Jump to content

Cable Myths Continued


thebes

Recommended Posts

Funny stuff Dave. You're an expert in the field of recording and microphones, it's simply a good example of them being out of their realm. You demonstrated that if a person knows what they're doing, they can do and get more with less.

For me, it's mostly of no use due to the fact that I'm unfamiliar with the music they use for the evaluations. Dudley needs to use more Rush and Sabbath.

Mark, no patents are involved. Al sent Stereophile some pertinent links along with some words simply to raise their level of awareness about some things. Dudley responded, and it was truly laughable stuff. I think he wrote it with an attorney standing over his shoulder. I think they might have thought the email was the precursor to being named in a lawsuit. If you want more information, just email me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mark,

You really would not like my criteria for sound equipment - acceptable or unacceptable. To me, audiophile glossolalia is unacceptable because it is not precise enough to describe what is heard accurately enough for me to make sense of. For example, "sheen" is not a word descriptive of an audio event; it describes an oil slick floating on water. Sheen is not a good thing, IMO. How about "air". The only relationship to audio is that the musician playing a wind instrument blows air through his instrument in order to make a sound. An examination of the dictionary does give definitions of air as related to music, however. It says "A melody or tune" or "a solo part without accompaniment". Is it any wonder why the majority of people think audio enthusiasts are all a bunch of wierdos?

Edited by Don Richard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point continues to be made: People are not familiar with their own criteria for judging stereos.

Nor is Mark familiar with the criteria for judging the rest of us or having any clue what we hear.

I've been reading Art Dudley for as long as he's been writing. I accused him of nothing, merely observed that while, as a professional painter, he might prefer blue he'll paint yellow if that's what the client demands. In his case, his move to $tereophile was marked with a move from clear, concise, relevant statements to the kind of nebulous, read into it what you want stuff as found in that article. The man has to earn a living as he sees fit. The "real" Art still comes out on occasion and it can be excellent.

Mark, I don't disrespect carnies either, but I also don't necessarily assume I am really going to see a "lobster boy" when I pays my dime.

"Audiophile" is the one of the most general terms I know of. Neither you, nor anyone, can pin it down to a set of descriptors that doesn't contain self-cancelling adjectives.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there anyone who doesn't understand that charge? heh, heh.

So far, you appear to be the only one who does understand that "charge" to be a "charge."

What's your goal in participating in this thread?

I find it amusing. Not so much as recording in a fine location, listening to my system, or researching my pipe organ project...but it's amusing. Why are you here?

I much prefer to read people who boil things done to the minimum accurate description than those who wander all over the place apparently unable to do so. I once asked a good friend for a review of the movie "Far and Away." She said "Stay far and away." All I needed to know.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fusing Marks' description of the "mainstay of subjectivist culture" and my experience you get "the mainstay of subjectivist culture is 99.9% BS. Thank god for the .01% nugget of wisdom.

Does that mean you don't watch movies, read novels, read poetry, attend art exhibits, plays, music events?

Quite the contrary. I just don't put any stock in reviewer's critiques.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before repeating a lot of things, have you read all the posts before the one you are quoting?

Yes, but admit this discussion seems to be all over the place. Fwiw, I agree with the gist of the opinion let those that feel they hear a difference in cables buy what they want...That said, I don't feel I am one of those that can.

Edited by tkdamerica
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perfectly clear. And very likely to be 99.9% BS.

Like

Don't like

BS

I

We want the playback kit to playback the art and the emotive element it invokes. Isn't music still "art"?

Music is art but the components and accessories to play it back isn't unless we are talking about visual art.

Components and accessories are fixtures that make the sound. It's the resultant sound we are referring to here, evaluating and examining. The resultant sound can be evaluated subjectively without knowing what fixtures are producing it. I better make this clear for you: Let's place all the components including speakers behind a scrim. The listener can't see them and doesn't know what they are. Now a record is played and the subject is asked, "How would you describe the sound?" The subject has no instruments. So, the subject uses SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS to describe what he is hearing. Subjective means it is based on his opinions. A typical description of a subjectivist might sound like Dudley's comments I posted earlier, or more simple, but the basis is the subject's opinions.

If we read a novel or a poem or watch a movie, and someone asks for a review - just like above - they will use the same SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS based on their opinions, to describe their feeling about what they read or saw (or.....HEARD!)

Is that clear enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fusing Marks' description of the "mainstay of subjectivist culture" and my experience you get "the mainstay of subjectivist culture is 99.9% BS. Thank god for the .01% nugget of wisdom.

Does that mean you don't watch movies, read novels, read poetry, attend art exhibits, plays, music events?

Quite the contrary. I just don't put any stock in reviewer's critiques.

Do you create your own? If I ask for your review of a movie you saw, what would you say?

You probably have read a few of my reviews here. Chick Corea and Yes come to mind. We aren't too far off here Mark. If my tastes or what I find amusing or satisfying or intriguing has nothing to do with yours, it is 99.9% BS to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We want the playback kit to playback the art and the emotive element it invokes. Isn't music still "art"?

Music is art but the components and accessories to play it back isn't unless we are talking about visual art.

That's nonsensical. So a television or camera can accurately "playback" art, but a good audio system can't. Where do you people come up with this crap, and how and why did you get into this hobby?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...