"Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer" wrote
in message news:5e450ecdf45f0b86ce3e620bea35e592@cypherpunks. to...
Only in audiophool land is an enormous premium for a run of the mill
product justified by the fact that it is exclusive, for which the English
translation is: Everyone else is too smart to waste their money.

You obviously have *NO* idea how the fashion industry works then.

TonyP.

There is a little more substance here. yet there is still the personal bias strongly evident.
How do you know Pat is such brute other than you have taken a dislike to him. Because he challanged you it doesnt make him uncultured. How do you know he doesnt love music,
the number of disks isnt a measure, what about the records as well.

Sure if you dont have a frame of referece you wont be able to aim for something good in design. I still dont see any real evidence for the claims your making, if you heard his speakers if you were honest you might even like them.

youd have pat like a stable hand sleeping out the back, how could a yob make anything good? Were the hell did you get this idea from, maybe it helps you feel better.


Paul


Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote:

Why the non-kulturny turneroid builds zero-culture speakers
rec.audio.tubes,aus.hi-fi

Let me say, first of all, Paul, that it is your money. You can spend it on any speakers you want, including Turner Audio speakers. It is also your soul. If you want to make a religion of the turneroids speakers, you will burn alone for it, so it is none of our business.

However, you must allow the rest of us too to make our own choices. And when you put your reasons on the public record in such abrasively personal tones, we are entitled to inspect them closely.

WHAT YOU HEARD
Your description of the turneroid speakers is perfectly fair, from your viewpoint. However, what we hear you telling us is that there is this toaster made in a Canberra electrical repair shop that toasts the bread evenly but not quite equally brown on both sides. All right, okay, so thats what toasters mostly do, they toast bread, and even common toasters toast evenly, and to get one that toasts equally brown on both sides may cost a bit more. But you also tell us this Canberra repair shop toaster, which doesnt even toast evenly brown on both sides, costs an enormous premium. And the maker of the toaster tells us he sells three a year.

Only in audiophool land is an enormous premium for a run of the mill product justified by the fact that it is exclusive, for which the English translation is: Everyone else is too smart to waste their money.

And then you get abusive when I state the obvious. Ouch, man. Since you dont like my first attempt to explain the reasoning to you, here is the neddy version (1):

WHAT HI-FI DOES
High-fidelity audio equipment attempts to reproduce the sound of live music in the concert hall faithfully in your home. It has not yet succeeded or we would not need the qualifier, high, we would use only the single definitive word, fidelity.

WHAT CULTURE HAS TO DO WITH IT
Music is an art form, by definition a cultured activity in its creation, performance and appreciation. It is a cultivated taste.

Those who have not cultivated the taste cannot judge whether the performance in the concert hall is in fact faithfully reproduced by the speakers in your home, or to be precise, since we are speaking of an ever-closer approach to fidelity, a journey rather than a fait accompli, more faithfully than by the next speaker. Those who have not cultivated the taste therefore have no business pretending to be makers of loudspeakers, because they are certain to take backwards, away from fidelity, rather than closer to it.

WHAT TURNERS LACK OF CULTURE HAS TO DO WITH LOUDSPEAKERS
Your friend Patrick Turner has no culture. He behaves like a yob. We know he rarely if ever attends concerts. We know his CD collection is a derisory sixty discs. He is not a music lover. How can Turner possibly judge and develop loudspeakers that will satisfy the criteria of music lovers?

THE MAKERS OF GOOD SPEAKERS
Mr Gilbert Briggs, founder of Wharfedale and at the helm throughout their glory days, was a pianist of some standing and a constant concertgoer. Mr Peter Walker of Quad did not just attend concerts, he put them on in the Royal Albert Hall.

The makers of good speakers, and amps for that matter, are not merely concert goers and engineers, they also think about music and its reproduction, and have arrived at a philosophy, and it is by the philosophy that they add value as much as by their engineering and cultivated taste to know what works artistically as well as mechanically.

SO, HOW DO THE TURNEROID SPEAKERS WORK
Your friend Patrick Turner has no such philosophy. He has a craft outlook. He sees something, copies it, and claims he makes it better than the original, and therefore it should be worth vastly more. That may be a way to make second-rate jewelry, though the discriminating will still patronize the original craftsman rather than the copyist, and will know the nouveau riche and non-kulturny pretenders precisely by the fact that they take the copyist at his own hyped-up valuation.

