"I. Care" wrote in message
.net

There is an interesting discussion which might relate to
one of the threads that was/has been going on here. It
is on rec.audio.high-end and titled "The long term
listening myth"

It's only interesting to people who don't already know the punch line.

Long term listening is a great way to find musical passages and
circumstances where there is audible distortion. In some sense, its the only
way.

But long term listening is a very poor methodolgy if you goal is the most
sensitive possible results.

The orgional ABX Comparator had a standard battery backup feature that
supported long term listening tests. 4 AA cells on the back panel would
maintain the storage of unknowns and test results for days, even when there
was an interruption of power. Frankly, it was one of the least important
features of the product and was almost never used.

Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.


They sure do a lousy job of teaching science in schools anymore.

Karl Uppiano wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.


They sure do a lousy job of teaching science in schools anymore.


http://solomonsmusic.net/postmod.htm

wrote in message
...

They sure do a lousy job of teaching science in schools anymore.

http://solomonsmusic.net/postmod.htm

I think you've hit the nail right on the head. Subjectivist audio is a
manifestation of postmodernism, the notion that nothing is objectively known
and that whenever you say anything is better than anything else, you are
expressing no more than a personal taste. (BTW, is there such a thing as
"feminist audio" yet?)

If postmodernism wins, it will be the end of science - a new Dark Age.

In a recent book Michael Novak points out that business (in a market
economy) is a potent defense against postmodernism because you can't be a
postmodernist entrepreneur. Things either sell or don't, and playing
mind-tricks on yourself won't change that.

That does not keep businesses from marketing things *to* the postmodernists,
who might be unusually easy to manipulate!

P.S. I think there's *some* good in postmodernism. It's an overreaction to
some of the excesses of rationalist "scientism" in the mid-20th-century and
earlier (e.g., antimentalist psychology). But it's an *over*reaction.

mc wrote:
wrote in message
...

They sure do a lousy job of teaching science in schools anymore.

http://solomonsmusic.net/postmod.htm

I think you've hit the nail right on the head. Subjectivist audio is a
manifestation of postmodernism, the notion that nothing is objectively known
and that whenever you say anything is better than anything else, you are
expressing no more than a personal taste. (BTW, is there such a thing as
"feminist audio" yet?)

If postmodernism wins, it will be the end of science - a new Dark Age.

In a recent book Michael Novak points out that business (in a market
economy) is a potent defense against postmodernism because you can't be a
postmodernist entrepreneur. Things either sell or don't, and playing
mind-tricks on yourself won't change that.

That does not keep businesses from marketing things *to* the postmodernists,
who might be unusually easy to manipulate!

P.S. I think there's *some* good in postmodernism. It's an overreaction to
some of the excesses of rationalist "scientism" in the mid-20th-century and
earlier (e.g., antimentalist psychology). But it's an *over*reaction.

I do believe there is feminist audio/artists, audience size varies by
venue :-)
Not being an economist, I would think that a postmodernist entrepreneur
would fail regardless of the economy.
In contrast though, look at what some will pay for "Art"
Is postmodern defined as the fall of civilization or a Utopian society?

mc wrote:
wrote

They sure do a lousy job of teaching science in schools anymore.

http://solomonsmusic.net/postmod.htm

I think you've hit the nail right on the head. Subjectivist audio is a
manifestation of postmodernism, the notion that nothing is objectively known
and that whenever you say anything is better than anything else, you are
expressing no more than a personal taste. (BTW, is there such a thing as
"feminist audio" yet?)

I disagree completely. The subjectivist approach to audio is mostly a
throwback to pre-rationalist, pre-scientific superstitious behavior,
coupled with some clever PT Barnum style marketing. It has little or
nothing to do with postmodernism, beyond the propensity to use
impenetrable jargon as a smoke screen to mask the fact that there's no
"there" there.

Moreover, postmodernism is a fad confined mostly to obscure academic
corners in universities; it has not infected the primary and secondary
school systems to my knowlege.

I do agree that the schools are failing to do a good job of teaching
science, but the reason is more plain old ignorance and superstition,
not a fancy erudite academic ofuscatory fad.

BTW, the classic rationalist take on postmodernism is he
http://www2.info.ucl.ac.be/people/PVR/decon.html
You might enjoy it.

And, of course, this is a lot of fun:
http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo

//Walt

mc a écrit :

wrote in message
...



I think you've hit the nail right on the head.


Judging by your ignorant dumbass response, I'd say he missed by a few
inches.


Subjectivist audio is a
manifestation of postmodernism, the notion that nothing is objectively known
and that whenever you say anything is better than anything else


Blah blah blah... prove it already, or shut your dumb yap.

, you are
expressing no more than a personal taste. (BTW, is there such a thing as
"feminist audio" yet?)

There is such a thing as a misogynist and a chauvinist. You're both.

wrote in message
...
Karl Uppiano wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.


They sure do a lousy job of teaching science in schools anymore.


http://solomonsmusic.net/postmod.htm

That is just scary. In that paradigm, "evil" is just another point of view.

On 13 Feb 2006 20:58:02 -0800, wrote:

Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.

Actually, it's not *his* ABX, it's what the entire audio industry
uses, because it works. Of course, it won't allow you to hear
*imaginary* differences due to such things as cables and 'high end'
amplifiers, which is likely why you have a problem with it.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On 13 Feb 2006 20:58:02 -0800, wrote:

Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.

Actually, it's not *his* ABX, it's what the entire audio industry
uses, because it works. Of course, it won't allow you to hear
*imaginary* differences due to such things as cables and 'high end'
amplifiers, which is likely why you have a problem with it.


However, it has also never been shown to reveal real but subtle differences
in areas such as transparency, soundstaging, dynamic response, or even
smallish volume differences when playing music, especially when attempting
to use it as an open ended evaluation tool (i.e. you are looking for
differences but don't know "what" differences, so there can be no training).
There is a big difference between its use as an audio research tool and a
general tool for making audio component choices.

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in
message ...
On 13 Feb 2006 20:58:02 -0800,
wrote:
Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a
joke. ABX is to audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom
microchip production. In other words, your ABX myth is
about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life,
I'm sorry to say.

Actually, it's not *his* ABX, it's what the entire audio
industry uses, because it works. Of course, it won't
allow you to hear *imaginary* differences due to such
things as cables and 'high end' amplifiers, which is
likely why you have a problem with it.

However, it has also never been shown to reveal real but
subtle differences in areas such as transparency,
soundstaging, dynamic response, or even smallish volume
differences when playing music,

Sure it does. ABX tests relating to established thresholds of audibility
either confirm them or set them at more sensitive points.

The only problems at hand are the goofy ways that audio's high end defines
these terms and the compeltely bogus ways that it tries to show that they
exist. The goofiness is shown by the lack of consistency, and the bogosity
is in their continued religous belief in sighted evaluations.

Stewart Pinkerton puked out :

On 13 Feb 2006 20:58:02 -0800, wrote:

Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.

Actually, it's not *his* ABX, it's what the entire audio industry
uses, because it works.

If by the "entire audio industry" you mean your fat faggot friend
KKKrueger's PC audio site, then you're right. If you're implying
anything else, then you're the stupid drunk ****head everyone knows you
to be.

Of course, it won't allow you to hear
*imaginary* differences due to such things as cables and 'high end'
amplifiers, which is likely why you have a problem with it.

The only thing imaginary here is your notion that you,re not a
dimwitted drunken ignorant asswipe. Why don't you just shut up and go
have a drink now, Drunkie.

On 16 Feb 2006 18:41:34 -0800, wrote:


Stewart Pinkerton puked out :

On 13 Feb 2006 20:58:02 -0800, wrote:

Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.

Actually, it's not *his* ABX, it's what the entire audio industry
uses, because it works.

If by the "entire audio industry" you mean your fat faggot friend
KKKrueger's PC audio site, then you're right. If you're implying
anything else, then you're the stupid drunk ****head everyone knows you
to be.

Try telling that to Sean Olive, you moron.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On 16 Feb 2006 18:41:34 -0800, wrote:


Stewart Pinkerton puked out :

On 13 Feb 2006 20:58:02 -0800, wrote:

Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.

Actually, it's not *his* ABX, it's what the entire audio industry
uses, because it works.

If by the "entire audio industry" you mean your fat faggot friend
KKKrueger's PC audio site, then you're right. If you're implying
anything else, then you're the stupid drunk ****head everyone knows you
to be.

Try telling that to Sean Olive, you moron.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

This is an individual ) that obviously has
some serious self-esteem issues.
Pointless ranting that rarely addresses the topic,
only attacks the poster of his choice.
This thread will also quickly degenerate into a
constant string of venomous posts.

Stewart Pinkerton a écrit :

On 16 Feb 2006 18:41:34 -0800, wrote:


Stewart Pinkerton puked out :

On 13 Feb 2006 20:58:02 -0800, wrote:

Still hawking your silly stupid ABX crap, I see. What a joke. ABX is to
audio, as pineapples are to cleanroom microchip production. In other
words, your ABX myth is about as relevant as your presence in the audio
community, Krueger Klown. And your entire failed life, I'm sorry to
say.

Actually, it's not *his* ABX, it's what the entire audio industry
uses, because it works.

If by the "entire audio industry" you mean your fat faggot friend
KKKrueger's PC audio site, then you're right. If you're implying
anything else, then you're the stupid drunk ****head everyone knows you
to be.

Try telling that to Sean Olive, you moron.

Hey hey now. No need for insults, you drunken bitch. You mean Sean
Olive, the ****ing ignorant pig from Harman Intl? Don't make me LAUGH,
you stupid limey ****wad! To begin with, he's a KKKrueger Klone, who
actively promotes KKKrueger's ABX agenda on the usenet audio
newsgroups. That already kills his credibility right there. Secondly,
Harman Kardon is a MID-FI audio company that produces PURE **** these
days; ie. home theatre junk. So in fact, you just gave people a
brilliant reason NOT to buy to your ABX propaganda, NOT to base
anything on the ABX myth. Name just FIVE true high end companies (which
means audio that has a chance of sounding GOOD), that use ABX tests in
their R&D phase. How about you start with the components in YOUR
system, you lying ****? Did your KRELL amp or electrostats rely on ABX
tests? Did you buy your high end gear after taking ABX tests, or you
just think everyone else should, you ****ing drunk hypocrite?

Let's see how fast it takes you to wriggle out of the questions I just
asked....


--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering