Steve,
As far as I can see, when someone comes into a thread in such as way as to not disagree with the key premise, they are in agreement with it, or else playing a word game.
Well that's where you would be wrong. You are making some gross assumptions. First off, is what you consider as the key premise of the thread. That's how YOU see it. That does not mean I see it the same way. Do not project your inference onto me. It's really quite unfair, and does nothing to further the discussion.
Granted, there is a presumption about the tone and thrust of the thread.
It seems obvious and self-evident that it is negative and derisive in tone - at least about the issue in question, and via the term "audiophool." But we've said that already.
As I said, show some specific evidence where I painted ALL high audio types (whatever that means exactly, since it was never really defined) and related purveyors as snake oil salesman. You can't, so now you want to paint me with a broad brush because I didn't explicitly disagree. And you want to talk about word games? Ironic.
Well, look Steve, this is an argument not worth having.
I'll withdraw my presumption and assumptions of your position for the benefit of not dragging a non-productive vector out ad-infinitum. Ok?
Let me be clear here. I have used real high end audio gear for over 20 years. I'm talking about stuff you likely will have never seen or touched - commercial quality test and measurement gear, NIST traceable calibration, anechoic chambers, mics that are flat to 200 kHz and such. None of it is/was consumer grade. If I thought all of it was crap, why would I be using it?
I don't know what you use, own, or have used, or why.
Unless you've said something about it here or on the air and I heard it, how could I?
If you'd like to share some of that, "I'm all ears."
I am skeptical about mics that are flat to 200kHz.
What type?
The best I know of that cover down into the audio range do ~100Khz.
There are good items in the expensive equipment category and there are some crappy or less desirable ones. Same as most any other equipment category or price range. This fact should be surprising to no one. The good ones can actually back up their claims with measurements and science. The snake oil salesmen can't. How is this painting ALL?
While explicitly, and obviously, the statements you made in this thread do not (again
explicitly) paint ALL high-end audio as "audiophools", there have been a fair number of threads that have the same general theme, that use the term "audiophool". This give the appearance, given the vacuum of any positive words about the audio/high-end world of being the "politically correct" position around here, as well as the intent of the posts being the bashing of it in general. In simple terms, close association with the ideas and sentiments expressed. That is how.
IF that is not what you think, and apparently it is not, you've only just expressed that, as far as I have seen - unless I missed something. Which is possible too.
Finally, you made a big jump when you assumed that snake oil salesmen equates to high end audio companies. Why? Can't there be snake oil salesmen in the lower end areas too? Similarly you infer that audiophool means ALL. Why? Where does this come from?
I think you've read far too much into things here. You most certainly have regarding my comments. I've agreed with you more than I've disagreed. To follow your logic, since you didn't comment on my agreement, you must be playing word games. Come on! Let's have a real discussion.
I agree with you in that if someone wants to spend a ton of money on audio gear (good, bad or otherwise), it's their choice. The value of something is determined by the market. If someone will pay tens of thousands for a single-ended 2A3 amp, then that's what the market will bear. Whether I like it or not (or anyone else) is irrelevant.
So, to sum it up, I don’t think ALL expensive audio gear is snake oil, neither do I think ALL people who buy or experiment with expensive audio gear are audiophools. I don’t know how to make it any more clear than this. I apologize if there were any misunderstandings.
Great!
I don't take this sort of discussion personally, so no worries, mate!
Having participated in far more heated "discussions" on matters audio, starting back when USENET was new to the world, I'm used to seeing all sorts of positions and attitudes bandied about.
The interesting thing is that when I find myself in the midst of a group of "objectivists" and/or "tweakers" they accuse me of being a "subjectivist" or "engineering/scientist" type. Then when I find myself in the midst of the "subjectivists" the opposite happens.
To sum up my experiences in audio - going back as many of us do - to the 60's, many things that were once considered set in stone have come loose of their moorings, and things that seemed like they could not possibly matter somehow do now. So, I keep an open mind as well as an eye to the science/engineering side of it - since often the "tweakers" are actually on to something, but have it wrong and don't really know what they are doing at all, but there is sometimes a real phenomena lurking, which is worth discovering and learning to apply properly.
I'm very anti-snake-oil myself, as it sends the wrong message, makes audiophiles look wacky, and generally hurts the field. I get very concerned when people focus on that unfortunate aspect and then co-mingle things that are
seemingly snake-oil with those that actually are! Oddly enough, there are some very strange things that seem wierd but actually are legit.
One of the problems in audio and perception is that now we can measure "differences" all over the place - the problem is that the measurements absolutely do not correlate directly or often not even indirectly to replicable repeatable perceptions. This last point is exactly where the entire debate often hangs, and it gets parsed down to some very fine minutia at times. Like down to specifics of protocols for testing, and their effects on the results... it's a boggy mess actually.
Just try to keep an open mind... because all sorts of stuff that seems like it is impossible to make any difference can, does and will. Not in the average system, but as I have said "I can demonstrate it." You can probably hear it. Really.
Ah well... let's see who's on 75 AM tonight...
_-_-WBear2GCR
