Audiofoolery at the Skeptic Society [Archive]

DSJR

06-01-2010, 16:19

All i could see really wrong in the article was the assumption that all CD players have a buffer... I don't believe they do and that's a major problem with "Red Book" CD replay, coupled with a much cruder way of identifying and correcting errors - one apparent reason why ripping CD's to a hard drive may well be better than playing them in a typical CD player...

I also think the article doesn't take into account that a lot of Top End audio gear IS incomptetently designed regarding mains isolation, causing certain well known brands to be VERY sensitive to mains quality. To be fair, the AVI gear I've used doesn't mind a jot about mains quality and neither does my Croft, Crown or Quad II's for that matter. Indeed, Glenn fitted a 2A rated mains filter in my preamp when new, complete with VDR to suppress spikes. As instructed twenty years later by "the man," I removed it and heard not a jot of difference.........

Marco

06-01-2010, 16:48

It really irks me that somewhere there is some know it all who thinks he is so much better and more clever than me to a point he would write an article like that! I'd never presume to know more than someone else in that way especially when it would apear, despite his comments, he has had absolutly no experience of high quality kit!
I don't know why I let people like that bother me, but they do... Like Richard dawkins, can't stand him! Jus because it's obvious that evolution exists doesn't mean that god might not be resposible for it... I'm not saying "god" is or isn't, I have my veiws, but at least I can see that there are more than one possibilty to expalin the world... These people who push their views, short sighted tossers!

Hear, hear Hamish! You fit in so well here :eyebrows:

Dawkins, in particular, is a cock of the highest order.

Marco.

Themis

06-01-2010, 16:56

All i could see really wrong in the article was the assumption that all CD players have a buffer... I don't believe they do and that's a major problem with "Red Book" CD replay, coupled with a much cruder way of identifying and correcting errors - one apparent reason why ripping CD's to a hard drive may well be better than playing them in a typical CD player...
Exactly. And also he states that "CDs (and DVDs) work on an entirely different principle that is immune to mechanical vibration" which is (buffer or not) entirely false : It's the Reed-Solomon error-correction that makes CD less prone to some errors, not the buffer. And mechanical vibrations rise the number of errors. As long as these errors stay in the recoverable (interleave) form, then everything is ok. But we can't really talk about "immunity" when we're just joggling with an error-coorrection distribution limits... This approach is as false as the "perfect sound forever" marketing approach ! :lol:

Ali Tait

06-01-2010, 17:14

Themis

06-01-2010, 17:16

+1, I know plenty of hard-core objectivists that use supertweeters, and can't do without. ;)

The Vinyl Adventure

06-01-2010, 17:25

Surel there is something to be said for the car analogy - Some would say there isn't much point in having a car that does over 70mph ... I would have thought having a car that does over 70 is an advantage to the quality of drive below 70.. Make sence?

Marco

06-01-2010, 18:49

Themis

06-01-2010, 19:07

Well, actually Tim is not alone. I know other people here who make deluded remarks about things they've never even heard .... :lol:

:sofa:

Marco

06-01-2010, 19:10

Certainly not me, Dimitri. If you have something you wish to share though, please do!

If you're talking about the graphic equaliser thread then the situation is rather different. I think sometimes that although your grasp of English is excellent, on certain occasions the language barrier defeats you, and sometimes you misinterpret things during discussions; in the process, as they say, getting hold of the wrong end of the stick :)

As a relative newbie too, you're also not aware of the 'history' between this particular character and me.

I'm glad though you agree that Farney is guilty of deluded remarks about things he knows nothing about - he needs to embrace this fact too for himself and learn from it ;)

Marco.

theoldtrout

06-01-2010, 19:18

My point in posting the link to the Skeptics Society was to give an example of how many people perceive the pursuit of audio nirvana; the chap who wrote the article does sound opinionated but does have some good observations. Furthermore, I do not believe he suggested that we are all gullible but rather a degree of scepticism is required; be open-minded yes, but don’t let your brains fall out. There are, as we know many snake oil salesmen out there who - when the gauntlet is thrown – bluff and BS rather than subject their product or claim to scientifically conducted trials; it is to these people we should direct our ire. If a claim is made for the efficacy of a product it must be backed up by evidence.

I must say I’m a bit disappointed with some of these posts, perhaps I’m not the only one who should read this site’s ethos. Calling the respected scientist Richard Dawkins “a cock” says more about the person who posted the comment and repeated it than Prof Dawkins; I suggest you read some of his papers and books, in particular work published before his TV fame - I have.
It is interesting to note most of Richard Dawkins detractors suffer from god disease and do not like their belief challenged by evidence – rather similar to the original topic what? Sadly, like many scientists, Richard Dawkins does not have the spit and polish of the media savvy so can come across as arrogant but it does not detract from the fact that he can back up his claims.

Enough!

As requested I’ve posted a bit about me in the introduction section so you can rip me to bits there :)

Marco

06-01-2010, 19:33

Pity, as you were doing ok up until this point:

It is interesting to note most of Richard Dawkins detractors suffer from god disease...

Sorry, as a practising Catholic I find that remark extremely offensive and completely unforgivable :steam:

We do not tolerate religious bigotry on this forum in any form, so cheerio!

Marco.

The Vinyl Adventure

06-01-2010, 19:36

It's dawkins atitude and way he puts accros his belifes that I have issue with, I couldn't give a monkys what he or anyone actually belives in, I just don't like having ideas shoved down my throat like I am an idiot just because I choose to belive something slightly different! I should also point out that the is absolutly no evidence that evolution isn't actually proof of god as aposed to the oposite! I'm not saying I belive in god, I'm not saying I don't, I'm just saying that you can't proove or disprove god! So why does he try, why go out to offend people who do belive! It's not even what he says, it's the way he says it, he basically call people stupid for having belifes! That just isn't fair!!

As for your first paragraph, for the most part I agree completly.

The Vinyl Adventure

06-01-2010, 19:36

Themis

06-01-2010, 19:39

If you have something you wish to share though, please do! .
I prefer not, sorry Marco. Because of this:

As a relative newbie too, you're also not aware of the 'history' between this particular character and me.

If it's to fix old quarrels, I'm afraid I can't be of great help. Older members should be much more helpful.

DSJR

07-01-2010, 09:06

I didn't read it all,but I had to take exception to his statement that systems have no need to produce frequencies over 20Khz,as we can't hear them.This is bollocks in my experience.I've heard a supertweeter taken out and back in circuit on a large full-range speaker.I know for a fact this supertweeter was only reproducing frequencies well over 20 Khz,yet had a huge impact on the sense of air and space being produced by the speaker.I'd like this guy to hear this for himself,and then try to explain to me what it is I'm not hearing!

Many of the "supertweeters" I've read about (and heard) actually come in at 7 -8KHz and in the case of the tannoy one, rolled off above 28KHz..

It's true what the chap said about frequencies above 20KHz though. Most analogue pro machines (hard used in their heyday) really don't stretch far above 20KHz, the tapes probably wouldn't have much at this frequency anyway, although I can't verify his comments about microphones not extending much further out.

It's another one of those "absolutist" style arguments where there are few if any grey areas.

Having said the above, I understand that preamp filters set to 300KHz make an audible difference to objectively based listeners which may mean that the Naim filters set to 50KHz odd would definitely have an audible effect on the signals they're processing.... :scratch:

tangye

07-01-2010, 12:50

unfortunately certain aspects of this thread have shattered my belief that this was one of the most decent polite forums around, pity

The Vinyl Adventure

07-01-2010, 12:56

Everyone has off days... Yesterday this forum had a proper off day!! Call it a "time of the month" ;)

tangye

07-01-2010, 12:59

yes I agree it does seem out of character, must be the snow

The Vinyl Adventure

07-01-2010, 13:03

There apeared to be a few things going on at once that off balanced things toward the negative, I think when that happens all of a sudden a normal debate can look a lot more ugly! My convo with the newbe about Richard dawkins for eg. I was looking forward to continuing that convo with him but I think with the vibe round here it got taken pretty badly ... Ah well today is another day, I have no idea what the rest of the arguaments were about and I don't intend to investigate, I just hope it all sorte now!

tangye

07-01-2010, 13:24

I think all you did was put your view across, which is healthy it was some of the other posts which were completely out of the norm

The Vinyl Adventure

07-01-2010, 13:39

Hopefully your right, I just suspect as fa as the new chap was concerned what I said was quite harsh concidering it in context with everything else that was going on... He seems to have disapeared anyway... Ah well nver mind, like I said it's a new day now, hopefully people have slept off the negativity :)

Ali Tait

07-01-2010, 15:48

Err the new chap was a lady!

REM

07-01-2010, 17:06

A lady, on a hi-fi forum, a lady, bloody hell whatever next!!! Bloody world's turning upside down, thin end of the wedge I'd say, bloody hell, they'll be wanting matching amps and tuners next and starting threads about which colour curtains go best with whatever veneer on speakers, mark my words, harumph:steam::steam::steam:

Steve Toy

07-01-2010, 17:14

This was no lady :eyebrows: ... More like McPeake in a frock.

Ali Tait

07-01-2010, 17:58

A lady that built her own valve amps no less!

Joe

07-01-2010, 18:19

This was no lady :eyebrows: ... More like McPeake in a frock.

You think everyone's McPeake!

Themis

07-01-2010, 18:40

EveAnna Manley makes nice tube amps... http://www.manleylabs.com/containerpages/stingray99.html. ;)

Steve Toy

07-01-2010, 18:48

Joe, it's the first time I've suspected him of coming on here. There are plenty like him, mind.

The Vinyl Adventure

07-01-2010, 18:50

A lady that built her own valve amps no less!

She been banned?
Did someone ban her in all the caffuf yesturday? I think that should be undone I don't think she did anything wrong?! Just my 2c, don't hold it against me please, but yesterday was a bad day for this place but I'm not sure this new person desurves to be drageed into it?!

Spectral Morn

07-01-2010, 19:11

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

07-01-2010, 19:24

My theory is that the old trout was an attempt at infiltration/troll from another forum...its interesting that exactly the same thread topic and content + vibe has started there...by a bloke...much to their joy.

It was not the devil, but someone of a similar outlook. We know it was not the devil as old trout knows about hi-fi...something the devil does not.

Regards D S D L

C'mon now, surely you can't be serious. Given the thought provoking nature of the article in question surely it is not unexpected that other audio fora may have noticed it?:scratch:
Also, to equate the outlook of the poster to that of the devil is beyond the pail, particularly as we now know that the poster is a lady - if you're a gentleman you'll apologise for that, paticularly as you are a member of the management team - this post brings shame on our forum, IMHO.
How low is this forum sinking of late?
Just my two pennyworth - do I get banned now?

Themis

07-01-2010, 19:31

Well, I have one or two thoughts about this.

First, the initial post is a provocation : Coming to a subjectivist forum and posting hard-core objectivist points of view, asking "what do you think ?", is utter provocation.

On the other hand, the poster may not be aware (and probably is not) of the subjectivist banner here. I know well people who maintain [want-to-become-popular]blogs : they often use manual mass cross-posting through forums just to get higher hit ratios. It's a kind of viral advertising method.

Not a big deal.

Steve Toy

07-01-2010, 19:34

If "Angela" is a female who built a crystal set at the age of 8 then I'm the tooth fairy.

Themis

07-01-2010, 19:35

I'm the tooth fairy.
:worthless:

Steve Toy

07-01-2010, 19:36

Dimitri, either way not good.

REM

07-01-2010, 19:39

How low is this forum sinking of late?

They let me post (sometimes;)), so it's got a whole lot lower to go yet:lol:

Themis

07-01-2010, 19:40

Dimitri, either way not good.
I meant : (banning is) not a big deal.
It's just my opinion.

The Vinyl Adventure

07-01-2010, 19:41

I dunno maybe I'm being nieeve, but it seemed fairly inocent to me... But then I wasn't party to any of the other stuff that happend yesterday... So I guess I know very little :)

Spectral Morn

07-01-2010, 19:41

C'mon now, surely you can't be serious. Given the thought provoking nature of the article in question surely it is not unexpected that other audio fora may have noticed it?:scratch:
Also, to equate the outlook of the poster to that of the devil is beyond the pail, particularly as we now know that the poster is a lady - if you're a gentleman you'll apologise for that, paticularly as you are a member of the management team - this post brings shame on our forum, IMHO.
How low is this forum sinking of late?
Just my two pennyworth - do I get banned now?

No certainly not.

However the old trout's opinion/views would seem to be very similar to James Mcpeakes (the devil) rabid anti-Chritian/anti-religion stance (also anti-subjectivist stance). He takes any and every opportunity to attack people of faith at the drop of a hat and revels in it. The "god disease" comment is very offensive to anyone of faith, a quote taken from another rabid anti-god commentator dawkins...who has no agenda other than seeking to remove God from creation..and being as offensive as he can be when about his business.

I have nothing to apologise for...imho.

Regards D S D L

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

07-01-2010, 19:42

If "Angela" is a female who built a crystal set at the age of 8 then I'm the tooth fairy.

Take a look at this you fairy :lol: :lol:

http://angelakingdom.com/

Spectral Morn

07-01-2010, 19:47

Take a look at this you fairy :lol: :lol:

http://angelakingdom.com/

Interesting....perhaps I am wrong about gender, but not intent.

Regards D S D L

Joe

07-01-2010, 19:53

rabid anti-Chritian/anti-religion stance

Which reminds me of the story of the bloke walking through Belfast and being stopped by a group of masked men.

'What religion are ye?' asks the leader of the gang.

'None' replies the man 'I'm an atheist'.

The gang confer in mumbled tones.

Then the gang leader says:

'Are ye a Catholic atheist or a Protestant athiest?'

Themis

07-01-2010, 19:55

Which reminds me of the story of the bloke walking through Belfast and being stopped by a group of masked men.

'What religion are ye?' asks the leader of the gang.

'None' replies the man 'I'm an atheist'.

The gang confer in mumbled tones.

Then the gang leader says:

'Are ye a Catholic atheist or a Protestant athiest?'

:lolsign:

Beechwoods

07-01-2010, 19:56

The team view was that 'theoldtrout' was here to troll, pure and simple. She caught us at a bad time.

In two posts someone who was otherwise likely to have been a good contributor, nailed their colours to the mast in a way that sounded like that of a troublemaker. You can't march into a forum and call established members diseased without some kind of track record to back you up!

Oft-times in recent history we've been too slow to spot trolls... remember the fallout all around when Shippy came onboard? These things happen dudes.

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

07-01-2010, 20:24

The team view was that 'theoldtrout' was here to troll, pure and simple. She caught us at a bad time.

The 'bad time' statement may be a reason but it isn't an excuse IMHO.
The first sentence is easy to post when the person concerned is banned from giving her side of the story. Your 'trolling' theory may well be correct, I don't know but I doubt it. How about rescinding the banning as part of a New Year act of clemency? - as you state "someone who was otherwise likely to have been a good contributor", should at least be given the opportunity to post their side of the debate and be judged accordingly.
All IMHO of course - are management gentlemanly enough to extend that courtesy, or does the prospect of having to admit you may possibly have been wrong and, even worse, may even feel obliged to offer an apology, deter you?

Beechwoods

07-01-2010, 20:31

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

07-01-2010, 20:46

We've restored posting rights before, on a good number of occasions, and often given people more than a couple of cracks at the whip so I think our credentials are clear on that point... we tend not to broadcast every decision though so it may not appear so commonplace.

But this time it's different, IMHO - this time there is a better than even chance that the banning decision was ill founded - doesn't that concern you?

Also, FWIW, there are far too many such decisions taken in secret (not broadcast), on his forum, IMHO.

Themis

07-01-2010, 21:08

Administration decisions are the sole responsibility of the staff. It's common on all forums. ;)
Still, you seem to think this should be an exception. Why so ?
I don't care about philosophical stands, nevertheless, there's a huge gap in hifi views between objectivists and subjectivists, imho. But pehaps, this is not your point... :scratch:

Joe

07-01-2010, 21:12

Would all secretly-banned people please make themselves known.

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

07-01-2010, 23:52

Administration decisions are the sole responsibility of the staff. It's common on all forums. ;)
Still, you seem to think this should be an exception. Why so ?

Hi Dimitri,
If this is addressed to me, simply because I think the banning decision was ill founded, therefore unjust and undeserved, as previously stated.

Marco

07-01-2010, 23:57

Guys,

I've been out for most of the day, so have just seen the most recent posts here. Before I tackle anything else, something needs to be addressed first.

But this time it's different, IMHO - this time there is a better than even chance that the banning decision was ill founded - doesn't that concern you?

Also, FWIW, there are far too many such decisions taken in secret (not broadcast), on his forum, IMHO.

I know what decision I'll be taking if you don't open a thread in the welcome area, introducing yourself properly (name and basic location details, etc) like I've asked you to do about five times now, and have even emailed you to that effect with no reply!

Are you a secret agent perhaps or just shy? :lol:

Now, this is the LAST time I'm going to ask, so please sort it out on your next visit... Cheers!

Marco.

P.S Dimitri, welcome back! :)

Themis

08-01-2010, 11:20

Hi Dimitri,
If this is addressed to me, simply because I think the banning decision was ill founded, therefore unjust and undeserved, as previously stated.
Ah ok. I hadn't read it all then, sorry. :)
In that case, you're right to point out your opinion. Most forums forbid discussing administrators' decisions in public, but it's not the case here afaik. ;)

Themis

08-01-2010, 11:23

P.S Dimitri, welcome back! :)
Thanks Marco. :)

Hope your personal affairs had no serious issues. ;)

Primalsea

08-01-2010, 12:43

What is Trolling??

I must admit I have no idea what it means.

Themis

08-01-2010, 12:51

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

REM

08-01-2010, 12:51

Old skool troll

Ali Tait

08-01-2010, 15:55

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

08-01-2010, 16:04

Just like to point out one thing-I emailed Angela after she was banned here and recommended the Audio-Talk forum to her,given her interest in valves and diy.She has since joined with no sign of any trolling.Funny that.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lolsign:
Anybody big enough to admit to getting it wrong?

Ali Tait

08-01-2010, 16:09

Further,she has been a member of diyAudio since 2008.

Ali Tait

08-01-2010, 16:20

Steve,hope you've got plenty change for slipping under all those gap-toothed kids pillows! :lol:

Steve Toy

08-01-2010, 16:57

OK, I'm the bloody tooth fairy. I was wrong. However, she still committed two ban-able offences here.

