Mr. Atkinson, in past you have substantially isolated yourself from review
content of hi fi gear by noting it represented the opinion of the author.
Does this also include those parts of a piece which expound technical
explanations for some perception offered in the opinion of the author to
explain why they might hear something? This practice lends rhetorical
support to the reality of the perception by tying the opinion to the
technical thesis. Did the two explanations offered below for the report
of percieved sounds offered in opinion cause your blue pencil to quiver
even the slightest bit? Do you concur that basic principles of physics
stand in support of the explanations underlying the opinion offered?
Does your role of the "ttechnical" person at stereophile and editer
suggest stepping in for the sake of the reader for accuracy and expanding
their knowledge of the science underlying acoustics?

http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeak...1204innersound

"But hybrids have their own set of issues. It's no easy
thing to successfully mate a necessarily massy dynamic woofer with an
almost massless 'stat panel and get the two to sing with one voice.

The Kaya echoes the Eros in its use of a 10" woofer in a
transmission-line cabinet to handle frequencies below 350Hz.
Innersound's Compact Transmission Line is tapered so that it has an
"infinite number of very tiny resonances that are then completely
absorbed by special damping material contained within the line." The"

wrote:
Did the two explanations offered below for the report of
percieved sounds offered in opinion cause your blue pencil
to quiver even the slightest bit?
http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeak...1204innersound

Despite the "have you stopped beating your wife" nature of
your questions, "outsor," I shall pay the respect of
responding. That does not mean I accept your statements about
my motivation or behavior.

First, note that the second passage is in quotation marks; these
are not the reviewer's comments but the explanantion offered by
the designer.

Second, the first passage I felt justifiable vernacular usage for
decribing a very real phenomenon, that attempts to match a
moving-coil woofer with a panel unit handling the midrange and
treble are often prone to fail, with exactly the subjective
consequences described by the reviewer.

This mismatch is most likely due to two causes, IMO. First is
the change from an omnidirectional radiation pattern in the bass
to a dipolar one in the midrange. While the integration on-axis
may appear seamless, the speaker's power response has a
discontinuity. Second, the tendency for designer's to "overcook"
the woofer alignment, to make the bass more generous than is
strictly necessary for in-room neutrality exaggerates the
integration problem between the two disparate units.

The subjective effect of both mechanisms is exactly as the
reviewer wrote: the woofer sounds "slow," disconnected with
the upper regions.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

I fail to see the source makes a difference, if they are his words or him
repeating another's. He offered technical information as a basis of
explanation for his opinion of what he thought he heard. This lends,
regardless of source, an air of authority based on presumed technical
reality. As to the two drivers different sound, he was evoking the well
worn urban myth that the "mass" of a speaker makes it "fast" or not. In
this instance the woofer would be said not to be able to keep up with the
panel and thus his opinion of the technical reason to account for what he
heard.

These are different then those "subjective opinions" you declare are the
author's and require no input from the editor and technical person at
stereophile. These are not offered as opinion but fact, which caused me
to consider in the original post where your role should be in this area of
non opinion for purposes of educating the reader. The alternative, and
more likely closer to reality, explanations you offered would have been a
good sidebar to educate and start weeding out the under brush of urban
myth that clutters audio.

Technical information is almost always offered to account for wire,
spikes, stands, amp "sound", etc. and becomes the stuff of a set of urban
myths that has grown up in the audio world and especially within the
subjective enterprise. It is apparently thought better to have some
technical explanation, any explanation, and that is as far as empirical
confirmation need go. Again, this is different then opinion of a
reviewer, these are urban myths that are held out in marketing copy and
reviews as a reason, any reason, that smacks often of pseudo scientific
rationalazation of the subjective enterprise.


http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeak...1204innersound

Despite the "have you stopped beating your wife" nature of
your questions, "outsor," I shall pay the respect of
responding. That does not mean I accept your statements about
my motivation or behavior.

First, note that the second passage is in quotation marks; these
are not the reviewer's comments but the explanantion offered by
the designer.

Second, the first passage I felt justifiable vernacular usage for
decribing a very real phenomenon, that attempts to match a
moving-coil woofer with a panel unit handling the midrange and
treble are often prone to fail, with exactly the subjective
consequences described by the reviewer.

This mismatch is most likely due to two causes, IMO. First is
the change from an omnidirectional radiation pattern in the bass
to a dipolar one in the midrange. While the integration on-axis
may appear seamless, the speaker's power response has a
discontinuity. Second, the tendency for designer's to "overcook"
the woofer alignment, to make the bass more generous than is
strictly necessary for in-room neutrality exaggerates the
integration problem between the two disparate units.

The subjective effect of both mechanisms is exactly as the
reviewer wrote: the woofer sounds "slow," disconnected with
the upper regions.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

wrote:
I fail to see the source makes a difference, if they are his
words or him repeating another's.

The use of quotation marks is understood as meaning that the
writer is quoting someone else, in this case, the designer.
The use of quotation marks is taken as meaning the writer
neither agrees nor disagrees with what is being said. It
is not necessary or appropriate to interject an editorial
commentary on such quotations; the text would quickly become
unreadable.

As to the two drivers different sound, he was evoking the well
worn urban myth that the "mass" of a speaker makes it "fast" or
not.

I have already addressed this comment.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

It is not the function of the marks, it is the inclusion
without comment
where such info is used in support of an urban myth in audio. For
purposes of educating the reader and removing urban myth undrgrowth, why
let such things stand? If quantum defrazzlement of the decling quark
activity had been used with marks to evoke the opinion of proported sounds
heard, would they be left as is? To cut the urban myth undergrowth would
it be better to not put them in if comment is not to be added? Or are
these urban myths expected by readers and fullfilling their wish to have
such confirmed part of what they are buying, not to mention that many ad
inches often also use same?

The use of quotation marks is understood as meaning that the
writer is quoting someone else, in this case, the designer.
The use of quotation marks is taken as meaning the writer
neither agrees nor disagrees with what is being said. It
is not necessary or appropriate to interject an editorial
commentary on such quotations; the text would quickly become
unreadable.

In your original response you thought it ok because there is a widely
accepted observation that mixing driver/enclosure types can be heard, I
agree. He was evoking "mass" and the "fast bass" etc. urban myth which
your response then and now do not address. The reasons you offered are
credible but did not point in any way to his "mass" explanation. Again,
your response here would have been good in the article for the benefit of
the reader, unless of course reader expectations of continuing
confirmation and ad space copy are at issue. The "fast" or not bass
remark is a common part of reviews and ad copy, it is an urban myth and
your editorial choices perpetuate it.

I have already addressed this comment.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

snip not relevant to following

In your original response you thought it ok because there is a widely
accepted observation that mixing driver/enclosure types can be heard, I
agree. He was evoking "mass" and the "fast bass" etc. urban myth which
your response then and now do not address. The reasons you offered are
credible but did not point in any way to his "mass" explanation. Again,
your response here would have been good in the article for the benefit of
the reader, unless of course reader expectations of continuing
confirmation and ad space copy are at issue. The "fast" or not bass
remark is a common part of reviews and ad copy, it is an urban myth and
your editorial choices perpetuate it.

snip John's signoff

The "fast" or "slow" bass has been discussed here before and is simply a
subjective way of describing how bass is handled by a given system.
Audiophiles in general, and subjectivists in particular, understand
subjectively what is meant by the terms. It is this audio impression that
is important, not whether or not the technical "linkage" underlying the
impression is totally understood by the person hearing it or not.
Again, we are dealing with a hobby that is inherently subjective. We are
not participating in an audio engineering session.

"The "fast" or "slow" bass has been discussed here before and is simply a
subjective way of describing how bass is handled by a given system.
Audiophiles in general, and subjectivists in particular, understand
subjectively what is meant by the terms. It is this audio impression that
is important, not whether or not the technical "linkage" underlying the
impression is totally understood by the person hearing it or not.
Again, we are dealing with a hobby that is inherently subjective. We are"

The "fast" or not bass is often evoked with es and ribbon etc. hybrids,
differences if any in sound caused by the mix have nothing to do with the
mass of the drivers involved or the speed subjective or not of their
moving parts in response to a signal. Yet countless times one will read
this as the explanation for the sonic failure or not of hybrids. This is
an urban myth and it is pervasive and it is wrong. In all conventional
systems "slow" or not bass is evoked sometimes also as a difference in
driver mass and some builders toute that use of smaller bass drivers or
large efficient magnets/motors solves one integration problem because the
bass driver can keep up with the tweeter/midrange.

I don't recall here particurally, but on other lists people will go to
great lengths to denfend driver mass as the source of "slow" or not bass
regardless of all explanation to the contrary. When we see this repeated
and affirmed in a hifi mag the myth is perpetuated. Marketrs tap into
this myth and make a point of their product haveing "fast" bass by
employing this or that technique to overcome the heavey driver problem,ex.
light paper cones and/or heavey magnets. They glum onto a myth as a
problem and offer to sell a product hat solves it, which in contridicting
it in a hifi mag would put ad space at risk. It is a hobby but does the
journalism related to it have to be false and sloppy? Bty, what about
"fast" amps and wire etc. as a similar urban myth and source of marketing
mischief?

wrote:
"The "fast" or "slow" bass has been discussed here before and is
simply a subjective way of describing how bass is handled by a given
system. Audiophiles in general, and subjectivists in particular,
understand subjectively what is meant by the terms. It is this audio
impression that is important, not whether or not the technical
"linkage" underlying the impression is totally understood by the
person hearing it or not.
Again, we are dealing with a hobby that is inherently subjective. We
are"

The "fast" or not bass is often evoked with es and ribbon etc.
hybrids, differences if any in sound caused by the mix have nothing
to do with the mass of the drivers involved or the speed subjective
or not of their moving parts in response to a signal. Yet countless
times one will read this as the explanation for the sonic failure or
not of hybrids. This is an urban myth and it is pervasive and it is
wrong. In all conventional systems "slow" or not bass is evoked
sometimes also as a difference in driver mass and some builders toute
that use of smaller bass drivers or large efficient magnets/motors
solves one integration problem because the bass driver can keep up
with the tweeter/midrange.


My experience is different. I have conducted a few experiments and found out
that the bass is really delayed in most set-ups with subwoofers, not because
of the driver mass, but of the delay the crossover induces. The now so
popular Linkwitz-Riley 4th order filters have a significant delay. If you
x-over at 60Hz for example the group delay at 40Hz will be 9ms, at 100Hz it
is 3.3ms and at 200Hz 0.7ms. Both the satellites and the sub will be delayed
by the same amount if done rightly.
Now it is easy to hear the bass "limping behind". Listen carefully to a
bassdrum beat. First arrives the "plop", then the "boom" comes a little
later.
I use subtractive xovers, that do not exhibit this annoying behaviour. And
thus the bass blends completly with the rest of the spectrum. In fact you
are not even aware of bass and treble separation. The whole sound is one.
http://www.pupazzo.page.ms/
--
ciao Ban
Bordighera, Italy

wrote in message
...
wrote:
I fail to see the source makes a difference, if they are his
words or him repeating another's.

The use of quotation marks is understood as meaning that the
writer is quoting someone else, in this case, the designer.
The use of quotation marks is taken as meaning the writer
neither agrees nor disagrees with what is being said. It
is not necessary or appropriate to interject an editorial
commentary on such quotations; the text would quickly become
unreadable.

It's a matter of context. If a writer is attacking a statement in
quotes, it can be assumed he does NOT agree with it. If the quote is
in support of the writer's argument, we can assume he supports it. If
the writer neither supports or rejects what is in quotes, he'd better
make that clear, because readers always figure the writer wants them
to associate the quote with the writer.

A case in point: In a televised interview with Barry Goldwater, he
mentioned that "some have suggested the possibility of closing off the
border between North and South Vietnam by setting off a series of low
yield nuclear explosives." (I'm paraphrasing here.) Goldwater did
not say that he agreed with this idea, but his failure to clearly
dissociate himself from the idea was interpreted by the public--quite
rightly, I believe--as meaning that he thought it was a reasonable
suggestion.

When John Atkinson quotes someone, and it is not clear that he is in
disagreement with what is quoted, his readers may assume that he's in
support of the quote. Logically it makes no sense, but that's the
nature of human beings.

Norm Strong

Dredge in flour, eggwash, then seasoned breadcrumbs;
allow to sit for a few minutes.
Sauté in butter and olive oil until golden brown,
about 6 minutes on each side.



Shish Kababes

As old as the hills, this technique has employed seafood, beef, pork, lamb,
poultry, and vegetables; just about anything can be grilled, and young humans
are no exception!

High quality marinade (Teriyaki and garlic perhaps)
1 inch cubes of tender meat, preferably from the nursery
Onions
bell peppers
Wooden or metal skewers

Marinate the meat overnight.
Get the grill good and hot while placing meat, vegetables, and
fruit such as pineapples or cherries on the skewers.
Don?t be afraid to use a variety of meats.
Grill to medium rare,
serve with garlic cous-cous and sautéed asparagus.
Coffee and sherbet for desert then walnuts, cheese, and port.
Cigars for the gentlemen (and ladies if they so desire)!



Crock-Pot Crack Baby

When the quivering, hopelessly addicted crack baby succumbs to death,
get him immediately butchered and into the crock-pot, so that any
remaining toxins will not be fatal. But don?t cook it too long,
because like Blowfish, there is a perfect medium between the poisonous
and the stimulating. Though it may not have the same effect on your
guests, a whole chicken cooked in this fashion is also mighty tasty.

1 newborn - cocaine addicted, freshly expired, cleaned and butchered
Carrots
onions
leeks
celery
bell pepper
potatoes
Salt
pepper
garlic, etc
4 cu

make no idols nor graven image. (and) Ye shall keep my Sabbath.
Leviticus 26: 1,2
[...else...]

Ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters ye shall eat.
Leviticus 26:29


Roast Child with Cornbread Stuffing

Turkey may be substituted for this classic holiday feast.
Although time consuming, this dish seems to take longer than it actually does;
as the entire house is filled with such a heavenly aroma,
the waiting becomes almost unbearable.

1 whole child, cleaned and de-headed
1 batch cornbread stuffing (see index)
½ cup melted butter

Remove the giblets from the infant and set aside.
Stuff the cavity where the child?s genitals and anus were located
using ½ cup per pound of meat.
Tie the arms flat to the body, then pull the skin flaps up to close the cavity.
Now tie the thighs up tight to hold it all together.
Place breast side up in a large metal roasting pan.
Bake in 325° oven covered for 2 hours.
Remove cover, stick a cooking thermometer deep into one of the
baby?s buttocks and cook uncovered till thermometer reads 190°,
about another hour.



Pro-Choice Po-Boy

Soft-shelled crabs serve just as well in this classic southern delicacy.
The sandwich originated in New Orleans, where an abundance of abortion clinics
thrive and hot French bread is always available.

2 cleaned fetuses, head on
2 eggs
1 tablespoon yellow mustard
1 cup seasoned flour
oil enough for deep frying
1 loaf French bread
Lettuce
tomatoes
mayonnaise, etc.

Marinate the fetuses in the egg-mustard mixture.
Dredge thoroughly in flour.
Fry at 375° until crispy golden brown.
Remove and place on paper towels

Deep fry in peanut oil till crispy golden brown, drain on paper towels.



