I am interested in what this topic has to offer to the community. I am interested in talking about the direction that we want this community to take and be proud of it. And in doing so, we will probably write some code of conduct complementary or in addition to the Terms Of Service.

It is of your interest to reply to my questions and participate in this tread in a constructive way. Else, you might find yourself violating these new Terms Of Service, and giving the moderators a founded reason to ban you from here.
The internet is big enough, so maybe this limitation will not matter to you. I just want you to realize that it can happen.


Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #70
You are a moderator?
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #71
Is it not enough reason that I am an user of this forum? Since I want to continue being such an user, I see the necessity of maintaining it a nice place to be.
You know, like picking up a paper from the floor of your building, even if it wasn't you the one that throw it.


Edit: Oh, and now that you ask it, I was offered several years ago to become a moderator. I declined it because I thought I would need to spend more time here than what I wanted right then.

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #72
I was just curious, is all. Thanks.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #73
@ajinfla You still have to reply to the questions i made.
Are your (still ongoing) comments helpful? Do they let the discussion flow in a friendly or at least educated way?
Is your usage of the words "my friend" amicable or disrespetful? In this regard, you should take notice that at least on some cultures (I bet the english culture too) calling "my friend" repetitively to someone that you don't know is offensive.


Re: Treating new members like...

Reply #74
Oh, don't worry about it. When he is using "my friend" you can be certain that it's used in a derisive way. ;)
"I hear it when I see it."

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019