| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
HE2005 Show Questions
I have always wanted to attend one of these high-end audio/video shows, CES,
etc., but I have never made it to one. I may finally get my chance this year, April 28th to May 1st (I can probably get trade passes), in Manhattan. I want to get some tickets for Yankees games that same weekend, so I am trying to figure out whether to go for day games or night games (miss the HE show days or nights). Any tips for enjoying the show, planning in advance, etc., would be appreciated. I grew up in New York, so I am familiar with the city, but I have only been back once (July 2004) in the last twenty years. Is it really best to stay at The Hilton, where the show takes place? Thanks! Marcus Montpelier, Vermont |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
There are limited evening events at HES. The Hilton may offer some
special rates for show attendees but, certainly, you can stay anywhere in the area. Kal (who lives in the area, sorta) On 8 Feb 2005 00:58:40 GMT, "Marcus" wrote: I have always wanted to attend one of these high-end audio/video shows, CES, etc., but I have never made it to one. I may finally get my chance this year, April 28th to May 1st (I can probably get trade passes), in Manhattan. I want to get some tickets for Yankees games that same weekend, so I am trying to figure out whether to go for day games or night games (miss the HE show days or nights). Any tips for enjoying the show, planning in advance, etc., would be appreciated. I grew up in New York, so I am familiar with the city, but I have only been back once (July 2004) in the last twenty years. Is it really best to stay at The Hilton, where the show takes place? Thanks! Marcus Montpelier, Vermont |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ bob |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message ...
If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ bob Arny Krueger in the flesh? This I gotta see. When I was 8 years old, I appeared on a local New York children's show called Wonderama, with Sonny Fox, on WNEW Channel 5. The guests that day were ventriloquist Paul Winchell and his dummies, and magician The Amazing Randi. Maybe Randi will show up at the sub/ob debate. Marcus |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Marcus" wrote in message
... wrote in message ... If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ bob Arny Krueger in the flesh? This I gotta see. I'm betting he's not the anti-christ some people seem to think he is. When I was 8 years old, I appeared on a local New York children's show called Wonderama, with Sonny Fox, on WNEW Channel 5. The guests that day were ventriloquist Paul Winchell and his dummies, and magician The Amazing Randi. Winchell invented one of the first practical artifical hearts, and Randi is helping to educate people about the (lack of) paranormal. Maybe Randi will show up at the sub/ob debate. Unless he just happens to be in New York, I wouldn't count on it, although I can see why he would have an interest. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
randy wrote:
wrote: If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ I would think that Arny would be in hostile territory-no wonder John invited him to a debate. Seems like a more fair venue would have been better. The original suggestion to have a debate (though not the choice of venue) was actually Mike McKelvy's. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"randy" wrote in message
... wrote: If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ bob I would think that Arny would be in hostile territory-no wonder John invited him to a debate. Seems like a more fair venue would have been better. Sort of like a debate between a liberal vs. a conservative at the National Rifle Association meeting. While it may not be the most neutral crowd, so long as the debate is held in public and the transcript made available and the debate accurately reported, it makes little difference. Arnie and the objectivist position will have plenty of room to debate and display. Arnie is not exactly a shrinking violet. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Harry Lavo wrote:
"randy" wrote in message ... wrote: If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ bob I would think that Arny would be in hostile territory-no wonder John invited him to a debate. Seems like a more fair venue would have been better. Sort of like a debate between a liberal vs. a conservative at the National Rifle Association meeting. While it may not be the most neutral crowd, so long as the debate is held in public and the transcript made available and the debate accurately reported, it makes little difference. Arnie and the objectivist position will have plenty of room to debate and display. Arnie is not exactly a shrinking violet. Nor, in my opinion, does he represent the rationalist, objective and science-based community whose members have participated in, have access to and, in many cases, are responsible for thousands of person-years worth of dedicated, detailed and arduous effort in the science and industry of hearing and sound reproduction. With all due respects, he is an amateur, a term I do not intend to use as an insult here, merely as a statement of observable fact. This, then leads to what I think is the important question he precisely what purpose does this debate serve? What will be the result if Mr Krueger "wins?" WHat will be the result if Mr. Atkinson "wins?" For that matter, what constitutes "winning?" Who