They're two different things, that employ different senses and are neurologically demonstrated to provided different experiences.
We don't need them to battle it out unless for the clicks.
Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
11–20 of 71 posts
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#12I prefer to read books literally multithreaded. Different parts of my brain gets the pages through the bus or through different paths and do each their things.
I can't be alone. I get that being able to finish a book anyhow is nice, but isn't that also like leaving half a steak cut on the plate?
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#13They're two different things, that employ different senses and are neurologically demonstrated to provided different experiences. We don't need them to battle it out unless for the clicks.
They are different pathways to an equivalent experience.
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#14Amazon is trying hard with Audiobooks, but they seem to be extremely expensive to me, maybe that’s their way of making a lot more money than kindle format.
I spend my listening time just trying to catch up with podcasts.
What audio book formats are there, and services. Dare I say it are there any open source ones?
There are many podcast players, are the many audiobook players?
Is there anything really useful in an audiobook player? I guess going through chapters, maybe linking into the actual text.
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#15For me, the difference is being able to listen to - and finish - an audiobook, versus having dead tree sitting on the shelf and never even starting to read it.
For me it's both. Listening to an audiobook while I otherwise do a mundane task (cleaning, commuting) it makes it possible to get through books in situations where I normally would not.
But some books I need (or want) to concentrate on to get the full experience. And then I don't want to spoil it by half-listening while doing something else. At the same time, I'm not really able to just sit in the couch doing nothing but listen. So then I prefer a book to actually read, otherwise I end up never getting through it.
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#16I’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.
They're only "cheating" if you consider it some kind of virtue or competition to read books. So I'd start with reconsidering that viewpoint.
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#17Amazon is trying hard with Audiobooks, but they seem to be extremely expensive to me, maybe that’s their way of making a lot more money than kindle format. I spend my listening time just trying to catch up with podcasts. What audio book formats are there, and services. Dare I say it are there any open source ones? There are many podcast players, are the many audiobook players? Is there anything really useful in an au…
With a subscription I basically have more access to audiobooks than I can consume
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#18I’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.
This is a fascinating view to me. What exactly do you think it's cheating? The physical experience is different maybe, but take a 100 people reading and they'll have a different physical experience in the process of reading. Are some of them cheating?
If you consider a book as an information delivery system or "experience" delivery system, the information and experience is delivered in both formats?
What are you ranking a book on that audiobooks "cheat"?
(This is a genuine question, this topic fascinates me and I'm interested in people's views on it. I've been an audiobook reader a long time, but find the idea that "audiobooks are the same as reading" just as weird as the idea "audiobooks are a lesser / invalid reading".)
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#19Well narrated audio contains an interpretation, a layer of sublexical meaning that transmits value judgement, emphasis and often the narrator's imagination as to the nature of the character's voices. Often desirable, but sometimes we want our own interpretation, unique and uninfluenced by the narrator's biases.
Re: Audiobooks vs. Printed Books: a debate as a reader and an author
#20Its 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 have issues with voices too sometimes. My favourite audiobooks are the Doctor Who audiobooks that are actually read by David Tennant, because then you get the proper Doctor voice, a nice scottish "narrator" voice, and he does reasonably good impressions of everyone else too. I got The Stone Rose, The Resurrection Casket and The Feast of the Drowned as freebies with the Radio Times when I was very young, and I listened to them so much. I recently found them again on youtube, as well as some others I'd not heard before, and it was a fun experience since I can apparently recite a lot of them from memory now