1) To refer to anyone with a faith as having god disease is offensive, arrogant and bigoted. Richard Dawkins is clearly an arrogant prick of the highest order. The likes of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawkins were/are much more humble, intelligent and command respect for refusing to rule out the existence of God.

This is not a forum for devout believers in superstitious nonsense (or foo in our hobby) nor is it for neo-con right-wing religious fundamentalist nutjobs. This is a forum for the open-minded, the genuinely curious and for those who accept that the more you learn the more you realise how little you know. Knowledge is power but its acquisition should be a humbling process. To refute the existence of God and to refer to those who either believe in God or believe there might be a God as suffering from god disease warrants a ban in itself for its sheer arrogance. Atheism on its own is fine but coupled with blatant contempt for those who are not fellow-atheists is unacceptable.

2) We don't view scientific proof in terms of measurements and double-blind testing as being the only way to evaluate kit. We are for people who trust their ears. Recent polls on other fora confirm that around 80% of audiophiles (or recorded music lovers as we prefer to call ourselves) are prepared to trust their ears when making purchases or even effect tweaks that cost nothing other than perhaps a little time.

There are plenty of places on the internet where the vociferous minority of arrogant, sneering objectivists or skeptics (sic) as they prefer to call themselves can enjoy the sound of their own voices (or the sight of their own words on the screen) without having to come and piss on our parade here. There needs to be a safe haven for llike-minded subjectivists, who just happen to be in the majority, to be able to discuss tweaks and improvements to their music listening experiences without fear of ridicule from this minority of vociferous self-appointed or wannabe Which? magazine writers.

The Art of Sound is that safe haven.

Those who want to engage in tiresome objectivist/subjectivist debates each and every time someone has tried out a tweak, please do it somewhere alse and refrain from crapping all over this community.

Do it here, especially in your first few posts and you will likely be shown the door.

Marco

08-01-2010, 17:30

As co-owner of AoS I'm with Steve 100% on his post above.

My sincere apologies to Joe, but I suspect that for the reasons above neither Angela or him would fit in here long-term. This is nothing sinister or unusual - there are just some places in life where you don't really belong :)

Marco.

Marco

08-01-2010, 17:40

Thanks Marco. :)

Hope your personal affairs had no serious issues. ;)

Hi Dimitri,

Thanks for that - unfortunately he's still not been found yet :(

But we live in hope....

Marco.

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

08-01-2010, 18:45

1) To refer to anyone with a faith as having god disease is offensive, arrogant and bigoted. Richard Dawkins is clearly an arrogant prick of the highest order. The likes of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawkins were/are much more humble, intelligent and command respect for refusing to rule out the existence of God.
Steve, please re-read her post. She did not refer to anyone having God disease, she referred to the author of that article making that statement - no personal opinion one way or the other was expressed by her. She may well agree with you about Dawkins and the existence of God, I don't know and don't care. Again, what she did was refer to the article by a third person where this statement was quoted - not the same!!!

This is not a forum for devout believers in superstitious nonsense (or foo in our hobby) nor is it for neo-con right-wing religious fundamentalist nutjobs. This is a forum for the open-minded, the genuinely curious and for those who accept that the more you learn the more you realise how little you know.
I'm sure that, if asked (and given the opportunity to respond) theoldtrout would agree with you - again I don't know and don't care - but I very much doubt that she would agree with your inference that she could be a "neo-con right-wing religious fundamentalist nutjob". If this is, to quote your next sentence, "This is a forum for the open-minded, the genuinely curious and for those who accept that the more you learn the more you realise how little you know," how does your opinion of her fit in with being open minded?

To refute the existence of God and to refer to those who either believe in God or believe there might be a God as suffering from god disease warrants a ban in itself for its sheer arrogance. Atheism on its own is fine but coupled with blatant contempt for those who are not fellow-atheists is unacceptable
But she didn't Steve, re-read it, she makes no claim to refute or confirm the existence of God, she just refers to someone else making such statements.

Those who want to engage in tiresome objectivist/subjectivist debates each and every time someone has tried out a tweak, please do it somewhere alse and refrain from crapping all over this community.
Do it here, especially in your first few posts and you will likely be shown the door.
And where exactly did she do that, pray?

As stated elsewhere, I completely accept managements right to ban members for whatever reason takes their fancy but in the interests of fairness and the understanding of all concerned it would be better if the reason for doing so was more apparent, IMHO.

PS Marco, sorry to hear about your loss - I don't know any details but if I read between the lines even though I'm not good at that, it sounds as though you have lost a pet. Been there, done that and shed the tears. I hope he/she turns up safe and well.

Themis

08-01-2010, 18:50

Joe speaks reasonably, imho. :)

But again, I don't know this lady. Perhaps she's not a hardcore objectivist, after all.

tangye

08-01-2010, 19:08

I tend to agree - sometimes the written word can be taken not in the way it was meant, a simple ' That was offensive please retract that remark' and we would have found out all we needed to know about the old trout.
As an example; a few years ago I was in Afghanistan and while on a short sabbatical between operations I sent an email to my wifes friend asking her to send me some naked pictures of herself and she took it completely the wrong way! :lol:

Marco

08-01-2010, 19:23

Hi Joe,

Without going into detail on the rest of your post:

But she didn't Steve, re-read it, she makes no claim to refute or confirm the existence of God, she just refers to someone else making such statements...

Looking at things literally, yes. However, I think we're all intelligent enough to read between the lines! It goes much deeper than that.

It is quite obvious to me that the woman, who uses other derogatory language such as "audiofoolery" in reference to the way some subjectivists make their decisions and choices in audio, has no time for people with a different mentality and makes it all too well-known, surreptitiously or otherwise, where her disdain lies.

PS Marco, sorry to hear about your loss - I don't know any details but if I read between the lines even though I'm not good at that, it sounds as though you have lost a pet. Been there, done that and shed the tears. I hope he/she turns up safe and well.

Thanks, Joe - much appreciated. It's one of our cats :(

Marco.

The Vinyl Adventure

08-01-2010, 19:36

That's no good marco, sorry to here that!

Spectral Morn

08-01-2010, 19:41

Indeed sorry to hear that too....

Regards D S D L

Alex_UK

08-01-2010, 19:41

Sorry to hear that, and fingers crossed Marco... :(

Barry

08-01-2010, 19:42

Hi Joe,

Without going into detail on the rest of your post:

Looking at things literally, yes. However, I think we're all intelligent enough to read between the lines! It goes much deeper than that.

It is quite obvious to me that the woman, who uses other derogatory (and offensive) language such as "audiofoolery" in reference to the way some subjectivists make their decisions and choices in audio, has no time for people with a different mentality and makes it all too well-known, surreptitiously or otherwise, where her disdain lies.

Thanks, Joe - much appreciated. It's one of our cats :(

Marco.

Not the one that was recently filled with hot water and put under the duvet for me to kick?

Sorry to hear of your sad news. Pets are a part of the family and their loss always leaves a big hole in ones life.

Regards

Marco

08-01-2010, 19:50

Cheers, guys. Hopefully he'll turn up as one of our other cats did this years ago and came back after a week :)

Marco.

Primalsea

08-01-2010, 19:59

Hi Marco, sorry to hear about your cat going missing, hope he turns up soon.

As for the original post it was a bit strange that someone should begin with such a post, the only reason for doing so is questionable in my book. I had a similar mindset to the guy who wrote that article but experience has shown me that its not correct. I'm still skeptical about many things in hifi and to be fair much of it is dubious, but I remain un-cynical.

Steve Toy

08-01-2010, 20:20

I 'm sure that, if asked (and given the opportunity to respond) theoldtrout would agree with you - again I don't know and don't care - but I very much doubt that she would agree with your inference that she could be a "neo-con right-wing religious fundamentalist nutjob"

You've completely misundrstood that one. By defending those with a faith their right to do so does not make us a neo-con site. How could I possibly suggest this of an atheist ffs!

Steve Toy

08-01-2010, 20:31

I think Joe is twisting certain things here. Theoldtrout clearly stated that those who disagree with Dawkins have what she refered to as a god disease.

Joe

08-01-2010, 20:40

I agree with Steven here. Those were theoldtrout's own words, not a quote from somebody else.

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

08-01-2010, 21:12

Hi Marco,
I guess Steve is unable to respond at the present moment so I'll address my reply to you as co-owner. I get the feeling that we are getting closer to understanding each others point of view, and I seem to be getting a more sympathetic response from some of the membership so, with your permission I'll continue in the hope of achieving more understanding.

But she didn't Steve, re-read it, she makes no claim to refute or confirm the existence of God, she just refers to someone else making such statements...

Looking at things literally, yes. However, I think we're all intelligent enough to read between the lines! It goes much deeper than that.

I posted earlier that I have a deeply ingrained tendency to take people at first value. Your experience of life (and particularly of running this forum, dare I suggest :) ) has left you with a different tendency. "Reading between the lines" is another way of saying "making an educated assumption" I would venture, and we all know about what making assumptions can do, don't we. I am fairly certain, in my own mind, that your reading between the lines was not well founded in this particular instance and I very much doubt that it does go any deeper than it's literal interpretation, IMHO.

