I used to read books continuously. I would always have a book in progress. These days I am always engaged in an audio book. Probably the last 11 years at least. I started listening to audiobooks on CD then got into downloading. I mostly go for titles from Graphic Audio. I would have to say that I have listened to over 500 of their titles. Sometimes I feel like I'm cheating. Do ya'll consider listening the same.or.close to reading?

I'd say it counts. You're still absorbing the information as presented by the author. And unlike TV, still exercising your imagination. The main downside is it's not as easy to quickly flip back to reference something mention on an earlier page. And certain books don't translate well to audiobook format, like certain history books that rely more heavily on referencing maps or charts.

I've always been a voracious reader, but as I've gotten older, my time for sitting down and reading has greatly diminished. But once I started listening to audiobooks, I was able to get back to reading a lot, since I can do it hands-free while driving, doing yardwork, working out, fixing projects around the house, etc.

Well, you're not reading it- you're listening to it. If the audio book is unabridged, I guess the result is the same, but if you ask me, it may not be cheating, but listening is not the same as reading. Listening is passive and reading is not. Reading requires more effort than just your attention.

Keep in mind that when you are listening to an audio book, the narrator is placing their own inflection and pacing on the words. When you read, all of this is your doing alone. Therefore, reading a book is the preferred method.

I like the slow pace I keep while reading a book. It also provides me with a opportunity to look up words in the dictionary that I’m not familiar with. I’m not sure I’d do that with an audio book.

Perfectly honest, I love audiobooks. Never enough time or energy to read this many books!

Personaly I don't think either can be compared that easily. I believe reading a book uses different areas of your brain that allows you to concentrate more, and that allows other parts of the brain to build the world in your mind to a greater detail. Your brain works harder and is "exercised" more than with just the passive listening. I would equate the two this way, listening is like watching television in black and white, or early color. While reading and getting into it is comparable to watching hi-def 4k television.

Also I am assuming audio books are usually listened to while doing other tasks. Your attention is divided from the beginning, so how much do you really hear? It would be to easy for it to become just background noise to me. Reading has always been my preferred method, doesn't hurt that the reading material is worth it as well.

While I love to read a book, I simply don't seem to be able to carve out enough time to sit and read. My life is very busy and listening to a good book, for me, is great. My hands are free to do other things.

I really like to read but when the wife and I are on a road trip audio books are the cat's meow for us.

quote:

Sometimes I feel like I'm cheating.

Who are you cheating, yourself? Who cares. Most of the reading I do is for my self-enjoyment and to relax. I do read some to learn more but mostly my reading these days is for fun.

No one is keeping score. Your an adult do whatever you want.

While you may get the same content, no, they are not the same. Whether they "count" as the same is more debatable, but I still say no.

Auditory and visual processing are different, for one. You also lose the tactile element of reading a book (i.e. holding the book and feeling the pages). So the method of input are wildly different, and therefore the reception will also be different (and probably also the recall of the information).

Remember, a book was written to be read. The act of reading is implicit in the author-audience interaction.

I "read" audiobooks from time to time as I do tasks because they are convenient, but they are not the same thing as reading the same work.

I don't recall ever listening to an audio book, so I guess I don't really have any valuable input.

However, when I READ a book, I'm totally immersed in it, like watching a movie in my mind while reading the "dialog".

If an audio book sucked me in that deep, I better never listen to one while driving.

Although I love to read, I find that I have very little time to actually do it. Sometimes for work, I drive as many as four hours per day. So, I listen to lots of audiobooks. That being said, I don't know that listening counts as reading, because as para mentioned, you are getting the narrator's inflection and pacing with audiobooks.

I have several narrators that I really like, including George Guidall, Ray Porter, Will Patton, and the late Frank Muller, who was my absolute favorite.

Over 20 years ago, the guy who owned the LGS where I hung out and taught CCP classes, offered me his box of audio books and told me to pick out one or some and give'em a try. I thought it was the stupidest thing I'd ever heard, but, reluctantly, I grabbed one, a Louis L'Amore novel on cassette.

I was hooked almost immediately and hardly ever read another book if I could get it on audio. I love the Graphic Audio, full cast books (A Movie In Your Mind) and the single reader books, too.

I should say I read almost nothing but novels, all Westerns and War (no Vietnam, though) and am going through Louis L'Amore's 4 Hopalong Cassidy novels now.

Bob

I’m sure you’ve heard it, “a man who doesn’t read is no better off than a man who can’t read”. Am I being an old codger? Maybe. I guess I’d rather read the written word than have it read to me.

Having done both, I would say no. They are not the same experience at all.

I say no if you are listening to it while you do other things. You will not absorb it like if you were reading it. Now, if you are listening to it in room with no other distractions, then I think it counts as you are focused on "listening" to it.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Well, you're not reading it- you're listening to it. If the audio book is unabridged, I guess the result is the same, but if you ask me, it may not be cheating, but listening is not the same as reading. Listening is passive and reading is not. Reading requires more effort than just your attention.

Keep in mind that when you are listening to an audio book, the narrator is placing their own inflection and pacing on the words. When you read, all of this is your doing alone. Therefore, reading a book is the preferred method.

Exactly. If I’ve listened to an audiobook after reading it, it’s like watching a movie after reading the book. I lose my characters’ voices, their behaviors, their personalities (who knew Dumbledore was gay, for chrissake, or that there really were that many whores in GOT? But I digress). I may not have even developed that character completely in my mind, but when the narrator of an audiobook gets in between me and my story, they take away a piece of my own imagination.

I love to read and manage only about two books a month, due to the demands of life. I've never listened to an audio book. Knowing myself as I do, I can see me missing important details due to my mind wandering. I don't have this when I read. I'll often go back over a paragraph during sections of dialog. I don't think it would suit me.

My eyesight has gone south these last few years. Audiobooks are an excellent alternative, specially if you are / were an avid reader.

Started the GoT saga on paperback and only could continue on audiobook, for example.

The experience of pacing your reading and the time and dedication might not be the same but the end result is close enough.

0-0

Some schools will allow you to listen to a book instead of reading it. Seems like cheating, but I enjoy audio books myself, so, if it works from an education standpoint, does it really matter? Perhaps it does if the point is to develop your reading and comprehension skills.