Hi Everybody!!

Printable View

  • 08-11-2004, 10:25 AM
    ericl
    Hi Everybody!!
    HI EVERYBODY!!

    My name is Eric and I am the new site administrator for AudioREVIEW.com! I am very excited to be here, and I'm sure you're all just overcome with joy as well! :D

    A brief bit about myself, I'm a twenty-something audio geek with a professional background in tech. I've been a frequent "lurker" on audio boards around the web for many years now - I don't post much but I'm on all the time. Up to now my main interest has been two channel and vinyl, but a new surround system is just around the corner for me. You all know the routine. I'll divulge more details about myself and my system as time passes.

    I've got big plans for the site, and look forward to working with all of you improve the site and make it as cool a place as possible. Now I don't mean to be a downer, but part of those changes will be some new rules about posting, discussion, and how to behave in general. I'm leaning toward a somewhat tough stand on making this a safe place for friendly, subjective discussion about all kinds of audio. There will be a special forum for those of you who wish to discuss lab results, double blind testing, or think that there is no difference between different types of cables or equipment, etc. I also plan on adding some new forums, such as a computer/mp3 audio board, perhaps a forum for vintage equipment. I'd like your input on that.

    To enforce these new rules, we will FINALLY be implementing a real moderator program. We'll get into this more later as well. If you're interested in being a moderator, check out <a href="http://www.audioreview.com/moderatorprogramcrx.aspx">this link</a>, and feel free to apply (if you've already applied, please apply again, as we've lost many of our old applications in the transition).

    There will be other exciting developements, coming soon. I'll be attending the CEDIA expo in September armed with a digital camera and the objective of schmoozing and checking out as much cool new stuff as possible. I'll be report back to you guys with photos and details on all the cool new stuff coming out. I'm looking forward to serving you guys!

    -Eric
  • 08-11-2004, 12:06 PM
    WmAx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ericl
    HI EVERYBODY!!

    My name is Eric and I am the new site administrator for AudioREVIEW.com! I am very excited to be here, and I'm sure you're all just overcome with joy as well! :D

    Greetings.

    Quote:

    Now I don't mean to be a downer, but part of those changes will be some new rules about posting, discussion, and how to behave in general. I'm leaning toward a somewhat tough stand on making this a safe place for friendly, subjective discussion about all kinds of audio. There will be a special forum for those of you who wish to discuss lab results, double blind testing, or think that there is no difference between different types of cables or equipment, etc.
    Are you implying something similar to AUdio Ayslum? DIsallowing any challlenge to unsubstantiated claims from people? I certainly hope you don't mean something like that.

    -Chris
  • 08-11-2004, 12:17 PM
    Woochifer
    Welcome to the group! First thing I gotta ask about -- where did the link to the galleries go? If you can clarify that, you'll definitely be on my good side ... well, until the next crisis! :)
  • 08-11-2004, 12:22 PM
    ericl
    Thanks!

    The galleries link is a little hidden, we'll have to find a more prominent place to display it.

    http://gallery.audioreview.com/
    it can be found on the "Community & Events" page.

    -Eric
  • 08-11-2004, 01:39 PM
    pwh03
    yes welcome and good luck

    but I also hope that your new direction isn't to agressive even hometheaterforum.com is a little too restrictive in my opinion. I think most of us are old enough to take the occasional knock on our egos

    thanks
    Ph
  • 08-12-2004, 08:57 AM
    ericl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by WmAx
    Greetings.


    Are you implying something similar to AUdio Ayslum? DIsallowing any challlenge to unsubstantiated claims from people? I certainly hope you don't mean something like that.

    -Chris

    Something like that. But don't worry, you'll have your very own forums. There will be a special forum(s) for "challenging" other people, but otherwise I want to make it a more friendly environment for newcomers, and others who want share experiences and enthusiasm for audio rather than lab results and skepticism. I know some of you may not like it, but I think it will increase and diversify participation on the board.

    Cheers
    Eric
  • 08-12-2004, 09:29 AM
    WmAx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ericl
    Something like that. But don't worry, you'll have your very own forums.

    Yes, I've seen the result of these 'dedicated forums' like Prop Head at AA.

