Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Audiophile Neuroscience

Audiophiles Unite !

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Audiophiles unite!

Recent posts here on SNA as well as my experience elsewhere has highlighted the often felt frustration of members regarding the ‘revolving door' and toxic environment which is the "Great Audio Debate"

 

Most importantly this post is not about blame, is not about who is right, is not a rhetorical question about why people do what they do, and is especially not about discussing the great debate to incite a flame war. I respectfully request that anyone who wants to indulge in this, start another thread.

 

This post is about appeals for solutions to the problem and a plea for change. Hopefully a repository of constructive ideas on how to move forward so that everyone can enjoy the technical and non-technical aspects as well as the fun aspects of being an audiophile (whatever that means to them) in the passionate pursuit of reproducing beautiful , life affirming and sublimely beautiful music.

 

For my two cents - In the social discourse of an audio forum this is what I would like to see:

 

Number one: civility. Unlike other audio fora this has been reasonably achieved here by virtue of moderation (the use of moderators). Outside the cyber world and into the real world this is equivalent to rule of law.

 

Number two: "Respect" . Having some degree of implied admiration, the admiration component is optional. I think it is deserved more than it is afforded between "tribes" and afforded more than it is deserved within "tribes". Things can change when for example people meet face-to-face which seems to tap into our goodwill and sense of graciousness we extend to others. Edit - IMO we need to move away from notions of "tribes" or "subjectivist" vs "objectivist" camps.

 

Number three: mutual support. By this I mean genuine sharing of knowledge and ideas in order to help each other learn. I believe debate even between experts can lead to a justifiable refinement of ideas even if not a change or modification of ideas. It is always healthy to rethink one's position in light of someone else's perspective.

 

Number four: Newbies are a rarer but special bird. The same people that provide mutual support in number three above are there to genuinely teach, guide and provide knowledge. Experienced audiophiles shouldn't be there IMO to recruit new members to their particular view. I think there should be at least an attempt to distinguish between fact and opinion (of which there will be sometimes disagreement) but with at least an honest tagging or prefacing with terms like "this is controversial but" or "certainly not everyone agrees but". In honesty, I think all experienced members know what those issues are.

 

Number five: tolerance. In the context of, and assuming civility has already been established, I think tolerance then probably means consciously not adopting an adversarial approach. Where I see this happening is in things like veiled insults and clever twisting of words in order to get under the radar of moderators but still with the intention of needling somebody or some "tribe". There is a fine line between tongue-in-cheek or good-natured humour versus biting sarcasm meant to hurt or point score.

 

Number six: attitudinal change. This is the big one. If the above tenets are to be upheld then there needs to be some attitudinal change infused into our cyber/forum culture. This needs to come from within and it is my supposition that the influence of an influential few can bring about change. There are philosophies around this sort of concept that most people are aware of but in essence it would boil down to the members that most frequently post (especially true if they get frequently "liked") need to reward tolerance and gently counter intolerant views even if they support the underlying premise. In other words they can support the premise but not the way it is being expressed, and to say so. When you look at any audio forum you soon get an impression of who are the most frequent and/or influential posters. I bet people could easily nominate a dozen or so people here that would fit into that category. I wager if half of those dozen strongly adopted this line of posting we would start to see attitudinal shift and change in the culture and behaviour.

 

Number seven: Strategies. There needs to be continued brainstorming for specific solutions. I submit that without necessary attitudinal change as built on the foundation of tolerance and mutual support etc no one specific solution will work. However I believe individual strategies can serve as important facilitators or adjuncts.

 

Some people have for example advocated sticky threads where competing views have been canvassed in a respectful way. maybe a kind of wiki document serving as a position statement as opposed to a call to arms. I am sure there are lots of other helpful suggestions and look forward to hearing them

 

My apologies for the long post but this is clearly a complex issue.

 

Cheers

David

Edited by Audiophile Neuroscience
clarification and typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Karl Rand
Posted (edited)

No need to apologise for the long post, it’s a complex subject riddled with traps.

As to specific solutions there may be many but I suspect in some instances nothing short of long term psychotherapy will achieve change.

As to the problems you draw attention to similar ones manifest, for instance, on philosophy forums whenever the contentious issue of religion and faith are raised. I don’t want to throw a brick into the wasps nest but need to suggest some of the extreme subjective views claimed for certain devices etc resemble claims made by the religious for their ‘truth’. I have no idea how that divide can be crossed but I’ll be happy to hear from anyone with positive suggestions. 

Then there are elephants in the room even audiophiles claiming exclusive objectivity and scientifically based  views can’t see. Instance , as far as I’m aware, respected audio reviewers never dare publish the results of their clinical hearing tests in the audioporn press.

. Your aims as expressed are worthwhile but you’ll have to forgive my cynicism for now. 

Edited by Karl Rand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Audiophiles unite!
Recent posts here on SNA as well as my experience elsewhere has highlighted the often felt frustration felt by members regarding the ‘revolving door' and toxic environment which is the "Great Audio Debate"
 
Most importantly this post is not about blame, is not about who is right, is not a rhetorical question about why people do what they do, and is especially not about discussing the great debate to incite a flame war. I respectfully request that anyone who wants to indulge in this, start another thread.
 