THE OUTCOME
Because Turner is not a music lover and not a cultured person in general, he has no reference for his speakers except other speakers he heard. Because as a consequence of not being a music lover he has no philosophy of reproduction, the outcome, at vast cost, is a me-too speaker, a possibly better made lowest common denominator speaker for which a premium is charged, perversely because no one with any discrimination wants it!

And why dont the discriminating want it? Because no value has been added. And no value has been added because the turneroid has no culture. The circle is complete.

You are in effect asked to pay a premium for a pretty common speaker because its maker, Turner, is a rude yob!

Im sorry, James, but there are literally hundreds of makes of speakers that do exactly what the turneroid speakers do, at a lower cost. In the case of the Turner Audio amplifiers, there are hundreds of makes that do exactly what the turneroid amps do, at vastly lower cost. If you dont want your religion ridiculed, dont display it in public.

Andre Jute
PS You express an opinion about the way I earn my living which I find amusing:
Why anyone would pay you for your perverse thinking is really quite bizarre
Actually, they pay me because I dont mind taking a few knocks for expressing unpopular thoughts which require to be expressed. After forty years they keep paying me because I have an awesome record of my controversial opinions turning into current dogma. Just in case you have a problem with the English language, as displayed in your letter below, here is the short version: I am always proved right.

(1) Neddy is an all-purpose fool to whom things must be explained slowly and repeatedly.

paul james
What the hell is diatribe from a so called writer. Very poorly argued you link speakers
to culture then say that Pat has no culture therefore couldnt possibility build good speakers. What meaningless twaddle, history is littered with people who did great things but had questionable character, not that this even applies anyhow.

It is easier to like the works of people we like, but the reverse also applies your approach seems loaded, youd only like the speakers of people that you culturally approve. What kind of perverse religion is this. you dont like Pat thats one thing it doesnt follow like 2 plus 2 equals four that his speakers are not any good.

Why anyone would pay you for your perverse thinking is really quite bizarre.

Paul

Speaker creation by culture.

Nomen Nescio wrote:

The turneroid School of Loudspeaker Design by Hammer
rec.audio.tubes,aus.hi-fi

I have heard Turners attempts at loudspeakers.

Until now I have not volunteered an opinion on Turners gear, though not for the perfectly valid reasons Phil states. There are two reasons he should add for complete coverage. One is that I am a professional writer, so I dont write a review until I am paid for it by a reputable publisher.

The other relevant is the relevant one here. I have no intention of writing a review from which Turner can misquote a phrase, or take a piece out of context, and then advertise that Andre Jute approves of his products.

Phil, whatever you guys may think of his manner (and I think some idiots on aus.hi-fi, born school bullies, bring that on yourselves by constantly taunting him), is a pretty smart guy, whose incisive insight is comprehensively illustrated in this bit:

The Turneroid cannot produce anything of such value

Before I heard the turneroids gear, I already made the case that loudspeakers, beyond their technicalities, require culture to know when they sound right, which is the same case Phil here makes concisely. Turner has no culture. Crude yobs like Turner do not produce great speakers. For Turners shameless hype and his prices, his speakers should be exceptional. You yourself tell us they are not. Plenty of very reasonably priced speakers do what you describe and more.

Please note that in all this I have not agreed any particular of your assessment of the turneroid speakers, nor expressed approval of your overall assessment. I have not said anything at all specific about my own listening impressions. I have merely made a case from the general standpoint of Turners observable behaviour as a zero-culture yob who cannot at any stretch of the imagination be considered a music lover. How a fellow with by his own admission a collection of 60 CDs can presume to call himself a loudspeaker designer is a mystery.

Turning to more pleasant things, I have among my speakers a set of the 1970s vintage Bang and Olufsen S25 which are a direct copy of the famous Goodmans bentback speakers of possibly the late 1960s, intended to be hung on a wall at an angle. I would consider it a favour if your would ask your dad if he remembers them and relay faithfully what he says about their origins, etc.

Andre Jute


"paul james"

Andre
Have bought nothing from Pat not have any commercial arrangement with him.
I have had a long standing interest in loudspeakers since as a boy when my
father worked for goodmans. I was impressed by the detail and naturalness of
Pats speakers. The only
weakeness being lack of low bass, but then thats more apparent on some
music than others. Thats a relative satatement also as there are not many
systems withnout a good sub that produce low bass, not boom.

Have you heard Pats speakers?

Why not ask a really loaded question - dickhead.?

If Andre says he has and was unimpressed then he gets accused of personal
prejudice or having tin ears.

If Andre say he has not heard them then he gets accused of commenting
without knowing.

Only objective test results and independent assessments count.

The Turneroid cannot produce anything of such value.

......... Phil

paul james wrote:

There is a little more substance here. yet there is still the personal bias strongly evident.
How do you know Pat is such brute other than you have taken a dislike to him. Because he challanged you it doesnt make him uncultured. How do you know he doesnt love music,
the number of disks isnt a measure, what about the records as well.

Sure if you dont have a frame of referece you wont be able to aim for something good in design. I still dont see any real evidence for the claims your making, if you heard his speakers if you were honest you might even like them.

youd have pat like a stable hand sleeping out the back, how could a yob make anything good? Were the hell did you get this idea from, maybe it helps you feel better.

Paul

I really don't think there is anything to be achieved by talking to
Andre Jute on the matter of any of my sound systems,
simply because whatever he said lacks any relevance, since he has never heard
any music through my gear, or been present at any AB tests,
and is he marinates all his opinions in the hate campaign he perpetuates,
because I dare to stand up to his arrogant elitist ravings.
While Andre maintains his irrational rage, he'd never appreciate
anything very much, and I suggest we just leave the cretin alone to stew all by himself .

Patrick Turner.

Delete Andre's drivel...

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:54:23 +1100, Patrick Turner
wrote:



paul james wrote:

There is a little more substance here. yet there is still the personal bias strongly evident.
How do you know Pat is such brute other than you have taken a dislike to him. Because he challanged you it doesnt make him uncultured. How do you know he doesnt love music,
the number of disks isnt a measure, what about the records as well.

Sure if you dont have a frame of referece you wont be able to aim for something good in design. I still dont see any real evidence for the claims your making, if you heard his speakers if you were honest you might even like them.

youd have pat like a stable hand sleeping out the back, how could a yob make anything good? Were the hell did you get this idea from, maybe it helps you feel better.

Paul

I really don't think there is anything to be achieved by talking to
Andre Jute on the matter of any of my sound systems,
simply because whatever he said lacks any relevance, since he has never heard
any music through my gear, or been present at any AB tests,
and is he marinates all his opinions in the hate campaign he perpetuates,
because I dare to stand up to his arrogant elitist ravings.
While Andre maintains his irrational rage, he'd never appreciate
anything very much, and I suggest we just leave the cretin alone to stew all by himself .

Patrick Turner.

Delete Andre's drivel...

Patrick

well said, starve the prat of the oxygen that he desires, and he
will soon wither and die.

kind regards

bill ramsay.

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


paul james wrote:

There is a little more substance here. yet there is still the personal
bias strongly evident.
How do you know Pat is such brute other than you have taken a dislike to
him. Because he challanged you it doesnt make him uncultured. How do you
know he doesnt love music,
the number of disks isnt a measure, what about the records as well.

Sure if you dont have a frame of referece you wont be able to aim for
something good in design. I still dont see any real evidence for the claims
your making, if you heard his speakers if you were honest you might even
like them.

youd have pat like a stable hand sleeping out the back, how could a yob
make anything good? Were the hell did you get this idea from, maybe it
helps you feel better.

Paul

I really don't think there is anything to be achieved by talking to
Andre Jute on the matter of any of my sound systems,
simply because whatever he said lacks any relevance, since he has never
heard
any music through my gear, or been present at any AB tests,
and is he marinates all his opinions in the hate campaign he perpetuates,
because I dare to stand up to his arrogant elitist ravings.
While Andre maintains his irrational rage, he'd never appreciate
anything very much, and I suggest we just leave the cretin alone to stew
all by himself .

Patrick Turner.

Delete Andre's drivel...

Geez I'm sure glad you understood his post Mr Turner. 'Coz I sure as hell
thought it was written in some obscure English dialect and couldn't make
head or tail of it.

"Tony Pearce"
...
Only in audiophool land is an enormous premium for a run of the mill
product justified by the fact that it is exclusive, for which the English
translation is: Everyone else is too smart to waste their money.

You obviously have *NO* idea how the fashion industry works then.


** So the Pearceoid makes his living dressing store window mannequins ????

Be as close as a worthless turd like him would ever get to the fashion
industry.




......... Phil

"paul james"

There is a little more substance here. yet there is still the personal
bias strongly evident.

** As if a banana bending HT moron like you would have a clue.


How do you know Pat is such brute other than you have taken a dislike to
him.


** Andre knows - from bitter experience.

The disliking was not over nothing - arsehole.



Because he challanged you it doesnt make him uncultured.


** What brainless comment.


How do you know he doesnt love music,


** The Turneroid is so deaf does not even know what stereo is.


if you heard his speakers if you were honest you might even like them.


** Still don't make them worth $5000 a pair.


youd have pat like a stable hand sleeping out the back, how could a yob
make anything good?


** Correct - yobs cannot design - they can only clone.




........... Phil

Light years ahead of you, you fool.
What does that make you? A sub yob, you couldnt even clone, only Rant.
you are a prize ****wit Phill.


Phil Allison wrote:

"paul james"

There is a little more substance here. yet there is still the personal
bias strongly evident.

** As if a banana bending HT moron like you would have a clue.

How do you know Pat is such brute other than you have taken a dislike to
him.

** Andre knows - from bitter experience.

The disliking was not over nothing - arsehole.

Because he challanged you it doesnt make him uncultured.

** What brainless comment.

How do you know he doesnt love music,

** The Turneroid is so deaf does not even know what stereo is.

if you heard his speakers if you were honest you might even like them.

** Still don't make them worth $5000 a pair.

youd have pat like a stable hand sleeping out the back, how could a yob
make anything good?

** Correct - yobs cannot design - they can only clone.

.......... Phil

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 05:48:45 +0100, Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga
Remailer wrote:

snip

WHAT HI-FI DOES
High-fidelity audio equipment attempts to reproduce the sound of live
music in the concert hall faithfully in your home. It has not yet
succeeded or we would not need the qualifier, high, we would use only the
single definitive word, fidelity.

snip

Perfectly accurate. However, a lot of people don't really want true hi-fi
- no matter what they say. They want a *concept* rather than *fidelity*.
To those people the look of the equipment (and its paper specification
and how loud it can go!) can be just as important as its sound. These
people are typically what you would class as "uncultured", but are the
vast majority of the marketplace. I'm afraid we live in a world where
marketing and "fidelity" collide and manufacturing costs outweigh
everything. If people wish to pay for specification and looks rather than
sound quality who am I to argue? That is what they want and it is their
money, not mine.


WHAT CULTURE HAS TO DO WITH IT
Music is an art form, by definition a cultured activity in its creation,
performance and appreciation. It is a cultivated taste.


Unfortunately a lot of us cannot (for various reasons) listen to live
performances anywhere near as often as we would like. Those that we do
attend are often not in ideal accoustic surroundings, so much of the
impact is lost. It is extremely difficult to cultivate true musical
appreciation under those conditions! Listening to a record or CD
collection is not a substitute as we do not know what the original
performance sounded like and we are actually listening to a "mangled"
version of it. Studio recordings are, of course, pointless as they are
completely artificial.


Those who have not cultivated the taste cannot judge whether the
performance in the concert hall is in fact faithfully reproduced by the
speakers in your home, or to be precise, since we are speaking of an
ever-closer approach to fidelity, a journey rather than a fait accompli,
more faithfully than by the next speaker. Those who have not cultivated
the taste therefore have no business pretending to be makers of
loudspeakers, because they are certain to take backwards, away from
fidelity, rather than closer to it.


I have to argue with that. A manufacturer can produce loudspeakers which
are designed to appeal to the *intended market*, and have no pretention of
producing sound identical to the original. They may indeed still be
"hi-fi" in the commonly accepted sense, but are not designed to be
"fidelity" loudspeakers. They may even be excellent designs and may
indeed *measure* better than "fidelity" speakers, but will sound
different to a trained ear - they are not *wrong*, but *different* as
their market decides what will sell. Their designers may, or may not, fit
into your catagory of "music lovers", but to them that is of secondary
importance to "will it sell, and how much for?". This doesn't make the
equipment necessarily *bad*, just *inaccurate* - which, as I said before,
may not matter. It doesn't condemn their designers and manufacturers to
eternal hell either! (Although, judging by the sound of some of the
cheap-and-nastys out there, this could be an arguable point :-).

You may even find that loudspeakers produced for another country sound
different to your own, as emphasis is placed on different frequency ranges.


snip

THE MAKERS OF GOOD SPEAKERS
Mr Gilbert Briggs, founder of Wharfedale and at the helm throughout
their glory days, was a pianist of some standing and a constant
concertgoer. Mr Peter Walker of Quad did not just attend concerts, he
put them on in the Royal Albert Hall.


