Problems with moderating/moderators [Archive]

jneutron

06-14-2006, 11:20 AM

With what people say in this forum, then take it to the "Audio Lab" forum.

There will be no more telling people off here.

He did not have a problem with what people say.

A "person" stated that science books tell us that we cannot hear a difference, so that person was asked....what book? Simple.

That person also said that as a result of reading that "science book", the ear/brain interface shuts down. Again, what is the basis for that connection.

This is not a technical discussion, which was the premise for the creation of the "audio lab". It is a simpler one...Science (in a book) was invoked to splain sumptin...begging the question...what book?

I certainly wouldn't cite Roger Russell's "paper, or article, or whatever...I can drive a mack truck through many of the holes in it..

Now a question asked is "having a problem with another?? Haven't the owners of this site learned anything yet?? That attitude has converted this forum from an active one to a wasteland..individual subthreads at AA and DIY have more posts in half an hour than you get here in a week. I would have hoped that the owners would have caught on to the fact that this place has been rendered DEAD by the change in rules. It's been how long?

I take it that should someone post that their cable sounds better because of ...length, plating, stranding, skin effect, grain boundaries, conductivity, resistivity, cryogenic immersion, metals, whatever....that you'll also warn them to take it to the "lab"? After all, they are bringing in "dat techneeekal stuff" to the FFKAAR (forum formerly known as AR.)

Cheers, John

Resident Loser

06-14-2006, 11:34 AM

He did not have a problem with what people say.

A "person" stated that science books tell us that we cannot hear a difference, so that person was asked....what book? Simple.

That person also said that as a result of reading that "science book", the ear/brain interface shuts down. Again, what is the basis for that connection.

This is not a technical discussion, which was the premise for the creation of the "audio lab". It is a simpler one...Science (in a book) was invoked to splain sumptin...begging the question...what book?

I certainly wouldn't cite Roger Russell's "paper, or article, or whatever...I can drive a mack truck through many of the holes in it..

Now a question asked is "having a problem with another?? Haven't the owners of this site learned anything yet?? That attitude has converted this forum from an active one to a wasteland..individual subthreads at AA and DIY have more posts in half an hour than you get here in a week. I would have hoped that the owners would have caught on to the fact that this place has been rendered DEAD by the change in rules. It's been how long?

I take it that should someone post that their cable sounds better because of ...length, plating, stranding, skin effect, grain boundaries, conductivity, resistivity, cryogenic immersion, metals, whatever....that you'll also warn them to take it to the "lab"? After all, they are bringing in "dat techneeekal stuff" to the FFKAAR (forum formerly known as AR.)

Cheers, John

...tee-hee...or was it nyuck, nyuck...

jimHJJ(...but then again, I think wire is wire...Que pasa? hombre...Why you wake me from my siesta in this sleepy border town...Trouble at the mill?...)

Geoffcin

06-14-2006, 12:08 PM

Now a question asked is "having a problem with another?? Haven't the owners of this site learned anything yet?? That attitude has converted this forum from an active one to a wasteland..individual subthreads at AA and DIY have more posts in half an hour than you get here in a week. I would have hoped that the owners would have caught on to the fact that this place has been rendered DEAD by the change in rules. It's been how long?

I take it that should someone post that their cable sounds better because of ...length, plating, stranding, skin effect, grain boundaries, conductivity, resistivity, cryogenic immersion, metals, whatever....that you'll also warn them to take it to the "lab"? After all, they are bringing in "dat techneeekal stuff" to the FFKAAR (forum formerly known as AR.)

Cheers, John

This isn't the forum for debate on the science of cable mechanics, as you well know. If you read the title of the thread, you will see that it is the "What do you use" thread.

Want to talk technical? By all means take it to the Lab.

I'm sorry but AR is not going to be the flame-fest that it used to be. If you want that kind of fun your going to have to go somewhere else.

jneutron

06-14-2006, 01:15 PM

This isn't the forum for debate on the science of cable mechanics, as you well know. If you read the title of the thread, you will see that it is the "What do you use" thread. .
I did not say it was.

I said that someone invoked a science book as proof of something, begging the question, what book.

Want to talk technical? By all means take it to the Lab..

I do not enjoy talking to myself.

I'm sorry but AR is not going to be the flame-fest that it used to be. If you want that kind of fun your going to have to go somewhere else.

There were no flames for you to douse. A simple question was asked. Your response was inappropriate to the discussion at hand.

I am not "hot under the collar". I simply pointed out your overboard reaction..no more, no less.

I expect moderation here to be one of .....moderating..

Not censure.

Cheers, John

Geoffcin

06-14-2006, 02:02 PM

I did not say it was.

I said that someone invoked a science book as proof of something, begging the question, what book.

I do not enjoy talking to myself.

There were no flames for you to douse. A simple question was asked. Your response was inappropriate to the discussion at hand.

I am not "hot under the collar". I simply pointed out your overboard reaction..no more, no less.

I expect moderation here to be one of .....moderating..

Not censure.

Cheers, John

Deleting the posts would have been, or even moving it to the Audio Lab, where you have so kindly pointed out is a dead zone. Nobody post was censured, and the thread continues unaffected.

The only thing different now is that people know that it's a moderated forum.

jneutron

06-15-2006, 05:13 AM

Deleting the posts would have been, or even moving it to the Audio Lab, where you have so kindly pointed out is a dead zone. Nobody post was censured, and the thread continues unaffected.

The only thing different now is that people know that it's a moderated forum.

Censure also comes in the form of telling others to take a specific topic elsewhere, which is what you have done.. The essence of good moderation requires good decisions on when to act, based on rules of engagement set up for the moderators.

If you are going to allow people on one side of the fence to invoke "science", but then not allow people on the other side of the fence to ask for specifics, that is not moderation...it is censure.

I believe it is in the better interest of this forum, and the members, for all discussion to be allowed, not castrated by the removal of one hand in the clapping equation.

This is, of course, the decision of the owners. However, their last decision made this forum the wasteland it currently is. I lament the loss of active dialogue here.

I also dislike flamefests, and reserve engaging in them as a last resort. They rarely bear fruit.

Examine diyaudio for good moderation. Examine here and AA for bad. (Note, I do not specifically blame the moderators for the shortcomings, most of them are following the rules laid out for them.

Cheers, John

Geoffcin

06-15-2006, 06:34 AM

Censure also comes in the form of telling others to take a specific topic elsewhere, which is what you have done.. The essence of good moderation requires good decisions on when to act, based on rules of engagement set up for the moderators.

If you are going to allow people on one side of the fence to invoke "science", but then not allow people on the other side of the fence to ask for specifics, that is not moderation...it is censure.

I believe it is in the better interest of this forum, and the members, for all discussion to be allowed, not castrated by the removal of one hand in the clapping equation.

This is, of course, the decision of the owners. However, their last decision made this forum the wasteland it currently is. I lament the loss of active dialogue here.

I also dislike flamefests, and reserve engaging in them as a last resort. They rarely bear fruit.

Examine diyaudio for good moderation. Examine here and AA for bad. (Note, I do not specifically blame the moderators for the shortcomings, most of them are following the rules laid out for them.

Cheers, John

Telling people that this is not the appropriate forum for this discussion is central to moderation. Notice I did not invoke my powers to move the thread summarily. That would have been within a moderators right, but I did not do it. I don't see any argument coming from the protagonists, so I don't understand why you've got your knickers in a twist over it.

You accuse me of being one sided? I assure you that is not the case. Anyone is free to post scientific arguments to refute claims in the Audio Lab forum. Which is EXACTLY what I stated. Your idea that the protagonists were "castrated" by my asking them to take it to the appropriate forum is highly ludicrous

You may believe that it's in the best interest of the forums to allow off topic discussions to continue in the forums, but you are not in the majority there. AR members have seen what that can lead to.

I was here during the "old days" AR has become a much better place since moderation.
I take my moderating position here seriously, as do all the other moderators. To claim that we are doing a poor job may be your opinion, but at least we can both agree that flamefests lead nowhere.

Mwalsdor_cscc_edu

06-15-2006, 07:52 AM

jneutron

06-15-2006, 08:04 AM

Telling people that this is not the appropriate forum for this discussion is central to moderation. Notice I did not invoke my powers to move the thread summarily. That would have been within a moderators right, but I did not do it. I don't see any argument coming from the protagonists, so I don't understand why you've got your knickers in a twist over it..
Again, this is not an emotional discussion, please stop attempting to portray it as such.

You accuse me of being one sided? I assure you that is not the case. Anyone is free to post scientific arguments to refute claims in the Audio Lab forum. Which is EXACTLY what I stated. Your idea that the protagonists were "castrated" by my asking them to take it to the appropriate forum is highly ludicrous.
Again, I ask you to read carefully. I accused you of nothing other than following the rules and guidelines that have been set for you by higher powers.

The rules that you are enforcing have hamstrung this forum.

You may believe that it's in the best interest of the forums to allow off topic discussions to continue in the forums, but you are not in the majority there. AR members have seen what that can lead to..
Yes, we have all seen the flamefests. The problem is what has been deemed "off topic". The criteria for that category is different depending on which side of the fence one resides..a pro cable person is allowed to state that science backs a specific concept, while a person who is not pro cable cannot respond by saying the converse without being told to take it to the lab.

I was here during the "old days" AR has become a much better place since moderation..

Sometimes, silence is not better.

I take my moderating position here seriously, as do all the other moderators. To claim that we are doing a poor job may be your opinion, but at least we can both agree that flamefests lead nowhere.

You are still attempting to introduce emotionalism into the argument. How many times will it be necessary for me to say that the rules under which you are working are what I take issue with, not the actual moderators?

Cheers, John

jneutron

06-15-2006, 08:20 AM

Jeeezz, somethings never change. The header reads "Speaker cables - what do you use?" Not "Let's recycle the tired cable debate". If you want to discuss that - fine - start you're own thread and do so in the appropriate forum. Is it that you have a problem with simple directions or that you just don't care? The sound you hear must be that of your voice speaking to itself.

MikE [justify this]

To whom are you addressing this?

My interest in the discussion as it unfolds was with respect to this statement.

""Science books tell them they shouldn't be able to and their ear/brain interface simply shuts down as a result.""