decides? Who really cares? How will this debate in any way elucidate either position? How will it advance the state of the art (something of an ironic question, given how far, really, the "high-end" biz is from the true state of the art)? In my opinion, this debate is little more than an inconsequential p*ssing match whose outcome, at best, will be ambiguous, which will have no effect on the factious "war" that exists between the proponents of each camp, will convince no one of anything and will simply provide empty bragging rights for each side's spin- meisters. Most assuredly, it will do nothing whatsoever to clear the air and, most importantly, won't push the industry one iota closer to satisfying peoples' desire of the enjoyment of music in their homes. If John Atkinson or someone other serious player in this industry were to challenge me to a debate, I'd flatly refuse. I would instead invite him and others to an ongoing public forum to identify where the weaknesses in the industry were and propose solutions to them. No debate, but instead a constructive discussion. This debate is going to be a collosal waste of time |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
Harry Lavo wrote: "randy" wrote in message ... wrote: If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ bob I would think that Arny would be in hostile territory-no wonder John invited him to a debate. Seems like a more fair venue would have been better. Sort of like a debate between a liberal vs. a conservative at the National Rifle Association meeting. While it may not be the most neutral crowd, so long as the debate is held in public and the transcript made available and the debate accurately reported, it makes little difference. Arnie and the objectivist position will have plenty of room to debate and display. Arnie is not exactly a shrinking violet. Nor, in my opinion, does he represent the rationalist, objective and science-based community whose members have participated in, have access to and, in many cases, are responsible for thousands of person-years worth of dedicated, detailed and arduous effort in the science and industry of hearing and sound reproduction. With all due respects, he is an amateur, a term I do not intend to use as an insult here, merely as a statement of observable fact. This, then leads to what I think is the important question he precisely what purpose does this debate serve? Given the venue, it's primary purpose is to give people at the show one more thing to do. What will be the result if Mr Krueger "wins?" WHat will be the result if Mr. Atkinson "wins?" Aside from some personal satisfaction, not much. For that matter, what constitutes "winning?" Peoples' opinion. Who decides? Whoever observes a debate decides for themselves who wins. That is nothing new. Who really cares? Whoever decides to care. How will this debate in any way elucidate either position? That depends on what is said don't you think? How will it advance the state of the art (something of an ironic question, given how far, really, the "high-end" biz is from the true state of the art)? It certainly won't. Why even ask this question? But do tell how high end is far from the state of the art. What is state of the art in sound recording and playback and how is it so far beyond anything in the high end? What are we missing? In my opinion, this debate is little more than an inconsequential p*ssing match whose outcome, at best, will be ambiguous, which will have no effect on the factious "war" that exists between the proponents of each camp, will convince no one of anything and will simply provide empty bragging rights for each side's spin- meisters. I agree. If it happens it will be no different than just about every other debate on the subject in the past. It won't be any different in it's effect than the thousands of such debates that have transpired here on RAHE. Most assuredly, it will do nothing whatsoever to clear the air and, most importantly, won't push the industry one iota closer to satisfying peoples' desire of the enjoyment of music in their homes. Yep just like most of the debates on RAHE it will not likely make anyone think or act differently. It certainly won't have any affect on the design and production of high end equipment or recordings. If John Atkinson or someone other serious player in this industry were to challenge me to a debate, I'd flatly refuse. I would instead invite him and others to an ongoing public forum to identify where the weaknesses in the industry were and propose solutions to them. No debate, but instead a constructive discussion. How will that advance the state of the art? Really? Talk is cheap. It's up to the people making high end equipment and producing recordings to advance the state of the art. This debate is going to be a collosal waste of time Do you think RAHE is also a collosal waste of time? How would the debates here differ in value? Scott Wheeler |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
