[JimC]

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of "listening to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving up the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to "browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones fan. But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the reference.

Jim

[MINe 109]

In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?

I like musical performances and how they sound.

Stephen

[Jenn]

In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of "listening to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving up the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to "browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones fan. But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the reference.

Jim

Good post, IMO. (predictably, LOL!)

Why do I spend time listening to my system? Because I can't have
Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, et al performed in my home by the Vienna Phil,
the Berlin Phil, the Eastman Wind Ensemble and so forth. Because I love
the music that I listen to with a passion. Because the composers and
the performers change my life for the better. Because music expresses
what words alone cannot. Because music informs me about human nature
and the nature of creating and the nature of the Creation.

--
REMOVE your capo to reply

[Sander deWaal]

JimC said:


A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?


To me, this is akin to asking "why breathe?"

Music is essential, is heals the mind, it lifts one up, it can express
feelings and emotions that are impossible to share otherwise.

--
"Due knot trussed yore spell chequer two fined awl miss steaks."

[George M. Middius]

MINe 109 said:

I like musical performances and how they sound.

Prove it! Calim of omniscience noted, again.




--
A day without Krooger is like a day without radiation poisoning.

[Walt]

JimC wrote:

Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?


why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

These are two distinct questions. I spend hours listening because it's
enjoyable. I'm willing to spend a fair amount of money on a system
because I spend so much time listening; averaged out it's not really
very expensive in the greater scheme of things.

Plus, you don't need to spend a lot to have a good sounding system.

//Walt

[George M. Middius]

Walt said:

why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

Plus, you don't need to spend a lot to have a good sounding system.

You do if you're an idiot. (Hi Queenie!)





--
A day without Krooger is like a day without radiation poisoning.

[[email protected]]

JimC wrote:
A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of "listening to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving up the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to "browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones fan. But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the reference.

Jim

It is a pleasure to see a message about the fundamentals
of MUSIC reproduction rathet than the endless boring bickering about
the
instrumentation one uses to achieve it.
For that reason I reject the "audiophile" label. It
means literally a
friend or a lover of sound. I knew people who used their equipment for
playing
train whistles and such. They were audiophiles. I'm a musicophile and
use hi-fi to try and get the closest I can to the live musical
experience.
I too like the Rolling Stones- the earlier the album
the better. But
after 20 minutes of real single-minded *listening* I have enough. But
I can listen to
the "classical" (another unfortunate term- what about the contemporary
serious
music- is it already "classical"?) chamber or solo music for hours.
What is tantalising and hobby- like about hi fi is
that it can come
closer and closer to that unattainable ideal of perfect reproduction
without ever
reaching it. Also that as happens with all aesthetic (i.e.
like-dislike) judgements
the opinions vary. Compare with reproductions of painting. Which
printing
technique is "better"? What about the paper: glossy or matt? How to
reproduce
those artists who stick tridimensional "objets trouves" on their
canvasses?
You have to concentrate on anything serious to allow
the impact.
Jenn chooses music. What about poetry? What about "serious" novels?.
If you do not *listen* you will never understand
what *listening* is
about. And when you try to communicate with those who do you're
shouting at
each other in your own dialect incomprehensible to the other side.
Ludovic Mirabel

[Arny Krueger]

"JimC" wrote in message
m...

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts (and
don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a decent
system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend hours of
their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or surround
systems?

The reason people listen to music is because they like to. Sometimes
stimulating, sometimes relaxing, sometimes helping you focus, other times
helping you dream. It can put you to sleep or wake you up or just let you
keep on feeling like you did.

[Clyde Slick]

"JimC" wrote in message
m...

Why do audiophiles want to spend hours of their time simply listening to
music played on their stereos or surround systems?


HORRORS!!!!
HORRORS!!!!
HORRORS!!!!!!



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[George M. Middius]

MusicHaterBorg lied:

The reason people listen to music is because they like to.

Wow. Deep, man.

Sometimes stimulating, sometimes relaxing, sometimes helping you
focus,
other times helping you dream. It can put you to sleep or wake you up or just let you
keep on feeling like you
did.


What is your current state, Arnii?




--
A day without Krooger is like a day without radiation poisoning.

[Joe]

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:55:09 GMT, JimC
wrote:

:Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
:first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
bjectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
:considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
:getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
:remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the reference.

You're probably right that this topic isn't appropriate for
rec.audio.flame or whatever this ng really is. I can
honestly say this is still the silliest ng or discussion
group of any kind on the net. People have been carrying on
the same flames for well over a decade and they just get
lamer and lamer over the years.

Personally I care about audio. What I don't care about is
following the herd mentality that all too often is more
about how much money you can spend rather than how good
something sounds at least on this ng. A few years ago a fad
happened where people bought into the idea that spending
thousand and thousands of dollars on a sound system was a
good idea. I have to admit that there are some very good
sound systems available as a result of this. But they
aren't worth the kind of money they bring to 99.99% of the
people on the planet.

You guys should learn to get along with the world. You
might find it more interesting than the childish flame wars
you perpetuate year after year. Very few people care about
these things like you do and most that do care about audio
couldn't stand sifting through the petty bickering in this
ng for more than 2 minutes at a stretch. You might help
people if you weren't so caught up with your egos.

[jeffc]

"Sander DeWaal" wrote in message
...
JimC said:


A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?


To me, this is akin to asking "why breathe?"

Oh brother.

[jeffc]

"JimC" wrote in message
m...
As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that listening to classical
music is a subjective (note: highly subjectivist!!!) experience in which
the music bypasses conscious thought and current mental clutter and begins
to communicate directly with the subconcious.

Then again, I might simply like it. Haven't these people ever been to a
concert? Any reason we can't want to "attend" one at home? I mean if you
went to a concert, would you use it as background music while cooking dinner
there?

But listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect.

I beg to differ.

[paul packer]

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:11:01 +0200, Sander DeWaal
wrote:

JimC said:


A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?


To me, this is akin to asking "why breathe?"

Music is essential, is heals the mind, it lifts one up, it can express
feelings and emotions that are impossible to share otherwise.

Yours and Jenn's posts probably answer the question about as well as
it can be answered. But it's a fair question because the OP is right:
the concept of sitting for hours--more than 30 seconds, in
fact--listening intently to music is utterly foreign to today's or
even most of yesterday's generation.

Anyone recall a Peanut's cartoon about this from the 70's? Shroeder
has just bought a new LP and Lucy asks him what he's going to do with
it. "Just listen," he replies. "You mean you're going to dance to it?"
she asks. "No, just listen." "You mean walk around the room while you
listen?" "No, just listen." ....And so on until she's exhausted every
possible activity. When he continues to insist he's just going to
listen she walks off saying contemptuously, "That's the silliest thing
I ever heard of."

[paul packer]

On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 03:35:29 GMT, "jeffc" wrote:


"Sander DeWaal" wrote in message
.. .
JimC said:


A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?


To me, this is akin to asking "why breathe?"

Oh brother.

Where art thou? :-)

[Sander deWaal]

(paul packer) said:


A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?


To me, this is akin to asking "why breathe?"

Music is essential, is heals the mind, it lifts one up, it can express
feelings and emotions that are impossible to share otherwise.


Yours and Jenn's posts probably answer the question about as well as
it can be answered. But it's a fair question because the OP is right:
the concept of sitting for hours--more than 30 seconds, in
fact--listening intently to music is utterly foreign to today's or
even most of yesterday's generation.

Anyone recall a Peanut's cartoon about this from the 70's? Shroeder
has just bought a new LP and Lucy asks him what he's going to do with
it. "Just listen," he replies. "You mean you're going to dance to it?"
she asks. "No, just listen." "You mean walk around the room while you
listen?" "No, just listen." ....And so on until she's exhausted every
possible activity. When he continues to insist he's just going to
listen she walks off saying contemptuously, "That's the silliest thing
I ever heard of."


LOL!!

Just for the record (and for mr. JeffC) , I wasn't talking about
spending thousands of dollars on equipment, I was talking about
listening to music.

I build most of my audio stuff myself, the rest is bought used.
My cables are coax RG58U.
I would be surprised if the total cost of my primary system would
exceed $2000 (material costs).

I'm probably the rarest variety of the species called "audiophile" who
both likes to listen to music and enjoy building or tweaking his gear,
or repairing audio stuff for other people.

Oh, I'm a pianist, too. And I fix broken Citroens.
And I design pro audio stuff for a living.
And I do voice-overs for video documentaries and commercials.

Hey, judging from this list, I'm a pretty versatile guy, actually ;-)

--
"Due knot trussed yore spell chequer two fined awl miss steaks."

[Jenn]

In article ,
(paul packer) wrote:

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:11:01 +0200, Sander DeWaal
wrote:

JimC said:


A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?


To me, this is akin to asking "why breathe?"

Music is essential, is heals the mind, it lifts one up, it can express
feelings and emotions that are impossible to share otherwise.

Yours and Jenn's posts probably answer the question about as well as
it can be answered. But it's a fair question because the OP is right:
the concept of sitting for hours--more than 30 seconds, in
fact--listening intently to music is utterly foreign to today's or
even most of yesterday's generation.

We're a very visually oriented culture now.


Anyone recall a Peanut's cartoon about this from the 70's? Shroeder
has just bought a new LP and Lucy asks him what he's going to do with
it. "Just listen," he replies. "You mean you're going to dance to it?"
she asks. "No, just listen." "You mean walk around the room while you
listen?" "No, just listen." ....And so on until she's exhausted every
possible activity. When he continues to insist he's just going to
listen she walks off saying contemptuously, "That's the silliest thing
I ever heard of."



--
REMOVE your capo to reply

[Robert Morein]

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of "listening to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving up the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to "browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones fan. But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the
reference.

Jim

Good post, IMO. (predictably, LOL!)

Why do I spend time listening to my system? Because I can't have
Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, et al performed in my home by the Vienna Phil,
the Berlin Phil, the Eastman Wind Ensemble and so forth. Because I love
the music that I listen to with a passion. Because the composers and
the performers change my life for the better. Because music expresses
what words alone cannot. Because music informs me about human nature
and the nature of creating and the nature of the Creation.

--
Jenn, you have the added involvment of actively creating music, which can
only amplify [sic] your pleasure. In that, I envy you. Recently, I put
together an electronic piano with Cubase and Fatar keyboard. I discovered
that I have the ability to noodle tunes from memory, but I lack the
polyphonic capabilities of a musician. It reminds me that I am no more than
an enlightened consumer.

BTW, I recently spent some time in the Four Corners region of the southwest,
and have returned with a collection of Indian flutes. Do you know anything
about these?

Bob Morein

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Robert Morein" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of "listening to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving up the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to "browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones fan. But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the
reference.

Jim

Good post, IMO. (predictably, LOL!)

Why do I spend time listening to my system? Because I can't have
Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, et al performed in my home by the Vienna Phil,
the Berlin Phil, the Eastman Wind Ensemble and so forth. Because I love
the music that I listen to with a passion. Because the composers and
the performers change my life for the better. Because music expresses
what words alone cannot. Because music informs me about human nature
and the nature of creating and the nature of the Creation.

--
Jenn, you have the added involvment of actively creating music, which can
only amplify [sic] your pleasure. In that, I envy you.

I'm very lucky.

Recently, I put
together an electronic piano with Cubase and Fatar keyboard. I discovered
that I have the ability to noodle tunes from memory, but I lack the
polyphonic capabilities of a musician. It reminds me that I am no more than
an enlightened consumer.

Good for you. I would hope you keep exploring. Fun, isn't it? ;-)


BTW, I recently spent some time in the Four Corners region of the southwest,
and have returned with a collection of Indian flutes. Do you know anything
about these?

