"audiophools"

[MJL21193]

I once did a stint behind the counter at a camera store. The most important sales advice I got from my boss was "Son, collecting camera equipment is a perfectly acceptable hobby, just don't confuse it with photography!"
I sold a lot of supplies and equipment to both types of hobbyists and became convinced that both groups got what they wanted for their time and money spent.

Exactly! Why do I only have 2 ears and 22 sets of speakers?

rdf: the article was funny, I laughed pretty hard at most of it (especially unobtainium).

 

[Cloth Ears]

I completely agree. It was done however using anecdotes, factual inaccuracies, and cherry picking extremes to represent common practice (how many $3800 interconnect owners do you know?), and in general purported to represent a point of view 'rooted a little more in reality' in an embarrassingly unscientific manner. It was hypocritical. On that point, little I saw in his bio gives him the right to weigh in on these matters so authoritatively, so why is it being accepted at face value? On agreement with its sentiments? Science is a method guys, not a popularity contest.

Who here, for example, really believes 'audiophools' use RCA instead of XLR for subjective reasons or plating? RCA connector use is based in historical precedent and the irony is it's typically very high end gear which includes a balanced option, usually mocked as overkill and unnecessary 'audiophoolery' in the home. Damned, do or don't if you're on the wrong side of the argument apparently. And what would Mr. Emmerson think of the very common silver - yes, SILVER! - plated XLRs littering studios around the world? He'ld no doubt drop dead at discovering the number of professional studios full of 'audiophool' cable, amplifiers, and speakers.

Number of $3800+ interconnect owners - 8

With the exception of his XLR thingy, I saw no 'factual inaccuracies', or 'cherry picking extremes'. And there may be silver plated XLRs littering studios where you come from, but not in this neck of the woods.

Our hobby is the only one where false advertising is the norm. When was the last time an 8 ohm speaker was, in fact, an 8 ohm speaker. Or that a 20w/ch into 8ohm amplifer (20-20kHz) actually could produce 20w from 20-20kHz? Or even worse, combining the 2 together finding that the 2 exacerbate each others failings. When was the last time a 90dB/w/m speaker was anything more than 87dB/w/m?

He is correct, this hobby is littered with people who will willing pay for 'snake oil' and who are phooled by pseudo-scientific bull(stuff). But, luckily, most of the people on this site are actually a bit more credible than the people who have to go into a hi-fi shop (salon, boutique, take you choice of words). Case in point - ygacoustics speaker, being talked about in this thread.

I too laughed at the article, like I laugh at most things that are sad, but true...

The opinions stated here are not necessarily those of the management.

 

[destroyer X]

The ones were "fished" by that unobitanium conversations..the ones paid for gadgets

for sure will not agree with our criticisms...this thread will show them to us..hehe

Cd demagnetizer made me fall down from my chair...lol.

regards,

Carlos

 

[Wavebourn]

I too laughed at the article, like I laugh at most things that are sad, but true...

What?

The article is a mess of criticism of audiofoolery and conter-audiofoolery, like the author did not know what he writes about, just collected all available articles and mixed them in a blender for taste.

 

[Cal Weldon]

What he was doing was throwing down a gauntlet that he knows no one will pick up.

 

[MJL21193]

In a rescent issue of UHF Magazine (I subscribe) they do a "blind" evaluation of 6 different power cords (yes, the cord for plugging a componet into the AC mains). The panel of 3 had no difficulty at all hearing which of these was superior. Included in this test was the original cheap ones supplied with some componet. The "sound" from this cable was so offensive, they could not finish the listening session for this and had to move to the next. The lowest price for any of the high end cables was in the $400.00 US range, with one reaching into the $1500.00 US area.
The proof is in the listening. Why would they mis-represent the sonic value of a power cord? More important, why take the chance that your power cord is allowing your system to sound like garbage?
Don't be so cheap, the best components deserve the best power cord.

 

[mikeks]

 

[neutron7]

One day a peculiar branch of quantum physics(or psychiatry) will discover that knowing the price of a piece of equipment will make it appear better.

