I think the primary reason that I got hooked on this hobby was my 10 year background as an amateur photographer. If you think audio guys are an odd bunch, go hang out in photo forums. Photographic hobbyists obsess over methodologies, systems and outputs just as much as you guys do. Endless discussions on sharpness, resolution, tonal balance and contrast of lens and paper. Synergy between lens, film, chemicals and paper. Vibration isolation for tripods and enlargers. You have treble, mids and bass. We have highlights, mid tones and shadows. And like audio, we also have endless (and often more heated) debates about analogue vs. digital.

One deals with aural reproduction while the other with visual reproduction, so there’s no surprise on the similarities. There are differences though, and two stands out for me.

The first is the lack of women participation in audio. This hobby is beyond the description of “male dominated.” When I was studying Engineering in university, we had a female population rate of 20%. THAT was male dominated. Audio can’t even claim that; it’s closer to being “male exclusive”.

I don’t buy the argument that women are turned off by audio because of its technical nature, of having to deal with various electrical and mechanical components. I’m taking an advance black and white darkroom course right now at a local university and almost half the class are women. And let me tell you, it’s not a fluff course. The details that we get into on the mechanics of the enlarger and lens, interaction between paper and different chemical combinations, contrast/density control, and mapping of tonal ranges from subject to film to paper is enough to make your head spin. But yet, the women in the course dive into all this with as much enthusiasm as the men.

So what give? Women appreciate excellent musical presentations just as much as men. In fact, on average, women have better hearing than us and should be able to appreciate all the tweaks and voodoo magic that we obsess about. You can argue that women are more likely to be turned off by the shear amount of money required for a high-end system, but we all know (the smart ones at least) that amazing music can be reproduced on the cheap.

The second difference I see between audio and photography is the issue of interpretation. Photography deals with the (re)production of visual moments and it’s acceptable (and encouraged) for the photographer and printer to put their own interpretation into the process. I’m not talking about PhotoShop stuff where you cut and paste subjects, change their positions, size, motion, and/or colour to recreate a completely different scene. I’m talking about subtle controls such as density balance, contrast, paper texture, grain resolution and tones to establish the emotion and character of a photo. I can take the same negative and reprint in five different ways, and each version still be considered correct. There are certainly wrong ways to create a photo, but there is no one right way. It’s all about objectives and taste.

However, in audio, hobbyists are obsessed with faithful reproduction. Systems that have their own colour, characters and personality are marginalized. Oh sure, they’re fun and exciting and sound great, but they’re not accurate, so they can’t be taken seriously. No respect at all. It seems to me that the upper echelon of audio systems are more interested in the process than the results. What about objectives and taste?

I just want to end off by describing one of the biggest milestones that I hit as a photographic hobbyist. It happened three years ago when I put my camera away and stopped reading photo magazines for over six months. Up until that point, I read every magazine and drooled over ads for the latest and greatest. I constantly hung out at equipment stores and surfed on the net looking for bargains, for that new piece that will allow me to take better photos. After six months of being “out of touch”, I picked up my camera and just shot. It was at that point when I was concentrating on using what I had, instead of looking for that next upgrade, that I found myself taking the best photos of my life and enjoying the process more than ever. Sadly, I’m not there yet with my audio hobby, but I do look forward to getting there.

Gar.

One thing I never could understand is getting involved in
hobbies or jobs that seem to be male dominated when that
was never my intent.

But consider the flip side of things: If a woman was designing
a line array rig, whould she have to go through the Spousal
Approval Factor to do the setup? Hanging a photo on the wall
would be much easier for hubby to handle. And here again, I'm
wagering that the hobby is some sort of an escape from whatever
is going on in relationships, else why talk about it at all?

A poll of users of this forum or full range driver forum,
Audio Asylum etc would reveal that there is a clear majority and
a clear minority of participants.

I, for one would like to give an equal amount of enthusiasm
to cooking or flower arranging and so be more in touch with
women I'd like to meet. But I don't, I have focussed on this.
And since I have to do for myself, the decor and food tend to be very
simple, if not totally mundane.

And also consider this: I think the hobby is an outlet for
frustrated musicians... it is a way to 'make music' without playing
an instrument. That's all the psychology I have to contribute today.

By the way, do you have a photography site? I'd love to see your photos. I have a 35mm camera and I click some shots from time to time. A few of them have turned out great, almost art. The thing is, I seem to gravitate towards taking photos of car parts and stuff like that, which isn't interesting to most people. But I also take photos of Alona, usually out in gardens or other scenic places, and those are always really great, like I said, almost art.

Speaking of art, there are a couple of artists that participate on these audio forums that are very talented. I love looking over their work, and have bought some of it. Dragan V. is a very talented painter, and I haven't seen him around for a couple of months, but he pops in from time to time. Sheri B. is also a talented artist, and happens to be the webmaster of this site.

Dave

For me, my hobbies are an escape from the mundane day-to-days of my job. If I had to define myself solely by my day job, I'd shoot myself. One thing I hate about meeting new people is when they ask "what do you do?" and expects an answer based on your job. Next time someone asks me that question, I going to answer "husband, dog owner, photography student and aspiring cabinet maker."

Gar.

You're right that in auto hardware, women are under-represented. But they are still represented, compared to the near non-existance in audio hardware. Believe it or not, the Subaru forums I used to participate in had their fair share of women who are into mods just as much as the guys. In fact, one of the most prominent figures in the online Subaru owners community is a gal who goes by SubieGal, a rally racer herself (women racers are so sexy!). www.subiegal.com

However, I do agree with you that men and women have different attitudes when it comes to technical hobbies. In general, women tend to be more focused on the results than the process. They will take time to understand and appreciate the technologies, hardware and methods, but only sees them as a means to achieve a particular result. Guys are more likely to get caught up on the process for its own sake.

In terms of my photos Wayne, would it surprise you that someone like myself, who listens to vinyl through a tube system on homemade speakers, don't shoot with a digital camera? I do use digital if I want to do quick web postings, but for serious shooting, I still shoot black & white with my manual focus Canon F-1n (built in the mid 80's), process my own film, and print in a darkroom. I have not seen any printers on the market that I'm satified with that does not cost more than a small car. Spec-wise the printers look good, but compared with a real print, to me, it lacks "life". Most people don't understand because they've never seen a real B/W print in their life. Their only benchmark for photographies is what they see in magazines, printed at a lousy 300 lpm. Of course computer printouts look good to them. (sounds like vinyl vs CD, doesn't it?)

But my wife recently brought home an "all-in-one" scanner, so I might looking into doing some postings.

Gar.

For me it's like being in the French Foreign Legion.

I wasn't trying to be a troll. Well, maybe a little bit.

The point up there about 'sport engineering' I think taps a
good idea.

I like the design process and read Architectural Record for fun.

We have a little digital camera that's fine for taking pictures like a little instamatic would be used for. We can upload 'em and E-Mail 'em easily and right away. But the camera I use most often is a Canon EOS Rebel G with a 28-105mm lense. It's a pretty good camera, and I have several filters so I can do some really cool stuff with it.