Bob Morein

Not too much, but I have a student who is heavily into Native American
flutes and she is becoming a nationally known expert. She played at her
son's funeral, and even though he was also one of my students and I
played and spoke at the funeral, I lost it when she played as they
released white doves. I'll never forget how beautiful it was.

--
REMOVE your capo to reply

[JimC]

jeffc wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
m...

As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that listening to classical
music is a subjective (note: highly subjectivist!!!) experience in which
the music bypasses conscious thought and current mental clutter and begins
to communicate directly with the subconcious.


Then again, I might simply like it. Haven't these people ever been to a
concert? Any reason we can't want to "attend" one at home? I mean if you
went to a concert, would you use it as background music while cooking dinner
there?


But listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect.


I beg to differ.


You beg to differ with what? Are you saying that listening to the Stones
has the same effect as listening to classical music? That Stones music
"speaks to and reenerizes the most civilized aspects of your inner self?"

I like the Stones also, and I hope to be able to get to one of their
upcoming concerts, but I can't say that listening to their music has
the same effect as listening to Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Rachmananinoff,
etc.

Jim

[JimC]

JimC wrote:


This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening to
classical music. .................................................. ..............................................

In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the
reference.

Jim


Anyone been around long enough to remember this article?

Jim

[George M. Middius]

Queenie smacks up against the Reality Barrier.

You do if you're an idiot. (Hi Queenie!)

A few days ago I was being accused of buying K-Mart-level audio
equipment. - Which is it?

You're an idiot.




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[George M. Middius]

Queenie slides into the past.

Anyone been around long enough to remember this article?

Where have you been, Queenie? Arnii Krooger, whom you venerate like a
millennial case of the hives, has told us he used it to wipe his ass.





--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[JimC]

George M. Middius wrote:


Queenie smacks up against the Reality Barrier.


You do if you're an idiot. (Hi Queenie!)


A few days ago I was being accused of buying K-Mart-level audio
equipment. - Which is it?


You're an idiot.


You told me that already Middius, and I remember it from your posts five
years ago (and also five days ago). Do you have anything else to say,
any other problems with me, for example, or are you simply butting your
head against the outer limits of your "mental" (???) resources? - -
Actually, Mid, it's getting rather monotonous.

Jim






--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[soundhaspriority]

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Robert Morein" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to
spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos
or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of "listening
to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for
extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening
to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving up
the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to "browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music
can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they
listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones fan.
But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to
why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is
that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level
that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the
reference.

Jim

Good post, IMO. (predictably, LOL!)

Why do I spend time listening to my system? Because I can't have
Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, et al performed in my home by the Vienna Phil,
the Berlin Phil, the Eastman Wind Ensemble and so forth. Because I
love
the music that I listen to with a passion. Because the composers and
the performers change my life for the better. Because music expresses
what words alone cannot. Because music informs me about human nature
and the nature of creating and the nature of the Creation.

--
Jenn, you have the added involvment of actively creating music, which can
only amplify [sic] your pleasure. In that, I envy you.

I'm very lucky.

Recently, I put
together an electronic piano with Cubase and Fatar keyboard. I discovered
that I have the ability to noodle tunes from memory, but I lack the
polyphonic capabilities of a musician. It reminds me that I am no more
than
an enlightened consumer.

Good for you. I would hope you keep exploring. Fun, isn't it? ;-)


BTW, I recently spent some time in the Four Corners region of the
southwest,
and have returned with a collection of Indian flutes. Do you know
anything
about these?

Bob Morein

Not too much, but I have a student who is heavily into Native American
flutes and she is becoming a nationally known expert. She played at her
son's funeral, and even though he was also one of my students and I
played and spoke at the funeral, I lost it when she played as they
released white doves. I'll never forget how beautiful it was.

--
If you could point me to a faq, I would appreciate it. I did read that real
Navajo flutes were made of reeds. Since these flutes are made of either
cedar, or pine stained to look like cedar, do they have any legitimacy with
any Native American tradition?
I acquired three styles, all of which have six finger holes:
1. round mouthpiece, with slide tuner held in place with a narrow rawhide
strap/wind
2. same style mouthpiece, absent the tuner, with one noticeably off-spaced
finger hole. Would the scale be harmonically related to any known scale?
3. Blow-over, no-contact mouthipiece, no tuner.

