On Sep 26, 12:22 pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Now all that stuff is pretty well figured-out, so it's not exciting and
people don't feel enthused about learning it.
Agreed mostly, but there's still plenty that *readers* have not yet
figured out. Such as the fact that digital does not leave "holes" in
the waveform, and other 101 other common audio myths. And acoustics is
mostly ignored, except by Sound On Sound which is my current fave.
Note well: SOS is the best science-based audio magazine out there, and
it continues to grow every month. Coincidence? I don't think so!
A lot of the magazines treat the advertisers as the customer
This is a huge problem. Too many publishers fail to understand that
they are there to serve us, the reader. If they give the reader what
the reader wants and needs, advertisers will surely follow.
Again, the great thing about Tape Op is that they go out of their way to
interview informed people who actually understand the technology. They do
interview a lot of clueless people who spout nonsense as well, too, but
in an industry where most people are spouting nonsense it's hard to avoid
that.
I wish they'd be more selective in what they print. The core problem
is that most audio magazine editors are themselves clueless about the
science of audio. I remember very well when I proposed my Audio Myths
article (
www.ethanwiner.com/myths.html) to Electronic Musician
magazine. After seeing my proposal the editor told me on the phone
they had a meeting and all the editors disputed every one of my ten
points. Sheesh! Thankfully, Frank Wells at Audio Media is sane and
very knowledgeable, so the article did get published.
--Ethan