What happened to diyaudio?

[svejkovat]

Been gone for a few years. Recently came back to discover that a thread about speaker connections has generated almost 7500 responses. There's a thicket of loopy esoterica concerning something called EnABL (the name alone really fails the smell test for catchy commercialeze vs straightforward DIY idea exchanges). Not to pick on that one too much. There're probably many other similar "ideas" here. EnABL was just the nearest one bobbing on the surface when I returned to take a look in the forum. There are so many forums out there. What attracted this to Diyaudio?


There seem to be increasing numbers of members with commercial bait (links to their moneymaking ventures) dangling from their signatures. You know who they are. That they don't share their designs openly with the community is perfectly reasonable. It's a business venture. Nothing wrong with that.

But there was at least one thread, probably many more since I've only just glimpsed the surface of the new site, where one of these guys got into a tussle with Zaph over one of his designs and seemed, to me at least, to contribute at least a small part in driving him (and his type) away. This from a member who does not post his designs openly for community criticism/evaluation/use/celebration/contribution (why should he after all? He's making money on them. Perfectly justifiable. No?). What?

Is it just me? Anyone else think this forum has gotten a little disappointingly 'faith based' and sometimes self serving? Strayed a bit from it's former no-nonsense, more genuine spirit of do it yourself, nuts and bolts project sharing?

[syn08]

Originally Posted by svejkovat

Is it just me?

No.

[svejkovat]

And BY ALL MEANS I hope that 99 percent of the members here are NOT offended by that little rant. I'm genuinely humbled by the wealth of resource contributed here by enthusiasts whose talent and knowledge far exceeds my own. I'm not suggesting anyone abandon ship. Who the hell am I?

Perhaps what I've noticed is simply inevitable. Any society has to deal equitably with growth, even some that is distasteful at times. That part of it that I've referred to just seems a little, well, distasteful. Not constructive at the very least. That's all. But there it is anyway.

[Gordy]

Originally Posted by svejkovat

And BY ALL MEANS I hope that 99 percent of the members here are NOT offended by that little rant.

No problem... rant on... !

[enochRoot]

i recently started looking around after several years and noticed the same thing. still is quality information here, but you need to dig deeper to find it.

[syn08]

Originally Posted by svejkovat

And BY ALL MEANS I hope that 99 percent of the members here are NOT offended by that little rant. I'm genuinely humbled by the wealth of resource contributed here by enthusiasts whose talent and knowledge far exceeds my own. I'm not suggesting anyone abandon ship. Who the hell am I?

Perhaps what I've noticed is simply inevitable. Any society has to deal equitably with growth, even some that is distasteful at times. It's just a little, well, distasteful I guess. That's all. But there it is anyway.

To me, the commercial side taking over it's a natural trend. It should be the owner's responsability to find and implement a model and a set of rules (aka "policies") to keep a certain (desired) profile and mission on track.

Scott Wurcer was suggesting a Free Software Foundation (FSF) model, which I agree it would probably be the best. But how such a model could be implemented and enforced, I don't know.

[Peter M.]

Originally Posted by enochRoot

i recently started looking around after several years and noticed the same thing. still is quality information here, but you need to dig deeper to find it.

Could it also be that the more we learn and know, the higher the threshold for what we consider quality information becomes?

[enochRoot]

not sure of that...i'm still pretty ignorant

Originally Posted by Peter M.

Could it also be that the more we learn and know, the higher the threshold for what we consider quality information becomes?

[cbdb]

Could it also be that the more we learn and know, the higher the threshold for what we consider quality information becomes?

Sure, but often the problem here is the more we learn (from sometimes unreliable sources) and the more we think we know (but dont) the easier it is to state opions as facts, and that is not quality information. I read thread after thread about mods to comercial products that "sound great" but have no proof. Lay people start to think they know more than the EEs who designed the stuff and that kind of arogance gets you no where. There are some good mods but some mods I have seen actually make the circuit worse, but they still "sound so much better". There is an enourmous amount of quality info on this site, but there is just as much **. The problem has become finding the truth (with patience you still can).

My turn to rant.
I dont have a problem with people mucking about with there own equipment to get it the way they want it to sound, but being egocentric enough to think everyones system should sound like theres is what bugs me. Very rarely do I see people say "just my opinion but it sounds better TO ME". They think because they like the sound better it is better, even if they have just added a bunch of distortion.

[planet10]

Originally Posted by svejkovat

There's a thicket of loopy esoterica concerning something called EnABL

You tripped over one of those ideas that is a big stretch for those with "rational" thinking, but this is one that has turned many into believers. No valid double blind tests have been executed (that takes a lot of resources), but single blind tests support a positive result. No one knows how it works, but some of the speculation drives some crazy.

All the info to try it is readily available.. just listen to it.

Given that technology has been given away by the inventor, it is hard to say he has a commercial motive.

dave