Jump to content

hsosdrummer

Regulars
  • Content count

    164
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

153 Excellent

About hsosdrummer

  • Rank
    Forum Veteran
  1. The Wussification of college students

    Indeed. The idea is codified in the Peter Principle: In an organization, people will tend to rise to the level of their incompetence.
  2. The Wussification of college students

    My point is that the vast majority of employees (including yourself, I'm sure) do work that is equal-to or above-and-beyond the call of duty, and provide fair value for their compensation. Those employees have no reason to be "grateful" that they continue to be employed, they earn their continued employment. The employer/employee relationship is a two-way business arrangement that is to the benefit of both parties — it is not a gift bestowed by some anonymous benefactor. The more that workers feel that they're somehow "lucky" to have a job, the more they allow themselves to be taken advantage of. The 'slacker' workers you describe are the reverse: They are taking advantage of their employers. Like a smart employee, a smart employer won't allow themselves to be taken advantage of either.
  3. What has happened? I wan

    You ain't kidding. The frustrated English teacher in me has had to bite his tongue with surprising regularity around here. (Not to mention around the entire Internet.) What's surprising about it is seeing how so many people here who are so obviously very intelligent can care so little about making sure their communication is clear and correct. The rest of the Internet is full of dumbshits, so I expect lousy spelling out there.
  4. The Wussification of college students

    Any employer who knowingly continues to employ a worker who is not providing fair service and value for their compensation is either a) providing charity, or b) a lousy businessperson. And if the employer doesn't know that the worker is not providing adequate service and value, the employer is still a lousy businessperson who needs to know what's really going on in their business if they ever want to succeed. Let me direct a question to those of you who own or manage a business and have others in your employ: Is there a single person on your payroll who you feel does not provide you with service and value that justifies the money (and benefits, if you offer any) you pay them? If so, then those employees are receiving your charity to one degree or another, and only those employees may have any reason to feel grateful to be employed. All your other employees, the ones who give you adequate (or more than adequate) work in exchange for their wages are fulfilling their business arrangement with you, and therefore, should be no more grateful for their employment than you should be for having them in your employ.
  5. this robbery stuff is getting dangerous

    In Ohio an employer can ban employees from carrying concealed weapons into their business, but can't prevent them from leaving their weapons in their vehicles parked on a company parking lot. So it would be up to Taco Bell as to whether their employees were allowed to carry weapons inside the restaurant or not.
  6. The Wussification of college students

    The article had me up to the point where the author says that an employee should feel grateful for having a job — any job. The idea that anyone should be "grateful" to have a job is utter bullshit — it's the kind of propaganda that employers have been spewing for generations, and have been using as a tool in an attempt to keep workers under their control and afraid to exercise their rights as workers. The fact is that a job — every job — is a business arrangement between an employer and an employee. The employer gives the employee money in exchange for services rendered. An employer isn't providing a job to the undeserving simply out of the goodness of their heart, the employee provides something of value to the employer and the employer pays for it. This is Business 101. Although luck may enter into someone's ability to find a particular job in a particular location at a particular time, once a person is hired it is their value to their employer (a result of the employee's knowledge, skill and expertise) that keeps them employed, not any charity from their employer for which the employee should somehow feel grateful. Every day that you show up and do good work you are earning not only your pay, you are also earning your continued employment. Workers need to realize this fact of the business world and stop feeling like Bob Cratchit, who was unfairly made by Scrooge to feel grateful for finally being given what he had earned in the first place.
  7. Your First Three Cars

    1960 Morris Minor station wagon (real woody) 1966 (and later 1972) Cadillac Fleetwood limousine (owned collectively by my band while on the road) 1969 Ford Galaxie station wagon ($200 rust bucket that got me and my drums back to L.A. from Minnesota after I quit the road)
  8. 5.1 & 2 channel music in same room

    If you optimize your system for performance in multi-channel for home theater there's no advantage to installing an additional system in the same room for 2-channel listening. dtel's recommendation of using the 3 Cornwalls across the front for L/C/R (with the Cornwall I as the center) and the Fortes for surround duties should sound incredibly good for both home theater and 2-channel if the speakers are positioned properly. If you use an AVR or surround processor that has a good music surround mode (like Harman Kardon's Logic 7) you can even listen to music in multi-channel, which will sound light-years better than listening to the same music in plain 2-channel.
  9. *Sigh* If my room only had corners... Those are really beautiful.
  10. My only suggestion would be to lower the risers for the top hats by at least 18". With the top hats that far above the dancers' heads you'll drive those sitting at the tables right out of the room. If you're using 3 pairs of K-horns as in your second diagram you don't need to worry as much about each pair projecting very far into the crowd. I like the setup in your second diagram, which would allow you to run each stack at a reduced level. If you have 3 more pairs of K-horns and artificial corners at your disposal you could add an additional woofer next to each full stack, and low-pass those at around 120Hz for extra bass punch. Oh, and an infrasonic filter for the turntable signal is an absolute MUST! With a –3dB point between 20Hz and 30Hz, 24dB/octave.
  11. What's the deal with bubble wrap CD mailers?

    When I order CDs from Amazon (direct, not 3rd-party) the only time I get one with a cracked jewel case is when they put more than one disc into one of those friggin' bubble-wrap mailers. Single CDs always seem to arrive OK. I've given Amazon lots of packaging feedback but it doesn't seem to make a difference.
  12. Apples and oranges. I'm certain that the vinyl and CD you speak of can each trace their ancestry back to different masters, and therein hangs the tale. You can't use the differences you hear between a CD and an LP of a recording of unknown provenance to extrapolate differences in the capabilities of the two hardware/software formats. If you were to take the same master recording (analog or digital) and create the best-sounding CD that is possible from it and the best-sounding LP that is possible from it, and then were to compare each with the original master recording using the best possible respective playback devices, the CD would sound closer to the master recording than would the LP. Nine out of nine times. The LP mastering process involves more compromises and the LP creation process involves more steps than does the CD mastering process and CD creation process. Just talk with any experienced LP mastering engineer about the kind of compromises they must apply to a master recording with wide dynamic range and considerable bass content (such as a piano concerto) in order to create a master disk that will yield playable and listenable commercial LPs from it. And then look at all the different physical processes involved in turning that master disk into a commercial LP, each of which yields a copy that's just that much further removed from sounding like the original master disk, which is already many steps removed from sounding identical to the original master recording. On the other hand, if the original master recording was digital, the entire CD disc production process, if carefully done, produces a playable CD with information that is identical to the original master recording — identical, not a copy. Any changes introduced by the decoding process within the playback device are infinitesimal in comparison to the changes introduced during the LP mastering/production process. And if the original master recording was analog, the encoding process that must be added at the beginning of the process introduces changes that are likewise as infinitesimal as those introduced by the decoding process when compared with the changes introduced during the entire LP mastering/production process. You may like the way LPs sound better than you like the way CDs sound, but the LP format is simply not capable of the same faithfulness to an original master recording as is the CD format. And that's where nostalgia enters.
  13. why does modern music sound so...

    Deleted (double-post).
  14. why does modern music sound so...

    Of course we haven't reached the limits of human creativity. What the video does illustrate is that when the creative people are pushed out of an industry that produces art (as happened when large corporations took over the recording industry during the 1970s – 1980s), that industry ceases to produce art and begins to exist only as commerce: to make money. Pop music hasn't been about art or creativity for over three decades — it's just a cash cow. Those of us looking for a meaningful emotional connection with music have had to look at musical forms other than pop since before that guy in the video was even born. (To be fair, in spite of his age and sometimes-difficult-to-decipher accent, I think the video nails it. at least as far as it goes.)
×