Why no pictures????

[givendale]

It's not pretty but it's functional

[Bernd]

... I post pictures is only to share with this community. It is actually an extra hassle for me to take the photo, re size it and then post it, as I am a PC midget and never really left the starting blocks. Basic, very basic I would call my PC knowledge.
I am with PS that something visual can help building up a picture of the members on here, even though if one reads what is posted one should get a pretty good idea too.
The last thing on my mind is to brag. I started some 30+ years in this crazy hobby and went through all sorts of systems in my time. I also remove my pictures from the gallery once they're out of date.Can't see the point on having 50+ photos in there.
I really enjoy seeing the picture and reading the enthusiastic posts by Basite. He is moving along nicely.Keep moving Bert.
Another one is Feanor (Bill) whose pictures I enjoy. RL (Jim) paints pictures with words, and I enjoy that very much too.
I also think that every member has a different level that is right for them. And once that is found that's it. It is very easy to make a multi $k system sound good, but a lot harder to work within constrains of any kind and get satisfaction, but it can be had, as John Michael shows regularly. Thanks JM. I also agree that seeing equipment in the members actual use is so much more pleasant to look at than the manufacturers staged shots.
I admire people who build their own this and that as I am completely hopeless with the Soldering Iron.
So I vote for pictures - the more the better.But it should never turn into a duty - that one has to post photos. Just enjoy, and if somebody wants to lie. Let them, in the end they are lying to themselves.

Peace and have a great Easter one and all

[basite]

Thanks Bernd, and a great Easter to you too!!

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[Resident Loser]

...once said to Johnny Carson "Did you ever get the feeling that the whole world was a tuxedo and you were a pair of brown shoes?"

Let's see if I can disabuse some of the participants of an incorrect notion or two, which seem to be snowballing in the wrong direction...

My response to PS's initial post was essentially a two-parter...In response to his posit that not posting pics was somehow linked to a members credibility, I offered a number of reasons why anyone (not necessarily myself, although they do apply) would not, could not or simply won't, post any photos...In addition I supplied what I see as plausible reasons why posting pics is no guarantee of real world experience...Simple statement of fact...no indictment of anyone who choses to do so nor any suggestion that the practice be halted.

The second part beginning with "...so as far as I'm concerned..." pertains to me and my gear...I'm simply downplaying the role that my stuff has on my abilities to render competent advice...When I say this plus this equals this, I don't need much more that the experience gleaned from my motley assortment of stuff to answer most questions or become involved in debate over some subjects...It's like workin' on a car...once you get the basics down, it's pretty much the same for all internal combustion driven vehicles...If someone needs to know how to change their oil-filter, it's pretty much the same from car to car...However, if someone wants to do it on an '67 Alfa-Romeo Pinafore, it would take a bit of specialized knowledge to know you'll need to cut a hole in the passenger-side footwell to do so and I'd be SOL...which is why I rarely attend to much more than the most basic and bleedin' obvious of HT questions. IMO HT is a waste of space...But, I digress...

With regard to the following:

Originally Posted by Resident Loser
...I don't think that highly of myself...

but I'd rather try to provide info and debunk hype based on my level of experience and common sense

...Those are a little inconsistent. You do think highly enough of yourself to offer advice based on experience. Why disparage people who need cell phones by implying that they think too highly of themselves?

First of all...context, context, context...the whole quote, in response to the cell phone camera suggestion, is:

...here's one for ya...no cell phone, don't need one, just one single touch-tone telset (no clock, no caller ID, no distinctive ring or call waiting or...) connected to a landline...Don't need to be connected 24/7...I don't think that highly of myself...

Actually I seem to be disparaging myself...I'm not important enough to annoy fellow diners with idle chit-chat that gets louder at the more impressive parts, like "Oh we're leaving for Europe tomorrow" ...I'm not important enough, nor is my time so valuable, that I must call my wife (who happens to be in another part of the same store) when I can just look around and find her...I'm not important enough to create a captive audience in the men's room to discuss last night's results on American Idol. and I'm certainly not important enough to subject those innocents who surround me with both sides of the "conversation" while using the walkie-talkie feature...I'ze just a reg'lar kinda' guy...I can be incommunicado at no ones peril...

Insofar as offering advice, suggestions or troubleshooting tips to those who post here, it's not that I think highly of myself or refer to myself as some sort of expert (cuz I tain't) it's simply, for the most part, a case of been there, done that (or tried to) so view it as anecdotal twaddle, like just about everything that's posted here...and you can take it or leave it at your discretion.

jimHJJ(...FWIW...)

