Audiophile or Skeptic?

[Karen Molinares]

Gene and Hugo touched on some important issues in their last video: The State of the Audio Industry.

Audioholics has long been home to healthy skepticism in audio and home theater. As a consumer advocate our Pro Reviews have been a trusted guide for unbiased information on electronics for over 15 years. But too much over-skepticism can lead to what we call "gadgetization" of audio; it's belief that pretty good, is good enough. They say "good" is the enemy of "great". Here's why you might be missing out on a great system because skeptical voices let you settle for good.

Read: Can you be an Audiophile... and a Skeptic?

Let us know what you are and why in the comments below.

 

[3db]

I just read thru the article and being an audioholic, I think scepticism is very much needed to try and steer audio into the direction towards honesty. As an example...I'm having an argument on another forum about micro flutter (never heard the term before in my life and I've had turntables since I was 17 yrs old) and how a stylus dragging across the surface of a record will induce minute changes in speed that only golden ear audiophiles pick up. The basis for this person's argument are advertising glossies and so called white papers from manufacturers such as KAB that build solid reputable turntable components. Much like the Dolby example, the pseudo engineering/scientific words are thrown into the case in hopes to legitimize the argument. It may fool the layman but not a person who's background is in engineering. I'll throw Yamaha's middle foot in their upper tier models of the RXA chassis to reduce physical vibration of the chassis to help clean up the electrical signals being amplified as another example. (I really like Yamaha quality btw) Really? And then the plethora of pseudo science and engineering terms meant to baffle the uninitiated to support an argument loosely based on science. I find the practice of pseudo science/engineering term despicable and dishonest. Skepticism is our only ally against the half truths being propagated in the audio industry. It must remain healthy or mediocrity will prevail.

I think the term scepticism is not an appropriate term for a person owning a cheap TV display and soundbar and claiming that to be on par or better than a dedicated home theater system . In my books, its called rationalizing for being cheap, wanting convenience, or for not making great audio/video playback a high priority. I'm falling into this category loosely for refusing to buy a new networked receiver and a new updated display to replace my non networked pre hdmi avr and my 32" CRT. Both are working flawlessly. I'm being cheap because its good enough for me as my secondary system. Although the black levels of that old CRT will blow away the black levels of any plasma/LCD you care to throw at it, the fact that its not hi def makes the picture subpar despite its astounding black levels. I believe that skeptism based on rationalizing cost, convenience factor, or one's life priorities affects only those people who have a dog in that race, not those who want a better quality in audio/video reproduction.

 

[Swerd]

Well said 3db, I agree.

Although I'm not an engineer, I believe any good engineer or scientist has to learn in practice the differences between insufficient, good enough, and overkill. These differences aren't always immediately obvious. More is not always better.

The best example I can think of is the frequently asked question of "how much amp or receiver power do I need?" When I was younger and poorer, I used to believe that "enough power to drive the speakers adequately based on their known sensitivity" was good enough. Now, I believe that "enough power so that your amp never ever clips while driving your speakers" is good enough. That took me from 70 wpc to 200 wpc.

Another example is TV screen resolution. The simple answer has it that more resolution is always better. Once people understood that perceived visual resolution varied with the size of the screen and the viewing distance, the answer was that 720p or 1080i was good enough in most cases. If you get 1080p for a decent price, that's fine, but paying a lot extra for greater resolution is likely to be overkill.

 

[TLS Guy]

I absolutely agree that we are at a crossroads now and things in my view are going from bad to desperate.

This whole saga has a huge number of roots and tentacles that started 20 to 30 years ago.

The chickens are now coming home to roost. It is no exaggeration to say that the this is now threatening the very survival of a key part of western civilization.

Gene, I will finish the article I promised you, but as I think about all that has happened and has happened, it might need to go into parts. There have been events in the last couple of years that are very disturbing to someone who has now watched and been involved in this for sixty years.

 

[lsiberian]

I absolutely agree that we are at a crossroads now and things in my view are going from bad to desperate.

This whole saga has a huge number of roots and tentacles that started 20 to 30 years ago.

The chickens are now coming home to roost. It is no exaggeration to say that the this is now threatening the very survival of a key part of western civilization.

Gene, I will finish the article I promised you, but as I think about all that has happened and has happened, it might need to go into parts. There have been events in the last couple of years that are very disturbing to someone who has now watched and been involved in this for sixty years.

