- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The audio book debate
Posted on 1/4/22 at 9:50 am to bayoubengals88
Posted on 1/4/22 at 9:50 am to bayoubengals88
quote:
both listening and reading at the same time
I don't do this. My reading time is limited and I have an hour commute. Audiobooks in the car are the best way for me to get more books in. If I do listen at home, I typically don't have the book anyway so I won't be reading at the same time.
Slight exception: I'm working through Rick Atkinson's WWII trilogy. I've read some and I'm picking up at that point listening to get through it quicker.
I feel like I absorb the books and enjoy listening with a good narrator, but I'd rather read overall, and I do differentiate between listening/reading. If someone asks me if I read LOTR, I'll tell them I listened to the audiobook.
0
Posted on 1/4/22 at 10:56 am to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
Technically, someone consuming a book or other written word via Braille wouldn't be counted as reading either under most definitions requiring a visual aspect - but it definitely is reading
I think its safe to say a blind person can get a pass.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 10:58 am to iwyLSUiwy
quote:
I think its safe to say a blind person can get a pass.
Oh yeah? Where does it end?
Posted on 1/4/22 at 11:34 am to iwyLSUiwy
quote:
The audio book debate
quote:
Technically, someone consuming a book or other written word via Braille wouldn't be counted as reading either under most definitions requiring a visual aspect - but it definitely is reading
I think its safe to say a blind person can get a pass.
Then, the term read isn't only applicable visual recognition and can be applied to audiobooks IMO.
This post was edited on 1/4/22 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 1/4/22 at 11:50 am to Sneaky__Sally
I like to buy kindle books and add the audio alongside it. That way I can transition between them. These days I can’t really do either I can’t focus on the physical books as much as I use to. I’ve never been completely all in on audio.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 1:27 pm to bayoubengals88
I don’t own a lot of audio books. But what I have found is that if I love a book and the reader of an audio book does a good job, and his/her voice and inflection fit the narrative and pacing of the novel, I discover details and nuance my mind skipped over as I was reading.
On the other hand, I own a couple of audio books that I can’t listen to. The readers voice and inflection just don’t fit my own interpretation of the novel.
On the other hand, I own a couple of audio books that I can’t listen to. The readers voice and inflection just don’t fit my own interpretation of the novel.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 1:54 pm to bayoubengals88
I claim to have read the book even if I had only seen the movie.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 1:56 pm to Broken Coyote
Sound quality and narrator are key.
I'm not listening to a guy sound like he's talking into a paper bag for 20-40 hours.
Also, some narrators sound like they're just reading you a book while others feel like they are telling you a story. Small distinction, big difference.
As mentioned previously, Tim Gerard Reynolds is IMO the best. Nick Podehl with the Kingkiller Chronicales, Steven Pacey with First Law, and Ray Porter with the Bobiverse and Project Hail Mary books are all great as well.
I'm not listening to a guy sound like he's talking into a paper bag for 20-40 hours.
Also, some narrators sound like they're just reading you a book while others feel like they are telling you a story. Small distinction, big difference.
As mentioned previously, Tim Gerard Reynolds is IMO the best. Nick Podehl with the Kingkiller Chronicales, Steven Pacey with First Law, and Ray Porter with the Bobiverse and Project Hail Mary books are all great as well.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 1:57 pm to Broken Coyote
I listen to everything. I couldnt imagine reading something like Expeditionary Force. Skippy would lose half the humor. And then with Project Hail Mary, again, you'd lose half of the experience. Also, the Bobiverse.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 2:14 pm to LordSnow
quote:
I listen to everything. I couldnt imagine reading something like Expeditionary Force. Skippy would lose half the humor. And then with Project Hail Mary, again, you'd lose half of the experience.
That’s pretty ironic given the aim of reading is to enhance one’s imagination.
It’s sounds like you’d really have a blast with added visual!
Posted on 1/4/22 at 3:06 pm to SLafourche07
quote:
Have you ever had a movie on while studying, cooking, or getting work done?
Did you really WATCH it?!?!?!
If someone asks if you’ve “SEEN that one”, do you correct them and let them know you mostly listened to it?
Typically don't do this is I haven't seen the movie yet, but yes, I will say I watched it if I actually watched the majority of it. I might need to rewatch it bc I missed stuff or admit that I tuned out. So I might not have watched it completely because I checked out, but yea, I consider that watching it.
quote:
If someone asks if you’ve “SEEN that one”, do you correct them and let them know you mostly listened to it?
