Do I really need an Academy?

[dragonfyr]

Where in the world do you dig up all this babble? A BSictionary or a BSpedia.

You must run dual browsers with the other setup to run queries on Yahoo and Google while reading through posts so you can respond with reviews, studies, theories, and chronicles conducted and determined by other individuals and not yourself.

Nope.

Obviously an opinion not based upon knowledge nor experience. As you know next to nothing about me!

And your ignorance is just that...YOUR ignorance.

[dragonfyr]

Nowhere did I suggest pure subjectivism . . . and only you would cut an aphorism in half so as to insure missing the point.

My focus was on your assumption that the other fellow was operating purely from a position of pure objectivism which equated theory with the real! And your subsequent cart blanche dismissal of all he had to say!

What I do get a kick out of is your posited position of 'moral' superiority based upon your vast experience, as you do assume that the other fellow is simply a victim of purely objective tools that fail to comprehend the real world! And that he has no understanding greater then this!

[Olorin]

I remembered what it was like to be a young man

myself, when book learning, theories, and formulae could sound

impressive and pass for knowledge to people who didn't know any better,

and when I thought my knowledge of the general applied to the specific

and vice versa.

I respectfully suggest to you that you will do

better to refrain arguing from theory with people who are arguing from

experience. You are armed with information. The people

whose feathers you are ruffling are armed with knowledge. Until

you have experience with a thing, yoiu have no knowledge of it.

If only the experience and knowledge (simply the accumulation of facts) to which you refer NECESSARILY leads to WISDOM!

I know plenty of educated fools and plenty of very experienced fools!

One need not become any wiser as a result of experience then they will from an education.

And to simply dismiss others based upon your vast experience is a fascinating, if not a flawed, position. Neither position is sufficient to draw the conclusion that one is a necessarily superior position of understanding!

I wasn't talking to you, Mr. Buttinski, I was talking to Dr. Who.

I like Dr. Who, and I am interested in what he has to say.

Conversely, I do not like you, and I am not interested in your

opinion. Engaging you is a waste of time and energy. Go

find someone who cares what you think, and talk to them.

[dragonfyr]

[

I wasn't talking to you, Mr. Buttinski, I was talking to Dr. Who. I like Dr. Who, and I am interested in what he has to say. Conversely, I do not like you, and I am not interested in your opinion. Engaging you is a waste of time and energy. Go find someone who cares what you think, and talk to them.

Poor baby!!!!

And if this is a private conversation and not for public comment, use email or PM.

But your vast experience should have taught you this!

And besides, if your vast experience has taught you SOOO much, one wonders why you would solicit the opinions of those who lack your prodigious knowledge(sic)!

[:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(]

[feersum dreadnot]

see http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern/

Maybe it is the audiophile version of the "postmodernism generator", hooked with pure gold power cables in a round, padded room.

The Circular Fruit: Subdialectic deappropriation and constructivism

Martin S. F. Sargeant
Department of Sociolinguistics, Cambridge University

1. Realities of economy

If one examines neomaterial narrative, one is faced with a choice: either accept Marxist socialism or conclude that the State is part of the rubicon of truth, but only if the premise of subdialectic deappropriation is invalid; otherwise, we can assume that narrative is created by communication. But the main theme of the works of Smith is the role of the observer as writer.

Foucault's model of neomaterial narrative states that narrativity is capable of significance, given that consciousness is distinct from narrativity. Therefore, the primary theme of Wilson's[1] essay on subdialectic deappropriation is a conceptualist totality.

The subject is contextualised into a constructivism that includes culture as a reality. In a sense, the characteristic theme of the works of Smith is the bridge between class and art.

2. Predialectic theory and capitalist sublimation

In the works of Smith, a predominant concept is the distinction between creation and destruction. Scuglia[2] holds that the works of Smith are empowering. It could be said that Sontag uses the term 'capitalist sublimation' to denote not dematerialism as such, but postdematerialism.

If subdialectic deappropriation holds, we have to choose between capitalist sublimation and pretextual capitalist theory. Thus, Sartre promotes the use of constructivism to attack the status quo.

The main theme of Hubbard's[3] model of subdialectic deappropriation is the failure of substructural society. Therefore, Bailey[4] states that we have to choose between the cultural paradigm of reality and premodernist textual theory. Marx suggests the use of constructivism to challenge sexual identity. However, if neodeconstructivist nihilism holds, we have to choose between constructivism and cultural semanticism.

3. Narratives of dialectic

The primary theme of the works of Tarantino is the role of the poet as artist. The subject is interpolated into a poststructuralist paradigm of discourse that includes truth as a whole. Thus, an abundance of desituationisms concerning not, in fact, appropriation, but neoappropriation may be found.