It is quite obvious to me that the woman, who uses other derogatory (and offensive) language such as "audiofoolery" in reference to the way some subjectivists make their decisions and choices in audio, has no time for people with a different mentality and makes it all too well-known, surreptitiously or otherwise, where her disdain lies.

Again, all I can say is re-read her original post. The thread title, which contains the word that you object so much to her using, "Audiofoolery", is in fact a (mis-spelled) quote from the title of the article to which she was drawing our attention, namely "Audiophoolery by Ethan Winer". At no point, as far as I can see, did she voice any support for such views. She did say, as others on this forum have since also said without threat of being banned, that there was some merit in some of the statements he made. That is a long way short of espousing the same views herself, IMHO. If we were to ban all members for referring to offensive remarks by others this forum would have a lot fewer members don't you think? Therefor, IMHO, she showed no disdain by quoting this. If you would like a little further background, can I refer you to her introductory post on the A-T forum, particularly her musical kit bachground. FFS she's one of us, though I doubt she'd thank me now for saying so :) .

To paraphrase Steve on a related thread, why not risk offering her enough rope to hang herself, you've done it before and will doubtless do it again. What have you got to lose, you will always retain the ultimate sanction if she steps out of line and there are more than enough people sensitised to the situation for her first mal-adroit step to be immediately noticed. FWIW you can ban me at the same time, always assuming that you've not done it beforehand :) , thereby killing two birds with one stone if you'll forgive the pun.
Yours in anticipation,

PS I've just seen Steve is back posting again and his view does not seem to be softening, to say the least! With respect Steve:
No, I am not knowingly twisting anything, just calling it as I see it. If you don't see it the same way, that's your perogative - I am genuinely sorry that we cannot better understand each others position, and
Yes, I have completely misunderstood that one. FWIW I still don't understand what you're getting at. I'll respond to it if you express it again in a way that I can understand and consider.
To repeat myself I would ask you to please take the trouble to read her introductory post today on the A-T forum and see if that gives you any reason for concern.

The Vinyl Adventure

08-01-2010, 22:01

Probably just confused by the snow buddy, I'm sure he will, cats aren't daft... He's prob found a warm barn or something

Steve Toy

08-01-2010, 22:21

Joe, thanks.

T'other Joe (Mercury1),

Theoldtrout clearly stated that those who disagree with Dawkins have what she refered to as a god disease.

The ban remains. You are now clutching at straws as well as twisting things.

I'll respond to it if you express it again in a way that I can understand and consider.

What are we accusing her of? Being a right-wing religious nutjob when she's clearly an atheist with only utter contempt for those who believe in God? That would be a complete contradiction.

The reference was to how the likes of her may perceive this site (in an attempt to polarise viewpoints) given that we choose to defend faith and foster tolerance and respect over her brand of bigotry, arrogance and contempt.

You're definitely twisting things or being obtuse. One or the other.

Steve Toy

08-01-2010, 22:23

Hamish,

Lets hope so.

Marco

08-01-2010, 22:44

Hi Joe (Mercury),

Thanks for taking the time to express your further thoughts on the matter, but with respect, the ban on Angela remains. I'm afraid she's just not someone I could ever warm to, and ultimately Steve and I decide who can post here or not. Life's too short to spend it with those you're uncomfortable with.

You, however, are most welcome to contribute to discussions, as and when you wish :)

Marco.

Marco

08-01-2010, 22:46

Probably just confused by the snow buddy, I'm sure he will, cats aren't daft... He's prob found a warm barn or something

Hi matey,

You could be right. We've done all the 'missing cat' posters, contacted animal rescue centres, local vets etc, so now I'm afraid it's just a waiting game...

I'll keep you posted :)

Marco.

Themis

08-01-2010, 22:48

Was it a male, Marco ?
One day one of my male cats (I had 23 cats at that time) disappeared for more than 48 hours... :(

Marco

08-01-2010, 22:52

Male, yep - ginger tom cat age 12 :)

Marco.

Themis

08-01-2010, 22:53

You have to wait, then. It happens.
I know it's hard. :(

The Vinyl Adventure

08-01-2010, 23:02

Do you have him chipped, hannah used to work at a vets and it was standard
practice, recomed it if you don't for peace of mind if nothing else! We lost our dog once and as much as I paniced it did help knowing that we would find her whatever ... Fortunatley we were phoned from her tag with our number on ...

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

08-01-2010, 23:12

Mercury1,theoldtrout clearly stated that those who disagree with Dawkins have what she refered to as a god disease.
The ban remains.

Hi Steve,
OK, you win, I have nothing to gain or lose either way so I withdraw my campaign to get Angela re-instated. Given that all the 'weapons' were in your hands and you had already made your mind up and acted on it I guess that I was always tilting at windmills. I don't happen to share your view about theoldtrout's intentions but it's not my view that matters. Have you never said something that offended someone which, with the benefit of hindsight could have been said less offensively, Tooth Fairy?
I do feel that AoS has lost a member who could have been a pillar of the forum with a little more tolerance on the part of management. Our loss is A-T's gain, you'll see.
In closing I would like you to accept my assurance that neither of us were party to a twin proged trolling attack. In my view I was just being a gentleman rushing to the defence of a lady being undeservedly abused by a bunch of bullies. This may be an outdated concept these days but that's the way I was brought up.
Let's all move on to more productive use of our posting time eh?

Hi Marco,
As said to Steve above, I'll stop my mini one man campaign on the lady's behalf.
Thanks for (I presume) not holding any suspicion of an ulterior motive against me. I had no aggenda other than to right a wrong as I saw it. I'll continue to monitor the forum and post as and when I see fit but I cannot promise to always toe the party line so don't expect it. I'll not be abusive or denigrating of other's opinions and I'll always speak the truth as I see it but it may not always be the truth as others see it, as exampled in all our recent exchanges.
On a more mutually agreeable note I hope your cat turns up soon, alive and well. We once rescued a couple of adult cats that had both come from the same abusive home. We'd had them only a week when one absconded over our stable door (in the kitchen, we don't run to stables at chez nous), and ran off. I spent all my spare time for a week touring the neighbour hood calling his name and kidded myself that I saw him in the far distance 2 or 3 times. I borrowed a couple of cat traps from the local cat rescue place and caught every cat in the neighbour hood, most several times, but never the one I wanted. I'd just about given up hope of seeing him again when, one dark night, there was a loud plaintiff "Miaow" at the same stable door, and there he was. I don't know who was the most relieved, us or him. He never strayed again and we spent the next ten years or so happily together. I hope you get the same result, I'll watch for updates and wish you well.

Ali Tait

08-01-2010, 23:20

Believe it or not,our cat went missing for three months! as above,one day there was a miaow at the window..

electric beach

08-01-2010, 23:20

We've just lost an eight month old cat, hit by a car in front of the house. Don't think she realised where the road started in the snow. Fortunately we have three spares (sick lol). At least we know, it's the not knowing that eats away at you. A few years ago some sick bastard enticed away the most friendly, trusting cat I've ever known from the low roof of our house. We came back on Boxing day to see the trainer prints in the snow on the bonnet of our car where he'd climbed up. That kind of took the edge off the festivities.

Optomistically, be reassured that most cats do come back. Apparently, when cats go outside they literally go into "scaredy-cat" mode, i.e. on ultra defensive. When they're spooked they do a possum and won't make their presence known, when in fact most of the time they are within earshot and don't generally venture further than that. He/she will strut in the door as if nothing unusual has happened!

Marco

08-01-2010, 23:48

Hi Joe,

I'll continue to monitor the forum and post as and when I see fit but I cannot promise to always toe the party line so don't expect it. I'll not be abusive or denigrating of other's opinions and I'll always speak the truth as I see it but it may not always be the truth as others see it, as exampled in all our recent exchanges.

That sounds fine to me. In fact, I enjoy people who have a bit of an 'edge', and exchanging views robustly with them as it makes for interesting discussions ;)

We certainly don't seek to invite 'yes men'!

The key for me in order to avoid confrontation, and I hope there are others out there reading this, is that people with opposing views on hi-fi should always show respect for each other's equally valid opinions. Your opinion isn't more valid than someone else's unless you're a proven expert in a particular field and your specialty is directly relevant to the discussion. However, your opinion in audio certainly isn't more valid because you've taken on the role of amateur scientist or full-time reductionist.

Mutual respect of each other from both parties is the key, and the avoidance at all costs of personal insults. Play the ball, not the man, as they say. Once mutual respect is established, civil debate can take place and hopefully something new learned in the process.

In my experience of over eight years of posting on audio forums, it is nine times out of ten usually the 'objectivists' with their sneering disdain for anyone who doesn't live and breathe measurements and 'scientific proof' in audio, who start the unpleasantness. Their often breathtaking and impregnable arrogance, believing that they're unquestionably correct because 'scientific proof' appears to be on their side (even though that science doesn't always have all the answers), is completely insufferable.

As soon as I detect this, and people implying that I'm some kind of deluded fool, is when I will treat those people with the contempt they deserve. It's a simple formula: respect my views and me, and I'll return the compliment in the nicest way possible; do the opposite, and I'll also 'return the compliment', but in a rather different way! If you don't agree with that ethos, then I'm afraid you're in the wrong place. It's really that simple :)

Thanks for your concern for my currently lost cat. That was a nice story, and one with a happy ending. Here's hoping that I get the same result! :cool:

Marco.

