test, or has it already been done?
From: (Nousaine)
Date: 6/11/2004 9:42 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: 3Rvyc.13294$eu.4395@attbi_s02
(S888Wheel) wrote:
.
From: (Nousaine)
Date: 6/10/2004 6:49 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: GFZxc.467$zz.441@attbi_s04
(S888Wheel) wrote:
....snips......
But what does listing these accessories in a speaker review ( Richard
Gray's
Power Company Substation isolation transformer, 1200s, 600s, & Pole Pig
power
conditioners; Sounds of Silence Vibraplane active isolation platform;
Symposium
Ultrashelf, Finite Elemente equipment stands' Audioharma Cable Cooker;
Walker
Precision Isolated Motor Drive, ACS Tube Traps, Shakti Stones & On-Lines;
PRG,
BAD, Abbfusor panels as accessories; in addition to 7 assorted cables) do
for
anyone's credibility?
Plenty for some, nothing for some others, including you. However it seems
to
me
that the listing of room treatment for a speaker review is quite
important.
by
the looks of your post it seems you might not agree. I will keep this in
mind
should I read a speaker rview by you.
I have nothing against room treatments but the above says nothing about
how/when/why thet were used.
The above, is what you wrote. The reviewers have described their set ups in
detail in previous issues if memory serves me. The details included
placement
of room treatments. If you are concerned about how room treatements are
being
used you might consider an e mail asking how they are used. The fact they
are
used seems pretty relevant to me.
First I'm not worried about anything.
Then why express concern about not knowing how the reviewer is using them?
My point is that when fancy cables,
audio
equipment racks. shakti stones etc. are "listed" it makes me question the
credibility of the reviewer rather than reinforce it
Sorry but in the case of Stereophile, it seems you give them no credibility
regardless of whether or not the reviewers list the associated equipment or
not. It looks to me that your conclusion was already gone determined.
AND it appears to me
that
listing of those audio-candy items as evaluation "accessories" when there is
no
acoustical mechanism for sonic improvement why would a rational person think
that the iterms that could improve the situation would be effectively
employed?
It appears this really more about your philisophical differences with other
audiophiles and reviewers. Not all the readers of Stereophile agree with your
beliefs on what makes a difference and what doesn't. make a difference. You are
free to denegrade everyone who does not see the world as you see it by calling
them irrational but Stereophile does not cater to your personal sensibilities.
My point has nothing at all to do with the effectiveness of room treatments
(although some of them rate as snake-oil) as such. This post was assessing
whether listing such along with audio-jewelry enhances the credibility of the
review. IMO, it does not.
What does it matter? The reviews in Stereophile already have no credability
with you anyways do they? Would the reviews in any publication *loose*
credibity with you if the reviewers listed all associated equipment?
To me it 'appears' that because the reviewer also
lists audio candy that he may not have effectively employed such devices.
Room treatments are audio candy? Why speculate on the use? Why not ask? If
it
weren't listed however, you wouldn't know to ask would you? The use of room
treatments certainly can affect the performance of a speaker. It makes
complete
sense to me that room treatments be listed in reviews. The *more* we know
about
the system used for evaluation the better. You seem to be arguing the *less*
we
know the better for the sake of space.
You're askew here. I'm saying that listing snake-oil as 'accessories'
obscures
the relevance of the real accessories and as used here tends to reduce the
credibility of the evaluator and appears to have other reasons behind the
screen.
Not everyone agrees on what is and is not snake oil. Again, Stereophile does
not and really cannot cater to you personally. You included room treatments in
your list. That is your mistake. Clearly they can make a difference and warrent
inclusion if a better informed reader is one of the goals of the review.
If you'll accept that (and I'm sure you don't) then it stands to reason that
this space might be better suited to other purposes.
I don't accept you as the arbitrator on what does and does not matter in a
system. I can filter the information for myself. I would rather have reviewers
ering on the side of too much information than not enough.
Even devoting it
straight
advertisments (instead of subliminal) might enable price reductions for
readers.
Do you find Stereophile subsciption rates unaffordable or unreasonable? I
don't.
IOW
the listing indicates that mythology may be more important than performance
to
this individual and that the accessory list is just a merchanding tool and
a
method of emphasizing self-importance.
How on earth is listing room treatments perpetuating any mythology?
Listing them along side "Ultrashelf, Finite Elemente equipment stands'
Audioharma Cable Cooker; Walker Precision Isolated Motor Drive, ...., Shakti
Stones & On-Lines;" just tends to put them into the high-end audio-candy
realm.
Indeed it diminishes their importance.
I think Stereophile is smart to let the readers sort those things out for
themselves.
How can
you
expect me to take your speaker reviews seriously if you hold such a belief?
Room treatments can make a huge difference. Listing them for speaker reviews
makes complete sense.
Well if I listed my draperies and carpets by brand (which have a large
acoustical impact) should that make anybody else feel "better" about my
reviews?
Should it make them feel worse? No. At least we would feel you are being quite
thourough. That does matter to me.
Who should think that there's something special about using Ultimate
brand tri-pod speaker stands for my surround speakers to the proper position
and height?
What is *wrong* with knowing exactly what was used?
Would listing the brand of mdf, drywall screws, glue or the brand
name of the blade used to cut the panels of my custom subwoofer make any
difference in its performance or the performance of a satellite speaker?
Why burn this strawman?
IMO the answer is No. And, "listing" such diverts attention from true
evaluation of sound quality performance.