Beware the audio guru


There are a few contributors to these forums who apparently see themselves as gurus. They speak in absolutes, using words such as "always" and "never." They make pronouncements about products or techniques they’ve never heard or experienced, justifying their conclusions because contrary claims are "impossible" or "snake oil." Those who disagree are accused of being "deluded," or suffering some insurmountable bias, or attempting to further some commercial agenda. On occasion, they have taunted detractors with an appeal that they engage in a wager - one guy wanted $25,000 cash up front and an agreement drafted by lawyers. Another offered 5-to-1 odds.

I am not going to tell you who to believe. But for anyone who might be uncertain about sorting out conflicting claims here, I suggest they consider the behavior of experts in other fields. No good doctor offers a 100 percent guarantee on any treatment or surgical procedure, even if medical science suggests success. No good attorney will tell you that you have a case that positively can’t be lost, even if the law appears to be on your side. No true professional will insult you for the questions you ask, or abandon you if you seek a second opinion.

A doctor conducts his own tests. An engineer makes his own measurements. Neither will insist the burden of documentation falls upon you.

These might be details to consider as you sift through the many conflicting claims made on Audiogon. In short: Decide for yourself. Don’t let other people tell you how to think, or listen.
Ag insider logo xs@2xcleeds
roberjerman,

Aczell and Moncrieff? You must be joking and/or delusional.

Aczell was a big-time subjectivist until he lost his hearing, went nuts, and tried to cover it up with his new-found allegiance to measurements. Were you even around for the Audio Critic debacle? As a charter subscriber I first thought that Aczell actually had something good going on. Then he stiffed me for the last promised but undelivered issues. He became a charlatan and tried for the brass ring with those crappy speakers that he tried to palm off on unsuspecting Audiophiles, not even revealing that he had money in the company. And you present him as praiseworthy? You obviously haven't been around long enough to even realize what you're trying to promote.

As to Moncrieff, the man hasn't a clue as to what he pretends to know.
2psyop
I have mentioned a very inportant fact here before when evaluating audio equipment. It gets overlooked at least 99 out of 100 times. Most often, it is ignored because it is true. It is one’s own hearing ability. A great many of us audiophiles and audiofools have hearing LOSS. Mainly in the upper to mid freq band. How many of you have had a hearing test and know that your main listening instrument is working properly???

It would not surprise me, if 10 people assembled together for a hearing audition and evaluation session and they did not agree on what sounded best. Chances are good, they don’t all hear well. Some have hearing loss.

>>>>Hey, that’s the way it goes sometimes. On the other hand one might argue someone with excellent measured hearing might not know what’s he’s listening to or be able to pass a blind test. And someone who’s hearing has degraded might be able to pass with flying colors. 
Cleeds - good question - how to diminish the «I know better than you» guru factor'. The «collective» power of Audiogon is what makes it interesting for me. I wish the proportion of people who actually listen before judging would be better, but all in all, it works.
I read an article, not related to audio, where an audiologist said that if you gave him 10 people with identical hearing profiles, all 10 would want their hearing aids adjusted differently.  No two people hear the same.
It's funny how some people delude themselves into thinking they are the smartest most scientific ones on here and they bring the supernatural like "Blue Fairies" into it.While the ones being addressed are smart enough to build good amplifiers from scratch, are accomplished musicians on several different instruments and know how music should sound infinitely better than they do.They advise to stick to the facts and the majority of what they chime in with is highly subjective and not near facts.They pretend to be scientifically astute.When I was reading "Science & Method" and George Gamov's "One Two Three..Infinity", before I was 20 years old they were probably absorbed in"Archie" and "Scooby Door" comic books.Why pick on people on here.Do you have a problem? I think so.