wrote: All true. If John Atkinson or someone other serious player in this industry were to challenge me to a debate, I'd flatly refuse. I would instead invite him and others to an ongoing public forum to identify where the weaknesses in the industry were and propose solutions to them. No debate, but instead a constructive discussion. Yes, well, that would be nice, wouldn't it? But neither the producers nor the consumers of Stereophile want to know where the weaknesses of the industry are. For the consumers, recognizing the truth as you and I understand it would mean giving up their inflated belief in their own superior hearing, something their egos will not allow. And as long as those inflated egos are out there, the producers are going to try to cash in on it. One of the weaknesses of the industry is the way its tendency towards, shall we say, *overstatement* is 'enabled' by audiophile culture, whose attitude towards scientific objectivity is at best conflicted and at worst hostile. In other words, they're not going to come to you. You have to go to them. And that's what Arny, to his credit, is doing. It can be brave and foolhardy at the same time. I do hope there's a recording or some other accurate record available, after the fact. (I'm also looking into attending.) This debate is going to be a collosal waste of time Ninety minutes is hardly colossal. But let's think about what we could do that wouldn't be a waste of time. Here's one idea: What if a group of dedicated objectivists were to take a room at one of these shindigs and set up the Mother of All DBTs? Trick out a system with components off the Class A list, plus tweaks galore, and compare it to a competent bargain system--both driving the same speakers. Then take all comers. Wasn't this done at one of the conventions in the past? |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message
... Harry Lavo wrote: "randy" wrote in message ... wrote: If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ bob I would think that Arny would be in hostile territory-no wonder John invited him to a debate. Seems like a more fair venue would have been better. Sort of like a debate between a liberal vs. a conservative at the National Rifle Association meeting. While it may not be the most neutral crowd, so long as the debate is held in public and the transcript made available and the debate accurately reported, it makes little difference. Arnie and the objectivist position will have plenty of room to debate and display. Arnie is not exactly a shrinking violet. Nor, in my opinion, does he represent the rationalist, objective and science-based community whose members have participated in, have access to and, in many cases, are responsible for thousands of person-years worth of dedicated, detailed and arduous effort in the science and industry of hearing and sound reproduction. With all due respects, he is an amateur, a term I do not intend to use as an insult here, merely as a statement of observable fact. I think he's better qualified than most of the SP people who have been misleading the public for years. This, then leads to what I think is the important question he precisely what purpose does this debate serve? What will be the result if Mr Krueger "wins?" WHat will be the result if Mr. Atkinson "wins?" For that matter, what constitutes "winning?" Who decides? Who really cares? How will this debate in any way elucidate either position? How will it advance the state of the art (something of an ironic question, given how far, really, the "high-end" biz is from the true state of the art)? In my opinion, this debate is little more than an inconsequential p*ssing match whose outcome, at best, will be ambiguous, which will have no effect on the factious "war" that exists between the proponents of each camp, will convince no one of anything and will simply provide empty bragging rights for each side's spin- meisters. Most assuredly, it will do nothing whatsoever to clear the air and, most importantly, won't push the industry one iota closer to satisfying peoples' desire of the enjoyment of music in their homes. Both sides seem to ber firmly entrenched, but there is some history behind all this that has been simmering for a few years. I thought it best for it to come to a head. If John Atkinson or someone other serious player in this industry were to challenge me to a debate, I'd flatly refuse. I would instead invite him and others to an ongoing public forum to identify where the weaknesses in the industry were and propose solutions to them. No debate, but instead a constructive discussion. What do you believe Mr. Atkinson would bring to such a discussion? This debate is going to be a collosal waste of time I hope in the end it will at least expose more people to some sound science regarding some of the nonsense that seems to be pervasive in audio. |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
... wrote in message ... Harry Lavo wrote: "randy" wrote in message snip, to focus on the most relevant part to my comment If John Atkinson or someone other serious player in this industry were to challenge me to a debate, I'd flatly refuse. I would instead invite him and others to an ongoing public forum to identify where the weaknesses in the industry were and propose solutions to them. No debate, but instead a constructive discussion. What do you believe Mr. Atkinson would bring to such a discussion? This debate is going to be a collosal waste of time I hope in the end it will at least expose more people to some sound science regarding some of the nonsense that seems to be pervasive in audio. And I think you will be surprised to find that a good chunk of it comes from Mr. Atkinson, himself. |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message