P.S Thanks to everyone else too for their concerns and stories. Hamish, unfortunately he wasn't chipped - he didn't even have a collar on. Dont' worry, we won't be making that mistake again...

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

09-01-2010, 00:20

Hi Joe,
In my experience of over eight years of posting on audio forums, it is nine times out of ten usually the 'objectivists' with their sneering disdain for anyone who doesn't live and breathe measurements and 'scientific proof' in audio, who start the unpleasantness. Their often breathtaking and impregnable arrogance believing that they're unquestionably correct because 'scientific proof' appears to be on their side (even though science doesn't always have all the answers) is completely insufferable.

As soon as I detect this, and people implying that I'm some kind of deluded fool, is when I will treat those people with the contempt they deserve.

Hi Marco,
I hate to risk opening up old wounds just when we seemed to have got the healing process in motion but it is your use of the words "sneering disdain" and "arrogance" again that triggers it. These are the same words you used when describing Angela's attitude, and I still think it isn't and wasn't justified, IMHO.
Do you think that it is possible that your detection antenae may just have let you down this time? Use of the word "detection" infers a possible degree of doubt, maybe?
Was your male cat neutered? Sometimes they are known to go out on the pull when whole, only to return having fulfilled their needs. Is that a possibility?
Good luck anyway.

Marco

09-01-2010, 00:25

Marco

09-01-2010, 01:03

I've just been reading Angela's introduction thread over on AT:

http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1992

...I can't help wondering why she felt it necessary to post the contentious and inflammatory "Audiofoolery at the Skeptic Society" link here and not on audio talk... :scratch:

I don't see her mentioning the "God disease" nonsense over there either. For me this proves that she was here simply to irritate 'the faithful', as it were.

I can assure you that if she'd also omitted to post that link here, accompanied by her contentious remarks about being irritating and requiring 'evidence', and concentrated only instead on offering the same warm and friendly introductory thread on AoS, she'd have got a much easier ride and wouldn't been banned now!

The truth is she went about joining here all the wrong way and got everyone's backs up as a result (or certainly those who make the decisions).

Perhaps, Joe, you can shed some light on the apparent discrepancy in Angela's attitude towards joining both forums? :)

Marco.

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 07:38

Marco,perhaps she was scared to after the welcome she recieved here! I see no evidence of trolling in her posts in the last two yeas on diyAudio.

John

09-01-2010, 08:32

Ali if she came in a built some warmth at first maybe there would of been a lot more tolerance but she came crashing in. The site does get the occational troll here
The site is generally a warm welcoming place but attacking peoples beliefs straight away is going to cause issues. If she came in with the same attitude as on the other forums none of this would of happened.
Marco and Steve have a responsiabilty for the safe running of the site

Joe

09-01-2010, 08:34

DIY rooms tend to be an oasis of calm in any hifi forum. I guess that's because DIYers are usually dealing in facts rather than opinions. If you use the wrong component or wire a circuit up incorrectly, what you're building won't work!

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 08:37

I don't see it that way at all.I think she was just trying to provoke an interesting disussion.A good way perhaps for a new member to find out where people here are coming from.

Themis

09-01-2010, 08:42

DIY rooms are calm, but DIY forums are no calmer than hifi ones. ;)

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 08:57

Not always Dimitri.This kind of thing never happens on WD or AT.

Themis

09-01-2010, 09:09

Not always Dimitri.This kind of thing never happens on WD or AT.
Not always, you're right. It was an exaggeration. ;)
I know a few in France or the States, that are no calmer than most hifi forums, though...

Marco

09-01-2010, 10:32

I don't see it that way at all.I think she was just trying to provoke an interesting disussion.A good way perhaps for a new member to find out where people here are coming from.

If you think that then, Ali, then you and I are on a totally 'different page'.

When you join a forum, you join giving due respect to the views and ethos of the forum and those of it members; you don't behave in a confrontational way completely contrary to that which is liable to piss off the owners of the site in your first post, and then make a deeply offensive (to those who have faith in God) religiously bigoted remark in your second one!!

Frankly I'm stunned you can't see this :rolleyes:

You might not agree, and that's fine, but surely you can at least appreciate where I'm coming from?

I wonder how Angela would've been welcomed on AT if she had joined posting a link which blatantly ridicules D.I.Y-ers and valve amp users??

Or consider how a Tory walking into a Labour Party convention would be 'welcomed' wearing a t-shirt with 'I think Gordon Brown is a misguided fool' written on it??

Would they belong there? No!

It's a fact that Angela would not have been banned had she joined AoS in same way as she did on AT - no poking fun at 'the faithful', no remarks insensitive to people's religious beliefs, just a nice polite introduction... *That* is the order of the day when joining a new community. If you want to 'stir the pot' a little to stimulate debate, then do so AFTER people get to know what you're about!

We have an ethos on here for a purpose - it's not there for nothing, so we expect potential new members to read it thoroughly BEFORE joining and decide whether they're liable to fit in here or not. Quite simply, if you don't think you're going to fit into our community then don't join and save everyone a lot of grief!!

Staunch objectivists joining AoS trying to 'poke fun' at or 'educate' the equally staunch subjectivists, who mainly populate AoS, is destined only to end one way, as Tim Farney found out. I'm afraid that oil and water just don't mix.

I'm sorry for the rant, but I feel extremely strongly about this. John's view above aligns perfectly with the reality.

Marco.

Marco

09-01-2010, 10:48

And this, Ali:

Not always Dimitri.This kind of thing never happens on WD or AT.

You can't be serious, surely? I've seen plenty of battles on both forums over the years with all sorts of insults flying around amongst D.I.Y-ers disagreeing over each others designs! Didn't Nick G start audio talk *precisely* because he was fed up with the way he was being treated by certain members of the clique on WD?

And as for AT, I've lost count of the amount of times certain people there have slagged off both me personally and this forum, on occasions completely unjustifiably, and all hell has broken loose as a result when I've had to go there and defend myself and AoS!!

You have a very 'interesting', rather narrow way of looking at things....

There's a hard-core clique on AT who if you don't get on with them you'll never be accepted. It's only a friendly site if you appeal to the mentality of the regulars who post there.

Now that's fine, as it's just the way things are in life, but the exact same situation exists on AoS. This forum is a very friendly place for those who enjoy its particular 'flavour' and observe our ethos. However, people will only last here long term if they genuinely enjoy the nature of the forum and make an effort to fit in. If not, there's usually only one outcome. That, I'm afraid, is life! It does not mean that the audio talk forum is friendlier overall and more welcoming than here - just different.

Marco.

Joe

09-01-2010, 11:04

There's a hard-core clique on AT who if you don't get on with them you'll never be accepted. It's only a friendly site if you appeal to the mentality of the regulars who post there.

Now that's fine, as it's just the way things are in life, but it's the exact same situation on AoS. .

So who are the 'hard-core clique' on AoS?

Marco

09-01-2010, 11:08

Easy... Everyone with a pro-subjectivist approach to audio who trusts their ears more than a bloody oscilloscope!

A "clique" is simply another word for a group of like-minded individuals, who share a similar passion for something and a particular way of going about it.

Marco.

Joe

09-01-2010, 11:16

Fair enough. I wouldn't know an oscilloscope if it bit me on the arse.

Themis

09-01-2010, 11:17

Fair enough. I wouldn't know an oscilloscope if it bit me on the arse.:D

All hifi enthusiasts trust their ears first. Even the objectivists, btw. ;)

Joe

09-01-2010, 11:24

Of course. Indeed, what the blind test advocates are saying in effect is, 'if you trust your ears so much you should be able to make judgements about components without knowing what they are', so they're sort of ultra-subjective.

I'm a subjectivist in the sense that I can't understand spec sheets or circuit diagrams, so have to go by what my ears tell me. But I'm a laid-back subjectivist in that I don't have strong views either way about analogue v digital, or valves v solid state or any other A/B type of options. I save that for literature.

Jonboy

09-01-2010, 11:36

I'm a subjectivist in the sense that I can't understand spec sheets or circuit diagrams, so have to go by what my ears tell me. But I'm a laid-back subjectivist in that I don't have strong views either way about analogue v digital, or valves v solid state or any other A/B type of options. I save that for literature.

The same goes for me Joe;)

I just wish i could listen something properly at the moment, my ears are full of drops and wax awaiting syringing next week:steam:

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

09-01-2010, 11:37

Hi Joe,

I wasn't referring to Angela. I was referring to the AVI 'terrible twosome' (you may know them or not), and people of that ilk in general, like Tim Farney, who was recently banned.

LOL - yes our ginger tom cat has been neutered, so he won't be out on the ran-dan!

Marco.

Hi Marco,
No I don't know any of them to whom you refer and I have no wish to do so :).
Apologies for my misunderstanding - my remarks withdrawn and healing process resumed:)

The Grand Wazoo

09-01-2010, 11:42

The same goes for me Joe;)

I just wish i could listen something properly at the moment, my ears are full of drops and wax awaiting syringing next week:steam:

Jon, that last smiley you used could've been made for that post!!

Themis

09-01-2010, 11:55

I guess the subject is closed. :)

Marco

09-01-2010, 12:06

All hifi enthusiasts trust their ears first. Even the objectivists, btw

I'm not sure about that, Dimitri. Perhaps then Ashley James and his ilk aren't hi-fi enthusiasts?