[Bernd]

Are you having a bad morning Jim?

Peace

[PeruvianSkies]

Are you having a bad morning Jim?

Peace

I think his morning has lasted for years...

[Resident Loser]

Are you having a bad morning Jim?

Peace

...mon frere......looking forward to a three-day weekend, a nice seafood repast on Good Friday and some gayly colored chicken embryos to remind us of the godess Oestre and the rich heritage of our pagan past...can a Maypole be far behind?...

jimHJJ(...absolutely ducky...)

[Resident Loser]

I think his morning has lasted for years...

...rose-colored glasses...I just calls 'em like I sees 'em...

jimHJJ(...as Disraeli said, "Never apologize for showing feeling. When you do so, you apologize for the truth"...)

[SlumpBuster]

Actually I seem to be disparaging myself...I'm not important enough to annoy fellow diners with idle chit-chat that gets louder at the more impressive parts, like "Oh we're leaving for Europe tomorrow" ...I'm not important enough, nor is my time so valuable, that I must call my wife (who happens to be in another part of the same store) when I can just look around and find her...I'm not important enough to create a captive audience in the men's room to discuss last night's results on American Idol. and I'm certainly not important enough to subject those innocents who surround me with both sides of the "conversation" while using the walkie-talkie feature...I'ze just a reg'lar kinda' guy...I can be incommunicado at no ones peril...

You're on shakey ground, and you know it. You know that you are not disparaging yourself, but are instead disparaging those around you that you view as self-important, pop-culture consumin', yuppy trash. Which is not a problem, other than you took Peru to task for disparaging those that dare not post photographs. Don't be backhanded.

When your baggin' on people at least have the balls to acknowledge that your baggin' on people, rather than saying "Well, I really thought I was making fun of myself." You weren't and you know it. Otherwise, your no better than Peru for saying "Post photos or I'm gonna think your all liars," then following it up with a "You guys are misinterpreting me."

[topspeed]

The reasons I don't have pictures posted:

1) Like Bernd, I'm technically challenged. I'm lucky I can turn these things on. Seriously. I'm an 'ol Nikon SLR kinda guy.

2) I could care less if anybody believes me or not. This is the internet for Pete's sake! What you own doesn't define your level of passion or depth of knowledge. I don't post my gear in my sig, if someone cares they can look up my moniker. Either way makes no difference to me. I do my best to contribute to this board by offering measured, balanced responses and perhaps a bit of levity now and again. My posts are based on my own experiences and information gleaned from this site and others. Some of my posts are good...some not so much.

If someone doesn't believe me because I don't have photographic "proof", trust me I won't loose sleep over it.

[E-Stat]

There's a real bad tendency to judge people by the pricetag on their gear. Unfortunately this can lead to newbies taking less than optimal advice.

Agreed. For me, it is not about ownership, but exposure and experience. I don't know of anyone who owns a symphony orchestra themselves, but I put more creedence in the opinions of those who have extended exposure to hearing live unamplified music to those who have not.

Before I accepted the position as a moderator (and thus try to be less forward presenting my opinions), I got into a disagreement with a poster over experience. Apparently, he had worked his entire life with television and consumer electronics repair. He had extensive experience with some gear. But zero regarding the topic of discussion. His comments were solely based upon speculation. If the question is automobile performance, I'd rather listen to a guy who has track time with a Modena than a Montana.

rw

[E-Stat]

...mon frere......some gayly colored chicken embryos

Did you realize (according to USA Today) that the most popular color for said is purple? I didn't know that!

rw

[Feanor]

Did you realize (according to USA Today) that the most popular color for said is purple? I didn't know that!

rw

It's not green eggs and ham?????

[Resident Loser]

You're on shakey ground, and you know it. You know that you are not disparaging yourself...When your baggin' on people at least have the balls to acknowledge that your baggin' on people, rather than saying "Well, I really thought I was making fun of myself."...

...can't get anything past you can I?...You mean I was being snotty and sarcastic (so WTF else is new?) when I said "I don't think that highly of myself"...Betcha' @$$ I was...but I can still remain incommunicado to no ones' peril...However it was you who took things out of context and aligned my aversion to cell-phones and their users to my ability to take an educated stab at answerin' some audio-related posts...There is no dichotomy, no conflict...the two are mutually exclusive...In fact it was your contextually-challenged post that prompted me to spew a further, rather precise diatribe re: cellular phone users...blatant, unforgiving and bleedin' obvious (or so I thought)...just to prove the point of their total un-relatedness.

