Live data from Hacker News

Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

newsandreviews.substack.com

1–10 of 71 posts

Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

#3
Its not cheating, some books can only be read, while others are improved with audio.

I prefer reading books, there is something special about holding a book in your hands, insering a book mark or jotting down something illegible in the margins.

I have read a massive amount of books in my time as a psychotherapist for 25 years.

For me, it is far better to read books to fully understand and examine the theories, concepts and methods illustrated by the authors. Marginalia comes to its fore.

However, I do listen to my fair share of audiobook. My main gripe with audiobooks is the readers voice. I cannot stand the squeeky, high pitched, robotic, nasally, sounds like AI, might well be AI, especially american female voices. Being British, just one paragraph and I am immediately put off and turn them off.

I have recently tried to listen to "Into the Into the Deep Wood 01, The Witch by Polina Volkova". I had to stop listening after a few paragraphs. If only the reader had a british voice.

I find switching back and forth between pages to find something you remember reading a few days ago is too difficult with an audiobook. No marginalia with audiobooks.

Do authors select who reads their books. maybe they do not. They should have readers from different countries and different languages.

My favourite audiobook reader is David Thorpe. I have the entire series of Mark Dawson's; John Milton, Beatrix Rose, Isabella Rose, Group 15, plus the novellas and more recently the Charlie cooper series.

I do not experience the same excitement reading those books.

Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

#5
post #2

I’m curious as to what people think about Audiobooks? They just seem so expensive to me, and the concept still feels like cheating to me.

After a day of staring at a screen being able to listen with my eyes closed is nice.

I don't mind reading either, it's not like one is better than the other.

Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

#6
post #2

I’m curious as to what people think about Audiobooks? They just seem so expensive to me, and the concept still feels like cheating to me.

I've switched completely to audiobooks for any kind of books (fiction primarily, but also non-fiction) that do not have code in them, or any other material that requires visual consumption. I made the switch more than 10 years ago. I am doubtful I'll ever be able to consume heavy prose requiring concentration and re-reading of the same or previous paragraphs via audiobooks; or poetry; so probably no Gravity Rainbow, or Infinite Jest, or the Bible for me; but for light reading, it's perfect.

Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

#7
post #2

I’m curious as to what people think about Audiobooks? They just seem so expensive to me, and the concept still feels like cheating to me.

Audiobooks are just a far superior experience to me. It's like reading someone's blog vs their podcast. I probably won't read the Huberman blog.

Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

#8
post #3

Its not cheating, some books can only be read, while others are improved with audio. I prefer reading books, there is something special about holding a book in your hands, insering a book mark or jotting down something illegible in the margins. I have read a massive amount of books in my time as a psychotherapist for 25 years. For me, it is far better to read books to fully understand and examine the theories, concep…

I like David Thorpe too. George Guidall and John Lee are probably my favorite narrators. Jonathan Cecil narrating the Jeeves books is wonderful. So is Stephen Fry, but he's pretty much amazing in anything.

Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

#9
I don't understand what's the debate unless you're assigning some higher value to the written form, like people who think reading makes you more disciplined or a better person than others in some way.

If you remove that and realize reading is a form of communication then it doesn't matter how you make it happen. There was a time when stories and knowledge was mostly shared verbally so it's not like reading is "the truest form".

Do what you like/works for you.

Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author

#10
post #2

I’m curious as to what people think about Audiobooks? They just seem so expensive to me, and the concept still feels like cheating to me.

I find audiobook performances are usually quite bad or cheesy. Even the ones that people rave about. I also find radio plays, or podcasts with full scripts, the same way.

I also find them simply boring to listen to, even the ones of books I love. It feels very passive and I'm always slightly annoyed that I can read significantly faster than the wpm of an audiobook (speeding up an audiobook ruins the performances).

Post reply on HN