> Ignorance is bliss means you can fool yourself, for some unknowingly, and enjoy in the > hobby while the reality of things is not that fruitful.
I am not sure I would agree. If you consider enjoying art such as books, music, movies and such then being ignorant (not knowing) about the construction and the mechanisms used to hold interest and manipulate the emotions allows one to respond to it in its rawest/purest/naivest form - bliss. Knowing something about the mechanisms will lead to a different and more knowing experience in which additional things may be appreciated but it will usually lessen the emotional response - less bliss. Audiophiles are not simply ignorant (absence of knowledge), they do not hold beliefs about matters that science cannot prove or disprove like traditional religious beliefs, they hold "flat-earth" beliefs that are scientifically wrong. In general audiophiles are aware of the view of sound professionals and the educated but consider them to be wrong and their beliefs to be right. This is a lot more than simple ignorance and what drives it bears no resemblance to a professional's pragmatic interest in sound quality. > Don't question while you enjoy. Enjoying can also be being frustrated and trying every > cable out there, having some sort of a goal to pass the time aka hobby. What were you enjoying when you believed in audiophile cables? > While discussing about the unfairness of the particular business it is not my priority > to look down on naive masses, We seem to be back to appearances, content and children. Would you look down on a child for believing in Father Christmas? Would you look down on an adult that believed in Father Christmas? Is the emotional content of "looking down" a requirement if you recognise someone is wrong? Why is the business unfair? It is selling expensive luxury goods and the illusions that go with luxury goods. In free(ish) societies the individual can decide what the luxury goods are worth to them. Do you really have a problem with this? Perhaps the taxpayers should fund an anti-luxury goods education programme? > I would like them to know and we as a collective move on to produce something that > really matters. Audiophile products are luxury goods and, pretty much by definition, do not matter in any important sense. Audiophiles do not buy audiophile products for reasons of sound quality or else record players, valve amplifiers, magic cables, etc... would not be on the market. They buy them for the same reasons they buy other luxury goods and there is nothing wrong with this. If you have a genuine interest in sound quality then buy products from the audio market sector that has a pragmatic interest in sound quality. Go to a music shop for your equipment. > Drive market for real sonic difference. Apart from the obvious like speakers and microphones, there aren't any sonic differences for competently made audio equipment. This was one of the main driving forces behind the creation of the audiophile industry in the 1970s. What business case exists for a publication that reviews home audio products in a technically valid manner? How can a manufacturer of electronic audio goods maintain profit margins and avoid the products becoming essentially commodities? > Room correction has a lot to be desired. Room correction is fairly cheap and has a substantial impact not only for music but also for conversation as well. However, it does not really fit in with the audiophile luxury goods thing. Electronic boxes for room correction are being pushed at the moment and do work to a limited extent. We will have to see if audiophiles take an interest. >> You don't think the pros outweighed the cons for you with audio cables? > > Sure it has some general benefits, if you call paranoia to be conned a benefit. > I don't have the time nor the money to be scammed into every bit of knowledge out > there, we should educate more about this phenomena. Who is this "we". The taxpayers? The audiophile community? How cables work is taught in schools, is available in countless book and on the internet. It is trivial to find out for anyone with the slightest inclination to do so. As far as I know, most people are fully aware that adverts and salesmen are trying to mislead them into purchasing something and treat the information accordingly. Most people reading that bumpf from a cable company posted earlier would recognise what is going on and view the product accordingly. It is only audiophiles that do not. As I am sure you know, audiophiles do not want to be educated about sound, sound perception and how audio equipment works. They are perfectly entitled not to do so but they are not going to get a sympathetic response if they complain about the consequences. > It seems to me you are not aware how expensive some cables are and how strong the > drive is to spend all your money on it without end in sight. I am aware of the price of audiophile cables because they are often ridiculed in the press and on websites. I am aware that people become obsessed with things but I am rarely in a position to appreciate why. If someone became obsessed with audiophile cables I would tend to assume it was a symptom caused by something else. I would discard any notion of an interest in sound quality. > I disagree that scamming is the best way to teach. Law should state that you cannot > make false sensory arguments or something down those lines. Maybe even a blind test > passed certificate (I know some will find that funny). I was not proposing scamming as a way to teach. I was proposing educating children and letting them work things out themselves. Which is pretty much what we have now. The law usually states one cannot tell lies (false objective statements) in paid for adverts. It varies in other places and from country to country. There is no law that one cannot tell lies and it would be a very strange world if there was. You do seem to be advocating the state funding a mechanism to protect rich foolish people purchasing overly foolish luxury products like audiophile cables. I would not support it and I suspect many others would not either. > So you assume audiophiles and superstition boosted the audio industry. What happened > to that "before we did not believe in cables"? Seems contradictory. I do not understand the contradiction. Audiophile cables first appeared in the mainstream in the late 1970s (i.e. they were stocked in hi-fi shops in the high street). The appearance of audiophile beliefs in the mainstream was probably around the mid 1970s but depends what you use as the criteria. Audiophile belief existed early than this but it was not in the mainstream (e.g. Stereophile). Prior to this home audio equipment had been designed and marketed primarily on technical performance like most consumer products of this kind still are. The rise of audiophile and the fall of high-fidelity in the home audio sector was not instantaneous and was not 100% but it was fairly rapid. Audiophile beliefs are incompatible with mainstream beliefs in science which lead to the audiophile sector having to become quite distinct from the pro-audio sector and the technical mainstream in a way it was not in the high-fidelity days. > What about plasma TVs; did videophiles on b&w screen TVs drove the today's industry as > well. I do not understand the question. > We all want nice pic and sound because reality is the reference. Although true to some extent, I can see little evidence to suggest it is a particularly strongly weighted factor for audiophiles. They would not pay lots of money for things audiophile cables, valve amplifiers, etc... if it was. -- honestguv ------------------------------------------------------------------------ honestguv's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13734 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45323 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