If I were mincing words, backtracking or tryin' to weasel out of what I'd already said, do you think pouring verbal gasoline on the fire would have been a covert way of doing so?

jimHJJ(...jumpin' butterballs!!!...)

[PeruvianSkies]

Wow, this is really turning into an interesting read. I wonder how this epic will end?

[E-Stat]

It's not green eggs and ham?????

No, not ham for Sam.

rw

[kexodusc]

Agreed. For me, it is not about ownership, but exposure and experience. I don't know of anyone who owns a symphony orchestra themselves, but I put more creedence in the opinions of those who have extended exposure to hearing live unamplified music to those who have not.

Exposure and experience - good points. There's people whose opinions I really value because of their exposure, guys like Topspeed, Geoffcin (whatever happened to him) know their gear and are fairly unbiased when providing assessments. Experience, well, I take that with a grain of salt. Technical experience I value highly because in my own experience, there's a fantastic correlation between sound quality and sound design based on proven science. Though, it's disappointing when long held beliefs or positions blind people to possibilities. Subjective experience I'm more cautious in accepting - I hear different than other people. And there's too much ego, legend, and snake oil in audio to rely on this kind of experience unless you know the individual's tastes and preference are very much like your own.

Your last comment is something I totally agree with. Except I would further expand that to include amplified music. Just my preference, but I listen to a lot of it. Gear I like is faithful to both, I don't find these two to be mutually exclusive. Though I can appreciate distortion in amplified music can have the effect of masking flaws in lesser equipment.

Good comments!

[SlumpBuster]

No, RL, I saw your ideas as being related. You don't post photos because you don't own the gadjets to do it. You find those people who own the gadjets to be annoying and believe they think too highly of themselves. Thus, those people that might post pics must think too highly of themselves.

You state that you call them as you see them. But you don't. You use sarcasim to make your venom more palatable. Often times it works. Many times its funny. And, to your credit, your sig generally lets people know where your coming from. But you fail to get as good as you give, which dulls your edge.

If the ideas are truely unrelated as you state, i.e. goofing on yuppies in a post about pics, then I will call it as I see it: That would be a trollish post.

Now excuse me: I have to turn off my Chocolate because my On Star conseirge is calling back with my confirmed dinner and show reservations. And, I have to cut off this tool in traffic ahead of me without looking.

[E-Stat]

Technical experience I value highly because in my own experience, there's a fantastic correlation between sound quality and sound design based on proven science.

And yet, there is some data that while possible to quantify, is rarely available. Here's but one example. Since my choice of speakers exhibits a highly reactive load, they present a challenge to many amplifiers that can result in audible differences. While one can quantify IV analysis in all four quadrants of an amplifier, conventional testing stands mute on that issue. A dummy resistive load is useless in that regard. Therefore, my choice of amp in that system is necessarily affected by its ability to deal with a reactive load.

Except I would further expand that to include amplified music. Just my preference, but I listen to a lot of it. Gear I like is faithful to both, I don't find these two to be mutually exclusive.

Perhaps I should refine my comments. I, too enjoy and listen to a great deal of amplified pop and jazz/new age music. While I enjoy those genres, the "live" reference of these is usually crippled by ear bleeding levels and a less than optimum presentation. I find most good home audio systems are "better" than live in that respect.

rw

[topspeed]

Before I accepted the position as a moderator (and thus try to be less forward presenting my opinions), I got into a disagreement with a poster over experience...

I don't know if this was one of Eric's requirements, but I disagree with this completely. I value and miss both Geoffcin's and your input on a number of topics. One of the reasons you were appointed as a mod was your level of experience and ability to relay that knowledge with an even hand. The board is a lesser place without that input and I for one would greatly welcome more interaction from the mods.

If the question is automobile performance, I'd rather listen to a guy who has track time with a Modena than a Montana.

rw

Not to nit pick, but while your example was good for alliterative purposes, cars are a bad example simply because performance is an objective, not subjective measuring stick. A car (or minivan) goes 0-60 in X seconds, does the quarter in X seconds at X mph, laps the Nordschliefe in X min, X seconds. Audio is almost purely subjective (how else to explain SVI?!?). A person that has track time in a Montana is just as likely to give you good feedback as a person with a Modena. In fact, if he was faster in the Montana, I'd really like to pick his brain!