Let's be honest there are certain parts of western civilization that need to die.

 

[TLS Guy]

Let's be honest there are certain parts of western civilization that need to die.

Please be specific.

There was an article in the Telegraph yesterday about rewriting Shakespeare to make his plays politically correct! Heaven help us.

 

[lsiberian]

Please be specific.

There was an article in the Telegraph yesterday about rewriting Shakespeare to make his plays politically correct! Heaven help us.

Sounds like social media ploy to me.

I'm glad to see the factory mindset going away(working the line all day with no creativity). We need to go back to a more artisan approach to life. Industrialism is great for a lot of things, but I prefer a more personal regional touch to food, music, art, inventing.

 

[TLS Guy]

Sounds like social media ploy to me.

I'm glad to see the factory mindset going away(working the line all day with no creativity). We need to go back to a more artisan approach to life. Industrialism is great for a lot of things, but I prefer a more personal regional touch to food, music, art, inventing.

Apart from art, that was not what I had in mind.

 

[fbov]

Of course one can be both an audiophile and a skeptic, as they reside in very different realms.

Skepticism is a tool for evaluating the world around us; it's the foundation of the Scientific Method that all theories are subject to continual confirmation, and updating when the data support it. Proof is never fully concrete, as one can never accept a null hypothesis, only reject it with known confidence.

Audiophilia is literally love of sound, a human emotional experience unique to each of us; no matter how we try to share our experience, that specific experience only resides inside us. That makes it off-limits for sketicism, as there is no objective basis for sharing the personal experience (outside of some spiritual/religious beliefs). That's one reason for all the flowery language in audio reviews; our vocabulary doesn't convey emotions easily, so we use metaphors that resonate appropriately within us without knowing how others will perceive it.

The real question is when do we allow our rational sketicism to affect our love of music? For me, the answer is to separate the experience from the details. I can enjoy a good song on an AM radio. There may be more to enjoy, more details available to my senses when listening through better equipment, more dynamics, more visceral sensations, but the best equipment can't create that enjoyment if it's not there in the first place.

What I think you're really getting at in the article is the trap-of-self-doubt that skepticism presents to the listener; instead of listening to music, you start listening to "performance" in the sense of the playback equipment, not the program it's playing. Your skepticism that your rig is as good as you think makes you listen for faults, and we humans will always find faults if we try hard enough. The trick is to remember why you're there.

There's a place for critical listening, for seeking faults, focusing on any tiny thing wrong, when that's the goal. However, all things have a place, and not everything has to be a test. Some things in our life can be pure enjoyment. But it's up to us to allow ourselves to do so.

HAve fun,
Frank

 

[Otto von Heidelberg]

"Audioholics" is a conjured up word, intended to include the widest possible interpretation and variety of status and opinions. That is clear because upon joining up, you are not required to remember a 100 page protocol of RULES which makes you officially an "Audioholic". So in actual fact, there is no such THING, but perhaps there is a whole Universe of THINGS which might be described by such as word. If a person goes into a shop and spends $95,000 on a pair of speakers and then $150,000 on things which enable him to listen to those speakers, does that make him an Audiophile or Audioholic? Would he then QUALIFY to consider himself a card carrying party member? Who says? Is there a trial period which might in the event of dis-satisfaction, render him no longer an Audiophile officially? The answer is no. This is a loose term much like the word "Shoppers" or "Motorists" subject to as many interpretations as there are human beings engaged in this conversation. Whether you are "skeptical" or easily persuaded, is a state of mind which in all practical purposes, is a useless WORD, because again, it describes a variety of intellectual approaches (or otherwise) which may or may not have ANY connection to HEARING SOUND with some measure of experience and expertise. If you never played or heard an electric guitar, with any significant experience, a $200,000 audio playback system isn't going to make a big difference to a $200 system. This also applies to listening to Peking Opera by the way, or The Berlin Philharmonic. On that note, if you were totally unaware of "Authentic" performance practice, then listening to Karajan's Handel's Messiah and comparing it to Sir John Elliot Gardiner's interpretation, would be totally wasted on your newly bought $200,000 set-up, because you would not know what you are listening for in "the difference".
So, Audiophile/Audioholic is about as ubiquitous as breakfast cereal or peanut butter, some like it crunchy others don't. My point is this, unless you have spent the large part or 2 decades or so learning the Viola, there is NO POINT in thinking you know something about what Hi-Fi IS, when you suddenly hear "Harold in Italy" played on Paganini's own instrument.
Technology described as "Hi-Fi" should, represent in the highest form, that particular sound of an instrument or body of instruments, that is, actually what they SOUND LIKE in a natural accoustic-space. Starting with "engineers" who record with multiple microphones and "balance control" knobs, you'd think that unless THEY get it right, the music would not fly. Then you have the tweakers at the DAC and Amplifier Universe (the designers) who literally re-write the natural accoustics to conform with their notion of what is "proper" and "correct." If you have not sat in the middle and played in an orchestra for years, how do you know exactly what Mahler's "Titan" Symphony sounds like?
Audioholicism and Skepticism is alive and well, no doubt. However it's better to search out the REAL THING.
O.

