[JimC]

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
JimC wrote:


Jenn wrote:

In article ,
JimC wrote:



George M. Middius wrote:


Kalman Rubinson said:




Now, $37.94 may seem like a lot, especially when Lord Of The
Rings is $8.99 at Costco.


Of course, economies of scale aside, you may learn something from
Mikey's DVD (if you are interested in the subject) which is more than
one can say about LOTR.


All of the "true hobbyist" magazines seem to be dead and gone. And the
'borgs continually whine about how expensive DIY materials are. Perhaps we
need the government to step in with a hifi tax that will fund an unbiased,
technical, objectivist magazine. Published by the GPO, of course, so
there's no whiff of profit motive to compromise the impartiality.


Not at all George. - What we need is a new and even more subjective
magazine in which all the techies who know anything about how the
components work (all the round earth folks) are eliminated, leaving only
the flat earth, voodo-magic subjectionists. Anyone who knows anything
about ohms law, for example, has no business reviewing high-end audio
equipment. - He obviously could never appreciate how the equipment
actually sounds.

Right George?

Jim


Sorry for butting in, but why would knowledge of Ohms law be a
requirement for telling people how a thing sounds?


Isn't that what I just said?


Nope.


No one who knows anything about how the
equipment works, including how the reaction of $2,000 cables of
particular gages, as determined by ohms law, should be permitted to
review high-end audio. They just don't get it Jenn. - If you don't
believe me, ask Middius.

Jim


Nice display of smartassity, but do you have an answer for my question?


The answer to your question is that a knowledge of Ohms law isn't a
prerequisite to knowing how a thing sounds. (As I suspect you know full
well, my original note was a satirical response to Middius' satirical
comment about the need for a new unbiased, Government-funded,
"objectionist" magazine, and my comment about those with a knowledge of
Ohms law was intended as referring to those with knowledge of the
scientific principles involved in audio. - As Middius so helpfully calls
them, the "Bourgs.") Nevertheless, although a knowledge of Ohms law
won't help in knowing HOW a component sounds, a reviewer with a
knowledge of Ohms law, along with other relevant principle of physics,
could tell his/her readers WHY a component sounds as it does, and HOW to
achieve desired results in a rational way. For example, buying speaker
wire of an appropriate gauge from Home Depot or the like for $30 rather
than spending $2,000 for speaker cable if the listener can't tell the
difference unless he is told which cable he is listening to. Without a
technical background, a reviewer may be at a loss to sort through the
technical jargon put out by the manufacturer of the $2,000 cables, and
therefore unable to help educate his readers as to when spending a
premium on audio gear is actually cost-effective. In my experience, many
high-end audio dealers simply take a "split the difference" approach and
suggest that the consumer should allocate about 10% of his budget to
cables and interconnects, since, after all, the chain is only as strong
as its weakest link.

By way of background, Middius and I had some discussions on RAO several
years ago, and my above comments re Middius were influenced by those
discussions over several years, although I wasn't one of his primary
interests. The gist of those discussions was that I kept trying to
steer the discussion back to audio-related topics, whereas Middius
preferred to argue with anyone with a technical background and to write
sarcastic, ad homonym poems.

Jim