The reason I was interested in this statement, is that I have not encountered a science book that stated that. Nor, have I found a "white paper", a datasheet, an article, or even simple musings, which were accurate enough in content to show that cables cannot make a difference.

In point of fact, the articles that are consistently used as backup for the "cables don't make a diff" posturing are so full of holes in scientific theory, that I no longer bother responding to their invocation..the Roger Russell paper being one of them..some reasonably accurate stuff within it, but lots of errors as well...errors which certainly trash the hypothesis which was attempted by writing the article.

Fred Davis...significant errors.

Steve Lampen...significant errors.

Am I allowed to discuss how botched those articles, which profess "all cables are alike" on this forum? NO. That would be a technical argument, and against the rules being enforced.

Am I allowed to discuss here why I believe cables can make a difference, be they PC's, IC's, or speaker runs? No, again, that would be a technical discussion.

If I were allowed to discuss the shortcomings of the so called "naysayer camp", entirely trashing their conceptually inaccurate proclamations, that would be morally objectionable.

Yes, I could take it to the lab. But I would be alone.

Cheers, John

Geoffcin

06-15-2006, 08:51 AM

Look guys, a new thread where you can complain all you want about us.

Brought to you by your friendly neighborhood moderator!

Geoffcin

06-15-2006, 09:08 AM

Again, this is not an emotional discussion, please stop attempting to portray it as such.

Again, I ask you to read carefully. I accused you of nothing other than following the rules and guidelines that have been set for you by higher powers.

The rules that you are enforcing have hamstrung this forum.

Yes, we have all seen the flamefests. The problem is what has been deemed "off topic". The criteria for that category is different depending on which side of the fence one resides..a pro cable person is allowed to state that science backs a specific concept, while a person who is not pro cable cannot respond by saying the converse without being told to take it to the lab.

Sometimes, silence is not better.

You are still attempting to introduce emotionalism into the argument. How many times will it be necessary for me to say that the rules under which you are working are what I take issue with, not the actual moderators?

Cheers, John

Your posts read otherwise. You've accused me of being a "bad" moderator, and that the rules that the AR Forums are run by are poorly chosen.

I disagree.

The rules have not "hamstrung" anyone here. Far from it, they have allowed people to ask questions without the fear of being ridiculed. AR is a much better place because of it.

jneutron

06-16-2006, 05:44 AM

Your posts read otherwise. You've accused me of being a "bad" moderator, and that the rules that the AR Forums are run by are poorly chosen..

Is it possible that you have a reading comprehension issue??? (hey, I hadta flame someone, now didn't I?);) After all, you are expecting some from me, I'm just soooo hot under the collar..:devil:

I have said, in time sequence, the following:

1. (Note, I do not specifically blame the moderators for the shortcomings, most of them are following the rules laid out for them.

and

2.How many times will it be necessary for me to say that the rules under which you are working are what I take issue with, not the actual moderators?

Nowhere have I accused you of being a bad moderator.. Please desist in your inaccurate statements to the contrary.

The rules have not "hamstrung" anyone here. Far from it, they have allowed people to ask questions without the fear of being ridiculed. AR is a much better place because of it.
No, but it is certainly a quieter one. If you definition of better is a forum which has on the primary page, last posts dating back a calendar year, then it is indeed a better forum.

At diy and AA, you have to click on "previous page" to find posts that are a week old, sometimes a day old..

That used to be the case here. No longer. I blame the excessive swing in moderation rules for that plunge in dialogue, and explained the danger of swinging so far.

It is unfortunate that my expectation of the results was so dead on.

Cheers, John

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 07:43 AM

FWIW,

I actually agree with the points Jneutron is making - way back when the Eric came on and the new rules were made, rather than sending everything to an audio lab, they should have forced people who want to avoid issues of science to post in a science-free forum or DBT-free forum or something rather than forcing censorship and limiting posts to the Audio Lab. The Audio Lab has been a huge bust for the most part - and more harm was done than good. The flame wars got to be stupid, but that's where moderation should have come in, closing threads, redirecting threads to the original subject if they were too OT, or doing as Geoffcin does - moving OT posts to new threads altogether.

If we were to take a snapshot of 50 random threads here, I'm pretty sure at least half of them would go quite off topic somewhere between the first and last post without a moderator getting involved - and the moderators themselves have contributed to this from time to time. And that's a good thing - some of the best discussions/conversations occur that way. At the very worst, it just takes up a bit of cyberspace. I've never had a problem taking a few microseconds to scan a post and then skipping it once I realized it wasn't what I was looking for.

Going off topic with good intention (as opposed to just going OT for the sake of starting a flame war) isn't always a bad thing - if it gets too disruptive, moderate it. With moderation. Moderately. There were a few DBT trolls who seemingly invoked the DBT argument in every thread - let them post their thoughts once - if they continue, open a new thread for them. If someone replied to their opinion in a manner that would create an OT discussion- move the reply to the new thread. That's the point it goes OT. What's the worst thing that could happen.

As I recall, the vast majority of users were neither for nor opposed to threads going OT a bit - they were mostly indifferent, not even recognizing a problem existed.

While I appreciate the need for better moderation than what we had, I always felt the site went a bit too far. Too bad a lot of the regulars just decided to quit for whatever reason. I for one do believe the ar.com was a bit better off having more people and more different opinions with the odd flame war, than the alternative - and a different approach could have been, and still should be taken.

Not going to lose any sleep over it - and I'm certainly not going to leave, but in my experience the new rules have been enforced rather selectively, and really does seem that one group was targeted a bit unfairly. I believe I have personally taken threads off topic dozens of times, and no action has ever been taken against me. Just seems a bit odd.

Just my opinion, FWIW...But I don't make the rules.

Geoffcin

06-16-2006, 09:03 AM

jneutron

06-16-2006, 09:29 AM

I haven't deleted a thread, or suspended a member in a coons age. Mostly I wipe out spam, occasionally move threads so that they make better sense (and get more replies)
and on the rarest of occasions tell someone to play nice. The way this has been posted you would have thought that I was deleting posts on some mad streak, hell bent to purge AR of any vestage of the former raucous times.

IT JUST AIN'T SO!

Nobody has accused you of untoward behaviour. Please stop, you are stuck in a defense "loop".

What this forum has done is this:

Poster A: The reason (some sound) occurs is that science has proven that (some piece of garbage) is causing this..

Poster B: Please provide us a source of this science.

Moderator,( according to the rules now in place:)

Poster B, "take it to the lab".

Result: An unsupported statement is allowed to remain in place, while anyone with any knowledge, or understanding of the science being discussed, is censured.

So, If a silly, inaccurate, made up "scientific explanation" is provided on cables, the only recourse for discussion of that "scientific explanation", is to start a new thread, in a different forum..where it will not be seen.

Hmmm.

That is directed censure.

It also prevents ME from countering any "cables can't make a difference" posts, as I can easily point out the irregularities in the vast majority of the anti cable tech talk rebuttals. But even though my statements (while technical) are in direct support of the desires of the members you wish to shield, I technically, am not allowed to post them.

Cheers, John

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 09:32 AM

I should have clarified...I don't think there's a moderator issue, just a policy issue.
The moderating's actually been pretty good near as I can tell - busting foul language, exposing that wanker Lexmark, killing spammers...and ironically it's been my experience that the moderating leans more to the policy I wish ar.com had rather than the policy I believe was put in place - so I ain't referring to moderating.

I know I've personally held back from posting some alternative opinions of a more scientific and skeptical nature just out of fear they'd be moved to Audio Lab. I wouldn't mind reading more replies of that nature to balance with the stuff we have now, is all...

Just as an independant observer to this thread, jneutron is coming across as sincere that his beef isn't with any of the mods, but the rules/policy they have to work with.

Let's be honest, his OT trip was a walk in the park compared to some of the excursions Sir T has been involved in :D

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 09:42 AM

What this forum has done is this:

Poster A: The reason (some sound) occurs is that science has proven that (some piece of garbage) is causing this..

Poster B: Please provide us a source of this science.

Moderator,( according to the rules now in place:)

Poster B, "take it to the lab".

Result: An unsupported statement is allowed to remain in place, while anyone with any knowledge, or understanding of the science being discussed, is censured.

Taken a step further:
Poser A: makes a claim that the Pioneer VSX-1015TX receiver comes with 3 HDMI inputs,
Poster B: wants to dispute this claim - they're permitted to do so.
Poster B: Could ask for a link or a "source" verifying Poster A's claim without being moved to another forum
Result: the proper information has a better chance of being reported in the forum.

For matters of technical/scientific truth, the standing policy dictates members are not permitted to behave in the same fashion...the policy seems inconsistent, if not biased.

Geoffcin

06-16-2006, 10:08 AM

jneutron

06-16-2006, 10:36 AM

You want to debate DBX on cables, refute the claim that tube amps are any good at following a waveform. Want smack each other in the head with white papers & abstracts? then there's a forum JUST for that, the Audio Lab!!
The audio lab was created as a place to send those who dare ask embarrassing questions as to the validity of an explanation that is without merit.

Science reigns supreme in there, and you can gloat over the corpses of the fallen theorists all you want without fear of being told to play nice.!

Reigns supreme..hmmm...when was there last a post there?

Need even more blood? Take it to the Steel Cage, where you can beat your opponents over the head with spectrum analizers and osiliscopes. .

It would appear from your words, that all you want to do is demonize anybody who wishes to provide a post of any technical merit. There are no demons from without..

Isn't AR wonderful!

That depends on one's definition of wonderful. Is it wonderful being the moderator of a forum which has about three active members?

Moderation can be used to provide a wonderful environment for spirited and engaging dialogue. That is not the case at ar cables. How long will it be until the lack of discussion within the forum is determined to be the result of the rules imposed on it?

At some point, the owners will have to admit that perhaps, the response to the problem of flamefests was worse than the disease..and yes, the excessive flamefests were indeed a disease. That is why I pointed to diyaudio as an example of moderation which does not practice one sided censureship, but does seem to enjoy lots and lots of dialogue without aninmosity destroying the forum.

The descriptors you choose (smack..gloat, corpses, fallen, fear, blood, beat), and your unwarranted defensive posturing do not put you in a very good light. Clearly illogical by nature.

Cheers, John

ericl

06-16-2006, 10:37 AM

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 10:38 AM

You want to debate DBX on cables, refute the claim that tube amps are any good at following a waveform. Want smack each other in the head with white papers & abstracts? then there's a forum JUST for that, the Audio Lab!

