It is sad to see a very low traffic on rahe: just a few (10 or so)
messages per day. Is our hobby evaporating, involving and passionate
so few people?
Is quality music reproduction getting so un-relevant for most of us -
the average Joe?
Is good music itself (mostly classical and jazz, IMO, with some good
rock and pop) getting so un-relevant for most of us? Classical and
jazz record sales are dropping lower and lower ( 5% ??)

I see the same on EU groups I sometimes attend ...

Marco from Milan, Italy

From my experience I think the lower traffic on rahe has more to do
with the availability of alternative online forums and discussion
sites. When I first got into the Internet side of my audio hobby
back in the late 80s there were only a few audiophile BBS locations
and a few audio related news groups. There was a lot more traffic on
the newsgroups then because there was nowhere else to go online to
share this information. Over the past 10 years the landscape of the
Internet has changed significantly and there are a number of sites
that maintain forums and discussion groups duplicating most of the
same types of discussions that were once limited to newsgroups. While
the newsgroups are still a very good venue for hosting these
discussions, its no longer the only show in town. My guess is there
there even more online discussion of our hobby...it's just spread
around a lot more. Granted, much of this discussion has become
diluted with content related to home theater but in general I think
there is still a great deal of interest in high end music systems.

Randy
"andy" wrote in message
...
It is sad to see a very low traffic on rahe: just a few (10 or so)
messages per day. Is our hobby evaporating, involving and passionate
so few people?
Is quality music reproduction getting so un-relevant for most of us -
the average Joe?
Is good music itself (mostly classical and jazz, IMO, with some good
rock and pop) getting so un-relevant for most of us? Classical and
jazz record sales are dropping lower and lower ( 5% ??)

I see the same on EU groups I sometimes attend ...

Marco from Milan, Italy

andy wrote:

It is sad to see a very low traffic on rahe: just a few (10 or so)
messages per day.

I just downloaded 21 posts, so I think your number is low. If you're using
Google Groups, not all posts make it there.

Is our hobby evaporating, involving and passionate
so few people?

That's part of it. There are other forms of entertainment now that didn't
exist years ago. When I was a kid, the coolest, techy-est thing you could
own was a good stereo system. Now, home audio is is your father's hobby.
You've got computers and video games, and you want your music in tiny little
boxes with tiny little earphones.

Also, RAHE is not the only place on the Web to discuss high-end audio. See
Audiogon or the Audio Asylum if you want to read hundreds of posts per day,
and all the missionary zeal you could ask for. Note, however, that certain
viewpoints are censored on those sites, and the level of unchallenged
technically inaccurate information is quite high, IMHO.

Is quality music reproduction getting so un-relevant for most of us -
the average Joe?

Quality audio reproduction was never relevant for the average Joe.
Audiophilia was always an elite hobby, and remains so.

Is good music itself (mostly classical and jazz, IMO, with some good
rock and pop) getting so un-relevant for most of us? Classical and
jazz record sales are dropping lower and lower ( 5% ??)

Don't confuse music and audio. Most music lovers (and even many musicians)
don't concern themselves with accurate reproduction.

bob

__________________________________________________ _______________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE
download! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/

In my opinion there is TOO much chatter back and forth about "objectivist vs.
subjectivist" points of view here. I have noticed that a preponderance of
posts have to do with this and I for one am tired of reading them. We all know
by now who the "usual suspects" are here on both sides of the issue and that no
amount of banter will change minds. So, I would like to see this newsgroup
drop this line altogether and concentrate on people's real world systems, how
to make them better for the user and not whether all amplifiers that measure
the same must sound the same. It would be more useful to hear from users who
buy products we read about in the magazines for instance and their experiences
with them. There is no absoulte sound, so it is ALL subjective. If you are
happy with the sound of your system, that is ALL that is required. -Bob
Bernstein.

"RBernst929" wrote in message
news:n9Gcc.79446$gA5.978146@attbi_s03...
In my opinion there is TOO much chatter back and forth about
"objectivist vs.
subjectivist" points of view here. I have noticed that a
preponderance of
posts have to do with this and I for one am tired of reading them. We
all know
by now who the "usual suspects" are here on both sides of the issue
and that no
amount of banter will change minds. So, I would like to see this
newsgroup
drop this line altogether and concentrate on people's real world
systems, how
to make them better for the user and not whether all amplifiers that
measure
the same must sound the same. It would be more useful to hear from
users who
buy products we read about in the magazines for instance and their
experiences
with them. There is no absoulte sound, so it is ALL subjective. If
you are
happy with the sound of your system, that is ALL that is
required. -Bob
Bernstein.


If *everything* is subjective, how is the fact that you are happy with
your system relevant to anybody else, especially considering others'
listening rooms? IMO, the single greatest value of RAHE is that it
gives the room for opposing views on audio without censoring anybody
(unlike some other forums) while maintaining the standards of civilized
debate. I prefer objective information on audio and it is not easy to
come buy such info and I do like the fact that I manage to learn useful
things on this forum from the likes of pros such as Pierce, Nousaine,
Krueger (while he was on this forum), Dunlavy (when he posts, which is
unfortunately rare), Putzey,..... as well as from in-the-know
engineers, who also happen to be audiophiles, such as chung,
Pinkerton..... And I really miss jj. Don't get me wrong.... I also
like to talk about equipment, but I would like to move beyond the
"purple prose" available elsewhere, and try things that *objectively*
work and then make my choice.

Usenet is yesterday's technology. Most online arguers have long since moved
to web-based forums. ;



--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

RBernst929 wrote:
In my opinion there is TOO much chatter back and forth about "objectivist vs.
subjectivist" points of view here. I have noticed that a preponderance of
posts have to do with this and I for one am tired of reading them. We all know
by now who the "usual suspects" are here on both sides of the issue and that no
amount of banter will change minds. So, I would like to see this newsgroup
drop this line altogether and concentrate on people's real world systems, how
to make them better for the user and not whether all amplifiers that measure
the same must sound the same.


In practice, 'how to make them better for the user' will inevitably
involve suggestions on how to effect an *audible improvement* from the user's
current system. And inevitably someone will propose getting
'better' cables or amps or transports, while others will propose that such
changes are intrinsically unlikely to make any 'real world' audible difference,
much less improvement.

Of course, discussion of intrinsically sound-changing *features* like
EQ, DSP, room treatment, etc would fit your bill, too, and would cause little or no
subjectivist/objectivist controversy.


It would be more useful to hear from users who
buy products we read about in the magazines for instance and their experiences
with them.

To me, it would be just as useless as the magazine's reviews themselves, unless
properly qualified.

There is no absoulte sound, so it is ALL subjective.

Apaprently Harry Pearson disagrees.

If you are
happy with the sound of your system, that is ALL that is required.

If you're happy with it, why bother posting requests for how to make it
better?



--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

RBernst929 wrote:
In my opinion there is TOO much chatter back and forth about "objectivist
vs.
subjectivist" points of view here. I have noticed that a preponderance of
posts have to do with this and I for one am tired of reading them. We all
know
by now who the "usual suspects" are here on both sides of the issue and
that no
amount of banter will change minds. So, I would like to see this newsgroup
drop this line altogether

If you want a forum in which subjectivist-objectivist debates are banned,
they exist elsewhere on the Web. Proceed at your own risk.

and concentrate on people's real world systems, how
to make them better for the user and not whether all amplifiers that
measure
the same must sound the same. It would be more useful to hear from users
who
buy products we read about in the magazines for instance and their
experiences
with them.

So who's stopping you? Post away! And don't worry that the thread's just
going to get diverted into the same old debate--there are rules against
that. If there are threads you're not interested in, just skip them.

There is no absoulte sound, so it is ALL subjective.

I agree with the first part, but I don't agree that the second part follows.
There are some things we can objectively say about the performance of audio
equipment.

If you are
happy with the sound of your system, that is ALL that is required.

This I absolutely agree with, even though I am one of those
bandwidth-clogging objectivists.

bob

__________________________________________________ _______________
Limited-time offer: Fast, reliable MSN 9 Dial-up Internet access FREE for 2
months!
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialu...ave/direct/01/

RBernst929 wrote:
In my opinion there is TOO much chatter back and forth about "objectivist vs.
subjectivist" points of view here. I have noticed that a preponderance of
posts have to do with this and I for one am tired of reading them. We all know
by now who the "usual suspects" are here on both sides of the issue and that no
amount of banter will change minds. So, I would like to see this newsgroup
drop this line altogether and concentrate on people's real world systems, how
to make them better for the user and not whether all amplifiers that measure
the same must sound the same. It would be more useful to hear from users who
buy products we read about in the magazines for instance and their experiences
with them. There is no absoulte sound, so it is ALL subjective. If you are
happy with the sound of your system, that is ALL that is required. -Bob
Bernstein.


So if someone says that cables need break-in, CD magic pens are
wonderful, the more expensive a cable is the better it sounds, etc.,
etc., you want the more technically inclined posters to just keep quiet
and let those claims go unchallenged? Wouldn't those new to the hobby
want to hear the viewpoints based on science and engineering?

To begin with, I believe that to measure the goodness of a forum by
the number of postings is inappropriate. Moderated newsgroups tend to
have a much lower posting volume than unmoderated ones, and their
signal to noise ratio is much higher: this makes them more useful.

josko writes:
"RBernst929" wrote in message
news:n9Gcc.79446$gA5.978146@attbi_s03...
In my opinion there is TOO much chatter back and forth about
"objectivist vs. subjectivist" points of view here. I have noticed
that a preponderance of posts have to do with this and I for one am
tired of reading them. We all know by now who the "usual suspects"
are here on both sides of the issue and that no amount of banter
will change minds. So, I would like to see this newsgroup drop this
line altogether and concentrate on people's real world systems, how
to make them better for the user and not whether all amplifiers that
measure the same must sound the same. It would be more useful to
hear from users who buy products we read about in the magazines for
instance and their experiences with them. There is no absoulte
sound, so it is ALL subjective. If you are happy with the sound of
your system, that is ALL that is required.

That is a very tendentious point.

The reason I read rec.audio.high-end and almost no other hi-fi forum
is precisely that the debate between those who believe that it is
meaningful to test audibility and those who don't is allowed here.

If *everything* is subjective, how is the fact that you are happy
with your system relevant to anybody else, especially considering
others' listening rooms? IMO, the single greatest value of RAHE is
that it gives the room for opposing views on audio without
censoring anybody (unlike some other forums) while maintaining the
standards of civilized debate.

That is exactly right. Without such a debate, everything collapses to
solipsism. This is more or less the state of the hi-fi press, which I
don't read much either. They're full of "we no longer believe there
is any doubt about the audibility of cables".

So, let a thousand flowers bloom. This is one of the best forums for
discussing such issues that I have ever come across, and we have the
moderators to thank for that.

Andrew.

andy wrote:

It is sad to see a very low traffic on rahe: just a few (10 or so)
messages per day. Is our hobby evaporating, involving and passionate
so few people?
Is quality music reproduction getting so un-relevant for most of us -
the average Joe?
Is good music itself (mostly classical and jazz, IMO, with some good
rock and pop) getting so un-relevant for most of us? Classical and
jazz record sales are dropping lower and lower ( 5% ??)

I see the same on EU groups I sometimes attend ...

================================================

At the risk of starting something, it seems that this is the "normal"
message volume. But from time to time, the umpteen dozenth variation of
the Double Blind Testing Argument gets going again, driving message
volume up.

I do hope the hardware never becomes more important than the software.

-Gene Poon

Which web based forums do you have in mind?

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Usenet is yesterday's technology. Most online arguers have long since moved
to web-based forums. ;

Philip Meech wrote:
Which web based forums do you have in mind?

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Usenet is yesterday's technology. Most online arguers have long since moved
to web-based forums. ;

forums regarding audio :

AudioAsylum.com
Audioholics.com
AVSforum.com
Hometheaterforum.com
hydrogenaudio.org
quadraphonicquad.com
stevehoffman.tv
lukpac.org
audiogon.com
chesky.com
audioreview.com

are ones I just plucked out of my bookmarks file.
By no means are these the only ones out there.
(There are also Yahoo groups, for example)

--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

chung wrote:

RBernst929 wrote:

In my opinion there is TOO much chatter back and forth about
"objectivist vs.
subjectivist" points of view here. I have noticed that a
preponderance of
posts have to do with this and I for one am tired of reading them. We
all know
by now who the "usual suspects" are here on both sides of the issue
and that no
amount of banter will change minds. So, I would like to see this
newsgroup
drop this line altogether and concentrate on people's real world
systems, how
to make them better for the user and not whether all amplifiers that
measure
the same must sound the same. It would be more useful to hear from
users who
buy products we read about in the magazines for instance and their
experiences
with them. There is no absoulte sound, so it is ALL subjective. If
you are
happy with the sound of your system, that is ALL that is required. -Bob
Bernstein.


So if someone says that cables need break-in, CD magic pens are
wonderful, the more expensive a cable is the better it sounds, etc.,
etc., you want the more technically inclined posters to just keep quiet
and let those claims go unchallenged? Wouldn't those new to the hobby
want to hear the viewpoints based on science and engineering?

Or... how about them listening for themselves and making a decision?
Yes, know the pro's and con's... but listen for themselves and decide on
how to spend their own money.

Gene Poon wrote in message news:NVWcc.91415$JO3.45810@attbi_s04...
I do hope the hardware never becomes more important than the software.

I think the very existance of threads like "cones of silence vs
Masterbase" and the cliams of dramatic difference in the sounds of
cables is sure existance proof that, indeed, the hardware has become
more important that the software, despite these peoples strident
claims to the contrary.

Yes software is where my heart is too.

HW investment = about $5K
SW investment = upwards of $40K

"Gene Poon" wrote in message
news:NVWcc.91415$JO3.45810@attbi_s04...
andy wrote:

It is sad to see a very low traffic on rahe: just a few (10 or so)
messages per day. Is our hobby evaporating, involving and passionate
so few people?
Is quality music reproduction getting so un-relevant for most of us -
the average Joe?
Is good music itself (mostly classical and jazz, IMO, with some good
rock and pop) getting so un-relevant for most of us? Classical and
jazz record sales are dropping lower and lower ( 5% ??)

I see the same on EU groups I sometimes attend ...

================================================

At the risk of starting something, it seems that this is the "normal"
message volume. But from time to time, the umpteen dozenth variation of
the Double Blind Testing Argument gets going again, driving message
volume up.

I do hope the hardware never becomes more important than the software.

-Gene Poon

TonyP wrote:
chung wrote:



So if someone says that cables need break-in, CD magic pens are
wonderful, the more expensive a cable is the better it sounds, etc.,
etc., you want the more technically inclined posters to just keep quiet
and let those claims go unchallenged? Wouldn't those new to the hobby
want to hear the viewpoints based on science and engineering?

Or... how about them listening for themselves and making a decision?
Yes, know the pro's and con's... but listen for themselves and decide on
how to spend their own money.

I don't think even the most extreme objectivist will ever tell someone
*not* to listen themselves. In fact, they simply recommend that one
really only listens, using bias-controlled methods. And of course, no
one has ever said that you can only spend your own money in any specific
way.

"andy" wrote in message
...
It is sad to see a very low traffic on rahe: just a few (10 or so)
messages per day. Is our hobby evaporating, involving and passionate
so few people?
Is quality music reproduction getting so un-relevant for most of us -
the average Joe?

I think there are several forces at play, primary among them is the fact
that it is truly difficult to purchase bad sounding electronics today. Even
the budget receivers of today are vastly superior to the high-end components
of 20 years ago. Whereas discussion over amplifiers used to be meaningful,
the nominal competance of the majority of today's amps has even the purest
subjectivists recognizing that audible differences between them are subtle
at best. The same can be said for digital source components, which really
only leaves speakers as a subject of meaningful discussion.

Excerpt:
At the risk of starting something, it seems that this is the "normal"
message volume. But from time to time, the umpteen dozenth variation of
the Double Blind Testing Argument gets going again, driving message
volume up.

Or down. This forum's name should be rec.audio.dead-end.

"Vade Forrester" wrote in message
news:uPoec.113985$gA5.1463578@attbi_s03...
Excerpt:
At the risk of starting something, it seems that this is the "normal"
message volume. But from time to time, the umpteen dozenth variation of
the Double Blind Testing Argument gets going again, driving message
volume up.

Or down. This forum's name should be rec.audio.dead-end.


My nomination is rec.audio.high-end-criticism., so that people know
what it's apparent purpose is. Because very little else goes down here.--
the
high-end-products are overpriced badly-engineered frauds, the people in the
industry corrupt charlatans, the press a self-serving lapdog, etc. etc. etc.
(but said more nicely than before :-) ). And except for speakers, mid-fi
reigns!

Part of the problem is that this newsgroup does not allow posting with a
munged email address or with an alias. Too many of us have found that SPAMMERs
routinely harvest email addresses to add to their SPAMing lists, so we don't
post here. This is the reality of the Internet today. Too bad. . . .

Vade Forrester wrote:

Excerpt:
At the risk of starting something, it seems that this is the "normal"
message volume. But from time to time, the umpteen dozenth variation of
the Double Blind Testing Argument gets going again, driving message
volume up.

Or down. This forum's name should be rec.audio.dead-end.

I think there are several forces at play, primary among them is the fact
that it is truly difficult to purchase bad sounding electronics today. Even
the budget receivers of today are vastly superior to the high-end components
of 20 years ago. Whereas discussion over amplifiers used to be meaningful,
the nominal competance of the majority of today's amps has even the purest
subjectivists recognizing that audible differences between them are subtle
at best. The same can be said for digital source components, which really
only leaves speakers as a subject of meaningful discussion.

I would say: speakers and digital processing (room correction). I vote
for the claim that 'properly designed amplifiers tend to sound the
same'. Just be careful with idiosincratics pairs - e.g. SET amplifiers
(is it a right example of properly designed amplifier??) with low
impedance loudspeaker systems

I personally am not too much excited to discuss about 'how much
transparent that pre-amplifier is ...'

regards

In article ,
(andy) wrote:

I think there are several forces at play, primary among them is the fact
that it is truly difficult to purchase bad sounding electronics today. Even
the budget receivers of today are vastly superior to the high-end components
of 20 years ago. Whereas discussion over amplifiers used to be meaningful,
the nominal competance of the majority of today's amps has even the purest
subjectivists recognizing that audible differences between them are subtle
at best. The same can be said for digital source components, which really
only leaves speakers as a subject of meaningful discussion.

I would say: speakers and digital processing (room correction). I vote
for the claim that 'properly designed amplifiers tend to sound the
same'. Just be careful with idiosincratics pairs - e.g. SET amplifiers
(is it a right example of properly designed amplifier??) with low
impedance loudspeaker systems

I personally am not too much excited to discuss about 'how much
transparent that pre-amplifier is ...'

regards

It is possible for the RIAA compensation to be off I suppose.