michaelgreen,
Thanks for coming back. I have been asking about you. Hope you are feeling good now.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something that has happened countless times happened again last night. Ordinary people over for a party listening to some music easily hear things audiophiles argue endlessly don't even exist. Oh, its worse even than that- they not only easily hear but are stunned and amazed at what they hear. Its absolutely clearly obvious this is not anything they ever were expecting, not anything they can explain- and also is not anything they can deny. Because its so freaking obvious! Happens every time. Then I come on here and read one after another not only saying its impossible, but actually ridiculing people for the audacity of reporting on the existence of reality.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Okay, concrete examples. Easy demos done last night. Cable Elevators, little ceramic insulators, raise cables off the floor. There's four holding each speaker cable up off the floor. Removed them one by one while playing music. Then replaced them. Music playing the whole time. First one came out, instant the cable goes on the floor the guy in the sweet spot says, "OH! WTF!?!?!"
Yeah. Just one. One by one, sound stage just collapses. Put em back, image depth returns.
Another one? Okay.
Element CTS cables have Active Shielding, another easy demo. Unplug, plug back in. Only takes a few seconds. Tuning bullets. Same thing. These are all very easy to demo while the music is playing without interruption. This kills like I don' know how many birds with one stone. Auditory memory? Zero. Change happens real time. Double blind? What could be more double blind than you don't know? Because nobody, not me, not the listener, not one single person in the room, knows exactly when to expect to hear a change- or what change to expect, or even if there would be any change to hear at all. Heck, even I have never sat there while someone did this so even I did not know it was possible to hear just one, or that the change would happen not when the Cable Elevator was removed but when the cable went down on the floor.
We're talking real experience here people. No armchair theorizing. What real people really hear in real time playing real music in a real room.
I could go on. People who get the point will get the point. People who ridicule- ALWAYS without ever bothering to try and hear for themselves!- will continue to hate and argue.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something almost all audiophiles insist on, its like Dogma 101, you absolutely always must play the same "revealing" track over and over again. Well, I never do this. Used to. Realized pretty quickly though just how boring it is. Ask yourself, which is easier to concentrate on- something new and interesting? Or something repetitive and boring? You know the answer. Its silly even to argue. Every single person in my experience hears just fine without boring them to tears playing the same thing over and over again. Only audiophiles subject themselves to such counterproductive tedium.
What is wrong with audiophiles????
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Okay, concrete examples. Easy demos done last night. Cable Elevators, little ceramic insulators, raise cables off the floor. There's four holding each speaker cable up off the floor. Removed them one by one while playing music. Then replaced them. Music playing the whole time. First one came out, instant the cable goes on the floor the guy in the sweet spot says, "OH! WTF!?!?!"
Yeah. Just one. One by one, sound stage just collapses. Put em back, image depth returns.
Another one? Okay.
Element CTS cables have Active Shielding, another easy demo. Unplug, plug back in. Only takes a few seconds. Tuning bullets. Same thing. These are all very easy to demo while the music is playing without interruption. This kills like I don' know how many birds with one stone. Auditory memory? Zero. Change happens real time. Double blind? What could be more double blind than you don't know? Because nobody, not me, not the listener, not one single person in the room, knows exactly when to expect to hear a change- or what change to expect, or even if there would be any change to hear at all. Heck, even I have never sat there while someone did this so even I did not know it was possible to hear just one, or that the change would happen not when the Cable Elevator was removed but when the cable went down on the floor.
We're talking real experience here people. No armchair theorizing. What real people really hear in real time playing real music in a real room.
I could go on. People who get the point will get the point. People who ridicule- ALWAYS without ever bothering to try and hear for themselves!- will continue to hate and argue.
What is wrong with audiophiles?
Something almost all audiophiles insist on, its like Dogma 101, you absolutely always must play the same "revealing" track over and over again. Well, I never do this. Used to. Realized pretty quickly though just how boring it is. Ask yourself, which is easier to concentrate on- something new and interesting? Or something repetitive and boring? You know the answer. Its silly even to argue. Every single person in my experience hears just fine without boring them to tears playing the same thing over and over again. Only audiophiles subject themselves to such counterproductive tedium.
What is wrong with audiophiles????
