10 audiophile myths busted

[magiccarpetride]

What's interesting to me is how strong emotional response to someone's opinion on audio usually tends to be. You know, if I say "this was the best coffee I've ever had, period!" no one's gonna get up and lose their shit about that. But if I say "this is the best cartridge I've ever heard in my life!" everyone and their uncle is all of a sudden up in the arms. They wanna hunt me down and hang me on the nearest tree.

Why is that? Do you ever wonder why is it that any other pursuit of personal pleasure makes other fellow humans shrug with indifference ("it takes all sorts, I suppose..."), but the moment we declare some opinion about audio gear (or, god forbid, about some guitar player), everyone is asking for our head on a stick!

Why is it a lie if I say that such-and-such a bottle of wine tastes better than some other bottle of wine? Is it because I am not a chemist? So if I say that such-and-such phono preamp sounds better than some other phono preamp, I'm automatically a liar because I'm not a physicist?

What happened to "one person's trash is another person's treasure"? What's the reason that adage is not acceptable in the world of audio reproduction? Because we are so kind hearted and want to protect the innocent and the gullible from predatory sales slime balls? Well, audio is not the only area where sales slime balls are preying on the gullible. Purveyors of coffee, alcohol, or any other consumer goods are equally guilty of lying, or at least sugar coating the truth. But for some reason, we, the righteous ones, let that slide. But no, when it comes to audio, we can't have that! We can't have some sleazy liar take advantage of some idiot with a fat wallet. Not on my watch, nah-ha!

To me, that's just stupid. It makes no sense whatsoever. Who are we pretending to protect, and why? Why are we acting like some self-proclaimed, self-appointed priesthood responsible for saving souls? What makes us the appointed keepers of the holy truth?

I view those impulses as symptoms of a sickness, religious feverishness bordering on lunacy. I have no respect for such 'healers'. Music is the realm of enjoyment, relaxation, feeling-good moments. Why let some frustrated maniacal fundamentalists spoil the enjoyment?

So I say fcuk the guy who enjoys torturing others by riding in on a high horse and 'mansplaining' to everyone all the audio lies they've been subjected to. To that person I say "get a life!".

I wanna spend my time on Yehova's green earth enjoying those fabulous performances that are captured for posterity on various physical, magnetic and optical media. And whatever is going to enhance those listening moments, I'm going to embrace it without any artificially inseminated guilt trips.

As you can see, I'm a subjectivist. I have repeatedly experienced that the exact same song, played on the exact same equipment, one day sounds so divine that it brings the waterworks, then some other day sounds lifeless and dull. Everything else remaining the same, Occam's Razor compels me to conclude that it's all a head trip.

Listening to music is a complex endeavour. Cannot be reduced to some measurable parameters that crude instruments can detect. It's the same as food -- a sophisticated chemistry lab cannot possibly analyze two different meals and declare one tastier than the other. If anyone attempts to do that, we would call them 'quacks', right? So why is it then that when it comes to listening to music, such 'quacks' are all of a sudden authorities on the subject? It's just pure untrammelled bullsh!t.

[Firebottle]

Nice one Alex, I'm with you all the way.

[Macca]

I've never tried it but I bet if you go on a coffee forum or a wine forum and start telling them what the best is then you'll probably get an argument. In fact I'd bet on it.

I think we all pass through three phases with any hobby

When we first get seriously into it we are evangelical.

That wears off and we try to use what experience we have to help the new people make good choices.

Finally we realise we are just shovelling shit against the tide and leave them to it.

Is there a hobby that doesn't apply to?

[magiccarpetride]

I've never tried it but I bet if you go on a coffee forum or a wine forum and start telling them what the best is then you'll probably get an argument. In fact I'd bet on it.

I think we all pass through three phases with any hobby

When we first get seriously into it we are evangelical.

That wears off and we try to use what experience we have to help the new people make good choices.

Finally we realise we are just shovelling shit against the tide and leave them to it.

Is there a hobby that doesn't apply to?