This post is about appeals for solutions to the problem and a plea for change. Hopefully a repository of constructive ideas on how to move forward so that everyone can enjoy the technical and non-technical aspects as well as the fun aspects of being an audiophile (whatever that means to them) in the passionate pursuit of reproducing beautiful , life affirming and sublimely beautiful music.
 
For my two cents - In the social discourse of an audio forum this is what I would like to see:
 
Number one: civility. Unlike other audio fora this has been reasonably achieved here by virtue of moderation (the use of moderators). Outside the cyber world and into the real world this is equivalent to rule of law.
 
Number two: "Respect" . Having some degree of implied admiration, the admiration component is optional. I think it is deserved more than it is afforded between "tribes" and afforded more than it is deserved within "tribes". Things can change when for example people meet face-to-face which seems to tap into our goodwill and sense of graciousness we extend to others.
 
Number three: mutual support. By this I mean genuine sharing of knowledge and ideas in order to help each other learn. I believe debate even between experts can lead to a justifiable refinement of ideas if not a change or modification of ideas. It is always healthy to rethink one's position in light of someone else's perspective.
 
Number four: Newbies are rarer but special bird. The same people that provide mutual support in number three above are there to genuinely teach, guide and provide knowledge. Experienced audiophiles shouldn't be there IMO to recruit new members to the tribe. I think there should be at least an attempt to distinguish between fact and opinion (of which there will be sometimes disagreement) but with at least an honest tagging or prefacing with terms like "this is controversial but" or "certainly not everyone agrees but". In honesty I think all experienced members know what those issues are.
 
Number five: tolerance. In the context of and assuming civility has already been established, I think tolerance then probably means consciously not adopting an adversarial approach. Where I see this happening is in things like veiled insults and clever twisting of words in order to get under the radar of moderators but was still the intention of needling somebody or some "tribe". There is a fine line between tongue-in-cheek or good-natured humour versus biting sarcasm meant to hurt or point score.
 
Number six: attitudinal change. This is the big one. If the above tenets are to be upheld then there needs to be some attitudinal change infused into our cyber/forum culture. That needs to come from within and it is my supposition that the influence of an influential few can bring about change. There are philosophies around this sort of concept that most people are aware of but in essence it would boil down to the members that most frequently post (especially true if they get frequently "liked") to reward tolerance and gently counter intolerant views even if they support the underlying premise. In other words they can support the premise but not the way it is being expressed, and to say so. When you look at any audio forum you soon get an impression of who are the most frequent and/or influential posters. I bet people could easily nominate a dozen or so people here that would fit into that category. I wager if half of those dozen strongly adopted this line of posting we would start to see attitudinal shift and change in the culture and behaviour.
 
Number seven: Strategies. There needs to be continued brainstorming for specific solutions. I submit that without necessary attitudinal change as built on the foundation of tolerance and mutual support etc no one specific solution will work. However I believe individual strategies can serve as important facilitators or adjuncts.
 
Some people have for example advocated sticky threads where competing views have been canvassed in a respectful way. maybe a kind of wiki document serving as a position statement as opposed to a call to arms. I am sure there are lots of other helpful suggestions and look forward to hearing them
 
My apologies for the long post but this is clearly a complex issue.
 
Cheers
David
Bravo.
Well written and well said my friend.
I'm voting you for P.M.
Parliament could follow your same guidelines.
Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a simple 4 letter acronym that posters might consider using more often when making 'BOLD' statements.

 

"IMHO"

 

If you don't know what it means...........google is your friend...........IMHO.🤗

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/one-ear-is-not-like-the-o/

 

As the good book says....................................there is 50 shades of grey................................... in audio.

 

Regards Cazzesman

 

 

 

 

50.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


As most know, I’ve been a member here for quite a few years.  I’ve seen lots of disagreements, lots of what could be described as disrespect, and almost childish reactions.  But I have seen a crap load more of members being just great people. Supporting each other in fair and foul times.  

 

I’ve been a member of quite a few forums, and be assured this is one of the best around. As   @Audiophile Neuroscience said so well in his post.  The 4 points to keep this forum somewhere for all of us to enjoy are very important  

 

We are always going to have differences of opinion. That’s what makes this forum a great  place to learn.   But respect for each other’s opinions is also very important, and some here sometime try and impose their opinions. IMHO anyhows 

 

But as I said before. That’s a small minority.  Most are just great blokes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Karl Rand said:

 I suspect in some instances nothing short of long term psychotherapy will achieve change.

Genuine psycopathology will no doubt exhibit itself and I agree we have no chance of addressing this. Fortunately this is not the target population. Most here I submit are just normally nuts, including myself of course.😀

24 minutes ago, Karl Rand said:

As to the problems you draw attention to similar ones manifest, for instance, on philosophy forums whenever the contentious issue of religion and faith are raised.

best to avoid these analogies

24 minutes ago, Karl Rand said:

I don’t want to throw a brick into the wasps nest but need to suggest some of the extreme subjective views claimed for certain devices etc resemble claims made by the religious for their ‘truth’. I have no idea how that divide can be crossed but I’ll be happy to hear from anyone with positive suggestions. 