    Quote:

    but otherwise I want to make it a more friendly environment for newcomers, and others who want share experiences and enthusiasm for audio rather than lab results and skepticism. I know some of you may not like it, but I think it will increase and diversify participation on the board.
    I understand what I believe is your motivation. Increase the hits of the site. That is primary concern. Remove the requirment to back up claims as is enforced by many posters here, and you turn this into just another subjectivist watering hole full of fairytales.

    -Chris
  • 08-12-2004, 10:05 AM
    ericl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by WmAx
    Yes, I've seen the result of these 'dedicated forums' like Prop Head at AA.


    I understand what I believe is your motivation. Increase the hits of the site. That is primary concern. Remove the requirment to back up claims as is enforced by many posters here, and you turn this into just another subjectivist watering hole full of fairytales.

    -Chris

    I guess i can infer that you'll be one of the ones who won't like it. ;) Any conversation outside of a science lab can be labeled "subjectivist". I'm perfectly comfortable with a "subjectivist watering hole" as it will be much more friendly to the newcomer and the typical hobbyist, since they're generally not interested in lab measurements and dbx, which seems to stifle good conversation anyway. But I understand that there is a group of people who wish to discuss lab results and dbt, abx etc, and there will be a place for that.

    Eric
  • 08-12-2004, 02:18 PM
    topspeed
    Welcome aboard, Eric.

    I'm looking forward to the board becoming a more interesting place for people to share ideas. There's entirely too much squabbling here, imo.

    Hopefully you can get the board thriving again.

    Good luck.
  • 08-12-2004, 03:06 PM
    JSE
    Hello Eric,

    I think some new fresh ideas and maybe a little shaking up of the boards in general would be a good thing. It's become a little stale around here lately. I pretty much know who will answer what questions and how they will answer. I am sure others can say the same about me. The fact is, we need more people to contribute. This is not to take away from our current members. There are some very good people here who really know what they are talking about and a lot members that myself and others like going back and forth with. We just need more people. Hopefully you can help make that happen. I have really cut back on my participation in recent months and I think a lot of others have as well due to the above mentioned reasons. A little shakin up could be just the thing to spark more interest.

    JSE
  • 08-12-2004, 03:34 PM
    ericl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JSE
    Hello Eric,

    I think some new fresh ideas and maybe a little shaking up of the boards in general would be a good thing. It's become a little stale around here lately. I pretty much know who will answer what questions and how they will answer. I am sure others can say the same about me. The fact is, we need more people to contribute. This is not to take away from our current members. There are some very good people here who really know what they are talking about and a lot members that myself and others like going back and forth with. We just need more people. Hopefully you can help make that happen. I have really cut back on my participation in recent months and I think a lot of others have as well due to the above mentioned reasons. A little shakin up could be just the thing to spark more interest.

    JSE

    I hear what you're saying, JSE. This is why I want to diversify the boards a little.

    I'm still learning the way the site is put together and I'm sort of in a brainstorming phase.
    Like I said I am going to be doing CEDIA Expo and other trade show coverage, and I am considering doing some equipment reviews. Once I've got a better grasp on the construction of the site I'll start making some changes.

    Please let me know if you guys have any other ideas to spruce up the forums and the site in general, I'd love to hear them.

    Thanks,
    Eric
  • 08-12-2004, 06:37 PM
    DMK
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ericl
    HI EVERYBODY!!

    My name is Eric and I am the new site administrator for AudioREVIEW.com! I am very excited to be here, and I'm sure you're all just overcome with joy as well! :D

    A brief bit about myself, I'm a twenty-something audio geek with a professional background in tech. I've been a frequent "lurker" on audio boards around the web for many years now - I don't post much but I'm on all the time. Up to now my main interest has been two channel and vinyl, but a new surround system is just around the corner for me. You all know the routine. I'll divulge more details about myself and my system as time passes.

    I've got big plans for the site, and look forward to working with all of you improve the site and make it as cool a place as possible. Now I don't mean to be a downer, but part of those changes will be some new rules about posting, discussion, and how to behave in general. I'm leaning toward a somewhat tough stand on making this a safe place for friendly, subjective discussion about all kinds of audio. There will be a special forum for those of you who wish to discuss lab results, double blind testing, or think that there is no difference between different types of cables or equipment, etc. I also plan on adding some new forums, such as a computer/mp3 audio board, perhaps a forum for vintage equipment. I'd like your input on that.

