I quit Obsidian for 1 Year. Here's what happened.

TL;DR

Suthapong’s near-year break from Zettelkasten and Obsidian coincided with feeling less happy and mentally less sharp, which pushed him back to the method.

Briefing Cornell Notes

Briefing

A year-long break from Zettelkasten and Obsidian left Darin Suthapong less happy and feeling mentally dull—an experience that pushed him back to the method with renewed confidence. After experimenting with near-total non-use, he reported a subjective drop in how sharp his mind felt and even a sense that he was less intelligent. That personal “control test” mattered to him because he had previously been highly committed to Zettelkasten/Obsidian, then heard from more successful startup founders that founders shouldn’t spend time on knowledge management—so he tried the opposite to see what would happen.

Returning to the system, Suthapong said the experiment strengthened his belief that Zettelkasten works for him, not just as a note-taking workflow but as a mental practice. He also clarified a common misconception: Zettelkasten is not the least time-consuming knowledge management approach. It requires extra steps—reading or listening, writing reference notes, distilling them into permanent notes, and connecting those notes inside a vault. Still, if the goal is learning and retention, he considers it among the best methods he has found.

The most valuable payoff, in his view, isn’t the volume of notes or the app itself. The real benefit comes from using the information from books, podcasts, or other media to “sharpen your mind.” In other words, the process of transforming and linking ideas forces active thinking, which is what improves how his thoughts work.

The hiatus also changed his tool preferences. Because he wasn’t using Obsidian for almost a year and he works across Mac and iOS, he leaned into Apple Notes and came to genuinely like it. He still uses Notion, but Apple Notes became his default for day-to-day capture during the experiment. He framed this as a practical lesson: when your primary system is removed, you discover what actually supports your workflow.

Suthapong also adjusted how he structures notes. He previously made templates overly complex—such as requiring reference notes to match source titles and adding extensive metadata about people and places. Coming back “with fresh eyes,” he concluded that those details matter less than clearly separating reference notes from permanent notes and focusing on the quality of the content.

Finally, he said he became more comfortable with imperfection. Even though he tells others that messy vaults are fine, he had personally tried to keep his system looking neat. After the break, he accepted that the system doesn’t need to be perfect because its purpose is not aesthetic organization. The core objective is to keep the brain and thoughts actively working with information so thinking stays sharp.

Cornell Notes

After nearly a year away from Zettelkasten and Obsidian, Darin Suthapong reported feeling less happy and mentally less sharp, which led him to return with stronger confidence in the method. He emphasized that Zettelkasten is time-intensive—requiring reference notes, distilled permanent notes, and connections—but it pays off for learning and retention. The key value, he said, is not the app or the number of notes; it’s the mental work of transforming and linking ideas from books and other media. The break also led him to appreciate Apple Notes, simplify his note templates, and accept that a vault doesn’t need to look perfect as long as it supports thinking.

Why did Suthapong stop using Zettelkasten and Obsidian, despite being previously passionate about them?

He heard from more successful startup founders (indirectly) that knowledge management like Zettelkasten/Obsidian could be a “waste of time” for CEOs—something founders shouldn’t prioritize. As an experimenter, he didn’t want to rely on hearsay, so he tried stopping almost completely for nearly a year to see what would happen to his learning and mindset.

What did he notice during the year without the system?

He reported feeling less happy and having a sense that he was less intelligent, along with the feeling that his mind was less sharp. Those reflections were the main reason he felt compelled to return to Zettelkasten/Obsidian.

What does he consider the real benefit of Zettelkasten, beyond producing lots of notes?

He argued that the most valuable part is sharpening the mind through active processing of information. The method forces the user to work with ideas presented in books, podcasts, or other media—turning them into reference notes, distilling them into permanent notes, and connecting them—so thinking becomes more effective.

How does he respond to the criticism that Zettelkasten is too time-consuming?

He acknowledged it isn’t the least time-consuming approach. It takes time to read or listen, write reference notes, distill to permanent notes, and connect notes in a vault. Still, if the goal is learning and retention, he believes it’s one of the best methods he’s found.

What tool and template changes did he make after returning?

During the break, he leaned into Apple Notes because he was on Mac and iOS and had no Obsidian workflow. After returning, he simplified his templates—dropping the urge to make reference notes “perfect” with matching titles and extensive metadata (like detailed properties about people and places). He now focuses on separating reference notes from permanent notes and improving the content quality.

What lesson did he draw about keeping a vault “perfect”?

He admitted that even though he tells others a messy vault is fine, he personally tried to keep his vault looking pretty. Coming back after the hiatus made him more comfortable with imperfection, reinforcing his view that the system’s purpose is how it trains the mind, not how polished the vault looks.

Review Questions

What specific mental or emotional changes did Suthapong report experiencing during his near-year break from Zettelkasten/Obsidian?
Which steps in the Zettelkasten workflow does he say make it time-intensive, and why does he still consider it worthwhile for learning?
How did his approach to note templates change after returning, and what did he decide mattered most?

Key Points

1
Suthapong’s near-year break from Zettelkasten and Obsidian coincided with feeling less happy and mentally less sharp, which pushed him back to the method.
2
He views Zettelkasten as time-intensive because it requires reference notes, distillation into permanent notes, and linking inside a vault.
3
The core value is mental sharpening—active transformation and connection of ideas from books and other media—rather than the number of notes or the app itself.
4
During the break, Apple Notes became his preferred tool on Mac and iOS, and he said he genuinely came to like it.
5
He simplified overly complex note templates, concluding that extensive metadata and “perfect” reference-note formatting matter less than separating reference from permanent notes and improving content quality.
6
He became more comfortable with an imperfect, messy system because the goal is thinking quality, not vault aesthetics.

Highlights

A year without Zettelkasten/Obsidian left him feeling less happy and less mentally sharp—his personal evidence for why the method matters to him.

He insists Zettelkasten isn’t lightweight: it demands reference notes, permanent notes, and connections, yet he still ranks it highly for retention.

The biggest payoff, in his framing, is not note volume or software choice but the mental work of processing and linking information.

After returning, he dropped template complexity and accepted that vault neatness is secondary to how the system trains thinking.