That is sad.:violin:Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis
Printable View
That is sad.:violin:Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis
Very sad indeed....I assume the audio show will also be no more? (I think there is a tie in between the 2) . Maybe the staff could take it on-line...costs are low etc.
Regards D S D L
No, no on-line unfortunately. :( I'm not sure about the show, though.
Well, Hiraga has his own site (http://www.jean-hiraga.com/) but for the other journalists, I don't know how they will do... Time will tell.
I know we all hear things differently but there must be a areas where there will be a general agreement. Sound stage and imaging being two??
I would have thought it a good idea to identify the things that for the most part can be objectively reviewed and the things that will always remain in the eye of the beholder.
In regards the the magazine. Sad truth is the average joe bloggs wants to read the sun and FHM magazine unless, of course you want your almost paranoid suspicions the world is going to the dogs to be confirmed, then you read the Daily Mail.
Your idea is good, Paul.
But I consider that both objectivists and subjectivists would be against : the first because they don't believe in differences, the latter because they don't like following rational ("objective") methods.
Still, that's what we should do. ;)
The trouble with this is that some people refuse to believe imaging has any relevance & some refuse to admit that different image heights are possible.
........but yes, you could get a range of listeners to score each one of your criteria & then the results could be expressed as a series of curves.
But a bell curve is only really useful when you have a large sample rate. You'd need a lot of reviewers to get a meaningful result, otherwise you'd never know whether you were looking at the full but inaccurate curve or a small but very precisely plotted part of it. (ie whether you have a statistically normal sample)
They obviously haven't heard the LEDR (Listening Environment Diagnostic Recording) test! Or if they have then their speakers/layout/listening position can't be very good.Quote:
some refuse to admit that different image heights are possible.
What's wrong with those reviews that tell you how nice and shiny the news toys are and how much it will impress your mates and dates - ala T3 etc. ? :rofl:
This is a superb question,
One which should be addressed at the start of any review article with pictures andf floor plane, this would give the reader a more genuine and realistic idea of the out come and how it would translate to their own enviroment
If the public could see 'where' and 'how' some of these scribes actually listened to equipment it may make you think in no short order.
Mind you, anyone that has had the privilidge of 'listening' to what hifi's two channel reviewing space may think that trailing note body and decay was discovered out side of Teddington :doh: