If someone on the forum addresses someone else (not you) on the forum and makes the friendly suggestion, " Hey, since you’re reassessing this, try this recording and see what you think," do you really think it’s good form to interject the statement, “That’s a poor way to judge Yale.”???
Yes, yes, you added “IMO in my system” but that’s true of everything anyone posts on this forum. It’s also worth noting that you’ve already expressed your disapproval of this recording in an earlier post and must have surely noted that it struck the recipient as a bit condescending. I have no opinion about this particular recording. I only know that if I had posted a suggestion to someone merely suggesting that the person I was addressing should check out a recording, I would not appreciate another forum member pointing out what a “poor” idea it was. Based upon your many posts, you seem to know exactly what’s best about a great many things. Might it be possible that having the last word on every topic posted here is unnecessary?
Duke of Earl said
There are more than a few audiophile unicorns out there. You'd be surprised.
That's what all the leprechauns say.
The leprechauns are right. Just because you're short or have one horn does not mean you're not there. It just means other folks may not notice. It is all about awareness -- levels of awareness. Consensus, in this regard, does not mean something is right. It often means something is wrong. An exclusionary attitude does not allow for all possibilities to manifest.
vhiner1 said
There's been a lot of speculation about how speaker placement and room tweaks can help one adapt to OS changes. While I can't deny that an OS change might warrant system adjustments, I'm just a tiny bit skeptical. I have watched some pretty well healed audiophiles tweak and adjust their systems from "very decent" to outright uninvolving. Tweaking as a response to new equipment can (though certainly not always) turn into a high dollar version of "whack-a-mole." Fix one thing, then you gotta fix the thing caused by the last thing you fixed, etc. I tend to lean in the direction of "first, do no harm" when it comes to tweaking a system that one already likes.
Consider this story: I knew a guy once who was an equipment “flipper” on audiogon. He moved equipment through his living room like some people change their socks. Because he was a successful physician, the guy only bought whatever the “hottest” products were. The irontic twist was that his wife would not allow him to employ even the most minor room treatment. Sadly, his listening room was made up almost entirely of hard surfaces and, frankly, sounded a bit like a gymnasium. It was FAR from ideal and he was well aware of this problem. Nonetheless, the good doctor was able to assess, analyze and describe equipment with the best of us. In other words, when he said something was lacking, I always discovered later when I heard the same piece of gear in my considerably better room that his assessment was right on the money. After several months of listening to gear in his echo chamber even I began to adapt to it and managed to successfully compare one amplifier to another and arrive at a fairlly accurate conclusion about the gear in question. Whenever the doctor recommended a particular recording, I never regreted buying it. But how could he know what was good when he listened in such a lousy room?? My view is that he learned how to filter out noise and he truly understood what was important to focus on and what was not.
This experience taught me that once you have a familiar reference point, the ability to identify and describe differences between one version of a piece of equipment or music and another is not as system dependent as some assume it is. Some extremely talented music producers and mastering professionals have audio systems many audiophiles would consider shockingly “bad.” I promise that some of your very own heroes in the music business use “horrible” systems to make their decisions. Nonetheless, they are able to assess and differentiate between what is “good” and “bad” far better than I or most anyone else on an audiophile forum can. Tweaks may be useful but it would be unwise to conclude that someone else’s assessment is less accurate or valuable because they don’t or can’t make similar adjustments.
vhiner1,
I conclude from your story that your Dr friend had a relationship issue. When domestic issues impinge on audio matters the results can be less than ideal. IMO.
If someone on the forum addresses someone else (not you) on the forum and makes the friendly suggestion, " Hey, since you’re reassessing this, try this recording and see what you think," do you really think it’s good form to interject the statement, “That’s a poor way to judge Yale.”???
Yes, yes, you added “IMO in my system” but that’s true of everything anyone posts on this forum. It’s also worth noting that you’ve already expressed your disapproval of this recording in an earlier post and must have surely noted that it struck the recipient as a bit condescending. I have no opinion about this particular recording. I only know that if I had posted a suggestion to someone merely suggesting that the person I was addressing should check out a recording, I would not appreciate another forum member pointing out what a “poor” idea it was. Based upon your many posts, you seem to know exactly what’s best about a great many things. Might it be possible that having the last word on every topic posted here is unnecessary?
vhiner1,
I believe my observations are accurate here. They are focused on the recording, not on the person. I never said or implied that any poster was a poor judge or a poor anything. I said the recording was a poor recording to judge FW. That’s all. Just listen to the recording. The sound is not a high quality recording. I suggest listening to high quality recordings to judge high quality FW upgrades like Yale. It is just that simple. Some may feel I am wrong on this. No problem. There is nothing personal in all this. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with having the last word. This is just a forum discussion. Just a discussion.
@Duke,I have no problem listening to any recording and will, no doubt, check out this session. I’m sorry you don’t see that the manner in which you have proposed it is, in fact, offensive. I can’t judge your motives or your heart. I know that when someone has what they think is a “good idea” it doesn’t feel good to have it publicly called out as a “poor” idea. When asked for a bit of empathy and diplomancy, your response is to double down on proving that you’re “right.”
vhiner1 said
@Duke,I have no problem listening to any recording and will, no doubt, check out this session. I'm sorry you don't see that *the manner* in which you have proposed it is, in fact, offensive. I can't judge your motives or your heart. I know that when someone has what they think is a "good idea" it doesn't feel good to have it publicly called out as a "poor" idea. When asked for a bit of empathy and diplomancy, your response is to double down on proving that you're "right."