... randy wrote: wrote: If you're a long-time rahe reader, you won't want to miss this: http://www.stereophile.com/news/020705debate/ I would think that Arny would be in hostile territory-no wonder John invited him to a debate. Seems like a more fair venue would have been better. The original suggestion to have a debate (though not the choice of venue) was actually Mike McKelvy's. True, because accusations of who skipped out on what debate had been going for too long IMO, I wanted it closed. Hopefully, some people will get an earful of what's wrong with the way audio equipment is reviewed and what can help in the process. It would be wonderful if more people were exposed to a DBT for example or if more people were educated on what is the best way to spend one's money when deciding on upgrades, something they don't seem to get from SP and other similar magazines. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote: What if a group of dedicated objectivists were to take a room at one of these shindigs and set up the Mother of All DBTs? Trick out a system with components off the Class A list, plus tweaks galore, and compare it to a competent bargain system--both driving the same speakers. Then take all comers. Wasn't this done at one of the conventions in the past? I'd be interested in hearing about it. If so, it's one of those things that should be done periodically, if only to expose subsequent generations of audiophiles to the idea that there are worldviews other than S-phile's. bob |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Michael McKelvy wrote:
I hope in the end it will at least expose more people to some sound science regarding some of the nonsense that seems to be pervasive in audio. Exactly. Most audiophiles know nothing more about the "objectivist" viewpoint than what Harley and Atkinson deign to tell them. At least they'll get to hear it from someone who believes it, rather than from editorial hatchetmen whose agenda is to discredit via distortion. bob |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote: wrote: What if a group of dedicated objectivists were to take a room at one of these shindigs and set up the Mother of All DBTs? Trick out a system with components off the Class A list, plus tweaks galore, and compare it to a competent bargain system--both driving the same speakers. Then take all comers. Wasn't this done at one of the conventions in the past? I'd be interested in hearing about it. If so, it's one of those things that should be done periodically, if only to expose subsequent generations of audiophiles to the idea that there are worldviews other than S-phile's. I might be thinkking of Tom Nousaine's old 'tweaked' versus mass market trial. But I could swear I've also read recently about someone leading folks to believe at a convention demo that they were listening to a high-end tweak rig, only to reveal that it was an I-pod playing through standard electronics. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... Harry Lavo wrote: "randy" wrote in message snip, to focus on the most relevant part to my comment If John Atkinson or someone other serious player in this industry were to challenge me to a debate, I'd flatly refuse. I would instead invite him and others to an ongoing public forum to identify where the weaknesses in the industry were and propose solutions to them. No debate, but instead a constructive discussion. What do you believe Mr. Atkinson would bring to such a discussion? This debate is going to be a collosal waste of time I hope in the end it will at least expose more people to some sound science regarding some of the nonsense that seems to be pervasive in audio. And I think you will be surprised to find that a good chunk of it comes from Mr. Atkinson, himself. As long as he has the power but not the will to debunk things like Shakti Stones, magic wire, clarifiers et al. I fear you are correct. |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote: Steven Sullivan wrote: wrote: What if a group of dedicated objectivists were to take a room at one of these shindigs and set up the Mother of All DBTs? Trick out a system with components off the Class A list, plus tweaks galore, and compare it to a competent bargain system--both driving the same speakers. Then take all comers. Wasn't this done at one of the conventions in the past? I'd be interested in hearing about it. If so, it's one of those things that should be done periodically, if only to expose subsequent generations of audiophiles to the idea that there are worldviews other than S-phile's. I might be thinkking of Tom Nousaine's old 'tweaked' versus mass market trial. But I could swear I've also read recently about someone leading folks to believe at a convention demo that they were listening to a high-end tweak rig, only to reveal that it was an I-pod playing through standard electronics. Ah, but that's not what I'm talking about at all. The fact that you can fool people into thinking they're listening to a high-end rig when they're not proves nothing about audible differences; it only proves that people can be fooled. I'm talking about a direct comparison between high-end and mid-fi systems. bob |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 15 Feb 2005 03:50:17 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote: True, because accusations of who skipped out on what debate had been going for too long IMO, I wanted it closed. Good idea. Hopefully, some people will get an earful of what's wrong with the way audio equipment is reviewed and what can help in the process. I quit reading audio equipment reviews, AND (classical) music reviews, a long time ago. There are so many aspects involved in audio equipment, and so many details make a difference, that it is virtually impossible to do a serieus review of some component. The same holds true for music reviews. I have read many articles claiming that