Is Audioholics Brainwashing Us?

[Rob Babcock]

I view AH like Fox News. People claim they're conservatively biased. To that I'd say perhaps so, but what of it? 95% of the regular media has a raging liberal bias and has for as long as I've been alive. If Fox slants things the other direction then it would still not be enough to counter all the liberal spin out there.

If AH goes a little overboard towards the objectivist side, what of it? There are dozens of sites devoted to audio mysticism- they're not hard to find. I find the scientific approach of Audioholics incredibly refreshing, and a nice break from the rampant pathalogical tweakism that pervades 95% of the net forums and 99% of print media.

 

[RMK!]

Brainwashing!

I view AH like Fox News. People claim they're conservatively biased. To that I'd say perhaps so, but what of it? 95% of the regular media has a raging liberal bias and has for as long as I've been alive. If Fox slants things the other direction then it would still not be enough to counter all the liberal spin out there.

If AH goes a little overboard towards the objectivist side, what of it? There are dozens of sites devoted to audio mysticism- they're not hard to find. I find the scientific approach of Audioholics incredibly refreshing, and a nice break from the rampant pathalogical tweakism that pervades 95% of the net forums and 99% of print media.

I don't see a lot of objectivity on this forum. I think strong biases are a given with a hobby or profession (some participants make their living from AV). I visit for information and opinions. It is up to me to filter this information. There are a number of forum participants who could use a cranial cleanse but for the most part, just good clean fun and the exchange of information.

 

[jaxvon]

I think it's pretty hard to be objective with a hobby like audio that is so subjective in nature. While the actual design of quality components may be more objective (at least in most companies), the use is all about personal preference. That said, I still see a lot more ties to science here than anywhere else. The thing I really like is the fact that there exists a balance here between science and subjectivism. Almost every product under review undergoes both kinds of evaluations.

Just my opinion though. My engineering tendencies are coming out. I'm such a number whore.

 

[brian32672]

This place is great. Every few days, someone will make a great sarcastic comment that I just chuckle over.

Oh yea, and the knowledge here is fantastic. Love the reviews from Gene & Clint.

For the most part it has been taking up my wasted time. And I enjoy it...

 

[Rob Babcock]

I don't see a lot of objectivity on this forum. I think strong biases are a given with a hobby or profession (some participants make their living from AV). I visit for information and opinions. It is up to me to filter this information. There are a number of forum participants who could use a cranial cleanse but for the most part, just good clean fun and the exchange of information.

That surprised me- nearly everything on this entire site is objective. You must not be reading very thoroughly!

 

[RMK!]

That surprised me- nearly everything on this entire site is objective. You must not be reading very thoroughly!

"If AH goes a little overboard towards the objectivist side, what of it? There are dozens of sites devoted to audio mysticism- they're not hard to find. I find the scientific approach of Audioholics incredibly refreshing, and a nice break from the rampant pathalogical tweakism that pervades 95% of the net forums and 99% of print media."

I believe you described the forum as "overboard towards the objectivist side". But you do have a thing for truth and objectivity, don't you.

 

[Cygnus]

I'd like to put my 2 cent's in here:

I agree that not everything in chain stores is crap. Yamaha, for example, and LG (imho), are great brands. Both of these are very common in chain stores! Good products too!

However, there are lower end products aimed at average joe HTIB guy who just wants music and movies "right on the spot", that works for him. It may not be great in our books, but it works for this average joe. Bose comes to mind.

That being said, whenever I'm researching a peice of audio equipment, I go here, to AH. Simply because the people here seem to "know their stuff" (which is what I tell people when reccommending AH to them ). I mean, look at Denon, they are one of the most high quality HT product makers out there. Gene and Clint go to their press confrences and what-not, so they must like high quality stuff too. Like me, now.


Look at it this way:

Before I discovered AH, i thought my audio system back then sounded awesome. Thanks to the recommendations here at AH, I now have a system that spins circles around that old one! (Which my little brother - who is 6 - now uses, im converting him - slowly, but surley - into an audiophile too! ).

So...basically:

I trust audioholics for everything A/V related (and sometimes my gut instinct: LG. which I am very happy ith so far), which is a great thing for me and family and freinds if they need help with something!

 

[Rob Babcock]

I think you don't understand what the word means, or at least the way I'm using it. "Objective" means based upon measurable parameters and features checklists. You won't find a lot of instances of AH staff using terms like "bloom", "air" or "prat", nor nebulous and vague phrases like "lush tubey sound" or "chocolately midrange". I mean, wtf is "chocolately midrange" and how exactly does it apply to a stereo component?

The bulk of the AH forum addicts tend to fall into the objectivist camp, ie they feel that products that measure similarly will sound similar. An objectivist will look at the science side of something and when in doubt will assume that an affirmative claim of audibility should be proven somehow, either by DBT or by showing some measurable reason. By contrast, a subjectivist assumes that everything will affect the sound of a component, sometime even its color, and that the same component can sound different on a Tuesday than it does on a Monday.

Mind you, I'm not attempting to pass judgement on each approach here, merely explaining what the terms mean.

 

[RMK!]

Chocolaty

I think you don't understand what the word means, or at least the way I'm using it. "Objective" means based upon measurable parameters and features checklists. You won't find a lot of instances of AH staff using terms like "bloom", "air" or "prat", nor nebulous and vague phrases like "lush tubey sound" or "chocolately midrange". I mean, wtf is "chocolately midrange" and how exactly does it apply to a stereo component?

The bulk of the AH forum addicts tend to fall into the objectivist camp, ie they feel that products that measure similarly will sound similar. An objectivist will look at the science side of something and when in doubt will assume that an affirmative claim of audibility should be proven somehow, either by DBT or by showing some measurable reason. By contrast, a subjectivist assumes that everything will affect the sound of a component, sometime even its color, and that the same component can sound different on a Tuesday than it does on a Monday.

Mind you, I'm not attempting to pass judgement on each approach here, merely explaining what the terms mean.

Thank you for the explanation professor. You and the other qualified members, moderators, samurai and ninja turtles scientific approach to audio is very interesting and one of the reasons this forum works for me. But ultimately, sound and any qualitative judgments about it are for the large part subjective. Your micro view of audio is interesting and helpful but ultimately it is the macro that matters to me. It is the blend of all of the components (micro) including the listeners ear that determine sound quality (macro). How people choose to describe this is irrelevant to me. Terms like “very impressive impedance/phase profile” are as meaningless to me as “Chocolaty” is to you.

Remember Rob, describing how food tastes is different than the recipe. Both are necessary and both are interesting, but when I read a restaurant review, I’m not looking for recipes.

 

[Josuah]

Comparisons to inherently subjective opinions and preferences isn't very appropriate, in my opinion. Otherwise, when a movie critic said a movie is good, everyone (or vast majority) would think it is good. And chocolate in the U.S. tastes very different than chocolate in Europe. So depending on where the reviewer is from would have a big impact on whether or not their "chocolaty" review is for you.

When reproducing an original, it makes sense in a lot of ways to limit it to objective measurements. Those objective measurements can be translated into precise personal preferences. If you prefer a warmer sound, look for a dB bump in the mid-range. If you prefer a wide sound-stage, look for good off-axis response (coupled with a room that does not have dead first reflections).

If impedance and phase measurements don't mean anything to you, perhaps you should try to find out what they refer to and how they affect sound.

 

[Buckle-meister]

You're (and the other qualified members, moderators, samurai and ninja turtles)...

HaHaHaHaHa. Man, this site has some great humour in it!

Remember Rob, describing how food tastes is different than the recipe. Both are necessary and both are interesting, but when I read a restaurant review, I’m not looking for recipes.

Nicely put.

Regards

 

[mulester7]

.....I would have to go along with both views since such a wide variety of readers frequent this site....but....the huge majority that read here could care less how deeply some topics are taken....I personally can understand, pretty much, haha, when topics are taken deeply, but I most embrace when someone describes as best they can, in a simplistic manner, what they hear or are striving to achieve....some post here in an attitude of only disputing and actually add nothing....some show up with an ego as big as all outdoors and try to impress....the posting at this site is actually more transparent than some evidently think.....

.....sure, opinion only just expressed....I now digress and go to ride the ole' sickle......

 

[Rob Babcock]

Thank you for the explanation professor. You're (and the other qualified members, moderators, samurai and ninja turtles) scientific approach to audio is very interesting and one of the reasons this forum works for me. But ultimately, sound and any qualitative judgments about it are for the large part subjective. Your micro view of audio is interesting and helpful but ultimately it is the macro that matters to me. It is the blend of all of the components (micro) including the listeners ear that determine sound quality (macro). How people choose to describe this is irrelevant to me. Terms like “very impressive impedance/phase profile” are as meaningless to me as “Chocolaty” is to you.

Remember Rob, describing how food tastes is different than the recipe. Both are necessary and both are interesting, but when I read a restaurant review, I’m not looking for recipes.

Just don't lose sight of the forest for the trees- I'm not saying one camp is right and the other is wrong, just trying to explain how things work here. Anyway, to extend your same analogy, what good would a restaurant reviews be to you if the terminology and lanquage of the review didn't correspond to any universal ideas? "My tirmisu was vibrant and euphonic to my pallette and increased the frothiness of my personal aura" or "The tenderloin proved not to be conducive to my personal energy patterns"- would those reviews tell you anything meaningful about the food?

Generally I find that all reviews, no matter the subject, must blend subjective and objective terminology to be effective. Take movie reviews- what you like may be very subjective, but most good critics are highly educated, many with film and/or literature degrees. There are rules for movie construction just like there are rules for movie reviews. A critic may point out the technical devices a director employs or criticize his overreliance on shopworn cliches, but then they may also describe the way a performance affected them emotionally.