I am currently reading a book (found in a charity shop!). "Amplifiers -
The why and how of good amplification" by messers G.A. Briggs and H.H.
Garner and published by Wharfdale Wireless Works, Bradford in 1952. The
love of the subject by these gentlemen really comes out! One of my
favourite "valve" books (I'm not stooping to calling them "tubes" - that
name has no class :-).


Oh - I hot an HTML email with your name on it. Unfortunately it appeared
to be junk, without an attached pdf. Just thought I'd let you know... :-)

"Form@C"


However, a lot of people don't really want true hi-fi
- no matter what they say. They want a *concept* rather than *fidelity*.
To those people the look of the equipment (and its paper specification
and how loud it can go!) can be just as important as its sound. These
people are typically what you would class as "uncultured", but are the
vast majority of the marketplace. I'm afraid we live in a world where
marketing and "fidelity" collide and manufacturing costs outweigh
everything.

If people wish to pay for specification and looks rather than
sound quality who am I to argue? That is what they want and it is their
money, not mine.


** The trouble arises when these same individuals start posting their views
on NGs and forcing them onto others as fact. As far as genuine hi-fi is
concerned they are utterly clueless - however they own expensive stereo
sound systems that they are adamant are far superior to any at lower cost or
with low status value ( ie consist of some home engineered items).

The desire to own hi-fi status symbols with "magic" sound quality runs
high in these folk - to the extent that it becomes a fetish overtaking the
reproduction of recordings for pleasure entirely. Then there is also the
treadmill of making constant miniscule improvements, most of them imagined
rather than real. A whole industry of snake oil merchants is waiting to
cynically exploit this self delusion with cables and devices so preposterous
as to be laughable.

The situation is such nowadays and has been for quite a few years that
genuine hi-fi sound gear is publicly shunned in favour of fad and fetish
items, the reputations of which are artificially created by dubious
subjective review writers paid to do so and urged on by dealers and
manufacturers alike.

As with many other things - truth goes out the window when it proves
to be no use as a selling aid.



.......... Phil

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 00:53:10 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:

snip

If people wish to pay for specification and looks rather than
sound quality who am I to argue? That is what they want and it is their
money, not mine.


** The trouble arises when these same individuals start posting their
views on NGs and forcing them onto others as fact. As far as genuine
hi-fi is concerned they are utterly clueless - however they own

I wouldn't say "clueless" because it can be taken as derogatory. Most of
them have never heard anything approaching "real" hi-fi, so it isn't their
fault. They realise that some people spend a lot of money on what look to
be very basic systems, but they just look on them as nutters with more
money than sense. They have just to attain enlightenment... :-)


expensive stereo sound systems that they are adamant are far superior to
any at lower cost or with low status value ( ie consist of some home
engineered items).

The desire to own hi-fi status symbols with "magic" sound quality runs
high in these folk - to the extent that it becomes a fetish overtaking
the reproduction of recordings for pleasure entirely. Then there is also
the treadmill of making constant miniscule improvements, most of them
imagined rather than real. A whole industry of snake oil merchants is
waiting to cynically exploit this self delusion with cables and devices so
preposterous as to be laughable.


Guilty as charged, your honour... I'm running bi-wired, heavily modified
old Kef Codas (the original version). They sound ok to me, and the
bi-wiring seems to have helped - even though I know, with my engineering
head on, that it can't make the slightest difference really. Deluded or
not? I dunno, but it makes me happy, and that's what counts! I *know* I
don't have a real hi-fi system. I don't have the sort of bank balance that
allows such things!


The situation is such nowadays and has been for quite a few years that
genuine hi-fi sound gear is publicly shunned in favour of fad and fetish
items, the reputations of which are artificially created by dubious
subjective review writers paid to do so and urged on by dealers and
manufacturers alike.

As with many other things - truth goes out the window when it proves
to be no use as a selling aid.


That's a good quote to remember... :-)


Mick
http://www.nascom.info for Nascom & Gemini information
Also at http://www.mixtel.co.uk where the collection started.
Currently deserting M$ for linux... :-)

"Phil Allison" wrote in message
u...
** So the Pearceoid makes his living dressing store window mannequins
????

No, you're wrong once more! But it would be a far more worthy job than any
YOU'RE fit for Phil.

TonyP.

"Tony Pearce"

"Phil Allison" wrote in message
u...

** So the Pearceoid makes his living dressing store window mannequins
????

No, you're wrong once more!


** The Pearceoid does something with mannequins.....




......... Phil

"Phil Allison" wrote in message
u...
** The Pearceoid does something with mannequins.....

No, that's you who has the blow up dolls Phil!

TonyP.