this or that cd is suberb, suberb interpretation, suberb recording, etc. And when I order the cd, it turns out to be a huge disappointment, because the recording is not good at all and the interpretation is bizarre. So you have to do the listening yourself. It would be wonderful if more people were exposed to a DBT for example or if Given the fact that nobody who is involved with dbt's will ever explains what he means by "hearing", the dbt's as they are executed are no more than hobby work, nice try. For a scientist, a physicist, words like "work" and "energy" mean something completely different than for the lay man. So the SCIENTIFIC meaning of certain words is many times very different from the NAIVE meaning. But when it comes to hearing, it seems that nobody is this newsgroup is interested in the SCIENTIFIC meaning of the word "hearing", in contrast to the NAIVE meaning. People always talk about "you can hear this" or "you cannot hear this", but how hearing goes, is never explained. So we get lay man's discussions about "hearing" in contrast to "thinking what you hear", because the lay man doesn't grasp the fact that ALL hearing is "thinking what you hear". There is no difference. On the technical side people tend to forget that all equipment parts work together, because they form one circuit. So it is possible that one piece works beautifully in this context, but not in that. The extremely naive view is that if you follow "good standards" every piece of "good" equipment may be connected to every other piece of "good" equipment. But that is not true. We all know that EVERY piece of equipment is a compromise. And sometimes the compromise works well, at others it doesn't. Some people like horn speakers for their clarity in the mid range. Others hate them for their colourations, their narrow field, their awful bass, etc. Some people like electrostats, others hate their unrealistic windy performance. If you work with a better OTL amplifier, as I do, you get a sound that resembles the sound of a transistor amp to a great extend. Only you get this incredible speed, this sense of immediacy and naturalness that is unsurpassed. I have heard, and have had at home, many transistor amps. The better ones all start out with a huge sense of clarity, but after some time, a few days, a few weeks, you start to realize that you are listening through a tunnel. You may get used to that and make yourself BELIEVE that this sound is natural, or good, or perfect, but it isn't. One visit to the concert hall and all your dreams are shattered. You may read stories about "tight bass" and the like, but one visit to the concert hall will tell you that the REAL bass, the contrabass in the orchestra, is not so "tight" at all. So the "tight bass" is a fake. The "huge soundstage" that some speakers produce is also a fake. The "pinpointing of every instrument" (the darling pet of every reviewer) is also a fake. Even the best seats in the centre of the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam, one of the truly great concert halls, will tell you that in reality you cannot "pinpoint" all the instruments. You may SEE a clarinet in the middle of the orchestra, but the SOUND may come from the right, through early reflections, Haas-effect and what not. It depends on the note the musician is playing, the positioning of the instrument (where is the bell pointed), etc. Going for the better OTL gives you a realism that is very hard to achieve with a transistor amp. Perhaps a mosfet amp comes in the direction, but they have their problems. The OTL also has its problems. You get noise. Sometimes you have to change tubes (once every 5 years). Sometimes you have to correct this or that. The OTL may be extremely sensitive to dirty mains. Some people say: "all good amps sound the same". That is a ridiculous statement. When my amp was modified, I asked for a variable negative feedback. Optimal neg feedback depends not only on the amp itself, but also on the amp + speaker combination. This means that a fixed amount of overall neg feedback is always a compromise. Therefore I wanted it to be variable. Can you hear the difference between slightly more and slightly less feedback (talking about 0.5 dB to 1 dB difference)? Yes, of course. Less feedback means two things: louder sound and different sound. What position is "the best"? Depends on measurements and taste. The modern western ear likes a bit of harmonic distortion. When we listen to well-tempered instruments, like the piano and the guitar, we always listen to beats & wow and harmonic thirds that are not really thirds etc. Furthermore the ear itself distorts. So a bit of distortion makes the sound "interesting". Personally, however, I hate the sound of a piano. I hate it that the strings are always tuned a bit off, that the things is ALWAYS out of tune, by physical necessity. more people were educated on what is the best way to spend one's money when deciding on upgrades, something they don't seem to get from SP and other similar magazines. I am doing at the moment some interesting tests with new interlinks between cd player and pre amp. It turns out that there are REALLY huge differences between this cable and that, irrespective from price. It also turns out to be an empirical, observed FACT, that some interlinks work better in my system than others. That is: huge difference in detail, huge difference in realism, huge difference in performance. ALL these differences are related to electrical properties of the cable, properties that depend on the copper or silver, the