 

[shadyJ]

Referring to Gene and Hugo's discussion, personally I am not worried about the state of audio or where it is headed. The science of audio is just like any other science; it is a growing body of knowledge. As time goes on, more and more will be understood about the field which should improve some things. The process is, of course, gradual. There will be fads, but like all fads they will come and go. Hi-fidelity audio may never be as popular as it once was, but as long as there are those who love music and want a full presentation of it, there will always be an audiophile culture and all the virtues and faults that come with it.

Gene and Hugo rips on Atmos, but one thing about Atmos which I think will be here to stay is the idea of object oriented sound-tracks. That is on the right track, although I agree that many aspect of the Atmos presentation is ridiculous ('atmos-enabled' speakers!). As for people for whom Atmos is too complex, well, for many of those people even properly setting up a two channel system would elude them. They were the type who could not program a VCR, and they were hopeless to begin with. Yeah, they may constitute a bulk of the consumers, but I wouldn't want to slow down progress waiting for Joe the Plumber to catch up.

 

[ATLAudio]

I’d like to think I’m skeptical about everything, especially a hobby I truly enjoy like home audio, but let’s face it; the 300 lb gorilla we are talking about here is price. Carl Sagan once said extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you’re selling me on a cheap 10$ idea (like bi-wiring with normal OFC stranded lamp zip) that might improve my experience I might try it without batting an eye. What’s ten bucks? If you’re claiming that your $10,000 Ethernet cable is going to improve my home audio experience, then I’m going to need as much information as possible before I commit to that investment. I’ll want measurements, and I’ll want to know the science, and I’ll also want to demo them.

I have no problem being a trendsetter or spending any amount of money that’s in my budget to spend for any particular piece of gear. I’m fortunate enough in my life that I could probably spend $10,000 on my audio system, however that’s not to say that I wouldn’t feel any different between being ripped off out of $10,000 compared to $10.

I had a 720p TV just about when they first hit the shelves. A 40” Sony, and it was literally a prized possession. 1080p was on the horizon at the time, and I didn’t care. I knew the science, and at my viewing distance it wouldn’t provide me any advantage. I also knew that larger TVs were going to be coming out cheaper soon, and I DID want that. However, when it came time to upgrade almost all TVs of the size I wanted were 1080p, and not to mention cheaper than what I paid for the 720p 40” Sony four years prior! Price won the day, so my skeptic bar was lowered.


Ps. In case you were wondering, I do bi-wire my towers. I thought there was a very minor difference, but I attribute this to using a run of wire as opposed to the free metal jumpers you get with speaker purchase. In any case, the price was cheap enough that I didn’t care much about it outside an AB comparison. Before you ask, I have read the literature on it, and understand that the science is meager at best. In my case, I bought a 100’ spool instead of a 50’ spool of monoprice for an extra 8-10 bucks. Again, price won the day.

 

[Bromo]

I am stealing this quote. I find it to be true for all art: "Art deserves to be appreciated as a personal transaction between you and the artist. It does not deserve to be consumed as though you’re reaching your hand into a bowl of potato chips."

I do think the extreme skepticism is a product of our age, and by adhering to it too strongly, we close off avenues that can enrich our lives. I think that even if there was NO snake oil in audio, the general lay of the land of where people get their information, is so laden with it, I think it encourages people to close themselves off.

