Antipodes;190405 Wrote: > Let's give it a try. > > Audiophile: One who is continuously searching for the reproduction of > musical truth in her environment, is open-minded about what might push > the envelope, and is prepared to challenge the prevailing paradigms. > This may lead to some side-tracks and wasted money but can equally lead > to new and important insights, and any dedicated audiophile will > consider it worth it. > > Enlightened Audiophile: One who has experimented in a robust manner to > discover insights in audio not yet captured in the limited paradigms of > electrical engineering. > > The unenlightened here are those that say things like 'XXX can't > exist'. Substitute XXX with things like 'cable differences' 'power > supply differences' 'burn in' 'superior expensive equipment' and you > more or less cover half the input here. Electrical Engineering models > are very useful in an incredible range of applications. But the serial > ignorance often expressed here about how 'XXX can't exist' often based > on EE models displays a profound ignorance of the fact that EE models > are models that approximate reality. Only dullard EEs insist there is > nothing beyond the prevailing paradigms. And I readily concede that > only fools believe in UFOs, and some of the excesses of the audiophile > market. But these forums are so stuck in derision of anything existing > beyond basic EE models and rooted in 'what must be true' rather than > open-minded and discovering. I am an EE myself and am very aware that > the EE models are of only basic usefulness in audio. I am sure there > is comfort in those closed little minds, but for anyone coming here for > new insights these forums are barren. Any poster indicating a new > possibility is jumped on by ten of you nay-sayers who unscientifically > insist that all that is knowable is known, by you, and the dumped on > poster goes away. > > You guys are all welcome to your opinions, but this place is dominated > by your nay-sayer fascism. Let a few others' opinions be heard without > your derision so we can have a more enlightened place for audiophiles to > be encouraged to join the Slim community.
I've read this post two or three times, and it strikes me as generally well reasoned. OK, the guy gets on his high horse a bit towards the end, but the responses seem to have taken the last paragraph to heart a bit and ignored the point. Real science is admitting that you may not know everything, proposing hypotheses to enhance the knowledge base, and testing them. You should remain open to most things - chocolate teapots aside, but possibly including bybee filters - while retaining suitable scepticism. This scepticism is not "that can't work" (which does seem too prevalent on these fora), but is "that sounds pretty unlikely, but should be easy to test". And it all is easy to test - you just need to listen. I've never seen any explanation of SD's listening methodology (despite requesting on this forum it some time ago), all I've seen here is the rubbishing of any non-glowing reviews with a "we know better" approach with nothing given to back it up. Oh and I suspect my bonus this month is going to go on an SB+ not a TP, not least because it's the only one I can do my own listening tests on and return if it's not good enough. Adam -- adamslim SB3 into Derek Shek d2, Shanling CDT-100, Rotel RT-990BX, Esoteric Audio Research 859, Living Voice Auditorium IIs, Nordost and Anti-cables http://www.last.fm/user/AdamSlim/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ adamslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7355 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33547 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