"Yea, but I wasnt paying all that much attention to it" or "yea but I missed some because I was cooking."
Which that ould be a lie because really my wife would be cooking and i'd be watching
quote:
Sorry. Had a few too many
Posted on 1/4/22 at 3:07 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
Then, the term read isn't only applicable visual recognition and can be applied to audiobooks IMO.
Im just saying as far as a debate of whether an audio book counts as reading the book or just listening to it, i'm going to give a person with a major disability a pass. Especially someone that literally cannot see what is on the pages of a book.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 3:13 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
That’s pretty ironic given the aim of reading is to enhance one’s imagination.
Who says thats the aim of reading? books have been around for thousands of years if you count scrolls etc.
And people have been telling stories around the campfire for even longer. I "see" the book in my mind when listening to it.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 5:08 pm to bayoubengals88
I listen to a ton of old radio shows from the 40s and never have that problem. Audio books are another story. Old Radio shows actually remind me of reading a book because you're using your own imagination to picture everything.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 5:12 pm to iwyLSUiwy
Well then clearly audiobooks can be counted as reading.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 10:01 pm to bayoubengals88
I much prefer audiobooks to physical books. The only thing I miss are maps and illustrations. Everything else about the experience is better for me.
I do still read physical books, but just not my first preference.
I do still read physical books, but just not my first preference.
This post was edited on 1/4/22 at 10:01 pm
Posted on 1/4/22 at 10:24 pm to bayoubengals88
I listen way more than I read, and of course it “counts”
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:17 am to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
Well then clearly audiobooks can be counted as reading.
Im confused as to the point you're making now. So you're only counterpoint now is in reference to blind people? A blind person can read braille, listen to an audio book, have someone shout it to them from across the room, I don't care. They cannot see the pages on the book, I'm not going to hold that against them. They literally do not have the physical capabilities to do what we're talking about.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:32 am to iwyLSUiwy
My main counterpoint is that read has multiple definitions that can work for non-visual input and interpretation of a story.
IF someone allows for "reading" to not be limited to only a visual recognition for a certain segment of the population - that indicates to me that said person recognizes the above definitions as applicable and those definitions would also be extended to the entire population.
A blind person, likely some of those with severe dyslexia, likely other conditions I am unaware of, unfortunately cannot read in the way it is defined from a visual perspective.
Luckily they, and any others who prefer, can read by definition of "hear and understand the words of" via audio input, it doesn't really have to be an audio input - braille, potentially even parts of nature that use scents to convey messages to another party, reading someone body-language, reading a voice tone, etc.
When you think about it, the visual act of reading for most people just transforms the words on the page into a voice in your head, the bulk of the "reading" is done after that minor transfer of data type - where a person thinks, understands, interprets, visualizes, etc.
TL;DR - basically the definition of read is not narrow and has lots of different ways it can be applied so I think non-visual input of various types of data, including audiobooks, can be classified as reading should a person choose to do so.
IF someone allows for "reading" to not be limited to only a visual recognition for a certain segment of the population - that indicates to me that said person recognizes the above definitions as applicable and those definitions would also be extended to the entire population.
A blind person, likely some of those with severe dyslexia, likely other conditions I am unaware of, unfortunately cannot read in the way it is defined from a visual perspective.
Luckily they, and any others who prefer, can read by definition of "hear and understand the words of" via audio input, it doesn't really have to be an audio input - braille, potentially even parts of nature that use scents to convey messages to another party, reading someone body-language, reading a voice tone, etc.
When you think about it, the visual act of reading for most people just transforms the words on the page into a voice in your head, the bulk of the "reading" is done after that minor transfer of data type - where a person thinks, understands, interprets, visualizes, etc.
TL;DR - basically the definition of read is not narrow and has lots of different ways it can be applied so I think non-visual input of various types of data, including audiobooks, can be classified as reading should a person choose to do so.
This post was edited on 1/5/22 at 10:44 am
Posted on 1/5/22 at 11:37 am to Sneaky__Sally
Would you say an illiterate football player, for example, who listened to an audio book actually read that book? How could he read it if he was illiterate? Therefore audiobooks =\= reading
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News