But when introducing people to high end sound, a common refrain has always been "I don't think I could hear the difference, my hearing isn't that good." and given the shadow of how our internal biases are arrayed (and also not having a well calibrated reference - live un- or minimally- amplified music) I can see how the general public has wandered off and felt it all was a waste of money.

But also high prices of some gear, tends to have an inverse halo effect, too, potentially. The fact that there are $200,000 speakers out there, and $100,000 amplifiers, might turn people off to the possibility that something in their budget might be completely acceptable and capable of weaving that illusion of live performance (suspension of disbelief) and enrich their lives with music that they love.

But after this article I got thinking ... how can you be healthily skeptical and keep yourself from descending into defeatism and cynicism?

While I think I have a healthy level of skepticism - I have to remain open to the possibility that I could be wrong, and that the mindset I have might need adjustment. I know when I first dipped my toes into high end audio, the end result I couldn't believe was as good as it was. It still wasn't as good as a classical concert, but it sure was able to weave a convincing illusion. And I have to accept that I might make a conclusion that something is "good/effective" that on further analysis might not be - I risk wasting some time and money. I can accept that, too, so long as the general trend is towards trying to allow myself to suspend disbelief and feel like "I am there."

 

[highfigh]

I understand people who want something because of its price- some like to impress their friends and when most of their friends are at the same level of income/wealth, the money will definitely flow. However, I refuse to believe many of the claims put forth by many manufacturers and sales reps. That said, let's get this out of the way- the vast majority of A/V sales reps are only pushing boxes and filing reports. Few of them actually know what they're talking about and even fewer want to know. I asked the branch manager of a local distributorship about security cameras and he told me that he avoids dealing with them as much as possible. When asked about some details, many just shrug and blather on about something totally unrelated.

When electronics company manufacturers trot out their "tech-guys", it's sometimes useful but the sad fact is that reps used to be salespeople in a store and they sold more than the others, not because they know more. Sometimes, they move up the food chain to tech support and then, it gets ugly. Some can be trained, many can't.

I read that Noel Lee's son was quoted as saying "My father created a solution to a problem that didn't exist" when asked about Monster Cables' success. I was talking with someone I have known from being in the local Audio business for almost 40 years and while we were discussing this topic, he said that when Richard Kimble was in their store, the owner asked how he got started in selling high-end cables. His response? "Because people will pay a lot of money for them". AudioQuest sells cables with batteries on an open loop, supposedly to "bias the dielectric and minimize or eliminate cable break-in". Can someone please tell me that this is valid? I refuse to believe that a 6' HDMI cable is worth $1500 or a 2m pair of audio interconnects with 6 batteries is worth $6900.

What about Cardas? I was watching some videos on YouTube and he said that he came from the phone company & that nobody knows more about cables and testing them. His site has "Golden Cuboids", which are blocks of Myrtlewood. Someone in the advertising department thinks it's America's most beautiful wood. Meh. They're made to Golden Ratio dimensions. Fortunately, nothing is written about any claims to improve audio or video quality. They also sell chunks of Douglas Fir with V-grooves. I assume they're for suspending cables above the floor and I wonder if the nautilus that's laser engraved helps the sound.

One thing that I think is forgotten- we're REproducing music. There's a big difference between that and the sound that occurred when it was recorded. First, many instruments radiate sound from the front, back, sides, top & bottom. Second, the room where it wsa recorded is often very large. If it's a concert hall, it was designed for specific acoustical properties WRT reverberation rate, not just capacity and to provide a place for the performers to sit or stand. Our rooms aren't that large, nor are they treated in the same way. Add the fact that our speakers don't radiate in the same way and it's not looking good, for total accuracy. However, we need to look at the path taken by the sound energy, the equipment used to record it, our electronic equipment and speakers as the opposite of the original. The list of items & characteristics that are dissimilar to the original process is often 100% of the system, and certainly the room. The fact that the sound we hear approaches realism is absolutely amazing.

Then, we get to the words that are used to describe the sounds made by the equipment. Ugh! 'Chocolatey midrange'? I have read that. 'Syrupy'? Amplifiers that are said to provide better pace and timing than others? The pace of the performance isn't going to be changed by an amplifier and minute changes in the signal will make it sound like the musicians have never played together before? (Room Setup video from Rocky mountain Audio Fest, on YouTube, watched last night).