    To enforce these new rules, we will FINALLY be implementing a real moderator program. We'll get into this more later as well. If you're interested in being a moderator, check out <a href="http://www.audioreview.com/moderatorprogramcrx.aspx">this link</a>, and feel free to apply (if you've already applied, please apply again, as we've lost many of our old applications in the transition).

    There will be other exciting developements, coming soon. I'll be attending the CEDIA expo in September armed with a digital camera and the objective of schmoozing and checking out as much cool new stuff as possible. I'll be report back to you guys with photos and details on all the cool new stuff coming out. I'm looking forward to serving you guys!

    -Eric

    Greetings, Eric!

    I can certainly appreciate what you're trying to do by separating the so-called "yeasayers" from the "naysayers". At least, I appreciate it from a business perspective. However, it's quite like separating the democrats and republicans or any two groups of people with differing views. It's doubtful much will be learned without direct interaction of the two groups. While I appreciate what you're trying to do, it doesn't sound like the place for me. Best of luck in your new endeavor.
  • 08-12-2004, 08:56 PM
    Rockwell
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ericl
    I guess i can infer that you'll be one of the ones who won't like it. ;) Any conversation outside of a science lab can be labeled "subjectivist". I'm perfectly comfortable with a "subjectivist watering hole" as it will be much more friendly to the newcomer and the typical hobbyist, since they're generally not interested in lab measurements and dbx, which seems to stifle good conversation anyway. But I understand that there is a group of people who wish to discuss lab results and dbt, abx etc, and there will be a place for that.

    Eric

    How can you determine what a someone will be interested in? Maybe they haven't been exposed to those ideas.
  • 08-12-2004, 11:24 PM
    ericl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DMK
    Greetings, Eric!

    I can certainly appreciate what you're trying to do by separating the so-called "yeasayers" from the "naysayers". At least, I appreciate it from a business perspective. However, it's quite like separating the democrats and republicans or any two groups of people with differing views. It's doubtful much will be learned without direct interaction of the two groups. While I appreciate what you're trying to do, it doesn't sound like the place for me. Best of luck in your new endeavor.

    Hey Guys, I guess I came on a little strong. Sorry about that. We're here to have fun right?!

    I see it like this:

    I recognize that there are at least two "factions" of audio guys with differing views. Thats great. I'm starting to question all of my assumptions the more I get into the debate, and I'm learning a lot. I'm all for the debate, I'm all for the conversation. I really think it is great. Yet even though you guys having opposing views, you have to recognize that you are both quite advanced in this hobby. In fact, you guys are way beyond the advanced stage, and beyond the 'hobby' too. I see you guys, on both sides, as audio philosophers. I want you to have your very own Audio Think Tank (can you tell I'm experimenting with forum names here?).

    The problem is with the many people who don't fall into those categories, or don't care about the debate, the methods, the philosophy, the frequency response charts, or any of that. Newbies, vintage guys, home theater guys, kids, or god forbid, someone who's just interested in MUSIC and wants to get good sound out their collection (remember that? Music!). They walk into this debate and it is pretty intimidating, to say the least, and they walk away confused and still don't know which receiver they should buy!

    I want them to be able to have a "safe space" to discuss the basics without getting dragged into the debate and through the mud. And I promise I don't want to marginalize anybody.

    OK?

    Cheers,
    Eric
  • 08-13-2004, 03:53 AM
    skeptic
    Since you're the new guy here.....
    This board has been a success for the four years I've been coming here BECAUSE it has been open to the discussion which the PARTICIPANTS want to engage in. Within the reasonable bounds of civility, everything has been allowed even if it has strayed from the topic of a particular category. If a discussion goes in an unusual direction, the people who post here take it where it is going and those not interested in it move on.

    "Now I don't mean to be a downer, but part of those changes will be some new rules about posting, discussion, and how to behave in general. I'm leaning toward a somewhat tough stand on making this a safe place for friendly, subjective discussion about all kinds of audio. There will be a special forum for those of you who wish to discuss lab results, double blind testing, or think that there is no difference between different types of cables or equipment, etc"

    Any attempt to censor the discussions here whether because they stray off topic, or they violate some mind control rule arbitrarily imposed such as the anti DBT rule at Cable Asylum, or they put certain advertisers here in a less than flattering light and I'm out of here in a heartbeat. I'm sure half the people who regularly post here feel the same way. This is exactly how we started out when Chris became the moderator and he caught on quickly. I'm not interested in being part of an advertising billboard boosting any companies or cottage industries such as the audiophile cable industry.