The ends of these flutes are perpendicular to the pipe, or a straight
oblique cut, or a curve close to an oblique cut.

There is also a style known as the "love flute" that I did not buy, where
the end is closed. Four sound holes, about the size of finger holes, near
the end of the pipe, release the sound. I blew on it, and found the sound
very soft and indefinite. I could well imagine use by an Indian beau to woo
his lover.

[George M. Middius]

Queenie battles her confusion.

Queenie smacks up against the Reality Barrier.

You do if you're an idiot. (Hi Queenie!)

I said that as a pointed reference to Queenie's well-known idiocy.
Nonetheless, Queenie tries to bait me with Clyde's jibe:

A few days ago I was being accused of buying K-Mart-level audio
equipment. - Which is it?

And I stuck to my position:

You're an idiot.

Now Queenie is confused, and she rattles on like an idiot:

You told me that already Middius, and I remember it from your posts five
years ago (and also five days ago). Do you have anything else to say,
any other problems with me, for example, or are you simply butting your
head against the outer limits of your "mental" (???) resources? - -

Let's review, shall we. You, Queenie Catie, asked me a direct question,
which I quote (again) he

A few days ago I was being accused of buying K-Mart-level audio
equipment. - Which is it?

And my direct answer was:

You're an idiot.

Why are you confused, Queenie?

Actually, Mid, it's getting rather monotonous.

Are you admitting that the notion of a question begetting an answer
confuses you?




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[soundhaspriority]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"JimC" wrote in message
m...

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos or
surround systems?

The reason people listen to music is because they like to.

The above is a tautology. It sorta resembles the logic presented by the
ABXers.

[George M. Middius]

Robert said:

The reason people listen to music is because they like to.

The above is a tautology.

Could you please expand on your statement?

It sorta resembles the logic presented by the ABXers.

That's a low blow.




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[Clyde Slick]

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message news


Queenie battles her confusion.

Queenie smacks up against the Reality Barrier.

You do if you're an idiot. (Hi Queenie!)

I said that as a pointed reference to Queenie's well-known idiocy.
Nonetheless, Queenie tries to bait me with Clyde's jibe:

A few days ago I was being accused of buying K-Mart-level audio
equipment. - Which is it?



I'll stick to my jibe.
You stick to yours.
They both fit



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[paul packer]

On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 17:40:25 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



Queenie slides into the past.

Anyone been around long enough to remember this article?

Where have you been, Queenie? Arnii Krooger, whom you venerate like a
millennial case of the hives, has told us he used it to wipe his ass.

He has an ass? That must be inconvenient in a suburban environment.

[JimC]

Bye Bye George.

Jim



George M. Middius wrote:

Queenie battles her confusion.


Queenie smacks up against the Reality Barrier.


You do if you're an idiot. (Hi Queenie!)


I said that as a pointed reference to Queenie's well-known idiocy.
Nonetheless, Queenie tries to bait me with Clyde's jibe:


A few days ago I was being accused of buying K-Mart-level audio
equipment. - Which is it?


And I stuck to my position:


You're an idiot.


Now Queenie is confused, and she rattles on like an idiot:


You told me that already Middius, and I remember it from your posts five
years ago (and also five days ago). Do you have anything else to say,
any other problems with me, for example, or are you simply butting your
head against the outer limits of your "mental" (???) resources? - -


Let's review, shall we. You, Queenie Catie, asked me a direct question,
which I quote (again) he


A few days ago I was being accused of buying K-Mart-level audio
equipment. - Which is it?


And my direct answer was:


You're an idiot.


Why are you confused, Queenie?


Actually, Mid, it's getting rather monotonous.


Are you admitting that the notion of a question begetting an answer
confuses you?