Derrida uses the term 'subdialectic deappropriation' to denote the genre, and subsequent fatal flaw, of textual sexuality. Therefore, a number of dematerialisms concerning Marxist class exist.

Sartre promotes the use of capitalist sublimation to deconstruct archaic, elitist perceptions of society. It could be said that Bataille uses the term 'subdialectic deappropriation' to denote a mythopoetical paradox.

[Olorin]

[

I wasn't talking to

you, Mr. Buttinski, I was talking to Dr. Who. I like Dr. Who, and

I am interested in what he has to say. Conversely, I do not like

you, and I am not interested in your opinion. Engaging you is a

waste of time and energy. Go find someone who cares what you

think, and talk to them.

Poor baby!!!!

And this is a private conversation and not for public comment, use email or PM.

But your vast experience should have taught you this!

And besides, if your vast experience has taught you SOOO much, one wonders why you would solicit the opinions of those who lack your prodigious knowledge(sic)!

[:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(]

Never mind. You're a loon and a windbag, and it's up to me to

walk away. God knows you'll never drop anything. See you

around, at least until this forum develops an "ignore" feature.

[jacksonbart]

.

[jacksonbart]

Now for something completly different, is she hot or what?

[DrWho]

I respectfully suggest to you that you will do better to refrain

arguing from theory with people who are arguing from experience.

You are armed with information. The people whose feathers you are

ruffling are armed with knowledge. Until you have experience with

a thing, you have no knowledge of it. You have rumor, hearsay,

intuition, induction. Maybe you could take a philosophy class to

explore the difference between information and knowledge. The gap

is substantial.

Always remember this, my young engineering friend -- in theory,

practice and theory are the same. In practice, they are not.

I will respond to one question you brought up -- why not use Academys

all around? It's simple -- economics. Cost and

availability. Nobody says you ought to use five Academys if five

Fortes will fit, now do they?

Ok, economics shouldn't come into play when discussing attributes of

sound quality - main reason being that the price of a speaker has no

influence on how it sounds. It is up to the person purchasing the

speaker to determine whether or not he/she can afford the price

difference and also whether or not he/she feels the difference is even

worth the cost. The reason I originally brought up the analogy was to

point out that the academy is simply not better sounding than the

floorstanders. If it were, then were would certainly be at least one

person using them all around because cost isn't always a concern for

everyone. And I don't have to actually listen to the speaker to

understand this fact and I don't think there is anyone here who's

opinion would contradict that either.

Though if such a person existed I would then have to filter their

opinion based on their background and what they are comparing too etc

etc etc...there are quite a few on the forum that I have to write off

as "deaf" because their opinions don't seem to lineup with my

experiences or even physics for that matter. To someone that has only

heard Bose speakers and didn't know anything else existed, the klipsch

synergy lineup would be the best sounding speakers in the

world...though we all know that is not the case. And if we all had

"perfect ears" then we would all have the exact same tastes in

everything - which again isn't the case. Btw, I'm not trying to imply

the people I "disagree" with are deaf, nor that I have perfect ears. I

do however observe an emotional factor invovled with the craze over the

academy. (it reminds me of diamonds: they have a certain appearance to

them, are rare and cost a lot of money...you can get the exact same

appearance with other materials that are much more abundant and cost

less - yet for some reason ppl will claim the diamond is prettier! even

though they can't tell the difference when they don't know which is

which)

Anyways, I don't think I'm even trying to argue theory against the

experience of others...not to mention I am including my own experiences

in the matter too. I am just pointing out that they don't sound the

same and I casually mentioned a bunch of reasons that quickly go

through my mind. I suppose I made the mistake of making the "reasons"

section a ton longer, but they certainly weren't intended to be the

emphasis of the post. Btw, if you feel there is something wrong with

the "model" then by all means point it out - but last time I checked

the laws of newtonian physics work very well for these kinds of

situations (no quantum or special relativity to worry about here). []

To put it another way, I might ask "how similar in sound is the Academy

to the floorstanders?" - of course I can get a lot of opinions on that

matter, but how would you suggest it be quantified? I can't qualify the difference because I've never heard the academy, but I can certainly try to quantify it with the numbers I have available. And as Dfly mentioned "What would be a welcome change would be if there

were published actual USEFUL measured specs ranging from impulse to ETC

to waterfall to Vertical and horizontal polars, group delay and Nyquist

plots - or simply a high quality impulse response that could be

deconvolved by any of the many tools available to obtain the

various real measurements to use rather then simple abstract theories!" I

won't pretend to fully understand all these measurements and the extent

of their implications, but I do know how to read them; make

interpretations and perform comparisons. While we're at it I would love

to throw in some distortion measurements as well. It would even be

interesting to see some in-room measurements comparing the differences

between typical center channel and main speaker locations. I suppose

it's possible that the design considerations for a center channel could

be quite difference from a corner loaded floorstander (ignoring any

constraints not pertained to the sound itself; like placement on a tv,

size, WAF etc etc).