    "To enforce these new rules, we will FINALLY be implementing a real moderator program."

    We've always had a real moderator. He did his job with a minimum of interference. That's how most of us like it. If you're a moderator, then restrict your activities to moderating, not censoring. You can be a participant if you like but your claims and statements may be discussed and challenged just like anyone elses including by people with more knowledge and experience than you have. That's the way it's always been around here. If you want to become a dictator, I'm out the door in one step. Nobody tells me what I can say or can't say as long as I remain civil and show reasonable respect for other people posting here. And if I choose to call someone who moderates on another board a Nazi mind control dictator as I have in the past, that had better be OK too. BTW, if your posting means that some of this place is to be dumbed down, I'm outta here too.

    For now I will suspend judgement to wait and see what develops.
  • 08-13-2004, 08:05 AM
    Resident Loser
    Definitely not into...
    ...some form of "AA Light"...

    I think you will see the only inhabitants @ this site who would like to have free dialog curtailed in some way, are those who have such a shaky belief system that it will not stand up to scrutiny...

    Newbies can ask all the questions they choose to...there are those among us who have such a high opinion of themselves, they toss out recommendations(very many high-ticket ones to boot) based on lord-knows-what, in an effort to impress the impressionable; based on the misplaced "philosophy" that throwing money at a "problem"(real OR imagined) is the answer to all. As long as that kind of response is tolerated, there MUST be counterpoint to it. Any segregation of a dialoge in response to such posts, only re-inforces the mythology that surrounds the audio community.

    Anyone with half a brain can manage to sift through it all and get some sort of feel for what is real and what isn't, it ain't rocket science!

    jimHJJ(...like Skep, I too will reserve judgement...)
  • 08-13-2004, 01:42 PM
    DMK
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ericl
    Hey Guys, I guess I came on a little strong. Sorry about that. We're here to have fun right?!

    I see it like this:

    I recognize that there are at least two "factions" of audio guys with differing views. Thats great. I'm starting to question all of my assumptions the more I get into the debate, and I'm learning a lot. I'm all for the debate, I'm all for the conversation. I really think it is great. Yet even though you guys having opposing views, you have to recognize that you are both quite advanced in this hobby. In fact, you guys are way beyond the advanced stage, and beyond the 'hobby' too. I see you guys, on both sides, as audio philosophers. I want you to have your very own Audio Think Tank (can you tell I'm experimenting with forum names here?).

    The problem is with the many people who don't fall into those categories, or don't care about the debate, the methods, the philosophy, the frequency response charts, or any of that. Newbies, vintage guys, home theater guys, kids, or god forbid, someone who's just interested in MUSIC and wants to get good sound out their collection (remember that? Music!). They walk into this debate and it is pretty intimidating, to say the least, and they walk away confused and still don't know which receiver they should buy!

    I want them to be able to have a "safe space" to discuss the basics without getting dragged into the debate and through the mud. And I promise I don't want to marginalize anybody.

    OK?

    Cheers,
    Eric

    See Skeptic's post below. He speaks for a lot of us. OUCH! Hadda pinch myself and yes, I'm awake and yes, I agree with Skeptic. LOOK... UP IN THE SKY! Are those... FLYING PIGS???

    Kidding, Skep, kidding! :) But Eric, that's an example of what I mean. Skeptic and I are diametrically opposed on a lot of things and still I've learned a lot of useful info from him. Had I chosen to steer clear of him, I never would have given myself the opportunity.

    For those that don't want to get into the debate, they're free to ignore whatever posts they choose. Those that want to debate are free to do so. But what about the people that only hear one side of the issue and have no clue? All they'll hear is the party line to which they've stumbled upon. Fun is great but learning new things is fun, no?

    Ultimately it's your forum and you can do what you want, but there's already Audio Asylum for those that choose not to see both sides. A/R is better because it's a place for the free exchange of ideas and is not subject to censorship.
  • 08-14-2004, 10:18 AM
    Steve1000
    I agree. This does not sound good. I'm looking for a new place already. If anyone finds anything could you please PM me or post here?