Science reigns supreme in there, and you can gloat over the corpses of the fallen theorists all you want without fear of being told to play nice.

Need even more blood? Take it to the Steel Cage, where you can beat your opponents over the head with spectrum analizers and osiliscopes.

Isn't AR wonderful!

There are instances where taking it to the Audio Lab or Steel Cage is defeats the purpose and just isn't good enough! Geoff, if you wanted to post an explanation to a newb's question about a particular receiver's power capability into certain speakers of different impedances, we wouldn't ask you to take it to the Audio Lab - you should do so right in the immediate thread. And as you know, most threads tend to continue with follow-up questions, discussion, the inevitable corrections, differences of opinion (provided they remain respectful) etc, the logical and best place for any replies is in that same thread, not in some other forum.

When I look for replies to my post, I certainly don't look for them in other forums, and I'm pretty sure you don't either.

So redirecting the posters to the Audio Lab is just terribly insufficient. All it does is limit the subject matter in existing threads - you can call it censorship if you want - IMO that's an abuse of the word - but it's a pain in the ass if nothing else.

I agree - if the original topic of the post is to debate cable DBT's nuances etc, it should be posted in the Audio Lab. But so, too, should every thread that contains any question or explanation of a technical or scientific nature. And so, too, should every thread that POTENTIALLY COULD contian questions, explanations, and discussion of a scientific nature so that the thread is allowed to naturally evolve, respectfully and without turning into a flame war, in order to ensure that every opportunity to provide responses from any perspective is provided.

How many explanations of watts, ohms, decibels, digital cables, frequency response, harmonic distortion, etc do we see in a year? If the site's authorities are prepared to ensure that all of these threads are redirected to the Audio Lab, to perfection, then anyone who posts something invoking science in the other forums deserves what they get. But if a thread isn't redirected by the moderators, they shouldn't have to wait indefinitely - let them post. Nobody's going to get hurt.

For example, it's very possible that 2 people will discuss the merits of a few amps - one a tight measuring Adcom with super low THD and high wattage, the other a less lab test impressive Krell of similar size, wattage, but higher THD. Someone might want to know why the Adcom measures better but sounds worse and doesn't play as loudly. What are we to respond? "Please see my post in the Audio Lab on this very subject?" Or "Magic pixie dust"? Or can we go further into explaining two diverging theories about the importance or insignificance of THD without fear of being asked to go to the Audio Lab. When do we cross the line? I dont' think that's ever been clearly defined or explained, and for the most part, I think the whole notion of keeping certain topics in the Audio Lab has been ignored (and I'm quite OK with that)

Am I allowed to make a claim that such and such white paper says this without being redirected? Sir T (a moderator) seems permitted to discuss the Toole White Papers wherever and whenever he pleases...he'll post links, challenge people's claims that contradict the papers, etc. And rightfully so. I trust the example he provides.

I really don't think this is a problem 99% of the time, but that 1% of the time it just seems what we say and what we do are two different things. This is one of those times.

ericl

06-16-2006, 10:51 AM

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 10:51 AM

sorry, but you guys know full well why i created the lab.. People were just trying to talk about what cable or receiver to buy and idiots like mtry are coming and saying "prove your claim that this sounds better than that" when this is a HOBBY, based on SUBJECTIVE experience.
Fair enough. And I can assure you for many of us the hobby relies heavily on science to explain the subjective experience. We also use it to cut through the BS.
It's a bit inconsistent when we'll use science against BOSE and everyone cheers, but if we use it against planar speakers or SET amps or cables we get flack.
In my experience, the science has been excellent at explaining why I like something or why I don't. I don't think you are forced to choose between one or the other.

DBTer's were just beating everyone over the head with the words "prove it" and it was obnoxious and childish. and really, it wasn't even the cable/dbt debate, i honestly don't care either way about it. It was the fact that many of those pushing that line were obnoxious little children, and bullies to those just trying to have FUN with their HOBBY. If people could have carried on these discussions with a bit of CIVILITY we would not be in this position.
I don't miss some of the nut-bar bullies that were here, but that was a people problem, not a policy problem. As jneutron pointed out, diyaudio.com does quite well at allowing "both camps" to co-exist. The forums at Partsexpress.com are another excellent example. Nobody's subjective experience is criticized, and people remain friendly. That's the key - if someone starts acting up, the moderators do their job and send him packing. Seems to work.

When I came in, everyone started crying about the rules and censorship, but all i really did was introduce some moderation (and contrary to claims that this forum is now "dead" it's getting more traffic now than in years). The little schoolyard bullies (who'd already been banned from many other sites) didn't rule the playground anymore, so they took their balls and went home.
Yeah, Skeptic was a loser, wasn't he?

The Audio Lab was meant for more advanced and heated discussion. it's not a "ghetto", it's just a forum like the rest of them. I don't know why it's so horrible to carry on conversations there.

Not horrible, just terribly inconvenient - Eric, you've got the stats - what's the ratio of New Threads-to-Replies. I'll bet my membership here we get at least 2 replies for every one new thread on average - and I suspect it's much higher!!!! What more obvious example of the inconvenience of being required to post anything scientific in the Audio Lab could you need? It's counter-productive - well, that is, the rare time it seems to be enforced...

I was one person that played the wait and see game when you came here. To be very honest, not much has changed in practice, just in policy. Otherwise I'm sure I'd have been redirected to the AL 2000 times by now. :D

So that begs the question...why the policy then?

ericl

06-16-2006, 10:56 AM

So that begs the question...why the policy then?

we can change it.. I really didn't know it was still such a sore spot until this thread came up. Generally I don't read the cables OR audio lab forums at all, i find them terribly boring. You're right it is a people issue not a policy/discussion topic issue. People are much better now..

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 11:03 AM

Discussions where scientific stuff comes up is fine, the rules are really just guidelines, and I am not opposed to changing the rules.

I just don't want people beating newbies over the head with science whenever someone says: "what should i buy" or "i liked brand x better than y"

This was my understanding...that's cool...and I agree, newbies shouldn't be bombarded with "all receivers sound the same until proven differently under DBT" by 37 replies. But at the same time, what's the harm in allowing someone to say "listen for yourself, there are scientific studies that suggest XXXXXx....you decide"?

I could be wrong, but I always suspected we had a people problem before, not a subject matter problem. A few internet-tough guys have long since left the site and things seem to be running very well for the most part. I'm sure if the rule was changed and those people came back, Geoff, Sir T, E-Stat, or yourself would put those people in their place or just ban them outright. Problem solved. We have good moderators now - we didn't before.

It's really no different than sports - your policies don't have to pick favorite sides - just call it down the middle - if a post goes off -topic and a "sub-debate" is created, move the corresponding individuals to the Steel Cage. I trust the good judgement of our modertors here.

Like I said...for the most part this is a non-issue to me, and I'll admit a part of the reason I'm posting today is because this is the most exciting thread I've seen in days, but I think some good can come from it.

Thanks for chiming in Eric.

Geoffcin

06-16-2006, 11:07 AM

ericl

06-16-2006, 11:09 AM

Yeah, Skeptic was a loser, wasn't he?

After my first spat with skeptic, he proceeded to call and email every number and address he could find in my company and our parent company, and ***** and moan about me. He was threatening, begging for them to fire me. I had just started. Great guy he was.

Funny part is, before i came along they wanted to give the job to ToddB, who wanted to come in and wholesale ban all dbt along with half of the members on the site. He was bloodthirsty. He left in a huff because I wouldn't delete threads or ban members he didn't like.

jneutron

06-16-2006, 11:12 AM

.- you can call it censorship if you want - IMO that's an abuse of the word - but it's a pain in the ass if nothing else..

I called it that simply because that is the only word I could think of to describe what I thought it was..duhh...:confused5:

I agree that is not a nice concept, but had no better descriptor that was less drastic. "Limiting subject matter" does have a better ring to it, although it takes longer to type, and the chances of me spelling it incorrectly is less..

You've been a pleasure, Kex..I have not been here much, so I forget.....are we supposed to be on the same side of the fence, or the opposite??

Bah, nevermind..it doesn't matter, does it..:cornut:

Cheers, John

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 11:13 AM

we can change it.. I really didn't know it was still such a sore spot until this thread came up. Generally I don't read the cables OR audio lab forums at all, i find them terribly boring. You're right it is a people issue not a policy/discussion topic issue. People are much better now..

The policy hasn't really been a sore spot because the moderators have been really cool and letting things go - or in Sir T's case, taking as well as he gives. :D
I didn't really want to bring it up before now because things were running pretty well. So it's a bit funny when people say they can't say this or can't say that and complain about censorship - chances are if they just said it, they'd get away with it.

In the case of FLZapped asking for a source - he didn't seem too harsh. If he was badmouthing another person, he should be reprimanded for his tone, not his asking for scientific evidence.

People like E-Stat, jneutron, Hifi Tommy, Bernd, Geoffcin, and even Florian are more than capable of defending the subjective side with science - I do what I can. I don't think anyone will be bullied. If they are, there's enough vocal regulars now that they shouldn't get far.

I dunno, if people can remain respectful I think differences of opinion will be tolerated. There's those of us with the "I'm better than you" attitude that escalate some discussions to levels of intensity that might not be desireable, but we'll always have that. If everyone was always nice, we wouldn't need moderators.
:D

Geoffcin

06-16-2006, 11:16 AM

After my first spat with skeptic, he proceeded to call and email every number and address he could find in my company and our parent company, and ***** and moan about me. He was threatening, begging for them to fire me. I had just started. Great guy he was.

Funny part is, before i came along they wanted to give the job to ToddB, who wanted to come in and wholesale ban all dbt along with half of the members on the site. He was bloodthirsty. He left in a huff because I wouldn't delete threads or ban members he didn't like.

This place would have been a wasteland if he would have been given reign. How lucky we are we got you instead!

kexodusc

06-16-2006, 11:17 AM

You've been a pleasure, Kex..I have not been here much, so I forget.....are we supposed to be on the same side of the fence, or the opposite??

Bah, nevermind..it doesn't matter, does it..:cornut:

Well, the DIY speaker buildin' hobbyist in me just wants to learn enuff' of that fangled science stuff to understand why my ears like certain things and why they don't.