I get the feeling sometimes, from what I read on forums from staunch objectivists, that if they were going to demo some new gear at a dealer's shop, they'd have an oscilloscope and spectrum analyser with them to measure the equipment they were thinking of buying just to verify that what they were hearing was 'real'! :mental: :lol:

Normal people, of course, simply trust their ears implicitly after being convinced (or otherwise) of the efficacy of the equipment demonstrated after simply listening to music through it.

I'm being a little facetious here of course, but what I'm getting at is that if measurement-obsessed objectivists can trust their ears in situations like I've described above then surely they can do so on other occasions when assessing audio equipment, or do they never buy any equipment until it's been thoroughly scrutinised through a piece of scientific apparatus?

Surely in the final analysis all we (as humans) can do is trust our ears? If you don't have faith in your God-given senses then quite simply you're not functioning properly as a human being...

Contentious I know, but that's what I honestly believe. If I had to have 'conclusive proof' for everything I genuinely experience in life (not just with hi-fi) before believing in it, it'd end up insane and locked up in a mad house!! ;)

Marco.

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

09-01-2010, 12:16

You have a very 'interesting', rather narrow way of looking at things, Ali....

There's a hard-core clique on AT that if you don't get on with them you'll never be accepted. It's only a friendly site if you appeal to the mentality of the regulars who post there.

Now that's fine, as it's just the way things are in life, but it's the exact same situation on AoS. People will only last here long term if they genuinely enjoy the nature of the forum and make an effort to fit in. If not, there's usually only one outcome.

Marco.

Hi Guys,
Marco please forgive me, I know I said that I wouldn't post again on this subject but I see it's grown another two pages overnight and I feel somewhat deprived not being able to contribute as I was largely responsible for many of the early contributions.
I have to say that I am wholly with Ali on this. The only evidence that Angela is a troll was/is your sensitive anti-trolling antenna. I am not decrying or dismissing that, I'm sure it's a finely tuned instrument after all the years it's been in operation but, like all finely tuned instruments it's bound to give a false result from time to time and I am personally sure that this was one of those occasions. Angela's post was open to the interpretation that you and others have put on it I have to accept but perhaps as much due to your super-sensitivity as it was to the post itself?
All other evidence, Ali's previous knowledge of the lady, her longish track record on other fora, her total anonimity to virtually everybody else on this forum until this blew up, and her trouble free joining of A-T, all point surely to the lady's complete innocence to the 'crime' you (AoS) accuse her of. Benefit of doubt and innocent until proved guilty spring to mind.
Regarding your allegations of a hard core clique on A-T, I have to say that is not my experience, having monitored the forum for several months.
Any news on the ginger tom?

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 12:19

All German beer tastes the same because it is made from rhe same four ingredients. Anyone who thinks wines with the same grape variety will taste any different is a fool. The taste of wine and beer is determined entirely by its acidity level. Etc.

Themis

09-01-2010, 12:20

I'm not sure about that, Dimitri. Perhaps then Ashley James and his ilk aren't hi-fi enthusiasts?
Marco, if one day Ashley (or whoever else) explicitly tells you he doesn't trust his ears, please report. I will be really amazed. ;)

Measurement-obsessed (as you say) objectivists, simply think that some differences are not in the listening possibilities of the human ear. Which means exactly that : they also trust their ears.

Objectivists don't trust other people's ears, that's for sure. ;)

The Vinyl Adventure

09-01-2010, 12:23

Contentious I know, but that's what I honestly believe. If I had to have conclusive 'proof' for everything I genuinely experience in life (not just with hi-fi) before believing in it, it'd end up insane and locked up in a mad house!! ;)

Marco.

I couldn't agree more marco, I have had two periods in my life of questioning everything to the point of near maddness. The second of which was only resolved when I realised I already knew the answers

but you have to accept that the world (thankfully) is made up of very different people, I personally, being someone with a belife system of sorts will no doubt take a similar veiw to you, but withou the oposite type of people the world would be a very odd place! There is a place for everyone and everyones views! I don't agree with the banning of this person, I personnaly think the decision was made to quickly, but, I can see the reasons in the eyes of the banners are valid taking into account the day you were having and in a forum of this nature
I personally think you are all barmy letting this arguament and what it has now turned into last as long as it has!

Marco

09-01-2010, 12:23

Hi Joe,

I have rather different and equally valid experiences of AT, but I'll leave it there because discussing it further here serves no constructive purpose.

I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree about Angela. All that's been said is all that needs to be said, otherwise we'll just end up going around in circles.

Nope, there’s no news on the cat yet. I'll let people know when that situation changes :)

Now let's leave the discussion of Angela where it is.

Marco.

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 12:25

Joe, we are going round in circles. For some reason Angela chose to behave offensively on AOS.
Do I need to refer to what she said yet again in an even bigger font size and in perhaps a different colour?
You are being obtuse again.

Thought-provoking? No. Inflammatory? Yes.

Perhaps you could shed some light on why we have been singled out by her for such special treatment when she is the perfect angel elsewhere.

The Vinyl Adventure

09-01-2010, 12:26

I would certainly think this angella lady find the impact she has had most amusing

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 12:31

Marco, perhaps Joe can answer my last question (the non-rhetorical one).

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 12:33

Hamish, I'd say she's highly flattered by this knight in shining armour coming to her rescue over here :laugh:

Marco

09-01-2010, 12:52

Hi Dimitri,

Measurement-obsessed (as you say) objectivists, simply think that some differences are not in the listening possibilities of the human ear.

But since they didn't design the human ear how can they know for sure what its true listening possibilities are? All we know is what currently available science dictates, and I believe this is incomplete.

The mistake they're making is in believing that man-made measurement apparatus is currently capable of conclusively measuring the behaviour of that which is not man-made.

I'm referring here to the ear/brain relationship and how it treats music signals reproduced by audio equipment, not how scientific apparatus measures the noise it makes - the two are quite different. It's thus why measurements, until able to conclusively explain the behaviour of the above relationship, can only tell half of the story.

Objectivists don't trust other people's ears, that's for sure.

That's fine - I have no problem whatsoever with that, as I feel they same about theirs.

It's not their hearing acuity I don't respect, but their insistence that other people should adhere to their judgement criteria, and that the opinions they then arrive at by 'objective means' are somehow more valid than mine, simply because their views appear to be 'confirmed' by science - science of course which is constantly learning and evolving and so thus far is imperfect.

Given that the above in bold is indisputable, how can these people ever know for sure that their oscilloscopes, spectrum analysers, et al, are telling them the full truth with audio? In reality, they can be no surer of that than we are of what our ears tell us!

That's the grey area for me that exists and why I will always accept the limitations of my hearing first before those of any measurement apparatus. In the final analysis, I trust my senses (and ears) implicitly.

Marco.

DSJR

09-01-2010, 12:56

Here I go again......

All german beers DON'T all taste *quite* the same because although they're "beery" in overall flavour, the PROPORTION of the ingredients is slightly different in each one and there are sublte differences in the preparation..

Same goes for audio.. I HATE this "only trust your ears" bull because our ears and minds are SO easily fooled (FACT). You have to have a balance of scientific proovable support upon which to develop ones products and as for the end listener, there are live gigs and concerts which, although not the same as a recorded, mixed and compressed end product, still give a reference of sorts upon which to judge.

We ALL know the crap that often gets peddled as Top End audio, the turntable system that deliberately altered what was there on the record to sound more "musical" and bass-bloated at one time to make bass-less speakers work at all, the amp range that deliberately added odd-order distortions to sound more "pr@tty." All these things are measurable. I suspect Mark Grant has a pretty good handle on WHY his HD audio cables perform so well, hence the use of a good gauge signal core (I believe) of high purity and a DOUBLE screen/shield, while keeping everything else simple and foo-free..

To suggest the likes of Ashley James AREN'T HiFi enthusiasts is probably absolutely correct, 'cos it's not the equipment that interests them. What DOES interest them is the truthful playback of recorded music done as best as a smallish domestically acceptable speaker can do. I bet if the market (and profit) was there, there'd be an active ADM30 three way with 12" bass unit and costing substantially less that Meridian's creations (and as for the hideously over-priced Wilson range which sounds very little like real life...)

You really DO need to know what it is you need to achieve and sound scientific and engineering practise is there for a reason. The fun begins when you start to adjust the parameters to fool the ears in a favourable way WITHOUT throwing the baby out with the bath water and making the stuff you're designing go unstable in the process..... Harbeth do this with speakers so well and so did Quad in their various generations (and I think Spendor too, before commerce and survival got in the way).

Am I talking total bull? Typing one's thoughts ain't the same as speaking over the phone, let alone face to face..... :scratch:

DSJR

09-01-2010, 13:00

Marco, I bet that ALL the things you have done to your setup (and every item has been modified) has given a measurable difference and almost certainly an improvement, along with the subjective benefits you claim...

Marco

09-01-2010, 13:02

Hi Hamish,

but you have to accept that the world (thankfully) is made up of very different people, I personally, being someone with a belife system of sorts will no doubt take a similar veiw to you, but withou the oposite type of people the world would be a very odd place!