[kexodusc]

And yet, there is some data that while possible to quantify, is rarely available. Here's but one example. Since my choice of speakers exhibits a highly reactive load, they present a challenge to many amplifiers that can result in audible differences. While one can quantify IV analysis in all four quadrants of an amplifier, conventional testing stands mute on that issue. A dummy resistive load is useless in that regard. Therefore, my choice of amp in that system is necessarily affected by its ability to deal with a reactive load.

Ok, if you say so. That doesn't change the fact I value technical experience based on my observed correlations between sound quality and sound design practices.

If anything I think you've just re-enforced my earlier point - you're selecting an amplifier based on symptoms you've been able to assign to the reactive load of your speakers. If you are absolutely correct in your assessment, then there's some correlation between pleasing sound and amps that don't mind the reactive load. That's more accurate than "I think this can sound better, maybe I need a new amp". You've followed that correlation to a conclusion. That's the kind of experience that blends subjectivity and objectivity that we should see more of.

That's a much more reasoned and calculated process than simply assuming "more power will make those speakers sound better, always".
Too often a person's answer is to throw more money at their system's perceived weak spots. Often they're assessment of a system's weakness is off, and the proposed solution is ineffective at addressing the true weakness. Even worse, they spend their money on an upgrade, and the sound is different, even improved. It's not the optimal upgrade, and the original weakness remains, though the new system sound is better. Voila! - a false cause-and-effect relationship is born. This sage then proceeds to pass his wisdom on to the next budding audiophile. Meanwhile, the most cost-effective, highest yield improvement is overlooked. That's the kind of experience we could use less of.

[E-Stat]

I don't know if this was one of Eric's requirements, but I disagree with this completely. I value and miss both Geoffcin's and your input on a number of topics. One of the reasons you were appointed as a mod was your level of experience and ability to relay that knowledge with an even hand. The board is a lesser place without that input and I for one would greatly welcome more interaction from the mods.

No, I was not told to "tone down" by anyone - that was my perception of what I should do as moderator. Perhaps I overcompensated. Thank you very much for your comments.

Not to nit pick, but while your example was good for alliterative purposes, cars are a bad example simply because performance is an objective, not subjective measuring stick. A car (or minivan) goes 0-60 in X seconds, does the quarter in X seconds at X mph, laps the Nordschliefe in X min, X seconds....A person that has track time in a Montana is just as likely to give you good feedback as a person with a Modena.

My point is that for someone whose ultimate point of reference is cornering at .68 Gs (with severe understeer), they really cannot appreciate what it is like at .95 Gs. Or what it is like to countersteer a transition from oversteer with the rear end hanging loose. That experience is completely absent. If your point of reference is a system with modest capabilities, then it is impossible to imagine what it like to hear a system with higher resolution. How do you know what you don't know? Further, it takes time to develop one's skill at discerning what those differences are (or driving at a much more spirited pace for that matter).

I was certainly not able to fully absorb all the information presented the first time I heard a truly world class system. Or each time I hear the constantly changing systems of my reviewer friends (and mentors for the past 30 odd years). It takes practice. Lots. Which for me is a lot of fun. Listening has always been an active sport. I tend to be a hyper individual and it is a way to keep my mind busy. It is the enjoyment of discovering something new in the completely familiar.

Audio is almost purely subjective (how else to explain SVI?!?).

I will respectfully disagree. Yes, preferences certainly play a role. The discernment of differences, however, should not. Regarding SVI, our young enthusiast needs some guidance. While I was never, um exactly quite like him, I benefited from several older and wiser audio and music enthusiasts when I was much younger. Exposed me to a completely different world of music and audio gear.

Thanks again for the feedback.

rw

[E-Stat]

Ok, if you say so. That doesn't change the fact I value technical experience based on my observed correlations between sound quality and sound design practices.

Don't get me wrong - I welcome any and all measurements that correlate to real world performance. Unfortunately, those remain relatively rare with the usual collection of specifications and test results.

If anything I think you've just re-enforced my earlier point - you're selecting an amplifier based on symptoms you've been able to assign to the reactive load of your speakers. If you are absolutely correct in your assessment, then there's some correlation between pleasing sound and amps that don't mind the reactive load. That's more accurate than "I think this can sound better, maybe I need a new amp". You've followed that correlation to a conclusion. That's the kind of experience that blends subjectivity and objectivity that we should see more of.

I'm glad we agree. As a programmer, I inherently like the elegance of math - where it applies.