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DMK
    Ultimately it's your forum and you can do what you want, but there's already Audio Asylum for those that choose not to see both sides. A/R is better because it's a place for the free exchange of ideas and is not subject to censorship.

  • 08-14-2004, 10:53 AM
    TinHere
    Hi Eric,

    There are many audio sites that enforce the constraints you are considering where members can preach to the choir. AR has always had the distinction of upholding the freedom to question claims, which has allowed for thought provoking debate and an introduction to "newbies" that all that is claimed is not fact. IMHO the restrictions you want to impose will lead to the further migration of knowlegable posters from AR. Perhaps a seperate new forum with a title like "Fantasy Findings" might be more acceptable to the stalwarts who have maintained a presence here over the years and allow for unchallenged subjective discussions. That way "newbies" would be given the message that all that they read of subjective claims is not necessarily accepted as undisbuted fact as is often pointed out by some members, and maybe create a bastion for unchallenged discussions for those who wish to partake. I don't think the solution is censoring factual information of an entire side of debatable issues as if they don't exist.

    Anyway, good luck with all that.
  • 08-14-2004, 02:25 PM
    Quagmire
    Hi Eric,

    Welcome. I'll be a voice of dissention from most of the replies you have received so far. I think what you're proposing is a good idea and doesn't amount to censorship as others here have suggested. It isn't as though you are saying that these "debates" can't take place; just that they will be more confined to a dedicated board for those who are most interested in them. I also don't believe (from what you've said so far) that it means that some level of healthy debate can't take place on the other boards; just that you don't intend to let the discussion deteriorate to the point that DBT's and the like become the primary focus for all of the other boards.

    I've been coming here for quite awhile, and used to post often. I can tell you that this forum is only a shell of its former self. We used to have more action on just one board than we do on the entire forum nowadays, and I think this issue and management's lack of providing some kind of useful response to it has been the primary factor in the overall decline of the forum. It is no secret that we've lost a lot of really knowledgeable people who were regular contributors to these boards. Frankly, I think folks just got tired of having so many threads "hijacked" by this group, to the point that nearly all discussion degenerated to being about this one topic. On more than one occation, I made the argument that this is suppose to be a "hobbyist" forum and not a laboratory. Granted, the scientific aspects of the hobby are just as valid, but not everyone wants to have this discussion and especially not be forced into it. I recall many times that someon who posted a simple question would get totally ignored - no helpful or practical advice given at all - while the "audibility debates" completely overtook the thread. It is sad but true that if people don't practice a little self restraint, eventually someone has to step in and do it for them. Here we have a case where management has ignored this problem for so long that the ship is almost sunk before they begin to do anything about it. Eventually, there is no need to worry about whether something qualifies as censorship or not because there is no longer any discussion to supposedly censor anyway.

    You would think that this group would be thrilled to have their own board. But as you are now finding out, that is not the case. They will allege that restricting this topic to a dedicated board amounts to censorship. However, I would suggest that in the past, because of a lack of self restraint and managment's unresponsiveness, all that we had was this one board - in essence they turned the entire forum into a board dedicated to this one topic. As I said already, I think that was the reason for the mass exodus that we saw, as people just got feed up. Having a dedicated board provides an outlet for those who are truly interested in this subject. Perhaps more importantly, it unfetters the remaining boards so that discussions there can expand beyond the parameters of this one debate. I fail to see how this qualifies as censorship when we finally get to talk about more that one thing. I know that there are plenty of people who will disagree with me... that's perfectly fine. I would just respond by saying that although for some, it may be hard to distinguish between the two, freedom and anarchy are not the same thing. Freedom will always attract people while anarchy will drive them away. One need only look at what has happened to this forum to discern which we have had more of around here. I'll get off of my soapbox now.

    Q
  • 08-14-2004, 02:46 PM
    WmAx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quagmire
    Hi Eric,

    It isn't as though you are saying that these "debates" can't take place; just that they will be more confined to a dedicated board for those who are most interested in them. I also don't believe (from what you've said so far) that it means that some level of healthy debate can't take place on the other boards; just that you don't intend to let the discussion deteriorate to the point that DBT's and the like become the primary focus for all of the other boards.

    I strongly disagree. Forcing such discussion into the single forum will remove any form of checks/balances on claims, since little to no people will post in this 'special' forum.

