Founder of Stereophile slams Audiophiles for losing their way

The founder of Stereophile rails against Audiophiles for losing their way:

"[H]igh-end audio lost its credibility [...] when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal."

http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/

Old article, but I think he hit the nail on the head.

 

While I think he has some good points, he comes off so bitter and negative that it's hard to get past his tone to the point he is trying to make.

 

I hope he's referring to people who spout crap like this.

 

Well, not entirely surprising given that he was 77 the time of that follow-up interview and 50 years in hi-fi. Nonetheless, J. Gordon Holt was a brilliant and pragmatic man, and most of what he had to say remains valid today.



2009 Obituary

 

Ironically, I was just thinking about this article when posting on the tubes vs. transistors thread. DBT is something that is sadly missing from the audiophile hobby, likely because it would put many companies out of business. What is truly compelling is when two products measure very similarly but sound repeatably qualitatively different to the listener. I'd love to see more engineers exploring this interesting quandary.

 

He was basically correct but he did have a lot of anger. Like the way he took a pot shot at a whole generation before signing off.

I agree the problem is not measurements, it is measuring the right things. And finding a tool that is sensitive enough to discern the data you are trying to analyze.

I loved his old reviews.

 

I feel the same way. Our shared hobby had branched off into the world of slightly pseudo science, almost magical traits, sky high prices, claims that are never verified, bashing of many things, and utter praise for other things.

It used to be a very sensible hobby, and the lower, middle and upper tiers were all in it for the same game, and were not at odds with each other.

Today and over the last several years, common sense seems to be partially gone, High end and high prices seem to be a bragging point, and something to bicker about, and to put down others etc.

It is very much not the hobby, I came into back around the late 70s.

 

Wonder how many celebrating this article will ever own an entire component system comprised of actual audiophile worthy high performance gear?

(Rhetorical question)

 

I don't quite buy his definition of the goal of audio reproduction, "Audio actually used to have a goal: perfect reproduction of the sound of real music performed in a real space. That was found difficult to achieve, and it was abandoned when most music lovers, who almost never heard anything except amplified music anyway, forgot what "the real thing" had sounded like".

Maybe because I'm too young, and I'm probably the exact kind of person he's mad at, but that seems like a very limiting definition. Sure it applies to classical, your swing era and jazz music... but there's so much new stuff out there that can't be performed in a real space, I mean, isn't the point of Space Rock to sound like it's NOT in a studio? And where does that leave so much done electronically or through MIDI? That definition seems more like a preference and an ideal than a reachable goal. Though, I suppose I do fit in his definition as someone who almost always listens to amplified music, I'm probably part of the problem.

Also, I know close to nothing about this guy, but my god, he seems like the most bitter, oldest person who probably yells at kids to get off his lawn.

 

It is sad in the end to have bitterness about a hobby one spent a great deal of time on and writing (well) about. It is always frustrating when one cannot gain enough converts to one's positions. Just as the microwave downgraded our cuisine so has the creation of MP3s done the same for our music. All too many are out there who believe both represent great progress, but both really represent more convenience than good taste.

I have no fight left in me to try and dissuade one away from MP3s. I"m not sure it can be done where all too many only use music in the background of another activity.

 

Far too often people tout or dismiss a format or release based upon ones equipment.
"Oh, Vinyl sucks" (beacuse I spent $4000 on a superior dac)
"I hate 5.1, thats not audiophile" (poster has 2 bookshelves on expensive stands he spent $9550 on)
"Not enough bass, too bright, mastering engineer sucks" (same as above, 8" drivers max, no sub)

 

Linn and Naim fxucked up hifi in the 80s with pointless arguements and religious semi fervour,and constant upgrades
Flat earthers to a man
Cynical excercises to extract the final pound from a punter
This is still reverberating in the hi End today (we auditioned 40 types of solder/wire....)
That turntables,valve amps and passive speakers exist at stratospheric costs is proof that this excercise is far from over
Double blind testing is the answer
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.....

 

Jim, while I feel quite certain you believe in your views, the reality, is, even many audiophiles find MP3 to sound great.

Have you recently listened to 320kbps MP3, or are you going from memory of what everyone says bad about MP3?

Seriously, there is nothing at all wrong with it. I listen for several hours a day, listen to redbook, and even some Hi-res, and while the recording and mastering obviously by far determine the sound, I have found the "actual differences" to be highly exaggerated between Good MP3, Redbook, loseless, and Hi Res.

I am not saying they are identical per se, but most comments come from an emotional standpoint. Most want to bash MP3, most want to brag up Hi res.

They are all for most intents, quite listenable.

 

I remember reading one of those issues with the speaker shoot out in Santa Fe many moons ago. It really struck as a wonderful little magazine at the time, it was the smaller digest size. Anyway, the speakers were all evaluated blind by the group of reviewers and then were reviewed individually. I don't recall the speaker or the reviewer but one model which had scored fairly low was not sounding so great to the guy who was re-reviewing it. Well lo and behold he swapped in some different speaker cables and the speaker now sounded superb.

This blew me away as I had never heard of this happening before. Remember this was in the late 80s , if memory serves, a time before there were hundreds of hi-end audio cable companies advertising in the audio mags. I will say though, I became hooked on that magazine and faithfully subscribed for many years.

I would love to see tests such as the blind speaker test occur more often and agree with most of what JGH said in that rant. The final paragraph was over the top though.

 

Coming up on 45 years in this "hobby" for me. And I also no longer consider replicating live music in my room as the goal. I mean, the room is 12x12. Why would I expect to hear a concert in that space.

I know what a piano sounds like, I know what an acoustic guitar sounds like, I know what a human voice sounds like. If I can hear that sound from my system, and I do, then I'm happy with it.

 

---------------------------
Kevin, I hear what you are saying, but this forum is not about "listenable" I didn't think. If someone thinks that MP3s sound great to them I have no problem with what ever makes them happy. If many become content that 320k is enough then better tracking and mastering will not matter and ProTools 2448 IS enough. I have nothing to gain by either side winning, other than hoping that lps, downloads, and SACDs would come down in price by more sales. I guess it would not make sense to have the new Mono Beatles' Boxed set all on a thumb drive. What ever people own now would be enough.

It does seem that to many over the last year or so that MP3 quality is not enough with the new USB products to help people hear "more", what ever their "more" is. If 320K or less works then I would bet the stock computer sound card is more than enough. Certainly the ones in the newer computers are way better than they were even 5 years ago.

I hope I don't sound snobbish, but I thought the goal was to hear more. Antony Michelson of Musical Fidelity once said in one of Sam Tellig's Stereophile articles that a manufacturer hate to hear the words,"that's good enough", about a piece of gear.

I have been listening to 4 - 2496 free downloaded tracks from Alan Sides from OceanWay Audio and they sounds so wonderful I can't imagine wanting them in a lesser format.