 

[neutron7]

In a rescent issue of UHF Magazine (I subscribe) they do a "blind" evaluation of 6 different power cords (yes, the cord for plugging a componet into the AC mains). The panel of 3 had no difficulty at all hearing which of these was superior. Included in this test was the original cheap ones supplied with some componet. The "sound" from this cable was so offensive, they could not finish the listening session for this and had to move to the next. The lowest price for any of the high end cables was in the $400.00 US range, with one reaching into the $1500.00 US area.
The proof is in the listening. Why would they mis-represent the sonic value of a power cord? More important, why take the chance that your power cord is allowing your system to sound like garbage?
Don't be so cheap, the best components deserve the best power cord.

well they SAY they did that test, who knows what really happened.
check to see if any of those power cords are advertised in their magazine or sister publications.

 

[rdf]

One last kick at the can I suppose.

Number of $3800+ interconnect owners - 8

Are you claiming it's the norm then? Very extraordinary claim in my neck of the woods. It misses the point entirely otherwise, which was this isn't at all typical of those who believe interconnects make a difference. It's another, this time local, example of using extremes to stereotype the vast majority of 'audiophools' who've never seen a $3800 interconnect.

And there may be silver plated XLRs littering studios where you come from, but not in this neck of the woods.

http://www.neutrik.com/content/products/level03.aspx?id=204_42012003&catId=CatMSDE_audio
http://www.neutrik.com/content/products/level03.aspx?id=204_114781&catId=CatMSDE_audio

Look again, pulled almost at random from the site of arguably the world's most popular manufacturer of XLR. I've tossed boxes of silver-plated Cannon and Switchcraft rewiring radio plants.

Our hobby is the only one where false advertising is the norm. When was the last time an 8 ohm speaker was, in fact, an 8 ohm speaker.

Be serious. Again this is historical nomenclature well pre-dating 'audiophoolery', shorthand approximations for ease of selection and to simplify things for inexperienced shoppers.

Or that a 20w/ch into 8ohm amplifer (20-20kHz) actually could produce 20w from 20-20kHz?

In one form or another in North America since about the mid-Seventies:

http://www.ce.org/Standards/browseByCommittee_2624.asp

Not sure what the point of all this is though. When was the last time you read a motorcycle test in which wet weight and rear wheel horsepower matched manufacturer's spec? If you don't read them, it's not very often. Unless your objection was specifically limited to 'hobbies', you must not be seeing the same advertising world I do. Audio isn't unique.

But back to the original topic:

- 'audiophools' are analogue only? Hard pressed to make the case from the pages of Absolute Sound, Stereophile or DiyAudio.
- 'audiophools' listen to reference recordings only? I have 2000+ releases to toss. And contact those reviewers who attend concerts and play instruments to stop, immediately.
- The established techniques developed and proven over the years by audio professionals blah blahblah. Which audio professionals? Emmerson's television peers? I've been in broadcasting a quarter century now and, our little secret, audio quality hasn't been a driving industry force since Guy Lombardo and his band played live to air. To re-iterate an earlier and ignored point, the production magazines I get at work often feature studios full of 'audiophool' gear.
- Twin line interconnect? Niche Brit-only as far I know, yet Emmerson leaves the reader with the impression it's normal. The last audiophool cable I bought out of pure curiosity was triple shielded.
- MOVs. Plain ridiculous, and near incomprehensible. Is it his claim manufacturers aren't meeting their respective national safety standards? Or that there's a thriving market for high end transient suppressors? It makes me question whether he understands the difference between an MOV and a power conditioner.
- Audiophool journals. Now quite the extraordinary claim, that any magazine which discusses the sound of a DUT does so because it's on the payroll. No proof of course. 'We just know'.
- Mercury cables. Uh huh, some anecdote about someone on the Internet.
- Burning houses. Just another pathetic unsubstantiated anecdote. The 'may be legend' disclaimer is intended to leave the 'or not' impression and is again completely at odds with what I presume to be his stance: scientific.
- Interconnects vs. connecting lead. Please. This is an audiophool affectation? Or does he have an issue with evolving languages? He does come across as quite the reactionary in hindsight.

Again, Emmerson, not content at merely picking them, distorts the ridiculous, marginal and even the fictional in his efforts to whitewash a caricature. Pure punditry targeting a straw man. Anti-science. Which is fine, as you say the audio world is full of such things, unless you claim to represent the opposing viewpoint. Then it gets complicated.

Wavebourne nailed it.

 

[MJL21193]

rdf: I guess you consider yourself an audiophile, therefore you take personal exception to the article. I read it thinking it was supposed to be funny, and indeed, I found it to be funny.
The writer, if he has any serious interest in audio at all, is probably guilty of the same "audiophoolery" he's making fun of. I believe everyone who frequents this forum is just as guilty, though some moreso than others. I've caught myself on several occasions wondering if I had used that 7" midbass instead of the one that cost half as much would I be transported to sonic bliss? How about the $56.00 capacitor instead of the $5.60 one? And how about my choice of speaker cable- 18 gauge lamp cord?
It's all a matter of degrees.

 

[Wavebourn]

And how about my choice of speaker cable- 18 gauge lamp cord?

I use an orange cable from power extender, green and black wires in parallel, it is at least thicker than 18 gauge fom your lamp.

Anyway, the writer is totally ignorant of what he is writing about, or makes a fun of messing arguments and counter-arguments together.

 

[MJL21193]

I use an orange cable from power extender, green and black wires in parallel, it is at least thicker than 18 gauge fom your lamp.

Anyway, the writer is totally ignorant of what he is writing about, or makes a fun of messing arguments and counter-arguments together.

An orange extension cord? Better than my lamp cord? We shall have to set up a blind evaluation to determine which is the superior sounding solution.
Totally ignorant is a little harsh, is it not? You have to have a sense of humor, and take things with a grain of salt, and not be so sensitive about things you read here. I consider forums such as this to be 99% entertainment, 1% educational, and that's because I'm feeling generous tonight.

 

[Cloth Ears]

P.S. rdf,

I knew a fellow, a few years back, who did high priced installations around here, which is where I met the 8. One pair was over $10,000 - in the late 1990's - and I scored a pair costing $2,500 for nix when they were 'thrown out'. They were badly constructed and degraded the sound of my mid-fi system.

And, regarding the XLR's, I'll have to check mine. I guess I was expecting the same lack of common sense as with RCA's (ie. the goldplate is thicker on the outside).

The rest... well let's just say I couldn't find a smilie who was fishing

Any idea why this is in Solid State?

 

[EC8010]

Twin line interconnect? Niche Brit-only as far I know, yet Emmerson leaves the reader with the impression it's normal.

MOVs. Plain ridiculous, and near incomprehensible.

What's a "twin line interconnect"? As a Brit and former broadcast engineer, I've never heard the term. Used a lot of silver-plated XLRs, though. Come to think of it, MUSA video jackfield connectors (they are niche-Brit) are always silver-plated.

For some reason, MOVs are routinely sold as aftermarket accessories in the UK. I've never really been convinced. After all, who's to guarantee that the mains spike arrives tidily on the peak of the mains waveform and not at 0V?

I found the Emmerson article quite amusing, but I didn't take it seriously, not when I know that the writer does this for a hobby:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Electronic-Classics-Collecting-Restoring-Repair/dp/0750637889

It's actually quite a useful book, by the way.

I'm afraid we have to face up to the fact that 99% of the world couldn't give a stuff about audio quality, 99% of the remaining 1% don't understand the physics/electronics of how to achieve it, and the remainder are broke. That's why people pay to download pop music with zero dynamic range, compressed using MP3, converted by a cheap and nasty DAC, amplified by an amplifier optimised for efficiency and nothing else, then reproduced through a pair of earphones costing £1.

Incidentally, a minor breakthrough recently occurred in my house when I temporarily replaced my small broadcast monitoring loudspeakers with a pair of really ugly and badly made MDF boxes (out of practice at woodwork, I'm afraid). Despite the immediate objections on seeing the horrible boxes, there was also a complaint when they were removed because "they sounded nice."

 

[MJL21193]

What's a "twin line interconnect"?

Twin line interconnects=two un-shielded conductors side by side.