That's a much more reasoned and calculated process than simply assuming "more power will make those speakers sound better, always".
Too often a person's answer is to throw more money at their system's perceived weak spots. Often they're assessment of a system's weakness is off, and the proposed solution is ineffective at addressing the true weakness.

If nothing else, what I have learned in my long audio journey is that system matching is everything.

rw

[Resident Loser]

No, RL, I saw your ideas as being related. You don't post photos because you don't own the gadjets to do it. You find those people who own the gadjets to be annoying and believe they think too highly of themselves. Thus, those people that might post pics must think too highly of themselves.

You state that you call them as you see them. But you don't. You use sarcasim to make your venom more palatable. Often times it works. Many times its funny. And, to your credit, your sig generally lets people know where your coming from. But you fail to get as good as you give, which dulls your edge.

If the ideas are truely unrelated as you state, i.e. goofing on yuppies in a post about pics, then I will call it as I see it: That would be a trollish post.

Now excuse me: I have to turn off my Chocolate because my On Star conseirge is calling back with my confirmed dinner and show reservations. And, I have to cut off this tool in traffic ahead of me without looking.

...we can follow this...I don't post pics because in addition to a lack of certain required, but IMO non-essential gadgetry, I chose not to...My response to PS (in respone to his generalized inquiry) gave reasons why some (keep in mind his post gave the impression of a generalized inquiry, there is a reason why I stress this, but read on MacDuff)....and not just myself, might not be able to do so...Bada-bing,,,bada-boom, finito...

Then...as if in some "AHAH!" moment, PS responds, in a way less generalized manner:

...You can come up with lots of excuses for NOT posting pictures and I could understand if you don't have the camera or the scanner, but nowadays that's stretching it a bit as even most phones can take decent pictures...

Firstly, I'm not making excuses...an excuse gives the impression that I must seek some sort of absolution for my Luddite "transgressions"...Again, at this point, I am responding to PS and his generalized (there's that word again) inquiry as to why folks don't or won't post...Prior generalities then become specific...The part that stews my prunes is the absolute astonishment...no, no, make that hubris on his part that someone might not own a cell-phone, particularly with pic cabability...to which I responded in kind with:

...here's one for ya...no cell phone, don't need one, just one single touch-tone telset (no clock, no caller ID, no distinctive ring or call waiting or...) connected to a landline...Don't need to be connected 24/7...I don't think that highly of myself...

I didn't bring up cell-phones...but I sure did respond...Finito redux...

Now for your response...I have no problem with gadgetry...I don't find people who spend their lives at The Sharper Image and like places, buying like wares, annoying...I find folks who have not one wit of common courtesy and/or impinge on innocent bystanders annoying...there's a reason there used to be telephone booths...nobody wants to hear your lame-o commuiques...or your screamin' rugrats (get a sitter)...lessee where that'll go...

Once in a while I find some of the pics of the more esoteric gear, a, er...interesting...Never ending sigs or photos? Well, folks do what they do...Not my cuppa' gov...reminds me of jewelry and horrific amounts of perfume, ostentatious, useless affectation, since much of it is contrived and deliberate. It exhibits itself in the guise of posessions being indicative of some higher level of expertise or somesuch. NOT! Just my POV...Took issue with the egoist ramifications of elaborate sigs w/TtT and others, much like I took issue with JR and his endless "links" most of which were of his own self-promoting device...it's what I do...somebody has to...my raison d'etre...my conceptual continuity...Oh yeah, most do it because they wanna' share...mea culpa...[/I]mea maxima culpa[/I]...(if you're Catholic and of a certain age, you know those phrases).

BTW, I never called anyone yuppy...didn't that term die when "Thirtysomething" passed on?

With regard to your last paragraph, yeah, that's about right...Would that be in a Caddy or Lincoln pick-up? Do you think "high occupancy lane" is really English for auotbahn?

jimHJJ(...sarcasm makes my venom more palatable???...I'll hafta' work on that...BTW, I'm tradin' all my gear for mtrycrafts' boombox, retrofitted with solid silver speaker wires...)

[Rock789]

If anything I think you've just re-enforced my earlier point - you're selecting an amplifier based on symptoms you've been able to assign to the reactive load of your speakers. If you are absolutely correct in your assessment, then there's some correlation between pleasing sound and amps that don't mind the reactive load.

we need to start getting VAR specs on speakers and VAR capability on amps :rofl:

question, do planar speakers have a capacitive load?
hehe

later
Mike