To paraphrase, "Talking about sound is like dancing about architecture".

I won't sell equipment or cabling that doesn't provide a benefit over another, just because I'll make more money. OTOH, I'm not in the high-end market. I would hate to be on the other end of the sale, only to find out that what I was told is BS.

I'm skeptical of a lot of what I read and hear from people, but I'm not so closed-minded that I refuse to believe some of it. People find it hard to be objective, even when using test instruments. Our minds also trick us into "hearing" things the way we do. It makes us hear what it wants, regardless of whether it's real, or not. Specs don't tell the whole story and neither does the sound. Something can sound great and spec very poorly and vise versa.

Doesn't stop us, though. I would like to see more honest advertising & descriptions and for the manufacturers to deal with reality, for once.

 

[Bromo]

"What about Cardas? I was watching some videos on YouTube and he said that he came from the phone company & that nobody knows more about cables and testing them. His site has "Golden Cuboids", which are blocks of Myrtlewood. Someone in the advertising department thinks it's America's most beautiful wood. Meh. They're made to Golden Ratio dimensions. Fortunately, nothing is written about any claims to improve audio or video quality. They also sell chunks of Douglas Fir with V-grooves. I assume they're for suspending cables above the floor and I wonder if the nautilus that's laser engraved helps the sound."

I have dealt with Cardas outside of audio, professionally. He is quite definitely NOT a snake oil salesman, and doesn't seem to sugarcoat what he's found and how he's found it (much of it empirical with careful observation). I can respect that, especially since he's been very forthright and honest with me. They just try their best to minimize vibration in their cables, and pay careful attention to the metallurgy, connector design and other "boring" aspects of good engineering mostly. I am sure they mark up quite a lot like everyone else, but so what? Their audio cables are luxury products like a lot of high end audio. (Incidentally I have both bought and made my own cables for my system)

And I never "got" the Myrtlewood blocks, but when I used them (they were cheap enough when I bought them - something like $5/ea - that I did a "sure what the heck" buy) it seemed to bypass the rubber feet on the component it was used on. Whether you prefer a rubber interface, or a hard interface, I'll leave up to you - I didn't notice much of a difference. I have no opinion, but my speculation is it is supposed to play around with how vibration comes into and leaves the gear as all aftermarket footers are supposed to do. Given the nonresonant properties of shaped designed with the golden ratio, perhaps they were trying to make a dense nonresonant block? I dunno, so I speculate.

Incidentally one of his claims to fame is making cables used as part of some Agilent (Now Keysight) test equipment to measure very low voltages (like microvolts - a lot harder than you think) - and he was the only one to be able to figure out how to construct a test probe so that the probe itself does not interfere with and swamp out the measurement, and sells cables and wire into that industry in addition to the solders, wires, and components he sells to audio companies. He also makes some very low microphonics microphone cables that are used in some studios. (We used him as a consultant for some tricky soldering for an RF problem - he is quite knowledgeable about solders, and methods of joining cables together with minimal impact to a signal).

My point is, that I find it helpful to keep your mind open. Sometimes if something doesn't make sense, it might simply be that it was found empirically to be true and the mechanism isn't fully understood. It is too easy to dismiss something because you don't understand it and assume someone is trying to rip you off (extreme skepticism?)

And there are a lot of honest people out there, along side the snake oil. The trick is telling the difference.

 

[ATLAudio]

Here's my $0.02 on speaker wire.

All you need for premium sound for just about any home situation is stranded 10-12 awg OFC.

That said...

Most exotic speaker wires DO look really nice, and ARE very well made, and for the MOST part the manufactures of exotic wire market on these attributes alone. Sure, they might dabble in sound quality improvement, but not much.

The biggest exception is Audioquest. They have gadgets and gizmos on their cables and make claims that are absolute poppycock. They claim sonic improvements first, and might give their quality aspects brief lip service at best. It was a hard sell on the science for DBS on speaker wire, now they slap that thing on all their digital cables, even digital.

That said, AQ does make cables that are well made, and look good like the rest, so if you're honest with yourself and that's all you need, you'll be ok with them I suppose.

 

[John Sully]

I became a skeptic a long time ago, but that doesn't mean that I don't suffer from a love of sound and music. I've been spending more on first hi-fi and then home theater equipment since the mid 1970's.