I'm afraid we have to face up to the fact that 99% of the world couldn't give a stuff about audio quality, 99% of the remaining 1% don't understand the physics/electronics of how to achieve it, and the remainder are broke. That's why people pay to download pop music with zero dynamic range, compressed using MP3, converted by a cheap and nasty DAC, amplified by an amplifier optimised for efficiency and nothing else, then reproduced through a pair of earphones costing £1.

[/B]

Amen.

 

[KBK]

In a rescent issue of UHF Magazine (I subscribe) they do a "blind" evaluation of 6 different power cords (yes, the cord for plugging a componet into the AC mains). The panel of 3 had no difficulty at all hearing which of these was superior. Included in this test was the original cheap ones supplied with some componet. The "sound" from this cable was so offensive, they could not finish the listening session for this and had to move to the next. The lowest price for any of the high end cables was in the $400.00 US range, with one reaching into the $1500.00 US area.
The proof is in the listening. Why would they mis-represent the sonic value of a power cord? More important, why take the chance that your power cord is allowing your system to sound like garbage?
Don't be so cheap, the best components deserve the best power cord.

We just showed our gear for the first time at the Montreal audio show 2007 (FSI). I specifically went to pains to not use any high end audio power cords. We were judged by many to have the best or one of the very top (2 or 3) sound quality at the show.

What we DID do..is use two 20 amp (cont.) rated 80lb balanced AC units from Furman. Far better money spent that power cords. I won't argue that power cords do SOMETHING, but it is a far more intelligent point to go after the source in a, er, intelligent manner and move to balanced AC first. And then just use mundane power cords of appropriate guage. The quality of the sound and associated dynamics..and associated noise floor of the system was good enough that many folks told us that they expected to enter the room and see a man playing a guitar and singing (John Martyn:Solid Air)..which is a VERY high and powerful compliment from seasoned audiophiles.

As some of you know, to alleviate any possibility of surge current draw from the audio equipment rearing it's head as a crushed current transient (draw) from my balanced AC transformer, mine is a 450lb 50kva (100kva rated for 30 seconds) balancing transformer. That should stop any current limitations from rearing their ugly little heads.

I also own interconnects which are in the $2500++ range and 15k++ speaker cables. I can't tell you exactly what they are yet, but maybe in the near future, I hope. Suffice it to say, even the most die hard objectivist scientist/phd among you will agree...that I'm definitely on to something (not simply 'on something').

 

[MJL21193]

Ok. Interconnects carry the <2 volt signal from the component to the preamp or poweramp. At any department store you can buy cables that will do this flawlessly. They will be less than $10.00, they will be properly shielded; and because it is currently trendy, they will have gold plated RCA's on each end. There will be NO difference in the resulting sound quality when these are used. To claim otherwise is ridiculous. Shielding is all that matters.
Speaker cables are another story. They don't need shielding, they just need to have low impedance. To achieve low impedance, the cable has to be thick enough to carry the current to the speaker without losses. For most HiFi setups, 18 gauge wire is enough. Heck, if you are feeling generous and really want to be absolutely sure that you don't lose even a microvolt of power on the 5 foot trip from the amp to the speaker, use 16 gauge. Anyone who thinks that $15000.00 is a good investment in speaker cable, better be buying enough to wire all of Canada for sound.

 

[SY]

MJL, I think you need to look more carefully at the high end to understand why your assertions are oversimplification.

Audiophile-approved electronics often have high source impedances, have marginal stability, and are sometimes seem almost deliberately designed to have a frequency response that varies grossly with load. As an amp breaks in and out of ultrasonic oscillation with one cable and not another, the satisfied audiophile basks in the knowledge that his amp is very revealing of cable differences. And, of course, the unconditionally stable p.o.s. that covers up those differences is scorned as "mid-fi." Likewise the equalization effects from moderate levels of cable capacitance because of high source impedances and odd practices regarding feedback.

But the differences are real, the audiophile does sometimes hear them as he changes wires, but misattributes what he hears as some intrinsic quality of the wire.

Do not assume that people are using competently-designed electronics.

 

[MJL21193]

As an amp breaks in and out of ultrasonic oscillation with one cable and not another, the satisfied audiophile basks in the knowledge that his amp is very revealing of cable differences.
Do not assume that people are using competently-designed electronics.

Elloquently put.