True. But it is very unlikely someone on some other forum would use hard science as the argument against someone's choice. Like, if I say I prefer the way medium roast tastes to the way dark roast tastes, it would be hard to say that lab measurements clearly point to the fact that there is no difference in the way these two roasts taste, or that science claims that dark roast tastes better.

In the world of audiophilia, a lot of the self-proclaimed 'preachers' tend to hide behind what they claim is hard scientific facts. Some even like to dazzle the unwased masses with mathematics. Bunch of losers...

[Macca]

True. But it is very unlikely someone on some other forum would use hard science as the argument against someone's choice. Like, if I say I prefer the way medium roast tastes to the way dark roast tastes, it would be hard to say that lab measurements clearly point to the fact that there is no difference in the way these two roasts taste, or that science claims that dark roast tastes better.

..

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure they do chemical tests on wine so I doubt coffee gets excluded. Maybe someone knows?

And isn't 'Food Science' I thing? seem to remember you could do a degree in that at a Polytechnic.

[magiccarpetride]

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure they do chemical tests on wine so I doubt coffee gets excluded. Maybe someone knows?

And isn't 'Food Science' I thing? seem to remember you could do a degree in that at a Polytechnic.

Oh sure, no doubt, but it is much harder to call someone a loser for preferring some particular coffee roast by pointing at some chemical lab test results. But in the world of audio, people try to denigrate someone's preferences based on some mathematical equation, which is moronic.

[Macca]

Oh sure, no doubt, but it is much harder to call someone a loser for preferring some particular coffee roast by pointing at some chemical lab test results. But in the world of audio, people try to denigrate someone's preferences based on some mathematical equation, which is moronic.

I agree.

But more likely the science gets brought in because someone says ' I prefer the ABC because it uses 'X' technology making it sound better'. And then someone says, 'No, that's just marketing bullshit, X tech does nothing' and then goes on to show why with graphs and so forth.

If they'd just left it at 'I prefer the ABC' then no-one would care.

I'm sure there is bullshit in the world of wine and coffee too, but Audio has a distinct combination of bullshit and technology, I think that's what does it.

[Marco]

Hi Alex,

Good thread

In the world of audiophilia, a lot of the self-proclaimed 'preachers' tend to hide behind what they claim is hard scientific facts. Some even like to dazzle the unwased masses with mathematics. Bunch of losers...

Lol... We are in full agreement! It's also one of the worst of my bête noire. Consider though, that those you're referring to are doing it simply to appease their own sensibilities, and thus make themselves feel better, not necessarily because they think that you're completely wrong...

The fact is [and experience bears this out], many objectivists can't handle (subjective) opinions being expressed in audio that defy their 'scientific teaching', or what logic 'established wisdom' apparently dictates, so far better simply to pooh-pooh it, than entertain the notion that what's being stated might be right, and that conversely what science (physics) apparently states is true, might be wrong - or more likely in many of these instances, not telling the whole story!

We've been here before. It's a classic case of cognitive dissonance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Essentially, many objectivists can't handle the mental discomfort of considering that their scientific belief system is fallible, and with it, exposing to scrutiny, and possibly proving as fallacy, what they've always automatically accepted as fact, so worry not, it's THEIR problem, not yours!!

Marco.

[Marco]

Sure, but that's not what Alex was saying. I stand by everything I've just written, based on the main premise of his opening post. He dislikes the arrogant and blinkered mentality (as outlined) of the people he's referring to, as do I, and that can apply to ANY subject, coffee, hi-fi or whatever - simples!

Marco.

[Sherwood]

This simply sidesteps the basic issue - that coffee is simply a matter of preference whereas hi-fi has a clearly defined objective. Whether or not the currently accepted scientific measurement techniques are valid isn't the point. The point is that accuracy isn't a matter of personal preference.

Surely the cd vs vinyl debate suggests that it is. If you cannot reliably measure accuracy on a cardinal scale then accuracy is not an objective parameter!

Geoff