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

Where have you been, Queenie? Arnii Krooger, whom you venerate like a
millennial case of the hives, has told us he used it to wipe his ass.

He has an ass? That must be inconvenient in a suburban environment.

Speaking of drinking....




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[Robert Morein]

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...


Robert said:

The reason people listen to music is because they like to.

The above is a tautology.

Could you please expand on your statement?

It sorta resembles the logic presented by the ABXers.

That's a low blow.

I'm flattered

[Jenn]

In article ,
"soundhaspriority" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Robert Morein" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to
spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their stereos
or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of "listening
to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for
extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of listening
to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving up
the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to "browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music
can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they
listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones fan.
But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to
why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is
that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level
that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the
reference.

Jim

Good post, IMO. (predictably, LOL!)

Why do I spend time listening to my system? Because I can't have
Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, et al performed in my home by the Vienna Phil,
the Berlin Phil, the Eastman Wind Ensemble and so forth. Because I
love
the music that I listen to with a passion. Because the composers and
the performers change my life for the better. Because music expresses
what words alone cannot. Because music informs me about human nature
and the nature of creating and the nature of the Creation.

--
Jenn, you have the added involvment of actively creating music, which can
only amplify [sic] your pleasure. In that, I envy you.

I'm very lucky.

Recently, I put
together an electronic piano with Cubase and Fatar keyboard. I discovered
that I have the ability to noodle tunes from memory, but I lack the
polyphonic capabilities of a musician. It reminds me that I am no more
than
an enlightened consumer.

Good for you. I would hope you keep exploring. Fun, isn't it? ;-)


BTW, I recently spent some time in the Four Corners region of the
southwest,
and have returned with a collection of Indian flutes. Do you know
anything
about these?

Bob Morein

Not too much, but I have a student who is heavily into Native American
flutes and she is becoming a nationally known expert. She played at her
son's funeral, and even though he was also one of my students and I
played and spoke at the funeral, I lost it when she played as they
released white doves. I'll never forget how beautiful it was.

--
If you could point me to a faq, I would appreciate it. I did read that real
Navajo flutes were made of reeds. Since these flutes are made of either
cedar, or pine stained to look like cedar, do they have any legitimacy with
any Native American tradition?
I acquired three styles, all of which have six finger holes:
1. round mouthpiece, with slide tuner held in place with a narrow rawhide
strap/wind
2. same style mouthpiece, absent the tuner, with one noticeably off-spaced
finger hole. Would the scale be harmonically related to any known scale?
3. Blow-over, no-contact mouthipiece, no tuner.

The ends of these flutes are perpendicular to the pipe, or a straight
oblique cut, or a curve close to an oblique cut.

There is also a style known as the "love flute" that I did not buy, where
the end is closed. Four sound holes, about the size of finger holes, near
the end of the pipe, release the sound. I blew on it, and found the sound
very soft and indefinite. I could well imagine use by an Indian beau to woo
his lover.

I'm going to forward this on to my expert student for you, and I'm sure
that she'll be able to give you more information. I believe that the
authentic flutes play in a minor pentatonic mode.

--
REMOVE your capo to reply

[Robert Morein]

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"soundhaspriority" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Robert Morein" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile
enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars
for a
decent system in the first place) is: Why do audiophiles want to
spend
hours of their time simply listening to music played on their
stereos
or
surround systems? To many non-audiophiles the concept of
"listening
to
music" is to use it as mood-enhancing background noise while doing
something else, to liven up a party, or to listen to it in
association
with TV or a home theater system, but certainly not as something
entailing listening to music with some degree of attention for
extended
periods of time. In other words, why waste all that money on a
stereo
system other than as a high-tech toy for impressing your buddies?