Lemon Neonate

Turkey serves just as well, and in fact even looks a bit like a
well-dressed baby. By the time you turn the child?s breast into
cutlets, it will be indistinguishable. The taste of young human,
although similar to turkey (and chicken) often can be wildly
different depending upon what he or she has consumed during its
10 to 14 months of life...

4 well chosen cutlets (from the breasts of 2 healthy neonates)
2 large lemons (fresh lemons always, if possible)
Olive oil
Green onions
Salt
pepper
cornstarch
neonate stock (chicken, or turkey stock is fine)
garlic
parsley
fresh cracked black pepper

Season and sauté the cutlets in olive oil till golden brown, remove.
Add the garlic and onions and cook down a bit.
Add some lemon juice and some zest, then de-glaze with stock.
Add a little cornstarch (dissolved in cold water) to the sauce.
You are just about there, Pour the sauce over the cutlets,
top with parsley, lemon slices and cracked pepper.
Serve with spinach salad, macaroni and cheese (homemade) and iced tea...



Sp

oil
2 large onions
bell pepper
celery
garlic
½ cup red wine
3 Irish potatoes
2 large carrots

This is a simple classic stew that makes natural gravy,
thus it does not have to be thickened.
Brown the meat quickly in very hot oil, remove and set aside.
Brown the onions, celery, pepper and garlic.
De-glaze with wine, return meat to the pan and season well.
Stew on low fire adding small amounts of water and
seasoning as necessary.
After at least half an hour, add the carrots and potatoes,
and simmer till root vegetables break with a fork.
Cook a fresh pot of long grained white rice.



Pre-mie Pot Pie

When working with prematurely delivered newborns (or chicken) use sherry;
red wine with beef (buy steak or roast, do not pre-boil).

Pie crust (see index)
Whole fresh pre-mie; eviscerated, head, hands and feet removed
Onions, bell pepper, celery
½ cup wine
Root vegetables of choice (turnips, carrots, potatoes, etc) cubed

Make a crust from scratch - or go shamefully to the frozen food section
of your favorite grocery and select 2 high quality pie crusts (you
will need one for the top also).
Boil the prepared delicacy until the meat starts to come off the bones.
Remove, de-bone and cube; continue to reduce the broth.
Brown the onions, peppers and celery.
Add the meat then season, continue browning.
De-glaze with sherry, add the reduced broth.
Finally, put in the root vegetables and simmer for 15 minutes.
Allow to cool slightly.
Place the pie pan in 375 degree oven for a few minutes so bottom crust is not soggy,
reduce oven to 325.
Fill the pie with stew, place top crust and with a fork, seal the crusts together
then poke holes in top.
Return to oven and bake for 30 minutes, or until pie crust is golden brown.



Sudden Infant Death Soup

SIDS: delicious in winter, comparable to old fashioned Beef and Vegetable Sou

thermometer reads 190°,
about another hour.



Pro-Choice Po-Boy

Soft-shelled crabs serve just as well in this classic southern delicacy.
The sandwich originated in New Orleans, where an abundance of abortion clinics
thrive and hot French bread is always available.

2 cleaned fetuses, head on
2 eggs
1 tablespoon yellow mustard
1 cup seasoned flour
oil enough for deep frying
1 loaf French bread
Lettuce
tomatoes
mayonnaise, etc.

Marinate the fetuses in the egg-mustard mixture.
Dredge thoroughly in flour.
Fry at 375° until crispy golden brown.
Remove and place on paper towels.



Holiday Youngster

One can easily adapt this recipe to ham, though as presented,
it violates no religious taboos against swine.

1 large toddler or small child, cleaned and de-headed
Kentucky Bourbon Sauce (see index)
1 large can pineapple slices
Whole cloves

Place him (or ham) or her in a large glass baking dish, buttocks up.
Tie with butcher string around and across so that he looks like
he?s crawling.
Glaze, then arrange pineapples and secure with cloves.
Bake uncovered in 350° oven till thermomet