Showing 42 responses by glupson
prof, I have been wondering for the longest time, why some song I know really well sounds much more exciting on the radio then when I play a CD. These days, it would have to be FM but I gave up on current radio programming at about the time I bought Sansui TU-717. Now, I own a pretty (to me) machine of no use. The only radio I listen to these days, and that is most of my listening time, is from the Internet and from far away place(s). It still feels like "radio". I never listen to radio while driving. I may be a minority, I know. You might have really started unraveling it for me with "element of surprise" comment. Maybe, something that will "escape" or "here now, gone in a minute" excitement. I really do not know. Speaking in audiogon terms, it cannot be "natural", "sound quality", etc. I draw a parallel to new clothes. Everybody has a different and positive feeling when wearing new clothes. It does not seem that there should be any reason for it, but it does happen.
|
yuvalg9, I have to agree with you on all those hoaxes regarding "high resolution". Nothing sounds better than a song you like played on a middle wave radio with short wave coming close second, depending on reception quality. There is something to it. It moves. Unfortunately, with decline of radio programming and barely existent middle wave in some parts of the world, DSD will have to suffice for now. I am serious. |
Are you gonna tell Caelin, "Sorry, I know you brought your new cables and all but I got friends so stuff em back in the fancy plush bag and lets all listen to Billy Joel?"Not to judge, but at the party I throw, he would forget that he brought anything with him. I am sure he is a nice guy and I even have a pair of Shunyata cables, but bringing cables to a party of any kind is a bit.... At the same time, what do you think would happen if someone brought Billy Joel to your party? Reality check. |
I can be the mediator so both are correct. Aerospace Engineering part of University of Virginia does mention that curriculum included propulsion and fluid dynamics. It is a little less clear if one would call that theoretical physics. In a sense, you do need to learn some physics for it and at some point you would be learning theories of it. Probably a lots of it. Now, would that final degree be called "theoretical physics" is slightly harder to decide and stay unbiased. Maybe dean’s office is the place to ask. http://records.ureg.virginia.edu/preview_program.php?catoid=45&poid=5589 EDIT: Maybe the wording/name of the degree has changed since 1967. Those things happen. At that time, it could have been that "theoretical physics" encompassed things that are now so subspecialized and called something else. |
"Which means..theory. Electrons are a theory. As in: ’we don’t know’."Extrapolated from Wikipedia Subatomic particle article. (It rhymes, geoffkait, it rhymes.) For whatever it is worth on a laymen audio website, a little lower on that Wikipedia page theory gets slightly more developed... "All of these have now been discovered by experiments..." |
"The two types of subatomic particles are: elementary particles...Did they forget to write the other type? |
prof, "...I can not reliably detect tones above, say, 14 kHz. This suggests my claim to be able to hear up to 20 kHz is false."I am not sure if this is the case, or it is an example you made for the discussion. In any case, you could have a dip at around 14 000 Hz and then hear 16 000, for example. It is a relatively well-known occurence but the name escapes me now. Not being able to hear 14 000 Hz at your age may suggest, but does not come even close to confirming, that you will not hear something above it. Still, I hope you just used this as an example and that your hearing at 14 000 Hz is as sharp as a knife. |
cleeds, Well, any test of any validity has to be reproducible. Which would make it into conducting another ("clone") test. Some tests are too complicated for many people to make them. Not necessarily these audio tests, but in other fields. Now, what you are saying is accounting for variables. That is the tricky part for any test/experiment that a person does in any field. With careful design and method selection, it can be reasonably achieved. If the room will influence the cable, result is worthless as the test has not been designed sufficiently well. That is one of the reasons to read methods before reading article as a whole. |
A number of recent posts are discussing/defending the fact that even casual non-audiophile visitors can be impressed by "soundstage" or similar phenomena. Does anyone even doubt that some really good system in a well-thought-out room will be noticeably better in every respect than something much less fancy? I would bet that I would be seriously impressed by soundstage and many other details, if I heard millercarbon’s system. However, the original post was a little more pointy than that. It was about those casual non-audiophile listeners being impressed by changes in cable elevator positioning. Well, that is a little harder to swallow. Maybe we should ask ourselves "what is wrong with casual non-audiophile listeners". |
How often do guests tell the host trying to impress them "what the heck are you talking about"? I am not saying that was the reason for display of awe, but some people are more polite in person than "audiophiles" are on a forum. "I've heard/seen the same thing happen at my house."You guys actually subject your guests to cable elevator challenges? Really, what is wrong with audiophiles? |