The 2014 Annual Reading Challenge Discussion Thread!

[Luffy]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I don't like audiobooks. First, they're too expensive. Second, listening to audiobooks is not reading; not for me. Sometimes, I want to stop for a few moments to think about something I've just read and flip back in a book to look something up. With audiobooks that is more difficult.

I can't abide audiobooks, similarly. I've never given them a chance mind, but I'd rather listen to music and read the bloody books. For me audiobooks sound suspiciously like radio programs from the 40's or something.

[jbcohen]

Originally Posted by Luffy

I can't abide audiobooks, similarly. I've never given them a chance mind, but I'd rather listen to music and read the bloody books. For me audiobooks sound suspiciously like radio programs from the 40's or something.

I hear you loud and clear, I do not like audio books either. I think the voice is better when I need to read it myself.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Luffy

I can't abide audiobooks, similarly. I've never given them a chance mind...

So how do you actually know that you "can't abide them"?

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I don't like audiobooks. First, they're too expensive. Second, listening to audiobooks is not reading; not for me. Sometimes, I want to stop for a few moments to think about something I've just read and flip back in a book to look something up. With audiobooks that is more difficult.

They're not expensive; there are frequent deals, plus you can get free audiobooks of public domain titles from LibriVox--some of the LibriVox narrators are very good.

I do agree that listening to audiobooks is not quite really reading, but you can't walk, clean the house, drive, etc. and read; you can do those activities and listen to an audiobook.

Originally Posted by Luffy

I can't abide audiobooks, similarly. I've never given them a chance mind, but I'd rather listen to music and read the bloody books. For me audiobooks sound suspiciously like radio programs from the 40's or something.

If you haven't tried them ...

And radio programs from the 1940s make wonderful listening!

Originally Posted by jbcohen

I hear you loud and clear, I do not like audio books either. I think the voice is better when I need to read it myself.

Just as an actor gives life to a play script, sometimes the narrator really enhances the text. I started a series recently, listened to the first three audiobooks, then had to switch to an e-book for the next volume. That last one wasn't as enjoyable--it was quicker to read, but not nearly as much fun.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Catlady

I do agree that listening to audiobooks is not quite really reading, but you can't walk, clean the house, drive, etc. and read; you can do those activities and listen to an audiobook.

I can't. For me, 'listening to music' is an activity in itself, just like reading, so listening to an audiobook would be as well.

[Tarana]

I have no issue with someone who prefers to read books over listening, but why would you refer to audiobooks as something almost vile? It's just not your format. You aren't forced to select audiobooks.

I have failing eyesight, so I both read and listen (more listen than read these days). Thankfully, the prices are way lower than even 5 years ago, although that is dependent on where you live.

[Luffy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

So how do you actually know that you "can't abide them"?

Originally Posted by Catlady

If you haven't tried them ...

And radio programs from the 1940s make wonderful listening!

I HAVE listened to an audiobook, only I haven't completed one or given them a fair chance. The medium ranks last of all audio...stuff.
1) Music
2) DVD audio commentaries
3) News on the radio
4) Audiobooks

[Yapyap]

As I suspected, over the last three weeks I've lost my comfortable lead on the number of books read - have only managed three books during that time, what with holidays and travelling.

Still, I'm currently "on track", as Goodreads tells me, so I should still be okay.

Sub-challenges ... well, at least I've bought fewer ebooks in September, due to the aforementioned travelling! (On the other hand, I have bought more paper books, including four different editions of the book I was travelling for, i.e. going to the signings and such - but I also got my Kindle cover signed. )

So all in all, I'm lagging a little behind compared to where I was in the same time in August, but it was a slump I expected and it doesn't particularly worry me, as long as I get back in the reading habit again soon.

[jbcohen]

I have gone on a few trips with my parents, who prefer audio books to printed books, so I got to hear a few of them myself. I figured out from that experience that I personally prefer to read the books rather than hearing the audio book. I can see that for someone with failing eye sight the audio books would be a better option.

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by jbcohen

I figured out from that experience that I personally prefer to read the books rather than hearing the audio book. I can see that for someone with failing eye sight the audio books would be a better option.

I tend to read faster than I hear, which is why I usually prefer print. Even so, there's much to be said for dramatizations, especially in situations where print isn't feasible.

Frankly, if I could just get ebook publishers to quit squashing their default body text to "small" or even tinier, I'd be a lot happier. I mean, I'm capable of adjusting it in non-DRM'd books...but it wastes effort and shouldn't be necessary. Some of these books drop down to below 60% for their fine print; how's anyone supposed to read that, even on a Pearl screen?

[jbcohen]

I have never heard of the senses at different speeds.

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by Rev. Bob

I tend to read faster than I hear, which is why I usually prefer print.

Originally Posted by jbcohen

I have never heard of the senses at different speeds.

Think of it like this: if it takes me thirty seconds to read a page silently, and one minute for a narrator to read that same page out loud, then I can get through the book twice as fast by reading the printed version. Hence, I'm reading the content faster than I could hear it.

[Geralt]

Because I have lot of chores every day, and I work from home, I blast through audiobooks so much faster compared to print.
I could be working 3-4 hours in one session on my computer and I listen to audiobooks at the same time. So I could finish 12 hours audiobook, which would equal anywhere around 400-700 pages, in 3-4 days. I don't have time to read 100-200 pages every day comparatively.

Even if I put all this aside, I really think some books are enhanced in audiobook format.
I tremendously enjoyed First Law series by Joe Abercrombie, where the characters had different accents and richer personality because of a narrator (Steven Pacey) which I could never emulate while I'm reading.
Good Omens is way funnier as an audiobook. I actually hear Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody playing, something that would never happen if I was reading. (Those who have read Good Omens know that Queen's songs are a something of a theme in GO)
Don't even get me started on Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell, that book came alive in all its "britishness" through the voice of Simon Prebble.

I can understand that some people have tried and tested audiobooks and found them not for them to put it mildly.
But those that haven't even seen the thing through (finished at least one book. At least.), are plain stubborn and ruled by their preconceptions. Because, if you don't want to try out something new that is absolutely not harmful for you or anyone else, I would say you're a close-minded man/woman stuck in your habits way too much.

Last year I was also apprehensive about audiobooks so I made this thread right here:
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=209327

I love audiobooks now and I never looked back.

[Katsunami]

Oh, but there are stories that are better in audio than they are in print; I found that out regarding the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The radio show is so much better than the books that the latter actually pale in comparison, to be honest. On the other hand, I would never think of listening to something like Charles Dickens or David Eddings as an audiobook (apart from maybe, A Christmas Carol).

[Geralt]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

On the other hand, I would never think of listening to something like Charles Dickens

Stephen King disagrees with you on that one
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1551492,00.html

A Charles Dickens novel read by the late David Case is something you can almost bathe in.

I loved this part. Just the idea that somebody can creep out Stephen King is hilarious.

When I heard Kathy Bates reading The Silence of the Lambs (an abridgment, alas), I was driving at night and had to shut off the CD player, even though I knew how the story went. It was her voice, so low and intimate and somehow knowing. It was flat creeping me out.

Or that he can creep himself out lol. Maybe even funnier.

I knew even better how the short story ''1408'' went, because I not only wrote it, I recorded it. Still, I wasn't prepared for the scream of trumpets the director had added at the very end of the story. My pulse rate spiked and I tore the headphones off my ears. That was a true sting.

Interesting article by King btw. Some points he makes ring close to how I feel about audiobooks now.