I really believe the metrics don't lie. I do believe we use the wrong metrics (or interpret them poorly) sometimes, but that science can explain it all.

I still don't know if I hear differences in cables. I can't afford the ones that I think I do hear differences with :D

I definitely hear a difference in resistors and capacitors, though, so I think there's still much more work to be done in the great cable debate - if people would just put their emotions aside and let people like you work, we might get somewhere.

Cheers!

jneutron

06-16-2006, 11:22 AM

[quote=ericl]Discussions where scientific stuff comes up is fine, the rules are really just guidelines, and I am not opposed to changing the rules. [quote]

That is all I can ask for.

That is why I posted in response to Geoffcin's origional post towards FLzapped. I wanted to say my piece regarding what I consider to be the inadequacy of the current policy, and discussion of the possibility of changing it to what I believe to be better.

While remaining vigilant against the disruptors, of course.

Cheers, John

KaiWinters

06-16-2006, 08:23 PM

kexodusc

06-17-2006, 03:38 AM

Having been a forum moderator for years on a different genre site I am generally supportive and sympathetic towards the mods.
Also after reading some of these posts I am quite glad to no longer have to deal with it. What you are reading here is but the merest tip of the iceberg that mods have to deal with.
No kidding - while this is only an internet forum, and we've all got more important things to worry about, we should thank these guys for doing the job they do more often. It does make the experience a bit better, and I'm sure Geoff and the guys have much more interesting things they could be doing with their time.
I hope they do get some sort of satisfaction out of it - must be a pretty thankless job most of the time.

Geoffcin

06-17-2006, 05:02 AM

No kidding - while this is only an internet forum, and we've all got more important things to worry about, we should thank these guys for doing the job they do more often. It does make the experience a bit better, and I'm sure Geoff and the guys have much more interesting things they could be doing with their time.
I hope they do get some sort of satisfaction out of it - must be a pretty thankless job most of the time.

I'm involved with all of my hobbies to a greater degree than you would say the average person is. For me they are more enjoyable that way. I'm sure you know what I mean.

Mwalsdor_cscc_edu

06-17-2006, 06:55 AM

The issue at hand is that of the purpose of the typical Objectivist reply post. The example given by kexodusc concerned a simple correction of information [regardless of the poster's audio philosopy]. The purpose wasn't to correct THEM but the info provided. The example by jneutron instead uses that opportunity not so much to correct the info but refute the philosophy of the individual [or school of]. Their purpose isn't to provide data for any individuals asking [or not asking], their primary purpose is to condemn an opposing POV. That is the reason the "Audio Lab" was established.

I joined Audio Review in the Fall of '97 and argued with the vocal Objectivists [mtrycrafts and eyespy, etc...] back then this very point. That rarely will you find them initiating posts to share information with anyone, instead they choose to hi-jack threads to satisfy their agenda. That was my principal issue with them: their dogmatic ideology and the [poor] manner they employed. And that rarely will you find fellow Objectivists conversing with themselves [unless to gang up on others or congratulate themselves] instead they only post to refute so-called "claims". And I predicted back then that if they ever established a technical forum for this type of discussion that it would be a wasteland because they don't want an open forum to share ideas with like-minded individuals. No, they want to use every other open forum to confront and bash those that dare disagree with them. All in the name of "public service". That is the difference.

And the Audio Lab has only supported my case. They refuse willingly to go there to share info, because that is not their will. They instead continue [as always] to seek out people with an opposing opinion. This aggressive and confrontational attitude is why they've been sent to what amounts to an adult "time out". OTOH, show examples of where Subjectivists exhibit like behavior toward Objectivists. Seek them out to combat their POV. They have no interest in this, they only wish to share information with like-minded enthusiasts. Not spend their lives supporting their opinions. If everyone would "play nice" there wouldn't be a need to seperate them. That it would be possible to learn from one another but that doesn't seem likely here. So, now don't complain about the situation you find yourselves. You would think that most groups would embrace a forum to discuss what they believe in. The fact that the Objectivists don't even support "their" forum only highlights the transparency of their motives.

MikE

kexodusc

06-17-2006, 07:40 AM

OTOH, show examples of where Subjectivists exhibit like behavior toward Objectivists. Seek them out to combat their POV. They have no interest in this, they only wish to share information with like-minded enthusiasts. Not spend their lives supporting their opinions. If everyone would "play nice" there wouldn't be a need to seperate them. That it would be possible to learn from one another but that doesn't seem likely here. So, now don't complain about the situation you find yourselves. You would think that most groups would embrace a forum to discuss what they believe in. The fact that the Objectivists don't even support "their" forum only highlights the transparency of their motives.

MikE

One doesn't have to look very far or very hard to find the examples of subjectivist behavior you're looking for..
In fact, I find them even more annoying than the objectivists. There's a huge group of subjectivists who religiously preach the virtues of whatever gear they like - RGA and Audio Note, Florian and Apogee, the tired Yamaha/Denon battles, the Paradigm camp, the list goes on and on. If you want examples, just open your eyes. It's a broken record. There's a few members here that I laugh at when I see they've replied to a post - I can predict without fail what they'll say.

When a subjectivist takes every opportunity he can to promote his favorite gear, it's just sharing opinion, an objectivist promotes his belief and you condemn him.
While I agree, the Mtrycrafts of the world seem to exist for the sole purpose of replying to threads and starting debate on the same old topic, there are those who can exist in both camps at the same time. I still believe we're better off dealing with the people issues, and allowing all points of view to be made, considered, and discussed.
If a new mtrycraft emerges, it'll be obvious really quick, and should be easy to deal with. Besides, did anyone really pay much attention to him anyway?

Geoffcin

06-17-2006, 07:45 AM

And the Audio Lab has only supported my case. They refuse willingly to go there to share info, because that is not their will. They instead continue [as always] to seek out people with an opposing opinion. This aggressive and confrontational attitude is why they've been sent to what amounts to an adult "time out". OTOH, show examples of where Subjectivists exhibit like behavior toward Objectivists. Seek them out to combat their POV. They have no interest in this, they only wish to share information with like-minded enthusiasts. Not spend their lives supporting their opinions. If everyone would "play nice" there wouldn't be a need to seperate them. That it would be possible to learn from one another but that doesn't seem likely here. So, now don't complain about the situation you find yourselves. You would think that most groups would embrace a forum to discuss what they believe in. The fact that the Objectivists don't even support "their" forum only highlights the transparency of their motives.

MikE

Why, when people like are given a forum to debate the issues that they hold so dear, do they refuse to the point of death (or literary castration as JNeutron has said) ever using it! It seems that the issues are not so dear to them at all. It's the ability to hammer down the opposition, and twist the forums for their own purposes that is the REAL driving force for them. Confrontation is it's own reward for people of this mindset.

Geoffcin

06-17-2006, 07:58 AM

One doesn't have to look very far or very hard to find the examples of subjectivist behavior you're looking for..
In fact, I find them even more annoying than the objectivists. There's a huge group of subjectivists who religiously preach the virtues of whatever gear they like - RGA and Audio Note, Florian and Apogee, the tired Yamaha/Denon battles, the Paradigm camp, the list goes on and on. If you want examples, just open your eyes. It's a broken record. There's a few members here that I laugh at when I see they've replied to a post - I can predict without fail what they'll say.

When a subjectivist takes every opportunity he can to promote his favorite gear, it's just sharing opinion, an objectivist promotes his belief and you condemn him.
While I agree, the Mtrycrafts of the world seem to exist for the sole purpose of replying to threads and starting debate on the same old topic, there are those who can exist in both camps at the same time. I still believe we're better off dealing with the people issues, and allowing all points of view to be made, considered, and discussed.
If a new mtrycraft emerges, it'll be obvious really quick, and should be easy to deal with. Besides, did anyone really pay much attention to him anyway?

We all have our favorite gear, and I've been guilty of recommending it more often than not.
Still, even I sometimes cringe when I see RGA posting (king of the subjectivists) , but what are you going to do? It's obviously just his OPINION, and as such is nothing refutable. But, when someone starts attacking others opinions claiming that he OWNS the truth (objectivists) then we have a problem.

kexodusc

06-17-2006, 08:06 AM

Why, when people like are given a forum to debate the issues that they hold so dear, do they refuse to the point of death (or literary castration as JNeutron has said) ever using it! It seems that the issues are not so dear to them at all. It's the ability to hammer down the opposition, and twist the forums for their own purposes that is the REAL driving force for them. Confrontation is it's own reward for people of this mindset.

That is true for a lot of people. We call these people trolls. They exist in many forms. Some bring up DBT's religiously, some take every opportunity to bash any speaker design that doesn't share the virtues of the speakers they own.
As I mentioned earlier, there are times when their points of view are better kept in the context of the subjects of other forums. I always understood the job of the moderators was to play referee and use their judgement to determine who was trolling and who was just contributing alternative points of view.
Punish the offenders, not, don't restrict the bystanders.

There are trolls on every forum. Don't think that will ever change.

kexodusc

06-17-2006, 08:16 AM

But, when someone starts attacking others opinions claiming that he OWNS the truth (objectivists) then we have a problem.

Half the time I don't even disagree with their opinion of what the truth is...just the way go about presenting their beliefs. Both subjectivists and objectivists are guilty of that. The world needs internet-etiquette classes. I really don't find the claim "all amps sound the same" any worse than "all japanese amps sound analytical (which means bad)".

I get a kick out of the objectivists who butcher the science and keep going as though they know what they're talking about. Or the subjectivists, who will dismiss indisputable fact because they don't understand or just don't like being wrong.

When I do get involved in those arguments, I usually like to join the losing side of the debate - At least that keeps it interesting.

Geoffcin

06-17-2006, 08:25 AM

Half the time I don't even disagree with their opinion of what the truth is...just the way go about presenting their beliefs. Both subjectivists and objectivists are guilty of that. The world needs internet-etiquette classes. I really don't find the claim "all amps sound the same" any worse than "all japanese amps sound analytical (which means bad)".

I get a kick out of the objectivists who butcher the science and keep going as though they know what they're talking about. Or the subjectivists, who will dismiss indisputable fact because they don't understand or just don't like being wrong.

When I do get involved in those arguments, I usually like to join the losing side of the debate - At least that keeps it interesting.