This subject was addressed in an essay published years ago, in
either
Stereo Review or Hi-Fi Review, describing the experience of
listening
to
classical music. As I remember it, the thesis of the author was
that
listening to classical music is a subjective (note: highly
subjectivist!!!) experience in which the music bypasses conscious
thought and current mental clutter and begins to communicate
directly
with the subconcious. Unlike other art forms, it requires giving
up
the
amount of time required to listen to a given work. (Hard to
"browse" a
Beethoven symphony, for example.) But the reward is that the music
can
speak to and sometimes reenergize the most civilized aspects of the
inner self. Obviously, audiphiles vary in how and to what they
listen. -
In addition to classical, I happen to be an enthusiastic Stones
fan.
But
listening to the Stones has never had quite the same effect. As to
why
a good sound system is especially important for listening to
classical
music, IMO, in addition to minimizing distortion, a major factor is
that
many classical works have such substantial variances in sound level
that
ordinary "stereos" can't handle them without lots of distortion in
the
louder (pianissimo) passages.

Well, maybe this topic isn't appropriate for discussion on RAO in
the
first place, since it doesn't relate directly to personalities, the
objectionist-subjectivist debate, dbt, etc. Somehow I thought that
considerations such as this were part of the underlying reasons for
getting into the hobby in the first place. In any event, if anyone
remembers this particular article, I would appreciate getting the
reference.

Jim

Good post, IMO. (predictably, LOL!)

Why do I spend time listening to my system? Because I can't have
Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, et al performed in my home by the Vienna
Phil,
the Berlin Phil, the Eastman Wind Ensemble and so forth. Because I
love
the music that I listen to with a passion. Because the composers
and
the performers change my life for the better. Because music
expresses
what words alone cannot. Because music informs me about human
nature
and the nature of creating and the nature of the Creation.

--
Jenn, you have the added involvment of actively creating music, which
can
only amplify [sic] your pleasure. In that, I envy you.

I'm very lucky.

Recently, I put
together an electronic piano with Cubase and Fatar keyboard. I
discovered
that I have the ability to noodle tunes from memory, but I lack the
polyphonic capabilities of a musician. It reminds me that I am no more
than
an enlightened consumer.

Good for you. I would hope you keep exploring. Fun, isn't it? ;-)


BTW, I recently spent some time in the Four Corners region of the
southwest,
and have returned with a collection of Indian flutes. Do you know
anything
about these?

Bob Morein

Not too much, but I have a student who is heavily into Native American
flutes and she is becoming a nationally known expert. She played at
her
son's funeral, and even though he was also one of my students and I
played and spoke at the funeral, I lost it when she played as they
released white doves. I'll never forget how beautiful it was.

--
If you could point me to a faq, I would appreciate it. I did read that
real
Navajo flutes were made of reeds. Since these flutes are made of either
cedar, or pine stained to look like cedar, do they have any legitimacy
with
any Native American tradition?
I acquired three styles, all of which have six finger holes:
1. round mouthpiece, with slide tuner held in place with a narrow
rawhide
strap/wind
2. same style mouthpiece, absent the tuner, with one noticeably
off-spaced
finger hole. Would the scale be harmonically related to any known scale?
3. Blow-over, no-contact mouthipiece, no tuner.

The ends of these flutes are perpendicular to the pipe, or a straight
oblique cut, or a curve close to an oblique cut.

There is also a style known as the "love flute" that I did not buy, where
the end is closed. Four sound holes, about the size of finger holes, near
the end of the pipe, release the sound. I blew on it, and found the sound
very soft and indefinite. I could well imagine use by an Indian beau to
woo
his lover.

I'm going to forward this on to my expert student for you, and I'm sure
that she'll be able to give you more information. I believe that the
authentic flutes play in a minor pentatonic mode.

--
Thanks! I look forward to more info.

[Will Brink]

In article ,
JimC wrote:

A question sometimes asked by those who aren't audiophile enthusiasts
(and don't understand the logic of spending thousands of dollars for a
decent system in the first place) is:

Yes, but questions are sometimes asked by those who aren't (fill in
hobby here) enthusiasts which non enthusiasts will never understand.
People not into cars don't understand what car enthusiasts see in it,
etc, etc. It's human nature and will never change. People ask me why I
need such a system when they think an Ipod is high end audio, I ignore
them and turn up the music!

--
Will Brink @ www.BrinkZone.com