I totally agree and am not against that - how could I be? :)

The problem I have is that 'objectivists' consider that their belief system (what current science says) is superior to ours (what our ears tell us), when that is simply not always the case, because both are flawed in their own different ways! Science is imperfect, as are our senses.

Both 'objectivists' and 'subjectivists' are in truth guilty of overly-simplistic thinking. The arrogance, however, arises when one side of the divide considers their belief system as being somehow 'superior' or more 'accurate', in terms of evaluating the complexities of audio, than the other. That's when the fights begin!

Quite simply, one will never discover the real truths in life (not just in audio) with a 'black & white' absolutist mentality, as the real truth of anything usually exists somewhere in the middle of both extremes.

Marco.

Marco

09-01-2010, 13:12

Hi Dave,

Same goes for audio.. I HATE this "only trust your ears" bull because our ears and minds are SO easily fooled (FACT). You have to have a balance of scientific proovable support upon which to develop ones products and as for the end listener.

You're perfectly entitled to that view, but I'm afraid that it doesn't reflect my own reality or how I ended up with the system I have now.

I completely understand why measurements are necessary in certain situations and environments, but I believe such things are more for the designers and engineers of the products we buy to worry about than the end users like you or me.

You of course are quite entitled to disagree with that, but I can assure you, hand on heart, that EVERY decision I've made to date with hi-fi has been made as a result of what my ears have told me through listening, and nothing whatsoever to do with considering how something measures.

The fact is, I couldn't give a stuff what happens to equipment before it gets to me for my subjective sonic analysis - that's not my department and as such I have no interest in that stage of things whatsoever. Quite simply, the proof of the pudding for me in audio is always in the listening - that will always be the only arbiter that matters :)

Marco.

Themis

09-01-2010, 13:12

It's not their hearing acuity I don't respect, but their insistence that other people should adhere to their judgement criteria, and that the opinions they then arrive at thorough 'objective means' are somehow more valid than mine, simply because their views appear to be 'confirmed' by science - science of course which is constantly learning and evolving and so thus far is imperfect.

Given that the above in bold is indisputable, how can these people ever know for sure that their oscilloscopes, spectrum analysers, et al, are telling them the full truth with audio?

Marco,

some objectivists are genuine scientists with solid knowledge in one or several domains. Science is used to classify and explain the surrounding world. So, it is very natural for scientists to have rules (and laws) for about everything that they observe. It is also natural for them to be aware of the uncertainties of some observations. Still, solid evidence (with some metrics) of such observations has to be proved.

It is not amazing, in such a context, that they make a causal relationship of human observations : it's their job.
Fortunately they do so, otherwise we would have never had technology around us, and we would be still wondering why a spark appears with two pieces of flint....

So, no, sometimes they don't know the "truth" about audio, but they try to understand nevertheless, when an observation contradicts common theory.

The other objectivists are another matter. ;)
They speak often BS and get things too far.

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 13:15

And this, Ali:

Not always Dimitri.This kind of thing never happens on WD or AT.

You can't be serious, surely? I've seen plenty of battles on both forums over the years with all sorts of insults flying around amongst D.I.Y-ers disagreeing over each others designs! Didn't Nick G start audio talk *precisely* because he was fed up with the way he was being treated by certain members of the clique on WD?

And as for AT, I've lost count of the amount of times certain people there have slagged off both me personally and this forum, on occasions completely unjustifiably, and all hell has broken loose as a result when I've had to go there and defend myself and AoS!!

You have a very 'interesting', rather narrow way of looking at things, Ali....

There's a hard-core clique on AT who if you don't get on with them you'll never be accepted. It's only a friendly site if you appeal to the mentality of the regulars who post there.

Now that's fine, as it's just the way things are in life, but the exact same situation exists on AoS. AoS is a very friendly place for those who enjoy its particular 'flavour' and observe our ethos. However, people will only last here long term if they genuinely enjoy the nature of the forum and make an effort to fit in. If not, there's usually only one outcome. That, I'm afraid, is life! It does not mean that the audio talk forum is friendlier and more welcoming than here.

Marco.

Well that's the first time I've ever been accused of being narrow-minded,I have to say! It's pointless continuing this,because it will just go round and round in circles,but one thing I will say,how many sites have YOU been banned from in the past Marco? Personally,I've never been banned from one in my life!
I've read some of the things you have said to others,including direct threats,so frankly,the phrase "Pots and kettles" does rather spring to mind!

Nuff said.

Marco

09-01-2010, 13:25

That was uncalled for, Ali, and completely unnecessary! You've got the wrong end of the stick.

All I meant was that when making your earlier statements about the AT and WD forums that you were painting a rather rose-tinted picture of them and what's happened on both those forums in the past - not that you were intrinsically narrow-minded.

You're not, just guilty in my opinion of not seeing the bigger picture and the actual reality. AoS is not perfect, and neither is AT or WD, or those who post there.

Anyway, offending you was not my intention, so please accept my apologies :)

Marco.

DSJR

09-01-2010, 13:26

Hi Dave,

You're perfectly entitled to that view, but I'm afraid that it doesn't reflect my own reality or how I ended up with the system I have now.

I completely understand why measurements are necessary in certain situations and environments, but I believe such things are more for the designers and engineers of the products we buy to worry about than the end users like you or me.

You of course are quite entitled to disagree with that, but I can assure you, hand on heart, that EVERY decision I've made to date with hi-fi has been made as a result of what my ears have told me through listening, and nothing whatsoever to do with considering how something measures.

The fact is, I couldn't give a stuff what happens to equipment before it gets to me for my subjective sonic analysis - that's not my department and as such I have no interest in that stage of things whatsoever. Quite simply, the proof of the pudding for me is always in the listening :)

Marco.

I think we're actually agreeing with each other in a cack-handed (on my part) sort of way :lol:

Measurements are the root for DESIGNERS and Ash for example (since he's been mentioned) is nearer to that side than he is a consumer. The likes of Neil here, JC and I are probably also nearer to designers as Neil and I dealt with them face to face (well, I did and the only one I never met from my era was Peter Walker of Quad, who'd have had a field day on forums as he used both "methods" and had a good SOH I understand).

Of course, as a consumer, one doesn't have access to all of this and listening tests and trying the stuff at home is the main way of doing things.

One thing that AVI and Harbeth have in common I think, is that they design their products NOT to have a "personality" as such, but to be the best that they can do within their paramaters. They then probably feel that the room should then be tuned to behave. Linn's way used to be to have speakers with an up-tilted response (measurable AND very clearly audible too) and then use this to drive bad rooms, which is totally against professional practise but great for the FE's amongst us.

Lets face it Marco, a big domestic boom-box wouldn't work in your listening room as the latter is too small. I suspect the Lockwood Majors were designed for a typical control room, which may not be hugely different in size to your room. You've then used a little Mana underneath them (have you compared Mana with a small stack of large format books?). The Techie you use is LADEN with bits that MEASURE better than the standard articles, your pre is festooned with boutique bits that MEASURE better apparently than the bits it was made with and your CD player has been tweaked with BETTER MEASURING clocks, op-amps etc which allow the design to perform better than ever.. Careful improvement of critical parts will inevitably improve the sound too so you gain in EVERY way.....

Do you get where I'm coming from? Hope this makes sense...:lolsign:

P.S. I doubt the Timestep supply would have been conceived if it mad the Techie perform worse, even though it may have altered the characteristics of the deck to "sound" nicer/better. Along with the other holistic improvements, it addresses a MEASURABLE characteristic in the supply and makes it BETTER, giving audible improvements with better arms and cartridges especially.. How is the Jelco "better" than the Techie arm? I suspect mainly in resonant behaviour as well as higher mass, which benefits MC cartridges as a whole - both MEASURABLE :lol:

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 13:36

That's way off beam, Ali, and completely unnecessary!

All I meant was that when making your earlier statements about the AT and WD forums that you were painting a rather rose-tinted picture of them and what's happened on both those forums in the past - not that you were intrinsically narrow-minded.

You're not, just guilty in my opinion of not seeing the bigger picture and the actual reality. AoS is not perfect, and neither is AT or WD, or those who post there.

Anyway, offending you was not my intention, so please accept my apologies :)

Marco.

No offence mate.Guess it's just in my nature to stand up for others.:)

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 13:42

Ali, we take people as we find them that's all. Angela chose to be disrespectful here and only here for some reason.

As for fitting in here, most do. It's those that try really hard not to that don't.

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 13:47

No worries.It's your forum to do with as you see fit.I just think you were too hasty that's all.

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 14:05

Given Marco's Christian nature I am sure an apology from Angela would go a long way.

Joe

09-01-2010, 14:09

Shouldn't he be forgiving her anyway? Turning the other cheek and such?

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 14:14

We don't have to unban her as part of turning the other cheek.

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 14:26

All moot in any case I think.I seriously doubt she'd come back anyway!

Marco

09-01-2010, 15:02

No offence mate.Guess it's just in my nature to stand up for others.

No worries, dude, and sorry for the misunderstanding :)

I would hope though that in standing up for others you also have the perception to recognise and acknowledge the faults and failings of the AT and WD forums, and those who contribute to them, the same as you have of recognising those of AoS and its members.

Nothing or no-one is perfect. We all have our quirks!

Dave (DSJR) and Dimitri,

I'll return to your latest contributions after lunch! :cool:

Marco.