coating, the dielectricum, the topology of the cable. All these aspects of a cable have electrical effects, all these aspects make a difference. There is NO magic involved. I do not believe in magic. It is amazing how many of those differences you can hear, if your audio equipment is sensitive enough, and how HUGE those differences are. Coating, dielectricum and topology REALLY make an audible difference. It is also amazing how difficult it is to MEASURE those differences. How difficult it is to measure what goes on during a transient. Measuring the behaviour during a steady 998 Hz sinus is NOT so difficult. But what goes on during a multi-tone impulse-like sound, is not easy at all. I always listen to acoustic music, that is music without stage amplification. If you listen to pop music that is constructed in the studio, there is no reference possible to how it "should" sound in reality, because there is no reality outside the studio. ------------ If you have difficulty to BELIEVE what I am telling you here, you are herewith invited to my home to listen for yourself. You may bring with you all the cds you like, preferably with acoustical music, for the said reasons. If you like, we will bring in a third and fourth person and do some blind or double blind tests. You may bring Randi with you if you like, or Santa Claus. I don't mind. You may also bring with you an ABX box of some kind and we could try to do some tests with it. BUT as in a simple cable topology etc is already of huge importance, and as such an ABX box introduces an extra circuit with extra cabling and the like, it is quite possible that the ABX box influences the electrical behaviour of the cables so much that it cannot function anymore as a neutral measuring device. You should ALSO realize that as all parts of the audio system form ONE CIRCUIT, a certain cable HERE may, and will, influence the sound of another cable THERE. I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that not only ***I*** will hear differences between this interlink and that, but that ***you*** will hear those differences too. And that ***you*** as well as ***I*** will be able to say: "this cable is better than that", at least in this system of mine. So herewith you are invited to Amsterdam to do some listening for yourself. I cannot pay all your traveling costs, but some 100 Euro or 200 I am prepared pay, if you are sorely in need of money. ------------------- If however you do NOT want to accept this my offer, then it is clear that you do NOT want to put yourself to the test. If THAT is the case, then I suppose it would be better that you refrain from the kind of statements that you make all the time in this newsgroup, about what is and is not relevant to audio equipment, and about the supposedly inaudibility of cable differences and the like. If you would not want to listen at all, then you should not pass judgements on what is audible and what not. Ernst Raedecker Anjeliersstraat 109 B 1015 NE Amsterdam Holland "You don't have to learn science if you don't feel like it. So you can forget the whole business if it is too much mental strain, which it usually is." Richard Feynman |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ernst Raedecker wrote:
On 15 Feb 2005 03:50:17 GMT, "Michael McKelvy" wrote: True, because accusations of who skipped out on what debate had been going for too long IMO, I wanted it closed. Good idea. Hopefully, some people will get an earful of what's wrong with the way audio equipment is reviewed and what can help in the process. I quit reading audio equipment reviews, AND (classical) music reviews, a long time ago. There are so many aspects involved in audio equipment, and so many details make a difference, that it is virtually impossible to do a serieus review of some component. The same holds true for music reviews. I have read many articles claiming that this or that cd is suberb, suberb interpretation, suberb recording, etc. And when I order the cd, it turns out to be a huge disappointment, because the recording is not good at all and the interpretation is bizarre. So you have to do the listening yourself. It would be wonderful if more people were exposed to a DBT for example or if Given the fact that nobody who is involved with dbt's will ever explains what he means by "hearing", the dbt's as they are executed are no more than hobby work, nice try. Indeed? Researchers in psychoacoustics, who certainly employ double-blind protocols, might disagree with you on that one. For a scientist, a physicist, words like "work" and "energy" mean something completely different than for the lay man. So the SCIENTIFIC meaning of certain words is many times very different from the NAIVE meaning. Indeed. And scientists researching *hearing* use double blind trials too. As do designers and developers of audio components and software. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would think that Arny would be in hostile territory-no wonder John
invited him to a debate. Seems like a more fair venue would have been better. Sort of like a debate between a liberal vs. a conservative at the National Rifle Association meeting. Heaven forbid there should be a debate on audio issues when there are actually audiophiles around! Vade Forrester |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
writes:
wrote: In my opinion, this debate is little more than an inconsequential p*ssing match whose outcome, at best, will be ambiguous, which will have no effect on the factious "war" that exists between the proponents of each camp, will convince no one of anything and will simply provide empty bragging rights for each side's spin- meisters. If just a few people hear a different opinion and say to themselves "yes, that makes sense; I hadn't thought of that" then a debate is worthwhile. I agree. If it happens it will be no different than just about every other debate on the subject in the past. It won't be any different in it's effect than the thousands of such debates that have transpired here on RAHE. Most assuredly, it will do nothing whatsoever to clear the air and, most importantly, won't push the industry one iota closer to satisfying peoples' desire of the enjoyment of music in their homes. Yep just like most of the debates on RAHE it will not likely make anyone think or act differently. It certainly won't have any affect on the design and production of high end equipment or recordings. I think you're underestimating the effect that reading forums like this one has on people. Please don't assume that writing here is a waste of time and influences no-one. This group has a huge readership -- probably bigger than any Hi-Fi magazine, although it's impossible to know for sure. The Hi-Fi press is remarkably uniform in its opinions, and the only place you'll see any real debate is on the net, especially in this forum. When someone posts here, they don't get special respect because of their job or their paper qualifications or how many advertisers they have. They have to establish their credibility by the quality of their posts. If it were not for RAHE and similar forums I would not have had the opportunity to hear opinions that differ from those in the Hi-Fi press, and would not have been prompted to read psychoacoustics texts to find out some more. Andrew. |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ban wrote:
wrote: Yep just like most of the debates on RAHE it will not likely make anyone think or act differently. It certainly won't have any affect on the design and production of high end equipment or recordings. I think you're underestimating the effect that reading forums like this one has on people. Please don't assume that writing here is a waste of time and influences no-one. This group has a huge readership -- probably bigger than any Hi-Fi magazine, although it's impossible to know for sure. I second that from my own experience. As will I. I first started reading RAHE (long before I began posting here), because I was hoping for some enlightenment about what to listen for when comparing, say, amps, which just didn't sound all that different to me. bob |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
writes: wrote: In my opinion, this debate is little more than an inconsequential p*ssing match whose outcome, at best, will be ambiguous, which will have no effect on the factious "war" that exists between the proponents of each camp, will convince no one of anything and will simply provide empty bragging rights for each side's spin- meisters. If just a few people hear a different opinion and say to themselves "yes, that makes sense; I hadn't thought of that" then a debate is worthwhile. I suppoose there is some outside chance that someone who has never been aware of the different POV held by objectvisist and subjectivists might stumble into this event. I think it is unlikely that anyone there will hear anything they haven't heard beofre on the subject. I agree. If it happens it will be no different than just about every other debate on the subject in the past. It won't be any different in it's effect than the thousands of such debates that have transpired here on RAHE. Most assuredly, it will do nothing whatsoever to clear the air and, most importantly, won't push the industry one iota closer to satisfying peoples' desire of the enjoyment of music in their homes. Yep just like most of the debates on RAHE it will not likely make anyone think or act differently. It certainly won't have any affect on the design and production of high end equipment or recordings. I think you're underestimating the effect that reading forums like this one has on people. Possibly. Please don't assume that writing here is a waste of time and influences no-one. This group has a huge readership -- probably bigger than any Hi-Fi magazine, although it's impossible to know for sure. I doubt that very very much. The Hi-Fi press is remarkably uniform in its opinions, No. and the only place you'll see any real debate is on the net, especially in this forum. I quite disagree again. When someone posts here, they don't get special respect because of their job or their paper qualifications or how many advertisers they have. They have to establish their credibility by the quality of their posts. One can read a great deal into that. I wonder what affect false claims that an industry pro has been fired from his job will have on that poster's credibility? If it were not for RAHE and similar forums I would not have had the opportunity to hear opinions that differ from those in the Hi-Fi press, and would not have been prompted to read psychoacoustics texts to find out some more. You mean you have never read Stereo Review or other objectivist audio magazines? Scott Wheeler |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Are newbie questions welcomed here? | Pro Audio | |||
| Annual AES show awards | Pro Audio | |||
| How do they get that "Awards Show" sound? | Pro Audio | |||
| Audio Myths was "System I'm designing - two questions" | Car Audio | |||
| Audio Myths was "System I'm designing - two questions" | Car Audio | |||
Linear Mode