An objective review of my restaurants timamisu won't give you the recipe (I hope- that's a trade secret!), but it might compare my dessert to others, saying mine is slightly sweeter (more sugar) with less loft than a competitors (mine is denser). Don't confuse specialized yet universal language with subjectivism- they're not the same thing.

I think the AH staff strikes a good blend. I don't care much about the actual measurement section- what do I care if THD is 0.0005% or 0.0003%? But I do love the comprehensive listing of features and notations of operational quirks (eg bass management flaws of recievers, non-intuitive menus or lack of accessibility to a control from the front panel). Somewhere in each review they typically address sound quality, but from a layman's pov without a lot of purple prose. To me it's a more useful approach than trying to coin new and more ludicrous words that mean the same thing. You can save the chocolate for the desserts!

 

[miklorsmith]

Clear

Wait a minute, Rob. When you say that subjectivists think the color of the component and day of the week affect how something will sound, that makes as much sense as saying that you all are deaf and don't hear music at all. And, you're buying tube gear the last time I checked.

Your comparisons of restaurant experience are going down the right road, but creating a severe example puts you right in the finger-pointing, name-calling camp as far as I'm concerned. I understand the point you're trying to make, but it isn't representative of the other side and stinks of politics.

 

[Rob Babcock]

Wait a minute, Rob. When you say that subjectivists think the color of the component and day of the week affect how something will sound, that makes as much sense as saying that you all are deaf and don't hear music at all. And, you're buying tube gear the last time I checked.

Your comparisons of restaurant experience are going down the right road, but creating a severe example puts you right in the finger-pointing, name-calling camp as far as I'm concerned. I understand the point you're trying to make, but it isn't representative of the other side and stinks of politics.

Don't you guys even read before you pounce? What do tubes have to do with subjectism? And where did I say subjectivism was wrong? Severe examples, as you call them, are exagerations to illustrate a point. As far as being "representative of the other side," why must I? Do you not understand the "other side"? If you do, then why would another example be needed? If someone posts here and claims they still don't understand objectivism as it relates to audio, then I'll give an example about how some guys think all CD players from a Meitner to a Walkman sound the same. Okay?

And are they wrong? I've read many many threads about the sound of gear changing by time of day- check AC if you don't believe me.

 

[miklorsmith]

Not me

Reading and learning, facts you might call them, only detracts from the severity of my position. So, I suppose the answer is "no". Minorities are more likely to call foul.

While you say subjectivism is not wrong, you call out color as being something cited by followers as salient. I've never read that in all my browsing. So, exaggerating to paint a group as eccentric at best does paint them (us) with a judgmental, negative palate.

Anybody claiming time of day mattering would (far's I know) be citing rested ears or clean/dirty power. I don't doubt either of these phenomena. But, day of the week?

It's OK to claim bias and I suppose slander another group with that bent, but playing Switzerland as you stab Germany in the back ain't playing fair.

 

[MDS]

Anybody claiming time of day mattering would (far's I know) be citing rested ears or clean/dirty power. I don't doubt either of these phenomena. But, day of the week?

Well certainly day of the week doesn't matter in an absolute sense. It would be nonsense to say my system sounds better on Wednesday than it does on Monday. But if you consider that not all days are the same, then it could be a factor - not because of the particular day but because of all the other factors that affect our perception of sound that could vary from day to day - like mood, general well-being (do I have the flu or feeling in tip-top shape today), ambient noise, ambient temperature (which affects mood), etc.

 

[mulester7]

.....let's see....this thread is entitled "Is Audioholics Brainwashing Us?"....I guess that would refer to Clint and Gene, mainly Gene probably, as he does most of the reviewing of products sent to hdqrtrs for review and possible endorsement, and the whole site being reputed to mainly push internet-only-available products....does that about cover it?......

 

[Rob Babcock]

Pretty much, Mulester. The rest is just off topic whining. The fact of the matter is that there's a world of great gear that you'll never see in the mainstream press. I've bought internet direct myself, and I've found some great deals on hi performance gear that way. My sytem(s) were purchased from brick and mortar and internet vendors.

To miklorsmith- sorry to took exception to one or two of my post out of almost two thousand. That'll happen on the internet. As for feeling stabbed in the back, well, that's occuring in your mind more than in my intentions. Whether you use Nordost Valhalla or bent coathangers makes no diff to me. This site has guys like WmAX and Mtrycrafts who won't believe it's raining unless you show 'em on doppler radar and guys like AVPhile who think Tibetan prayer beads shaken over your 'table improves the sound. And while both of those extremes tend to tick people off, both are welcome at AH. But keep in mind the sites tag line. This is a site run by engineers, and they're skeptics by trade. As I've said before, there are dozens, maybe hundreds, of sites and publications devoted to the tweakier side of audio. This is not one of them. You can try to change it, but it's not likely to get you anywhere.

BTW, I really love my tube amp. It's good to be Switzerland, I guess.

 

[RMK!]

Back on subject

Now, about that timamisu recipe .