This is the most interesting thread in a while!

Florian

06-17-2006, 01:50 PM

You guys seem to get really stressed about this. I am amazed by that, really!

This is meant in a positive way and i understand some of your points better now.

Cheers

Flo

"all japanese amps sound analytical (which means bad)"

I personally dont consider this bad. Ok, its not my kinda sound but i dont think it is entirely bad.

Geoffcin

06-17-2006, 01:57 PM

You guys seem to get really stressed about this. I am amazed by that, really!

This is meant in a positive way and i understand some of your points better now.

Cheers

Flo

I personally dont consider this bad. Ok, its not my kinda sound but i dont think it is entirely bad.

Who never stresses out over anything. :crazy:

Florian

06-17-2006, 03:53 PM

Who never stresses out over anything. :crazy:

Not much anymore, i get better. I ignore RGA, SH and others and it works well. I have enough friends and think alikes on here to be fine.

:)

Mwalsdor_cscc_edu

06-18-2006, 03:59 AM

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">
One doesn't have to look very far or very hard to find the examples of subjectivist behavior you're looking for... In fact, I find them even more annoying than the objectivists. There's a huge group of subjectivists who religiously preach the virtues of whatever gear they like - RGA and Audio Note, Florian and Apogee, the tired Yamaha/Denon battles, the Paradigm camp, the list goes on and on. If you want examples, just open your eyes. It's a broken record. There's a few members here that I laugh at when I see they've replied to a post - I can predict without fail what they'll say.

When a subjectivist takes every opportunity he can to promote his favorite gear, it's just sharing opinion, an objectivist promotes his belief and you condemn him.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

I don't spend enough time on this forum to comment on the protocol of the individuals you've singled out. My observation dosen't concern the current state of affairs on this forum, or any one individual, but what I've observed over the years on this and other forums. I stand by what I said. I believe it is very infrequent you'll find a Subjectivist posting in a technical forum the merits of their POV and at the same time where do you find Objectivists posting? In the Audio Lab or among themselves? No, you'll find them where you've always found them. Searching out and refuting the Subjectivists. The difference is that one group only wishes to speak amongst themselves and the other only wishes to combat the other. That was the behavior I was speaking about. The example you sight has to do with product preference. The example I sight concerns their philosophy and the manner in which they advertise. I agree that if someone were to continually tout their brand preference [or doctrine] as the one and only and belittle all other brands that would be very annoying and counter productive. My preferences are well-known [if you did a search] but I would never suggest my choices would satisfy everyone. It's only natural for us to want to share the success we've enjoyed and the joy our system allows [or you'd hope with all the time and $$$ invested] but when you continually knock alternative approaches to system-building, component type or label preference that is just "poor form" as the English say.

I've said many times that I do not believe any one system can do everything well. That the current SOTA still requires certain compromises by the system-builder to choose what to embellish. To the unknowing any one of these systems would appear to do it all but there will always be one system that can do something better than another. The key is knowing what you're after and then finding components that best stroke that desire. Ex: My system is flawed. The Silverline speaker / Moth amp partnership is suspect. I replaced a very nice VAC 32wpc push-pull amp with a 3wpc SET amp - driving 93db speakers. Even though the speakers are an EZ load and the SET is quite "ballsy" there are limits to what this combo can do. I can't play "big music" but that isn't my preference. I prefer intimate music and recordings. For my tastes, my system draws me in like no other system I've witnessed long term. Sure, the VAC amp was a better match with the speakers but after two years I found myself spending more time admiring the equipment than the source. For me that is a sin. For someone else maybe not. And the current "mismatch" is going on it's 5th year, and still manages to make me smile whenever I press play.

Florian

06-18-2006, 05:27 AM

kexodusc

06-18-2006, 06:07 AM

Florian

06-18-2006, 06:20 AM

Its not an attack, simple an addition to your "Yesterday, 07:40 AM" post.

One doesn't have to look very far or very hard to find the examples of subjectivist behavior you're looking for..

I personally consider SirT, You and Wooch to be very highly "subjectivists" and feel that you should add yourself to the list instead of pointing fingers to others.

-Flo

kexodusc

06-18-2006, 06:27 AM

Its not an attack, simple an addition to your "Yesterday, 07:40 AM" post.

I personally consider SirT, You and Wooch to be very highly "subjectivists" and feel that you should add yourself to the list instead of pointing fingers to others.

-Flo

Subjectivist how? Why am I being lumped in with Sir T and Woochifer here? Please explain a bit more thoroughly, I wouldn't want to get the wrong idea about what you're trying to say.

Florian

06-18-2006, 06:45 AM

Well i feel that we all are "subjectivists" in one way or the other. I am for ribbons, Wooch is generally for Paradigm boxes, SirT contests all of High End and argues MC with Bernd who is in a totally different leauge then him. E-Stat is generally quiet but is a 2Channel perfectionist, You want to be the next Wooch and recommend Paradigm up to 2K (silly in my opinion). RGA is all Audio Note in every forum on the internet, And Wooch generalises planars all the time etc...Audio_dude is a nice kid and considers him a budget expert which at the age of 14 is a bit premature. He is a nice kid !

I am simply saying that we ALL are "subjectivists" and absolutly noone is correct or better on these forums. Some members are looked up the as the holy grail and all knowing which is simply bogus.

I simply think that some big guys on here lack character, they dont stand for anything and simple agree with most people and encourage them instead of stepping up and sticking to their opinion.

--This is a friendly post

-Flo

PS: Also the moderators dont stick together. For instance, the MMG question was never moved to the planar forum. Even this small move would yield in more diversified traffic in the site and less dead spots. Designate experts in seperate areas, maybe make price ranges....i have many ideas and others do too. I think we should rethink some aspects of the forum and carry together ideas on what to improve if we want to get more traffic and more happy members.

kexodusc

06-18-2006, 07:00 AM

You want to be the next Wooch and recommend Paradigm up to 2K (silly in my opinion).
First, I rarely recommend Paradigms under $2000 anymore, and haven't for awhile now - with the exception fo 2 models that I still find are good for the money.
Second, my wanting to be the Next Wooch has been grossly overexaggerated here. That's a joke - nothing more...I hope you dont' take it seriously. This isn't the first time you've lumped me into the pro-paradigm flag waving crowd. I really don't know what gives you that impression - is it the "the next woochifer" tag?

I am simply saying that we ALL are "subjectivists" and absolutly noone is correct or better on these forums. Some members are looked up the as the holy grail and all knowing which is simply bogus. Yeah, which means you agree with my earlier post "One doesn't have to look very far or very hard to find the examples of subjectivist behavior you're looking for.." Good!
That wasn't a condemnation of the behaviour in itself, we all act like that from time to time, but rather just a means of defending the prior claim against objectivists - they really aren't so different

I simply think that some big guys on here lack character, they dont stand for anything and simple agree with most people and encourage them instead of stepping up and sticking to their opinion.
That's just a goddamn lie and very unfair accussation based on anythihng but substance. Your just bitter because of your prior arguments with the "big guys".

For a friendly post, you sure took a good swing at the character of the big guys - your definition of friendly is radically different from mine.

Florian

06-18-2006, 07:04 AM

That's just a goddamn lie and very unfair accussation based on anythihng but substance. Your just bitter because of your prior arguments with the "big guys".

For a friendly post, you sure took a good swing at the character of the big guys - your definition of friendly is radically different from mine.

Ouch! Someone took that the wrong way!
I dont have problems with the big guys, only when i ask for help and have to wait 5 month for action :ihih:

Check your PM

kexodusc

06-18-2006, 07:16 AM

Ouch! Someone took that the wrong way!
I dont have problems with the big guys, only when i ask for help and have to wait 5 month for action :ihih:

Check your PM

That's between you and them. But if you want to set an example for "standing up", the very thing you accuse them of not doing, you should take it up directly with them, not make off-hand comments on an internet thread somewhere where they aren't provided an opportunity to defend themselves.

Having strong opinions is fine - but being able to present them tactfully and respectfully is a skill everyone should have.

Florian

06-18-2006, 07:24 AM

I tried that in the past, but got no response. This is a free forum, and the ones are definetly capable of adding their comments on this thread. I am beeing named in a few threads and never direct, so after my trial and errors i simply give up. I dont have a problem with them anymore, i simply ignore them. There are enough that agree with me and enough that dont, so that both sides can coexist.

Having strong opinions is fine - but being able to present them tactfully and respectfully is a skill everyone should have.
I tried that in the beginning, but got chocked with endless quotes from webpages, opinions from people with no hands on experiences and a endless beating from those who label everyone a snob with toys they cannot or do not want to afford. After me, Bernd got named a snob as soon as the opposite site had no valid arguments anymore.....and give it time, others will get named too.

jneutron

06-19-2006, 05:54 AM

The issue at hand is that of the purpose of the typical Objectivist reply post. The example given by kexodusc concerned a simple correction of information [regardless of the poster's audio philosopy]. The purpose wasn't to correct THEM but the info provided. The example by jneutron instead uses that opportunity not so much to correct the info but refute the philosophy of the individual [or school of]. Their purpose isn't to provide data for any individuals asking [or not asking], their primary purpose is to condemn an opposing POV. That is the reason the "Audio Lab" was established.
MikE

Stating such hogwash with respect to my motives, while semingly making you happy, does not make it so.

I provide several examples:

1. A subjectivist poster says that by spacing their wires farther apart, the inductance is lowered. This provides some "audible change" which is much better.

The response I would provide... (don't trust what I say here, go to diyaudio, or AA, or AH, to verify that I speak the truth)..

The inductance of a wire pair increases as a result of spacing. Here's a graph showing the actual inductance of a #18 awg wire pair vs spacing. As to how it affects sound, I cannot answer.

2. An OBJECTIVIST poster says that increasing the wire guage increases inductance, thereby (yada yada)

Response: From the Terman equation, the geometric based inductive component is a log of the ratio of wire diameter to wire spacing. For wire geometries that look the same regardless of the scale, the external inductance will remain the same.. I have verified this via calculation and measurement.

3. A subjective poster claims that the velocity of propagation affects the sound (OR, AN OBJECTIVIST CLAIMS IT CANNOT!!!!!)

Response: Actually, it is more interesting. The speed of propagation is determined by the equation (yada yada), which is dependent entirely on the L and C. So, in actuality, the prop speed correlates to the L/C metrics. Whether or not that affects sound, I can't definitely say..However, differential localization certainly brings the possibility into view, as the numbers I'm getting with that fall into the realm of human capability.

If you doubt the information I have provided as examples, I can explain further.

If you doubt that this is how I would post, history is not on your side. You will find at other websites (diy favored mainly because they support jpegs), all this stuff, with graphs, pictures, equational analysis, and DEMEANOR.

This site, by definition of rules, does not allow me to do that within the cable forum.

This site requires I start a new thread, in an entirely different location.

This is good? Over at diyaudio, it works. People can simply ignore my explanations, people can learn, people can discuss.

Here, that is gone...a double edge sword..

What would you have me post at the lab? Lectures? Classes? What?

Heck, I'd fall asleep reading that..

You need to cull out people problems, not cull out content.

Cheers, John

FLZapped

06-19-2006, 08:43 AM

The rules have not "hamstrung" anyone here. Far from it, they have allowed people to ask questions without the fear of being ridiculed.

Really, then why move the thread when a simple question was asked?

In this case, ridicule came in the form of dumping the thread into a well known pigeon hole here. Now called the Audio Lab, which once had a far more sinister name. The stigma lives on regardless of the name change.

Quite frankly, you've just pointed yourself out as a hypocrit.

AR is a much better place because of it.[/QUOTE]

Yes, a forum without any opposing point of view from that of the moderators, whatsoever.

-Bruce

Geoffcin

06-19-2006, 09:03 AM

Really, then why move the thread when a simple question was asked?

In this case, ridicule came in the form of dumping the thread into a well known pigeon hole here. Now called the Audio Lab, which once had a far more sinister name. The stigma lives on regardless of the name change.

Quite frankly, you've just pointed yourself out as a hypocrit.

First of all the thread was NOT dumped anywhere. Go check you facts first.

Yes, a forum without any opposing point of view from that of the moderators, whatsoever.

-Bruce
I'm getting a little tired of people complaining about things that just aren't so. I'm also getting tired of being called names too.
I've never censured/castrated/cannibalized anyone for posting opposing views, especially opposite of my own. I HAVE sent people packing for being trolls & dickheads THOSE are the people that really piss me off.
In case you haven't figured it out yet _I_ started this thread so that JNeutron could air his complaints without hijacking the thread that you were having your argument in, that thread continues unaffected. Does that sound like the work of someone who casually deletes peoples posts?
I've done my best to let you guys air all your complaints, but I draw the line at being called names, or having my rep maligned.

KaiWinters

06-19-2006, 09:17 AM

LOL sorry to laugh Geoffcin, not laughing at you, but even this thread has been hijacked.
It happens all too often but is part of the human equation.
If one were to be hard core all posts not on topic could be removed but what a pain in the ass that would be for the mod and the backlash would be worse than we see now.

To add to the hijacking I am a Paradigm fan because of the sound and how that sound affects my hearing experience but truth be told I have very, very few speakers to compare them to. Perhaps if I had a wider variety of speakers, B+W, etc. to compare/contrast I would choose a different brand but I don't so I chose what sounded best to me, and what I could afford, from the selection available.

jneutron

06-19-2006, 09:21 AM

To add to the hijacking I am a Paradigm fan because.......

If you want to hijack a thread, you have to include the mandatory name calling.

Civil hijacking is not allowed..

Didn't anybody send you a program?? Can't tell the playas without a program..

Cheers, John

FLZapped

06-19-2006, 09:25 AM

First of all the thread was NOT dumped anywhere. Go check you facts first.

I'm getting a little tired of people complaining about things that just aren't so. I'm also getting tired of being called names too.
I've never censured/castrated/cannibalized anyone for posting opposing views, especially opposite of my own. I HAVE sent people packing for being trolls & dickheads THOSE are the people that really piss me off.
In case you haven't figured it out yet _I_ started this thread so that JNeutron could air his complaints without hijacking the thread that you were having your argument in, that thread continues unaffected. Does that sound like the work of someone who casually deletes peoples posts?
I've done my best to let you guys air all your complaints, but I draw the line at being called names, or having my rep maligned.

You're right, my apologies, I mis read something and when I actually found the thread, I couldn't get back here quick enough to edit.....

Again, sorry, my fault.

-Bruce

jneutron

06-19-2006, 09:26 AM

You're right, my apologies, I mis read something and when I actually found the thread, I couldn't get back here quick enough to edit.....

Again, sorry, my fault.

-Bruce

Uh oh...if he posts it a third time, then the middle one has to drop the antimatter at the right time..

John

FLZapped

06-19-2006, 09:30 AM

2. An OBJECTIVIST poster says that increasing the wire guage increases inductance, thereby (yada yada)

Response: From the Terman equation, the geometric based inductive component is a log of the ratio of wire diameter to wire spacing. For wire geometries that look the same regardless of the scale, the external inductance will remain the same.. I have verified this via calculation and measurement.

Cheers, John

Man, that sounds extremely close to the definition for transmission line characterisitic impedance....

-Bruce
(Hi John)

jneutron

06-19-2006, 09:44 AM

Man, that sounds extremely close to the definition for transmission line characterisitic impedance....

-Bruce
(Hi John)

ZL = (L/C)1/2

Vprop = 1/(LC)1/2

Lcoax = length (inches) times 5.08 times 10-9 Ln(d2/d1)

It's all interrelated..

Cheers, John

Edit:...uh oh, am I allowed to post technical equations in this forum, or will it be moved over to the lab?

(Yes, intended to be humorous, however, that is the crux of my point...the information I posted is "not welcome" at cables..or at least, this is how it appears to be presented to us by the rules of moderation.)

Resident Loser

06-19-2006, 10:33 AM

ZL = (L/C)1/2

Vprop = 1/(LC)1/2

Lcoax = length (inches) times 5.08 times 10-9 Ln(d2/d1)

It's all interrelated..

Cheers, John

Edit:...uh oh, am I allowed to post technical equations in this forum, or will it be moved over to the lab?

(Yes, intended to be humorous, however, that is the crux of my point...the information I posted is "not welcome" at cables..or at least, this is how it appears to be presented to us by the rules of moderation.)

...when you get all exponential and subscript-y...

jimHJJ(...I joined the ladder/hammer club last weekend...sorta...double-ended nail claw...luckily I was hit with the flats...ba-da-bing...)

jneutron

06-19-2006, 10:40 AM

...when you get all exponential and subscript-y...

Geeze, ya make it sound so dirty..

jimHJJ(...I joined the ladder/hammer club last weekend...sorta...double-ended nail claw...luckily I was hit with the flats...ba-da-bing...)

No, your kiddin me..I go and tell everybody about that on forum, and there are stoooopid people out there (like you) who didn't learn from the stupidity of other stooopid people (like me)????

Regardless of how stupid you get, just remember, your still not in my league..

I did it twice..

Cheers, John

Geoffcin

06-19-2006, 11:08 AM

You're right, my apologies, I mis read something and when I actually found the thread, I couldn't get back here quick enough to edit.....

Again, sorry, my fault.

-Bruce

I'm really not the "bad moderator" the Jneutron paints me out to be.

jneutron

06-19-2006, 11:16 AM

I'm really not the "bad moderator" the Jneutron paints me out to be.

Now you owe me an apology..

I have stated time and time again, you are following the rules laid out for the forum..

Are you reading challenged??? Are you far more experienced with hammers and ladders than I??

Curious minds want to know..

If you think that I can't reach you through that mouse, you are sadly mistaken..

I consider the rules of the FORUM as silly.....goose.:)

Cheers, John

Geoffcin

06-19-2006, 12:01 PM

Now you owe me an apology..

I have stated time and time again, you are following the rules laid out for the forum..

You can state it "time and time again" but you do not understand them.

Here's a little education for you; The rules are guidelines for the moderators. The action I took was my own choice.

So, by challenging my actions you are calling my judgement flawed. (notice you are not debating with any other moderator)

I do not feel like indexing all your remarks, but words like "overreacting", "censure', and "castration" (if only in a literal way) were all used by you to discribe the actions I took.

Are you reading challenged??? Are you far more experienced with hammers and ladders than I??

Curious minds want to know..

I think it's you that should re-read some of the posts. If you had not spent all your time challenging everything that was written, you would see that I DID get it, and I DID removed my objection to FLZapped's post. FLZapped understood that right away. perhaps he's a bit more on-the-ball than you?

I consider the rules of the FORUM as silly.....goose.:) Cheers, John

And I don't. A simple difference of opinion there.

jneutron

06-19-2006, 12:21 PM

You can state it "time and time again" but you do not understand them..

Umm, them being what? The rules?

Here's a little education for you; The rules are guidelines for the moderators. The action I took was my own choice..

Wow, guess I was asleep in class that day.

So, by challenging my actions you are calling my judgement flawed. (notice you are not debating with any other moderator).

Challenging your actions...sheesh, you with the violent tendencies...

What I have been saying all along, is that you have been following the rules of the forum as laid out by the "higher ups".

In reality, what I HAVE been doing all along, is giving you the benefit of the doubt, allowing you the avenue of escape that you are following the guidelines in your decisions. I have been keeping open an easy "out" for you, regardless of the popularity or lack thereof, of any moderating decisions you choose to make.

Now, you have simply decided to toss out the window, any benefit of the doubt...now you are staking ownership of any and all decisions to quash any discussion regarding actual technical stuff in the cable forum.

You will eventually learn to recognize when others are keeping doors open for you, instead of trying to box you into a corner..maybe not yet, but perhaps in the future.

Stop thinking that I am your enemy. That is a silly attitude..

I am not "debating" any other moderators simply because other moderators have not chosen to use their power to move discussion which they do not like..

I do not feel like indexing all your remarks, but words like "overreacting", "censure', and "castration" (if only in a literal way) were all used by you to discribe the actions I took. .

They were all used to show what the ramifications of enforcement of a one sided discussion is. It is censureship, disguised as protection of a fraction of the population....no more, no less.

I think it's you that should re-read some of the posts. If you had not spent all your time challenging everything that was written, you would see that I DID get it, and I DID removed my objection to FLZapped's post. FLZapped understood that right away. perhaps he's a bit more on-the-ball than you?.

Do you not read your private messages? Did I not commend you for removing your objection to flz's post? Or, was it too convienient to forget that, as it would not support your argument..

It must be noted that you posted the objection, and you moved it once it was pointed out what it looked like. Now you write it out as if it was your idea all along to move it..sheesh..

A simple difference of opinion there.

Differences of opinion are fine..it is a shame you are not allowing that in cables..

Cheers, John

Geoffcin

06-19-2006, 01:16 PM

Stop thinking that I am your enemy. That is a silly attitude..

But I don't hold it against you.

Differences of opinion are fine..it is a shame you are not allowing that in cables..

Cheers, John

Back to square one with this. For the record; debate IS allowed in the cables forum. It's still going on as we speak....

cam

06-19-2006, 02:32 PM

I feel for you Geoffcin, it's like you are running up hill in mashed potatoes, blindfolded, with both arms tied behind your back all while being pelted by bags of $hit. It's a thankless job but somebody has to do it.

bonsaiguitar

06-19-2006, 02:33 PM

Geoffcin

06-19-2006, 06:15 PM

LMAO I would just like to say being new here the rules do seem a bit strict. I posted about I-Pod speakers and Bose was brought up. A moderator told me I was off topic even though several others were also off topic. It's seems to me the REAL problem was that some people, even moderators have a problem with Bose.

If this post belongs somewhere else please let me know because with all the different forums I really don't have a clue.

It wasn't that the moderator (no it wasn't me) didn't like Bose, it was that he thought you were (with your first post I believe) trolling for a "Bose Bashing"

Give the moderator his due though. Once he realized that you were not a troll, he re-instated your post. That's the sign of a decent guy who plays fair. It seemed to work too, as you've stuck around awhile. You must like the place!

bonsaiguitar

06-19-2006, 06:38 PM

It wasn't that the moderator (no it wasn't me) didn't like Bose, it was that he thought you were (with your first post I believe) trolling for a "Bose Bashing"

Give the moderator his due though. Once he realized that you were not a troll, he re-instated your post. That's the sign of a decent guy who plays fair. It seemed to work too, as you've stuck around awhile. You must like the place!

Actaully my first post was removed, then reinstated after I proved myself. I've never had a post removed on a forum let alone one so fast and without reason. Thanks for bringing that up, almost forgot about that.

The other one in question was about I-Pod speakers and the subject of Bose came up. So from what I see here so far if someone asked about eggs your OK talking about them unless you say how you liked them cooked.

I think the forum is OK, but I was looking for another one that allows a little more freedom. As for flamers they can be suspended and weeded out with proper registration.

Mwalsdor_cscc_edu

06-19-2006, 08:41 PM

Geoffcin

06-20-2006, 03:58 AM

But I don't know why you complain about the "rules of engagement" on AR. The admins run the show and if you don't like how they handle it then hang your hat elsewhere. I've done that myself on a few occasions. I've got better things to do than fight them on how they should run their site. Providing them with feedback is one thing but it isn't right to bend the rules just to suit our personal gain or folly.

A well managed public forum should have a place where the members can engage the administration to air their grievances. The moderators/administrators should be flexible in the way they respond to problems, not dogmatic and rigid.

Jneutron, even though I disagree with him on several points, brings up a valid argument, and as such has a right to be heard.

bonsaiguitar

06-20-2006, 04:00 AM

Hey, that's it! Everyone that doesn't like the rules here, just leave. Now we can change the name of this thread to "If you don't like it leave". JK.....LMAO

I think it's great that we have this area to vent. It's kind of a cop out to just say leave when we're all here to discuss and as with anything in life we're not always going to agree with eachother. That's what forums are all about.

My only request would be for the moderators to check out posts before acting and maybe allow a few threads off topic as long as the thread gets back on track.

kexodusc

06-20-2006, 04:46 AM

The sense I got from Eric and Geoff was a willingness to let a few things go as far as discussing science outside the Audio Lab goes, to see how it works out, and deal with any blatant and obvious flamers and thread jackers as they come.
This sounds like the perfect compromise to me. I'm not sure what people can still complain about. If your intentions are good, you have nothing to worry about as far as censorship or restrictions go. If you're just there to call cable buyers foolish and challenge their beliefs for the sake of challenging them, get the @#*$ out!
These guys should be commended for their openness and flexibility. Most forums I visit have a "my way, or the highway" attitude where the admins get so emotionally attached to their suggestions for the forums that any constructive criticism is taken personally and a jihad is ordered.

This thread was great, and aside from a misunderstanding, remained very civil throughout. But maybe it's time we all got back to posting more audio oriented opinions and thoughts.

bonsaiguitar

06-20-2006, 04:57 AM

I can care less what people say about my cables, those huge runs behnid my system running to my speakers look cool. ;)

I agree, this has been pretty open thread and many forums are so locked up with rules and subject bans that it's hard to post about anything other than what the moderators beleive. I don't see that here, and I hope the Bose I-Pod incident was coincidence. Time will tell and I plan to be here as long as you all will have me.

Maybe like 3 or 4 posts off topic could be the rule. It's pretty hard sometimes to stay only to one topic when people are asking for advice. Someone always has a story to tell that my go off a bit but that's part of the fun of being here to me. Other members experiences are amazing in some cases.

jneutron

06-20-2006, 05:06 AM

But I don't hold it against you.....
Hmmm..an enemy, but I don't hold it against you..??

Cryptic, yet, ummm, cryptic..

Back to square one with this. For the record; debate IS allowed in the cables forum. It's still going on as we speak....

I know, I've been following it.

What I have been concerned all along about is your initial action to direct the discussion away from what you wished to avoid. Science was invoked, that should be questioned..Bruce did so very kindly, no flames, so it should have been allowed to continue unhindered. The fact that you removed your remarks in response to my concerns tells us that you listened and reconsidered your actions. That is always a good thing.

I only wish a place where it all can be discussed..

My history here has also been one of speaking against those who say prove it..just look through the archives.

Cheers, John

Geoffcin

06-20-2006, 05:15 AM

The fact that you removed your remarks in response to my concerns tells us that you listened and reconsidered your actions. That is always a good thing.

I only wish a place where it all can be discussed..

My history here has also been one of speaking against those who say prove it..just look through the archives.

Cheers, John

My sense is that you want(ed) a more active forum. On that point we are also on the same side.

jneutron

06-20-2006, 05:34 AM

Even though you were named my post wasn't directed at you personally. As I said, I was speaking more about the behavior I've observed in the last 9 years than any one individual or forum. I was using the example you gave to make a point, it had nothing to do with you as I'm not even familiar with you.
I did not take personal offense. I concur with your viewpoint on previous posting behaviour...I have also cautioned against simply allowing bad behaviour to come back.

But I don't know why you complain about the "rules of engagement" on AR. The admins run the show and if you don't like how they handle it then hang your hat elsewhere. I've done that myself on a few occasions. I've got better things to do than fight them on how they should run their site. Providing them with feedback is one thing but it isn't right to bend the rules just to suit our personal gain or folly.
I did indeed do just that. No whining, no complaining, no showy feet stompin. I just said I'll come back in a coupla months and see how it's going.

I started checking the place out recently, and I see it's a dead zone. Cables is dead, the lab is, ummm, words fail me...nonexistant?

Of the three forums I used to frequent, this one was the best for jpeg support as well as equation support..(course, they don't support full ISO 8859, so greek symbols are out..AA does support it, so I can pop nice format equations there, but no graphics..)

As I have stated all along here on this thread, I have provided feedback. I believe it is time to back off the stance that was taken in the effort to bring this forum back to civility, it was a swing too wide....that of an underdamped feedback, too much.

So, yes I think you should allow those that wish to discuss the merits of cables to do so without pooping on their parade. Just as they shouldn't go running around slamming your beliefs, unsupported claims or what not. Like I said, if you guys want to discuss technical stuff as freely as others talk about the benefits of cables then post in the Audio Lab. If there is no traffic there is that the fault or concern of members that frequent the other 20 or so forums? I think not.
In my entire history at this site, at any site whatsoever, I have not rained on anyone's parade. I do not provide unsupported claims without stating such. I try to keep what I say fully supported, via science, physics, e/m theory, whatever...and if what I state is unsupported, I make it clear that it is such.

The technical information is precisely the reason a cable would provide a benefit. The fact is, there is little correlation between the technical side of cables, and what benefit is indeed realized.

If I wished to discuss pure technical without the benefit of real life emperical evidence, I'd go find a book in the library. But the advancement of cable science requires the emperical. That is why the great divide exists, that is why, after 20 or 30 years, the argument continues. If all you are here to do is keep the argument going, then in that we do not agree.

As I said, "If everyone would "play nice" there wouldn't be a need to seperate them." And the Audio Lab wouldn't even exist. Rules are put in place for those that can't govern themselves.

We concur...if everyone would play nice. That has also been one of my key points..moderation at diy has been successful in that regard, they use different rules to establish and maintain decorum. Banning technical discussion to another forum was not one of them.

The audio lab was established as a place for the unruly to go, unruly being the camp that says "prove it".

It was tried, it failed. As a result, it is dead, cables is on life support. I only asked that the decision be re-visited, perhaps with stronger rules for dealing with the unruly.

Even though you did mention me by name and used my example, I understood your intent. If you choose to believe that I have taken offense to anything you say in support of your position, I will then have to re-think about taking "offense". As is, you've been quite civil while stating your position..

Cheers, John

jneutron

06-20-2006, 05:45 AM

My sense is that you want(ed) a more active forum. On that point we are also on the same side.

We are in full agreement.

The fact that THIS thread exists unmolested, I find very refreshing. My voice of "discontent", which I intended as positive feedback, was not deleted (that would have been easy, and well within the rights of the moderator, you..).

Instead, I find that I am happy with the outcome. Thanks for allowing the discussion.

I am somewhat unhappy however, that one of the most active threads was not about audio, but about the environment of the forum. I do not know if that is due to "rubber-necking", discontent, or drinking anything in the desert. My two cents was intended to help, I hope it does..

Cheers, John

Sir Terrence the Terrible

06-20-2006, 11:09 AM

Sir Terrence the Terrible

06-20-2006, 11:55 AM

Well i feel that we all are "subjectivists" in one way or the other. I am for ribbons, Wooch is generally for Paradigm boxes, SirT contests all of High End and argues MC with Bernd who is in a totally different leauge then him.

