It's in one ear and out the other unless I'm reading the book whilst listening. If I had a droning job then I probably would be more enamored with audiobooks.

>>25379200
>Do you find that you retain less of the material?
yes
>Is the retention insufficient enough that the ability to multi-task is not worth it?
no, but it depends how much you need to focus on whatever you're doing
for example, if im trying to listen to an audiobook while hiking, looking at birds and dodging roots, it's much harder to focus on listening compared to listening while doing something super monotonous like walking/cycling/driving a car
>Is the medium worse or better for certain genres?
I find non fiction audiobooks much easier to follow
>Do you find any extra satisfaction in audiobooks?
no

>>25379200
people get weird about audiobooks and forget oral tradition is the oldest form of storytelling

>>25379200
it's not the audio book that I have problem with, it's that people use it and say it's the same as reading. You cannot read and do your chores. You cannot read and drive. You cannot read and walk (well). There is no reason that because you're listening you're activating the same parts of the brain and thus getting the same experience as the book. If they're different experiences, fine, but stop pretending that doing your laundry and listening to Tolkein is the same as sitting down in a nook and listening to the book.

I work nights so audiobooks are a constant companion. A good reader who acts out the dialog makes the experience live.

I love audiobooks but deeply dislike audible.

>Do you find that you retain less of the material?
No.
>Is the retention insufficient enough that the ability to multi-task is not worth it?
I have no issues with retention when it comes to audiobooks. I don't due cognitively difficult things while enjoying a audiobook. "Multi-tasking" is shit like walking, riding as a passenger somewhere (while not getting motion sickness), or brainless chores like washing dishes and sweeping. Stuff that doesn't actually require even 10% of my attention. If something actually requires my focus I pause the audiobook, quickly deal with whatever demands my attention, then go back to the audiobook.
>Is the medium worse or better for certain genres?
Matter of taste. Only books I don't prefer in audiobook form are reference books and educational books. You know, books where you are typically flipping back and forth through the book in a non-liner fashion while extracting particular chunks of information and ignoring other chunks. Audiobooks are bad for that kind of reading, studying, and note taking. Audiobooks are primarily for narratives. At least in my opinion.
>Do you find any extra satisfaction in audiobooks?
Yes. It allows for the deepest immersion of any medium for me. I prefer it to all other methods of story telling besides maybe in some select cases animation. It is by far the most enjoyable way of engaging with a book.

>Or any other opinions that you hold?
I think a lot of people who have trouble with audiobooks self sabotage their experience. They don't actually pay full attention to the book. They don't visualize what is described. They just play the audio as background noise then complain that they can't remember stuff they never paid attention to well enough to form memories.

There are also people who for retarded reasons I rather not get into, think of audiobooks as "cheating" and therefor don't "count". These people are stupid and should be mocked.

>>25380277
>I love audiobooks but deeply dislike audible.
why? what's the alternative?

>>25379200
I think this is going to be controversial, but I think that most people don't realize it's just harder than reading. There is nothing special that makes us wired for spoken languages. People used to speak, because for the vast majority of cases, speaking was more practical, as it doesn't require tools, nor line of sight.

>>25379200
>Do you find that you retain less of the material?
No, not really. I could probably give a beat for beat outline of the last 1 or 2 books i listened to
>Is the retention insufficient enough that the ability to multi-task is not worth it?
Nah.
>Is the medium worse or better for certain genres?
Don't think so,
>Do you find any extra satisfaction in audiobooks?
Not over normal reading, no.
>Or any other opinions that you hold?
Nah

A good question to ask the audio book listeners is when was the last time they read a book.

>>25379200
Audiobooks are great for people who otherwise wouldn't be able to read. Now, at least, they can enjoy literature in some respect, even if it's a shadow of what it would have been otherwise. We have to be realistic; it's the 21st century and most people have been addicted to passive consumption for a century.

File: Jolly_Roger.jpg (552 KB, 3234x3210)

552 KB JPG

>>25380444
Arrrrrrrr. Let d'others buy th' Audible books f'r ye, matey.

>>25382688
Reading in general is inherently a passive activity.
You aren't active in any sense of the word when reading. You are passively consuming written content while passively sitting still. Nothing about it is active.

Audiobooks are for only the most shallow of books. Serious books invite you to regularly pause, re-read, and even read at varying pace. Visa orchievable with audiobooks, but in a more clunky manner.

In short: audiobooks handicap texts whose complexity is structural or referential.

>>25382789
This comes off as something you heard somewhere and not something you have ever personally experienced.

>>25382804
Is your post meant to contribute to this discussion in some way?

>>25382838
Mindless repetition of things you heard in another thread about audiobooks isn't a discussion.
You have nothing to discuss. You have no thoughts of your own.
You are just a npc.

>>25382860
Do you see the irony in labelling something as NPC without reasoning with the argument itself? Your reflexive thought-termination is hypocritical.

>>25382877
>more buzzwords he heard from somwhere else and doesn't even know how to make them fit in context

Oh no, I broke the bot.

>>25379200
They're cool if you're working or something, otherwise they're just worse books. Have a buddy who used to be welder and he'd listen to audiobooks all day while on the job.

>>25380656
it was also just totally infeasible to create a meaningful supply of any single title for individual-ownership before the printing press. books would be laboriously hand-copied by scholars and the final product costed absurd amounts of money. the only people that could afford such things were mostly aristocrats; and furthermore, obscuring a book in your private library was seen as immoral and contemptable. book ownership is one of the many things we take for granted now, but for much of history was a comical luxury.

>>25382804
>This comes off as something you heard somewhere and not something you have ever personally experienced.
Any proof of this? Or are you making an ad hominem to avoid engaging with something that disconcerts you?

>>25379200
I find myself going on long walks every day to reach atleast 15k steps a day. Sometimes I listen to nothing or music or podcasts while I walk, but now I'm thinking of starting to listen to audiobooks were as before I'd only read books physically.

I feel like I can "get through" books faster with audiobooks. To me some books aren't worth reading to deeply analyze, go back on, annotate and philosophize about but just take in (possibly solely as entertainment) and maybe do those other things to a little extent. The list of books that I want to experience just gets larger and larger each day the more I found out about different authors and things that interest me, so using walking time for this doesn't sound too bad.

>>25383012
Not every book needs to be homework.
You are allowed to just enjoy the story. The vast majority of books are supposed to be entertainment.

>>25382989
Bot post.
Copied word for word from somewhere else.

speaking of audible i was listening to that new great courses course on cannabis and the second lecture is very interesting how she talks about how enjoying smoking weed is a social construct. the feeling u get when u smoke weed is neutral but pot smokers sort of convince each other to enjoy it.

>>25384143
That's stupid even on the face of it.
Social constructionist are actually delusional.

>>25384207
if u smoke weed and get tired, paranoid, and thirsty it's not obviously that's some wonderful thing you want to spend all your time doing, but when a bunch of stoner buddies convince u that's enjoyable u consume more. if u got filtered by this basic concept u are just too fucking normie to go on.

>>25384220
It's a stupid concept that is objectively false.
Social construct hypothesis is stupid. It's first principles aren't grounded in reality. It's philosophy is a offshoot of gnosticism, not science or the anything to do with seeking truth in the real world. At the root, social constuctionist don't really believe the real world actually exist.

>>25384254
>gnosticism
oh u had an ideological lobotomy

>>25384264
Says the person fully believing that people find weed enjoyable due to peer pressure because some tard gave a ted talk saying so.

>>25384313
being a pothead is a recent phenomenon that goes back to the early 1960s, even the beats didn't care about it that much, but people have been using hemp products for like 10,000 years.

>>25384322
People have been using the psychoactive effects of cannabis for thousands of years.
Even in America it was used both in medicine and recreationally for hundreds of years.

Resorting to straight up lying about history to make a argument is pathetic.
Even the laziest lookup of weed's history shows you are totally full of shit.
So at this point I am convinced you aren't arguing sincerely and instead just saying whatever bullshit you can to get negative attention.
I am no longer going to bother arguing in good faith with you. You are just a troll and a faggot.

>>25384379
check out "becoming a marihuana user" by howard becker

>Howard S. Becker's seminal 1953 study, "Becoming a Marihuana User," argues that marijuana use is a learned social behavior rather than a result of psychological predisposition or physical addiction. Becker identified three critical stages individuals must navigate to become regular users: learning to smoke properly to produce effects, learning to recognize those effects, and learning to enjoy them as pleasurable rather than alarming.

>>25382789
Maybe it takes a shallow intelligence to not retain what they hear from an audiobook.

>>25379200
i stopped listening to audiobooks in favour of ai summaries. i ask chatgpt to give me a few dozen academic work suggestions in whatever field i am currently interested in, download them from annas, upload them into a chatgpt project, then ask it to give me a couple of prompts i can use for it to generate a series of overviews that will give me as much value as possible without the usual fluff that makes books "well written". i am in my knowledge and optimization era

>>25379796
>A good reader who acts out the dialog makes the experience live.
This. Narrators make or break a book. A shame there are more garbage narrators than good ones, and the good ones only read mainstream shite.

>>25380444
if you have to ask, you don't need to know.

>>25384254
>It's philosophy is a offshoot of gnosticism, not science or the anything to do with seeking truth in the real world.
Science has nothing to do with "truth seeking", materialist retard.

Audible is for suckers ever since they changed it to lock titles you already purchased with credits when your membership is not active. Total rip off. Jist use audio book bay unless you buy titles with cash