    Quote:

    Frankly, I think folks just got tired of having so many threads "hijacked" by this group, to the point that nearly all discussion degenerated to being about this one topic. On more than one occation, I made the argument that this is suppose to be a "hobbyist" forum and not a laboratory.
    Quote:

    However, I would suggest that in the past, because of a lack of self restraint and managment's unresponsiveness, all that we had was this one board - in essence they turned the entire forum into a board dedicated to this one topic.
    Quote:

    Freedom will always attract people while anarchy will drive them away. One need only look at what has happened to this forum to discern which we have had more of around here. I'll get off of my soapbox now.
    Q[/QUOTE]It may seem ironic, but I strongly agree with most of what you say in direct regard to 'self restratint' and 'management's unresponsiveness'. I am a guilty threadjacker, with not much self-restraint on some threads IMO. But, it's hard to just stop discussing something that is ongoing in a thread. Some tangents(threadjacking) make be productive in certain cases, and should be allowed but as can be seen in some threads(recently), some of these tangents can be destructive and just confuse/distort the original topic to the point where it's unrecognizable. I believe a moderator should be active on these boards, to an extent, policing the threads for some of the more destructive behaviour. I am not promoting any sort of dictatorship or banning of topics/debate; just an eforcement of some basic rules of behaviour.

    -Chris
  • 08-14-2004, 03:21 PM
    skeptic
    You are entitled to your opinion but in my view your posting is pure rubbish. There isn't one scintilla of truth in it. I don't think you can point to even one actively running thread right now where DBTs have even been mentioned let alone have "become the primary focus for all of the other boards" or any thread on any board. I challenge you to mention just one.

    " We used to have more action on just one board than we do on the entire forum nowadays"

    That was before people were required to register at all. You just chose a moniker and could say whatever you wanted. That changed about two years ago.

    "It is no secret that we've lost a lot of really knowledgeable people who were regular contributors to these boards."

    The only one I can think of that could conceivably fit that discription in anyone's mind but only in the most warped way was Jon Risch. And he left not after I took him to task for being a "Nazi mind control gestapo" at CA for denying others the intellectual freedom he was granted in order to get an education but only after I demoloshed every one of his crackpot technical arguements about audio cables. And I used his own quotes from his own website for much of it.

    "On more than one occation, I made the argument that this is suppose to be a "hobbyist" forum and not a laboratory."

    We often discuss the technical performance of equipment and how it relates to its audible performance because that is the basic nature of electronic equipment. It's unavoidable. I don't recall anybody refusing to explain a technical statement that he made when someone else said they didn't understand it. If you remove the technical disucssions from any of these boards, they will be dumbed down to the point where only the least knowledgable participants will be interested in them.

    "I think that was the reason for the mass exodus that we saw, as people just got feed up."

    Judging from the fact that there are sometimes more than a thousand participants who view an individaul thread, this board seems to have very good participation. Especially when a debate heats up.

    "I recall many times that someon who posted a simple question would get totally ignored - no helpful or practical advice given at all "

    You were here, you said so yourself right at the beginning. Why didn't you volunteer to help? Not enough technical knowledge to contribute?

    Actually, lots of people come here even for the first time and get tons of sound practical advice. Here are just a sample of a few threads running right now where advice is being given;

    This Guy has just asked for advice about buying a subwoofer and already 5 other participants have responded.

    brian_tr has asked for advice on a problem with his Yamaha receiver and has gotten responses from 4 participants

    grampi has asked for advice on the best way to connect his television set and has gotten replies from two participants.

    cam and phw03 asked for advice about projection tv and got advice from woodman who knows as much about television as anyone I've met on any board.

    Lord Nikon asked for advice on the best receiver under $600 and got many responses.

    IRG asked for advice on a 26"/27" TV monitor and got many responses.

    r.bowen asked for advice on his Paradigm speakers and got a response from topspeed.

    saul asked for advice on selecting between two Yamaha receivers and got many responses.

    Lord Nikon asked for advice on a cd player for under $600 and got many replies.

    And that's just a partial list of what's currently running on the HT board. I think only one request didn't get a response and that was about a computer monitor. Probably nobody knew the answer.
    Just about every other board on this website is filled with these kinds of requests and replies.

    "I would just respond by saying that although for some, it may be hard to distinguish between the two, freedom and anarchy are not the same thing."