No Florian, I do not contest all of high end, I contest the notion that price equal performance. You and Bernd seem to have it in your head that if you don't pay 20k for speakers, they are not good. You specifically argue that all box speakers sound boxy and colored, which not only is a lie (you haven't heard every box speaker and certainly not mine) but is not supported by objective measurements at any level. I have also read statements of yours that state that all horn loaded speakers are colored, have you actually heard ALL horn loaded speakers? I don't think so, especially not mine since they are not a mass market speaker set. You expouse the virtures of ribbon and planar speakers as if they were the perfect design, they in fact are not, and there has been no listening studies that confirm your belief.

Nobody is in a different league than anyone. We are all equals here with varying degrees of knowledge. If you are going to attempt to size up ones opinions, look at them all, not one opinion in one isolated thread. I own two sets of speakers that one can consider are high end. A 5.1 set of Aerial Acoustics speakers, and 5 Dunlavy SCV and two of their accompanying subwoofers. If I was so against high end, why in the hell would I spend what would be considered the price of a Mercedes to own them? Because they were worth every penny. I have not heard a pair of speakers that cost 20k a piece that were actually worth that. Speakers that cost this much for a pair are statement pieces ONLY. When you reach a certain price point, you experience diminshing returns. I have spent 10K on a digital processor for my studio, was it worth it? You're damn right it is. I will spend the money when the performance equals the price.

I have grown up and wisened up. No more bragging about how much I spent on my rig just for the sake of being able to say I have the money. No more spending outrageous amounts of money for stuff that just isn't worth the price just to brag about it. That is childish, stupid, immature, and infantile. When you understand this, you will grow up too.

I simply think that some big guys on here lack character, they dont stand for anything and simple agree with most people and encourage them instead of stepping up and sticking to their opinion.

--This is a friendly post

-Flo

Rather than pointing fingers you could add yourself to that list.

Sir Terrence the Terrible

06-20-2006, 12:14 PM

jneutron

06-21-2006, 08:57 AM

My personal opinion on the Audio Lab is I hate it, but understand completely why it was created. While I don't like to see newbies knocked on the head just because they have a preference, I equally do not like to see sombody passing off their subjective opinion as science. I think mentioning DBT as a source to an arguement should be allowed as it lends(or may not) credibility to an arguement. I think science should be allowed to enter in the discussion, as it is a counterbalance to subjective conjecture. I hope the rules are relaxed post haste, as I tend to learn more when what is said is actually factual, and not just somebody's opinion or experience. Experience is very valuable, but it is not the only thing that should be used to support a point.

Nice post..

Unfortunately, experience is sometimes the only thing that is available to support a point. That, I feel, is the soft spot for the subjectivists which sometimes does require intervention by moderation. One does not need a science background to hear something that one cannot explain, just as one does not need an advanced automotive degree to feel that one vehicle is more stable around corners than another. But it is all too easy to apply science to quash subjective, and this can be at times, counterproductive.

With respect to DBT's, they are certainly useful for spotting differences that can be discerned instantly. Unfortunately, humans by nature, adapt to stimulus. We adjust to light intensity, sound intensity, and those adjustments take time.

HIFi presents us localization cues which do not exist in nature. So, we adjust. Change the relationship of the localization cues, we will also adjust...but that takes time.

Rapid switching does not allow humans that adaptation time...it therefore, is not very good for localization cue alterations. Imaging artifacts are not spotted..

I've been pinging jj with this stuff..hopefully, with time, he will do something along these lines. That would be good, as it lays the foundation for some of my more complex stuff.

You hate subjective opinion passed off as science.. I certainly concur.. But, I dislike even more... incorrect science passed off as accurate. On occasion, I have some inkling of the science, but cannot post corrections when forum rules deny me that option.

Cheers, John

Woochifer

06-21-2006, 11:35 AM

Hey Kex;

i would add yourself to the list and add Wooch ontop of it also. Dont you think that we get tired of constant Paradigm and HT recommendations? Maybe this forum needs different categories with price classes. Other big audio video forums have this and its wonderfull. There are "budget recommendations" in the ten thousand dollar area too and not only in the 200 dollar area. Maybe more seperated sections are a good thing.

-Flo

Taking things awfully personally, eh? I wasn't even part of this discussion, yet you still feel this persistent need to smear people on your "list" and drag them down into crapper with you. The rest of your responses on this thread are just a continuation of that theme -- attack the messenger and ignore the message, no matter what the truth is.

Since you're so "tired of constant Paradigm and HT recommendations" and have to talk up how wonderful "other big audio boards" are, maybe this is the wrong place for you. (I don't who you might be referring to when you say we, since you're all too eager to name people when you're on the attack, yet remain vague and secretive about who your unknown and nameless supporters might be)

Then again, I thought that you were ignoring my posts anyway, so how can you be "tired" of them?

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=135827&postcount=39
http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=134208&postcount=32

BTW, I don't universally recommend Paradigm and HT. Anyone who actually reads my posts will tell you that. I will discuss HT whenever it's part of the topic, and recommend that people try Paradigm whenever it potentially matches with someone's preferences and budget. It's not like Paradigm is the only speaker that I advise people to try out, and if a Paradigm model does not fit with someone's preferences, I will tell them that as well. If someone wants a two-channel system, I'm not going to waste anyone's time recommending HT packages. That's called staying on-topic.

I simply think that some big guys on here lack character, they dont stand for anything and simple agree with most people and encourage them instead of stepping up and sticking to their opinion.

So, let's see here, a sign of "character" is beating someone up for daring to have a different set of preferences, budget limits, and expectations? :lol: What makes you think that people who post on here are agreeing with "most people" for its own sake? I guess that in your world, the ultimate sign of low character is "encouraging" someone to do the best for what they want, rather than launching into some kind of holy crusade to convert them into some self-annointed definition of high end.

I dunno, I always thought that part of having "character" was having the fortitude to be truthful. Gosh, silly me!

--This is a friendly post

Another lie, nothing new.

Florian

06-21-2006, 05:28 PM

To Wooch: You know i dont read your posts and neither do the ones i get along with.

To SirT:

I did add myself to the list ;-)

I never said that i equate performance for money and i also wrote many times that there are box speakers i like and there are also planar speaker i dislike. The problem for me lies in this sentence

Nobody is in a different league than anyone. We are all equals here with varying degrees of knowledge.
This is simply untrue! A AtmaSphere setup on Soundlabs, Acustats big Horns or whatever speaker is in a different league then a Paradigm Ref. 40 on a Yamaha Receiver. Is it fair to compare? No! But do members with Paradigms, Yamahas argue about sound quality with members of lets say Dunlavy SCV or Wilsons ? Yes!

Maybe they dont argue over the brands i mentioned, but 400$ system owners aregue with 10000$ system owners. And that is silly, so different leauges do exist. They could coexist just fine, but they dont because the high leaguge wont accept crap talk from low league people. (Like me not accepting Woochs point on planars because he doesnt understand/own them, let alone gets the difference between their technologys).

Knowledge is great and i never claim to be all knowing, nor do i claim that ribbons, electrostatics etc.. are superior to all speakers. I believe they are, and in my opinion all boxes are colored. Because you have the box and the driver is acoustically transparents. But is it a fact? No! But its my opinion and i am sticking to it!

I like some Horns, i like some Ribbons, I like some Dynamic Systems but i dont let opinions stand that judge a technology that they dont own, afford or have any experience with besides 15 minutes in a showroom.

-Flo

PS: And this is a friendly post, same as the last ones. Sorry if ir reads negatively. I am simply expressing my opinion! I have nothing personal against SirT or others. I just dont agree with their opinion sometimes.

Woochifer

06-22-2006, 10:55 AM

To Wooch: You know i dont read your posts and neither do the ones i get along with.

So, if you don't read my posts (of course, that's a lie and you know it), why are you so bent on about dragging my name into a thread that I did not even participate in? You've done this whole feigned ignorance schtick time and time again whenever I point out a lie or inconsistency.

Message to Florian -- it's actually a sign of "character" to own up to your mistakes and apologize for any false accusations that you throw out. Your repeated evasions whenever I or anybody else calls you out for telling outright lies say a lot more about your so-called "character" than whatever new piece of audio equipment you're buying this week.

And who are these "ones that i get along with" that you claim ignore my posts? It would stand to reason that if they ignore me, then they never respond to me (so it would be easy enough to see if this is true) unlike you, who brings my name into discussions that I didn't participate in and responds to posts that you claim to ignore.

This is simply untrue! A AtmaSphere setup on Soundlabs, Acustats big Horns or whatever speaker is in a different league then a Paradigm Ref. 40 on a Yamaha Receiver. Is it fair to compare? No! But do members with Paradigms, Yamahas argue about sound quality with members of lets say Dunlavy SCV or Wilsons ? Yes!

Please show an example of where anyone has compared these systems. You've said this before, and you've been asked to prove it. To date, you've not done anything other than respond with personal attacks and put people who question your claims onto your vaunted "list".

And BTW, have you actually LISTENED to the current Paradigm Studio 40? How would you know whether it's fair to compare when you have no first hand experience? Once again, you're going back to your lame old line of equating the validity of people's opinions with what they own.

Maybe they dont argue over the brands i mentioned, but 400$ system owners aregue with 10000$ system owners.

Who on this board owns a $400 system and is arguing with $10k system owners? Time to name names or shut the hell up with your strawman arguments.

Like me not accepting Woochs point on planars because he doesnt understand/own them, let alone gets the difference between their technologys.

So, what is my "point on planars" other than having heard several of them first hand and finding that they don't match with my preferences? It's not like I'm claiming that Paradigm, B&W, and Bose speakers sound the same, right?

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=135025&postcount=78

PS: And this is a friendly post, same as the last ones. Sorry if ir reads negatively. I am simply expressing my opinion! I have nothing personal against SirT or others. I just dont agree with their opinion sometimes.

"Friendly post" huh? Yeah, and the world is flat. :rolleyes:

Feel free to respond to this post, but if you do it would only expose you as a lying sack of crap with these pathetic claims that you ignore my posts. Your posting history demonstrates an obsession with smearing people that don't share your opinions, and that pattern's pretty obvious and well established, no matter how you try to spin personal attacks, smears, and lies into "friendly" posts.