I do however remember the first time I became a dyed in the wool skeptic. I was auditioning various arm/cartridge combinations in 1981 or 1982 and walked into an audio salon in Santa Monica to listen to some well regarded combinations. The proprietor insisted that I listen to these new cables from Monster (the default hookup, as it always was in those days was medium gauge, 16 or 14, zip cord) because it would make a huge difference in the sound. Damned it I could hear it. I could hear the differences between cartridge/tonearm combos really easily, not wires. BTW, I ended up getting a Sony PS-X500 table with a mid-line Grado cartridge. I was really looking for a combo which would handle the horrible pre-warped off center pressings of the day and those Sony BioTracer arms really did the trick and helped minimize skipping due to excessive levels in my dorm room

Since I first got into this hobby I have always looked for good value because I do not have unlimited funds. I also learned early on that one should spend most heavily on transducers. These days the only transducers most people have are their speakers and that is where you should spend your money. I currently have $4100 in my speakers/sub and it sounds pretty damn good. My AVR is $800 and it sounds pretty damn good when attached to my speakers.

One point Gene makes in his video that I agree with is to avoid snake oil. He then goes on to recommend HDTracks which is, well, snake oil. Many of the tracks available there (and this is knock on the labels, not HDTracks) are just upsampled CD tracks. When their albums cost 50% more than a CD from Amazon, I ended up figuring out that if I just bought CD's from Amazon and ripping them to ALAC (I have an iPod which I use in the car) I could buy 50% more music, and isn't this what it is really all about, music?

 

[ATLAudio]

One point Gene makes in his video that I agree with is to avoid snake oil. He then goes on to recommend HDTracks which is, well, snake oil. Many of the tracks available there (and this is knock on the labels, not HDTracks) are just upsampled CD tracks. When their albums cost 50% more than a CD from Amazon, I ended up figuring out that if I just bought CD's from Amazon and ripping them to ALAC (I have an iPod which I use in the car) I could buy 50% more music, and isn't this what it is really all about, music?

This is a good point. Generally when Gene says it's snake oil you can bet the farm it's snake oil, but Audioholics isn't always consistent with their logic. I'm yet to see any measured reason to spend thousands and thousands on a turntable, but they post them all the time. Or several thousand dollars on an amplifier that has the same specs as one a fraction of the price, but they review and recommend them frequently. Also to a lesser extent speakers...

Again, I can afford gear far more expensive than what I have, but I do not want to be ripped off.

 

[3db]

This is a good point. Generally when Gene says it's snake oil you can bet the farm it's snake oil, but Audioholics isn't always consistent with their logic. I'm yet to see any measured reason to spend thousands and thousands on a turntable, but they post them all the time. Or several thousand dollars on an amplifier that has the same specs as one a fraction of the price, but they review and recommend them frequently. Also to a lesser extent speakers...

Again, I can afford gear far more expensive than what I have, but I do not want to be ripped off.

I see no problem with Audioholics reviewing higher end equipment. Just because it may be out of someone's budget shouldn't exclude it from being reviewed. It could be that even the specs between the cheaper and the higher end equipment comes close which is often the case. The shrinking rate of return is personal and person dependent. Once you get into that high league however, performance is not the only aspect. There is also aesthetics to consider, exclucivity that people are longing for, perhaps warranty such in Bryston's case. Many reasons. I think its good that Audioholics scopes their review all over the map instead of just great budget gear.

 

[ATLAudio]

I see no problem with Audioholics reviewing higher end equipment. Just because it may be out of someone's budget shouldn't exclude it from being reviewed. It could be that even the specs between the cheaper and the higher end equipment comes close which is often the case. The shrinking rate of return is personal and person dependent. Once you get into that high league however, performance is not the only aspect. There is also aesthetics to consider, exclucivity that people are longing for, perhaps warranty such in Bryston's case. Many reasons. I think its good that Audioholics scopes their review all over the map instead of just great budget gear.

"Just because it may be out of someone's budget shouldn't exclude it from being reviewed."

This is begging the question. I am saying a. the more expensive, the more data and evidence for sonic improvements I'll want to see. b. As for me, I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford most of the products, but I don't want to be ripped off.

That said, if you're shopping for exclusivity, which is basically like saying you want the Rolex version of an audio component. That's fine, but let the review and the company marketing reflect that.