    We have never had anarchy here. Even before the registration and change in format several years ago, people who were abusive beyond reason were warned and if they didn't change, were thrown out. Censorship, trying to steer discussions to one side or another by limiting the intellectual freedom to explore ideas, to challenge statements, to not allow a drift in the topic because that is where the participants want to take it is unacceptable. It is the mark of a totalitarian dictatorship usually because the points of view being favored can't stand up to the rigors of evidence or intellectual challenge. This is exactly why the anti DBT rule exists at CA IMO. They do not want their sponsors products or the rationale behind them maligned because they have absolutely no defense to the arguement that there is no scientific basis for them.

    If censorship of this kind happens here, I will leave and for once, I will use whatever influence I have with people who ask me for advice to steer them away from the products advertised on this site.
  • 08-14-2004, 05:43 PM
    Pat D
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ericl
    HI EVERYBODY!!

    My name is Eric and I am the new site administrator for AudioREVIEW.com! I am very excited to be here, and I'm sure you're all just overcome with joy as well! :D

    A brief bit about myself, I'm a twenty-something audio geek with a professional background in tech. I've been a frequent "lurker" on audio boards around the web for many years now - I don't post much but I'm on all the time. Up to now my main interest has been two channel and vinyl, but a new surround system is just around the corner for me. You all know the routine. I'll divulge more details about myself and my system as time passes.

    I've got big plans for the site, and look forward to working with all of you improve the site and make it as cool a place as possible. Now I don't mean to be a downer, but part of those changes will be some new rules about posting, discussion, and how to behave in general. I'm leaning toward a somewhat tough stand on making this a safe place for friendly, subjective discussion about all kinds of audio. There will be a special forum for those of you who wish to discuss lab results, double blind testing, or think that there is no difference between different types of cables or equipment, etc. I also plan on adding some new forums, such as a computer/mp3 audio board, perhaps a forum for vintage equipment. I'd like your input on that.

    To enforce these new rules, we will FINALLY be implementing a real moderator program. We'll get into this more later as well. If you're interested in being a moderator, check out this link, and feel free to apply (if you've already applied, please apply again, as we've lost many of our old applications in the transition).

    There will be other exciting developements, coming soon. I'll be attending the CEDIA expo in September armed with a digital camera and the objective of schmoozing and checking out as much cool new stuff as possible. I'll be report back to you guys with photos and details on all the cool new stuff coming out. I'm looking forward to serving you guys!

    -Eric

    Welcome and I hope you can do great things for the site.

    As for your remarks on changing the rules of discusion, Eric, I'm with skeptic, DMK, and a number of others on this one. We should be able to discuss all the relevant issues and audibility is certainly one of them, as are technical issues and measurements. The rationalist types seldom have any thing against free speech kept within the limits of civility and neither do many on the subjectivist end of the spectrum. But some find talk about technical matters threatening and references to DBTs positively insulting, and I really think that is their problem. Cable Asylum is just as acrimonious as ever and mention of DBTs is ostensibly forbidden. I certainly don't agree to segregrate discussions on audibility and technical matters. It isn't working that well at Prop Head and Tech Square at AA, so why do it here?

    I was away on a trip from early December to the end of April helping my wife deal with a family crisis. So I didn't post as much for a while, having to depend on computers in public libraries a lot. But I have been pretty regular for quite a while, since at least 1999--I know AA was already in existence when I started. But if we can't discuss the real issues then there my participation will be curtailed considerably, possibly limited mostly to Rave Recordings, where my main interest is in so-called 'classical music,' although I read and learn from many of the other discussions.

    I have volunteered a couple of times for moderation in the past and received a polite acknowledgment but nothing more. Will anything more happen now? I know it's hardly your fault, but ho-hum.

    And the reviews certainly need looking at. I believe that is one of the reasons many in the general public would visit this site, but perhaps you have data. There are many which say nothing, a good many multiple reviews, some reviews of another product instead of the correct one, some which simply make a complaint about service (usually very vague!), and I dare say, some which seem to show no actual knowledge of the product though it is hard to be sure. I'm not talking about a product from an obvious spoof manufacturer that has been part of audio humor for quite some time and offers an opportunity for creative and very funny writing.
  • 08-15-2004, 09:36 AM
    Quagmire
    Skeptic,

    "You are entitled to your opinion but in my view your posting is pure rubbish."