The academy is not the perfect center channel for the floorstanders,

but it's good - I have no doubt about that. Likewise, the KLF-C7 isn't

perfect but it is also good. But how different are the two not perfect

designs? Heck, the heresy does an ok job too! And this goes back to the

first point in this post : economics doesn't matter until a purchase is

going to be made. And in such a situation, it is up to the purchaser

alone to determine which flavor of speaker to go with, because afterall

none of the choices are the "correct" one. I get the feeling that many

want to make the academy the "correct" choice. Cost aside I have no

problem with the academy being the best option after an identical

center channel.

================================================================

I am seperating this part so that it sticks out from the previous mumbo jumbo...

I really wonder how much is to be gained by going with the academy over

a C7. I have heard the C7 between corwnalls and chorus II's and the

difference between the C7 and the mains was no greater than the

difference between the cornwalls and chorus speakers. This begs the

question, which speaker does the academy sound more like? Because if it

sounds more like the chorus II then that means the C7 is a closer match

to the cornwalls. I would really love to see some comparisons between

the C7 and academy as well - I would expect two nearly identical

designs to sound extremely similar. If it weren't for the tractrix

versus exponential horn (which from numerous other experiences have two

hugely different sounds) I would say the academy and C7 probably sound

closer to each other than they do to the floorstanders!

[Olorin]

That's a good post -- waaaay too long, but good. []

You're right that the Academy doesn't sound as good as the

floorstanders, and for my own part, I've never said it does. And

please understand that unless I say otherwise I speak only for myself,

not for Frzn or feersum or Popbumper or any of the other Academy users

and lovers. Also, please do me the courtesy of only using what I

say against me -- not what anyone else says.

The thing is, it doesn't HAVE to. It really doesn't have to be a

full range reproducer. It needs to do the vocal frequencies very

well, and it should do upper-register effects well too, since they are

easy to locate. It doesn't need to do low frequencies so well --

that's what the LFE channel is for.

While doing what it needs to do, it needs to sound like the other

speakers. And THAT is what it does well. Now I'm going to

speak for the crowd -- the Academy is A GREAT CENTER CHANNEL BETWEEN

CHORUS IIs, FORTE IIs, AND QUARTETS.

That's all. I think we can put the argument about using five of

them to rest. That's not what they are for. They are for

having a center channel-sized speaker when you have one or more of

those three floorstanding models.

Now maybe you're right about the polar response, the lobing, and all

that other stuff. If you were right or wrong, I wouldn't know

it. Frankly, though, and understand I say this in all respect, I

don't care. It doesn't matter. The damn thing sounds enough

like the mains in the frequencies in which it is supposed to work that

the technical stuff just doesn't matter to me. It is also the

only small speaker I've heard that REALLY works there. I've never

said a KLF-C7 doesn't, but then I've never heard one. I just

don't know. I certainly have no reason to think it would work

better than an Academy, though.

Now I would differ in your opinion that the Heresy does a good job

between Chorus IIs. I don't think it does, nor do I think the

Academy does well between Heresys. I think they are all good

speakers, but not together. I've run all Heresys, and it's pretty

awesome. I like my current setup better, though, and that's just

my opinion.

And in the end, that's what it comes down to, right? The compromises and the opinions? I mean, what

good are opinions if we can't argue about them on the Internet?

[oldtimer]

Now for something completly different, is she hot or what?

I agree with Jbart, I agree with Sartre (I have even read him, And Camus). Dragonfyr loves to stamp on anthills even more than I, which makes him dangerous in my book......not necessarily bad, the world needs this, up to a point. But do I really need an Academy? No, I don't. I already have one. If you have what has been called extended heritage and need a center for multi-channel applications, and don't have room for a third speaker identical to your mains, then yes, you would optimize your listening experience by installing an Academy. This answer uses both heuristics of the end users and the design physics of the manufacturer.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The crux of the biscuit, is the apostrophe."

[chuckears]

Hot? Yes.

Legal? Not so sure; possibly in certain Southern states, but only if she's a relative []

[wstrickland1]

she looks like she's 14 years old!!!!!!!!

Like one of our old mechanics used to say, "if she's old enough to pee, she's old enough for me"