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 15:19

Yes indeed nothing and no-one is perfect.

DSJR

09-01-2010, 15:25

I thought I was once - what a come down..... :D

mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)

09-01-2010, 16:46

The usual requirement of not deliberately causing offence to others apply here, although we certainly don't want to be encouraging witch hunts

....we would like to provide our members with a place where they feel that they can be themselves and express their views on hi-fi, music, and any other permitted subject, without peer pressure, one-upmanship, and a feeling of having to conform to some accepted ‘norm’.

and

....and not only will our members themselves be treated with respect but also their opinions and observations, particularly those of people who may not have the same level of experience with hi-fi as others.

Hi Steve and Marco,
The above quotes, in case either of you don't recognise them, are lifted verbatim from your respective posts in The Basics of Ethos section. Can you both put your hand on your heart and say that all your posts over the last couple of days or so have fully complied with the sentiments expressed therein?

Marco

09-01-2010, 16:49

Yes indeed nothing and no-one is perfect.

Indeed. Just one thing I'd like to clear up properly:

I think the crux of the matter and something very significant which perhaps you've failed to consider, is that AoS has got eight times the membership of audio talk, and as such the forum is much more difficult to manage. I suspect that if Nick opened up AT to a wider audience, he'd face the same challenges as Steve and I do running this place!

Audio talk, with respect, is simply a place where a small gathering of like-minded D.I.Y enthusiasts congregate to exchange information on their current designs, and that's cool. If you embrace the D.I.Y mentality (which undoubtedly you do) then you'll get on like a house on fire with them.

The same cannot always be said however if you don't quite fit in for whatever reason, and I'm speaking from personal experience here. Therefore your views on how 'friendly' the welcome on AT is for new members is directly proportional to the experiences you've enjoyed there or not. This is why you and I see things rather differently in that respect.

Anyway, the important thing is you can see the good points of both forums and actively participate on them both :)

Marco.

Marco

09-01-2010, 16:52

and

Hi Steve and Marco,
The above quotes, in case either of you don't recognise them, are lifted verbatim from your respective posts in The Basics of Ethos section. Can you both put your hand on your heart and say that all your posts over the last couple of days or so have fully complied with the sentiments expressed therein?

Joe, please give it a rest as you're continual failure to grasp the main point is becoming rather irritating!

Angela got the 'reception' she deserved - end of. That's the view of the majority here, particularly those who make the decisions. Now please either live with that and stay, or don't and go.

Your call :)

I don't want to hear any more about this.

Marco.

Themis

09-01-2010, 16:53

This topic is still active ? Unbelievable ! :eek:

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 16:56

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 16:59

As I said, I'm sure an apology for the religious bigotry would be well received. If it isn't even offered then...

Subject closed.

Primalsea

09-01-2010, 17:01

I know!!

It seems to me to be the case that the original posters intention was to open the can of worms and then step back. The birds have been going ape shit for them right from the start!

:lolsign:

Themis

09-01-2010, 17:03

As I said, I'm sure an apology for the religious bigotry would be well received. If it isn't even offered then...

Subject closed.
Voilà. :cool:

Marco

09-01-2010, 17:10

Yes I quite understand that Marco,I'm not a complete numpty! It doesn't change the fact that someone was treated badly on ths forum though.I'd also refer you to Joe's post above.

With regardto AT and WD,what you say is true,but it is equally true that no-one would be treated there as Angela has been here.

Ali,

I'm afraid that's simply YOUR interpretation of the situation. Therefore it's only your 'truth'. I've seen people treated worse there for far less!

Angela was not treated badly at all in our view - she simply reaped what she sowed......

Also in your eyes, the AT and WD forums can seemingly do no wrong. This is far from the truth but your unswerving loyalty to them is unfortunately clouding your objectivity!

I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree before we end up completely falling out.

It seems to me to be the case that the original posters intention was to open the can of worms and then step back. The birds have been going ape shit for them right from the start!

Indeed, Paul, but some people here don't appear to have the perception to realise that! :rolleyes:

This thread is now way past its sell-by date, so therefore it's time to put it out of its misery.

Marco.

anthonyTD

09-01-2010, 20:46

Marco

09-01-2010, 21:41

We've just discovered (after some detective work) that 'mercury1' was Dave K, as we have suspected for some time. Here are the results of our investigations after forcing him into a confession, taken from the audio talk forum:

Hi Nick,
Seeing as how I've earned your forum another underserved diatribe I offer you a public apology. It wasn't my intention but, with the benefit of hindsight I should have anticipated it - sorry again
FWIW I would like to give you my honest assurance, (and any other reader, though some may be more willing to believe me than others), that I was not wanting to cause mischeif on AoS with any of my posts on the Audiofoolery thread or indeed on any post on any thread on any forum, for what that's worth. Irrespective of what others may say that is the honest truth. I had never heard of Angela Kingdom in any way shape or form until she posted on AoS. I objected to the reception her first post received, and said so, and everything kicked off from there. I am of an age where gentlemen were brought up to treat ladies with respect, the accused was innocent until proved guilty and always given the benefit of the doubt, at least at the first offence , and I'm too old to change now.
Sorry again,

What a load of bollocks! You can translate the above as he saw an opportunity to come and have a pop and took full advantage of the situation. How very pathetic...

Words fail me why banned members (such as he) insist on returning where they're not wanted and wasting everyone's time!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Dave K, you should be feeling very embarrassed now - let that be a lesson to never try it again. Trolls will always be found out in the end.

Marco.

Spectral Morn

09-01-2010, 21:41

Sadly we have after a thorough investigation discovered that an AOS member who was banned some time ago has recently (Oct 09) re-registered under a new nick name and has been conducting a clever (though not clever enough) campaign at stirring things up on AOS.

AOS will not nor ever allow new or old Trolls to be active here...those who have been previously banned may not come back to AOS unless invited by the management or after asking can they re-join the forum. At that time and only at that time after discussion will they (if at all) be allowed back. Doing such with out priory permission will result in an instant no discussion Ban

So I have to announce that Mercury1 has been discovered to be in fact DaveK who was banned some time ago.

We will now take action to remove him from the forum. This was a unanimous decision taken by the AOS management and prompted by my suspicions of Mercury1's activities recently and writing/posting style.

After a through investigation the decision is now taken.

Edit... With that confession words fail me.

Neil

Marco

09-01-2010, 22:17

From Dave K's post on audio talk:

I would like to give you my honest assurance, (and any other reader, though some may be more willing to believe me than others), that I was not wanting to cause mischeif on AoS with any of my posts on the Audiofoolery thread or indeed on any post on any thread on any forum, for what that's worth.

Well how come then Dave K registered as 'mercury1' on 15-10-2009, almost three months before Angela 'theoldtrout' joined on 06-01-10, if his reason for rejoining AoS as a banned member was to 'defend her honour' (which is what was implied by what he wrote)?

Honest assurance? He wouldn't know the meaning of the word!! The fact is, as a banned member he shouldn't have been there in the first place, and was thus causing mischief by default by his unwanted presence.

Not only is Dave K a time-wasting troll, but a bare-faced LIAR into the bargain!!!!!!

Marco (who hates liars with a passion).

Themis

09-01-2010, 22:30

Who is Dave K ? :scratch:
He used to be a member here ?

Ali Tait

09-01-2010, 22:36

I have no wish to fall out with anyone,but in the interests of fairness,Marco,did you not do exactly the same by joining HDD as "a discerning critic"?

I am not condoning or otherwise anyone's behaviour.Cant we just drop this now?

Steve Toy

09-01-2010, 22:40

I don't think Marco has been previously banned from HDD.

Marco

09-01-2010, 22:43

I have no wish to fall out with anyone,but in the interests of fairness,Marco,did you not do exactly the same by joining HDD as "a discerning critic"?

No, Ali, I joined there to get the thread locked (and succeeded) because I was unfairly being slagged off with no right of reply. Therefore I was there for a constructive purpose, unlike Dave K's unwanted visit here - that's the difference.

Anyway, we only reopened this thread to expose the troll for what he is. Job done, so thread now (permanently) closed.

Marco.

Spectral Morn

09-01-2010, 22:45

Who is Dave K ? :scratch:
He used to be a member here ?

Dimitri

He was a member here who was un-happy with how the forum was run...he constantly challenged the management and began to stir the forum up against Marco by PMing members etc. Sadly he was given multiple chances and after way to much grief causing he was removed. Frankly he dislikes Marco a lot and even now seeks to wind him up and bad mouth the forum whenever he gets the chance...elsewhere on other forums

As a member who is not allowed to post here...he came back and has been lurking in-active for the most part 33 posts since Oct of last year until recently with this thread.

I became aware of a similarity in Mercury1's writing style, so we launched and investigation to confirm that Mercury 1 was DaveK. After quite a bit of work we proved it and then DaveK admits it on another forum.

We don't allow trouble making ex-members back, if they have been removed..except in rare cases were an apology for past behaviour is given , and then those re-instated members are here on a trial basis only, in the hope they have grown up/wised up and can be productive contributors and not trouble makers.

DaveK was not invited back, nor would he have been, as I said earlier he can't or so it seems move on from AOS, but at any and every opportunity slags AOS and Marco off.

Any one discovered coming back in such away will be outed and removed again.

Regards D S D L