    Really? You can find nothing constructive within my comments at all, huh? That's too bad.

    "I don't think you can point to even one actively running thread right now where DBTs have even been mentioned let alone have "become the primary focus for all of the other boards"..."

    You're probably right. I haven't bothered to look, but that is because as far as I'm concerned, the damage has already been done. As I said in my original post, I think management has waited until the boat is nearly sunk. Much of what I commented on has to do with the past and only relates to the present in terms of how the forum can be revived - asuming it can be revived - but I'm not entirely convinced that it can be.

    "I challenge you to mention just one."

    I'm sorry... did I make a testable claim? Man does this sound familiar!

    "That was before people were required to register at all. You just chose a moniker and could say whatever you wanted. That changed about two years ago."

    And why was that necessary? Isn't this requirement to register censorship too? The presence of rules, guidelines and organization doesn't automatically equate to censorship. What is in question is the degree to which these things are necessary. I'm all for a "hands off" approach with as little "government intervention" as possible. But the level of intervention needed is determined by the conduct of the participants. In the past, the track record was not good and many folks got feed up and left as managment did little to address the situation.

    "We often discuss the technical performance of equipment and how it relates to its audible performance because that is the basic nature of electronic equipment. ...If you remove the technical disucssions from any of these boards, they will be dumbed down to the point where only the least knowledgable participants will be interested in them."

    Discussing technical perfomance is fine, especially when that was the point of the thread to begin with. But what occured frequently in the past, and what was objected to by many was the that ANY statement made regarding audible performance was met with a barrage of challenges from the so called naysayer camp that a "testable claim" had been made and then "proof" was demanded. This wasn't casual, it was confrontational and obtrusive. Like I said before, this is suppose to be a hobbyist board where people can come for practical advice based on personal experience. IMO the demand for white paper support for every so called "claim" takes the discussion out of that realm. I am fully aware that unchecked, audio myth can also run rampant. A certain amount of skepticism, Mr. Skeptic, is a good thing and should be encouraged. What is needed is BALANCE. I don't think there HAS to be a naysayer yeasayer board for these discussion, but at one time I think it would have been a very useful thing and may have prevented the decline of the forum.

    "You were here, you said so yourself right at the beginning. Why didn't you volunteer to help?..."

    When I saw one of these hijacked threads, I often times replied to the original poster to answer their question rather than join in the fray. And actually, I was nominated by several people to be a moderator on these boards; I just simply didn't have the time.

    "...Not enough technical knowledge to contribute?"

    Now, that wouldn't be a cheap shot, would it? A little goading perhaps? No thanks. I don't want to argue with you. I will let others decide whether I have enough technical knowledge to contribute. All I will say in that regard is that when I posted more often in the past, I believe I earned a reputation for offering practical technical advice which belonged neither in the yeasayer or naysayer camp.

    "We have never had anarchy here."

    I respectfully disagree.

    "Censorship, trying to steer discussions to one side or another by limiting the intellectual freedom to explore ideas, to challenge statements, to not allow a drift in the topic because that is where the participants want to take it is unacceptable."

    And what if the participants don't want to take the discussion in a certain direction over and over again? What if a small group of people continually decide to "steer the discussion" back to one topic even when the thread had nothing to do with that topic to begin with - what I have called hijacking a thread? Much of the language that you use to define censorship could instead be used to define "harassment" which is how many folks viewed the repeated insertion of these topics into existing threads.

    "It is the mark of a totalitarian dictatorship..."

    Seems a little dramatic, but in fairness, I did introduce the subjects of freedom and anarchy so I suppose it's fair game. However, so far Eric seems level headed and "undictator" like to me. If that changes and it appears that he is merely pandering to the sponsors you will likely find a very vocal ally in me.

    Q
  • 08-15-2004, 09:45 AM
    skeptic
    "And what if the participants don't want to take the discussion in a certain direction over and over again?"

    Then they ignore statement which steered it in that direction and continue on with what they were trying to discuss in the first place. If they've exhausted their points, then they should let other people who still want to discuss them take the conversation where it leads them.

    "so far Eric seems level headed and "undictator" like to me."

    He's been here less that two weeks, has less than ten postings and has already deleted one of my threads. What would you call that?