My suggestion is one of tolerance, if not acceptance. My view is hearing something is an observation. If nobody else hears it, it is an hallucination. If many hear it it may be there or it may be a shared illusion. I don't judge. lets not go into debating it here though.

24 minutes ago, Karl Rand said:

 

. Your aims as expressed are worthwhile but you’ll have to forgive my cynicism for now. 

The problems are well known but really this is not about solving insoluble problems or changing beliefs, its about changing the culture of how we get along despite different beliefs :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general change is difficult for most people, but I agree with all stated in the OP, though will take a conscious effort on peoples part to have a chance of progress along such a path.

 

I have been trying 6to follow something like this for a while now as I used to be a lot more reactive and emotional regarding conflicts/disagreement here. For my part I'm willing to make even more effort to be part of this objective.

 

Only thing I'm hesitant with is the tribe aspect (maybe It's just the term I'm uncomfortable with), where there is more than one, it in itself fosters barriers between identified tribes. Maybe it is my view of tribalism that I have an issue with in this respect..

I likely should have woken up more before posting, but....   time for another coffee :)

 

We need to be one tribe and we all need to try and view it in this way, and I need to make a concerted effort to take this view myself.

 

Great post, David.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, needlerunner said:

I'm voting you for P.M.
 

Thanks for the kind words Ken but the only PM job I'd be good at is Plant Manager in my vege patch😁 Even then my wife does most of the skilled part !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


My general philosophy is don't let the 1% create a knee jerk reaction that effects the other 99%.    And there is always the 1%, no-matter the topic.

 

As was said above.....most are great blokes here and I will add, extremely helpful.    I aim to play nice on SNA because I believe I have such limited knowledge on most subjects that I could certainly make a fool of myself in an instant otherwise.  

 

Human nature often makes us just want to come out and say.........."You idiot!"   But cheap shots on Internet forums are a dime a dozen, so why bother.

 

As I proffered above.....................it's just an opinion................it's not world changing stuff we are dealing with here.     Put in your 2 bobs worth when you can and with others 2 bobs worth............take it or leave it.

 

I'm still waiting for a member to explain $450 for a Sata 3 'Audiophile Cable'  B)

 

Regards Cazzesman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cazzesman said:

I'm still waiting for a member to explain $450 for a Sata 3 'Audiophile Cable'  B)

Bait...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Muon N' said:

Only thing I'm hesitant with is the tribe aspect (maybe It's just the term I'm uncomfortable with), where there is more than one, it in itself fosters barriers between identified tribes. Maybe it is my view of tribalism that I have an issue with in this respect..

Totally agree. i don't subscribe to tribes either, it is too conformist in one way and too divisive in another way. I try to stick to science but not just a biased cherry picking version that supports one agenda. I particularly dislike the terms subjectivists and objectivists.

 

i will see if I can edit my OP to reflect this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


6 minutes ago, andythiing said:

It’s easy HTFU

Have you gone New Age, Andy?

 

I can almost smell the incense ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, andythiing said:

It’s easy HTFU

 

High Treble Frequency Undamped ! 😉

Edited by Audiophile Neuroscience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do love all of those points.

Patterns for etiquette are hard to establish and become practiced.


If a discussion is going on about cable X vs cable Y, they don't need "cables are for idiots"

If a discussion is about testing, measurement, bias, perceived reality, they don't need "I haven't looked back since installing magical cable Y"

If I am rambling about some new magic in my system that I am coming to grips with  - I don't need the sneering "Enjoy your expensive distortion box, the people doing it properly are over here with clean equipment  that measures well". Really I just wanted how others feel about what I was hearing. 

To the innocent "I'm just getting started - do I need to pay $X for good cables?". Well, that just looks like a troll to me.  A good troll knows how to fake the innocent: "I really don't know how to ask, can you help me?". No doubt many of these are as innocent as they appear.  Direct them to maybe a good unbiased external article about the the issue - "come back if you have any questions?". 

The same people launching into the same argument would no doubt give an innocent newbie a "wtf" moment. 

Perhaps we need a more robust language about the anti-patterns. Then the inappropriate becomes easier to label and deal with: "no - you don't need to express that opinion in that thread - its not appropriate because ..."

I don't know - this one is hard :)





 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cazzesman said:

There is a simple 4 letter acronym that posters might consider using more often when making 'BOLD' statements.

 

"IMHO"

 

If you don't know what it means...........google is your friend...........IMHO.🤗

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/one-ear-is-not-like-the-o/

 

As the good book says....................................there is 50 shades of grey................................... in audio.

 

Regards Cazzesman

 

 

 

 

50.jpg

 

How sensitive are folks though where that is required?  Is it not self evident that it is the posters opinion?

 

I tend to think that if anything needs to change it’s people being overly sensitive to alternate opinions and their ideas being challenged.  

 

Seems bizarre to me to join a discussion forum and then act somehow surprised to find folks that think differently than you!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...