I tried.
vhiner1,
Once again you have misread what I have said. I did not say or imply anything about “good” or “bad” ideas. Please re-read my posts. Anyone can choose whatever recordings they wish, of course. I simply said that the Brubeck recording was poor quality and this can be assessed by comparing it to other recordings – especially others from the same era. That’s all I said. This has nothing to do with proving I am right. It’s about how my ears feel about different recordings. But now, instead of staying on topic and discussing various viewpoints, the issue has morphed into how I express my ideas. We all have our own style – thank goodness. But it is unfortunate this discussion has become personalized.
vhiner1 said
Yes, it is unfortunate but very easy to fix.
vhiner1,
This assumes there is something to fix. There is not. If you look closely, you will see that my remarks were not personal. But the response to them was personal. There is no need to take offense where none was implied. When it comes to how we express ourselves – different strokes for different folks. I am not a proponent of the imposition of standards of expression on audio forums. We do not need to walk on egg shells here. Let’s let it fly and have some fun. In this regard I think my attitude is similar to alrainbow’s – though our writing styles are obviously different. All IMO.
(massive nested quotes snipped to relevant portion of a single post. Duke, please do not quotes entire posts in your responses, just that portion necessary for context. Elk)
Elk said
Duke, this is humor.
. . .
Please also take your last sentence above to heart. If you, and everyone else, avoid “an exclusionary attitude” our discussions will be much more productive.
Elk,
Your remarks were not taken personally at all. This was intended as a bit of lighthearted repartee. Talking about exclusionary, I mean all opinions should be freely accepted here – for whatever others may think they are worth.
Duke of Earl said
I find it interesting that the use of IMO is frowned upon in this forum . . .
Not in the least. But adding "IMO" does not elevate an insultingly expressed opinion to acceptable.
We strive for a community where adding IMO is wholly unnecessary; we know it is the writer’s opinion and he should never need to add IMO or an emoticon to soften his presentation to make it socially acceptable.
I use “IMHO” as a qualifier to express I’m new to the hobby. Therefore, I’m a lot less experienced as an audiophile than most of user’s here on the forum. Being low man on the totem pole, it can be a little daunting commenting and expressing opinions for a new guy. You never know how it will be perceived, that you’re a Noob who doesn’t know sh*t.
But for the more seasoned guys, I understand your point… If you say something then own it!
No frowning, no worries. I am more soggy than seasoned, anyway. I can’t speak for Elk. I think of Elk as more seasoned. Particularly with salt and garlic, seared to perfection with… oh dear, I’m so sorry.
davidldixon said
I use "IMHO" as a qualifier to express I'm new to the hobby.
An excellent use as well. But we are delighted to learn of your thoughts, however you express them - with or without an IMO.
My point above is to reject the practice of writing something offensive or demeaning to another, and adding IMO as if this makes everything OK. It does not. It remains offensive.
We strive for an open, respectful atmosphere. We do not want to be yet another forum where snarky comments and personal attacks are considered acceptable.
Duke of Earl said
I find it interesting that the use of IMO is frowned upon in this forum . . .
Not in the least. But adding "IMO" does not elevate an insultingly expressed opinion to acceptable.
We strive for a community where adding IMO is wholly unnecessary; we know it is the writer’s opinion and he should never need to add IMO or an emoticon to soften his presentation to make it socially acceptable.
Elk,
Since you have not stated this clearly, is this a general statement or are you referring to a specific instance or specific instances ? If the moderator thinks something is insulting he can simply excise the post. So, this is really a non-issue since insults are not allowed.
You stated that using IMO is not frowned upon here, but "We strive for a community where adding IMO is wholly unnecessary … ". I do not see why an audio community should strive for such a thing. If a someone wants to emphasize such and such, in his or her opinion, what’s the harm in saying so? What is the point of trying to strive for linguistic conformity in this matter? Sorry, I don’t see it. I do not believe in audio political correctness. On the other hand, if IMO is being used to cover up something “insulting”, then whatever is perceived as being “insulting” can be excised by the moderator if he feels there is something offensive in the comments. So, it’s really a moot point. Since the moderator controls these things the forum cannot deteriorate into a place where these kinds of things are allowed to happen. In which case the use of IMO or IMHO cannot be seen as “covering up” anything.
You stated that a writer “should never need to add …” IMO. This may be so, but if one feels like adding IMO of IMHO is one context or another then I don’t see how this could be perceived as a problem. Respect for one another should be the basis for all communication here. That’s pretty clear. In fact, I have yet to see an “insultingly expressed opinion” on this forum. I assume the moderator would not allow such posts and that he has already excised them. There are lots of differing opinions and some sharp rebuttals here but I have yet to read any insults. Since we cannot know if any given person has perceived one comment or another as insulting this may not include where a poster may have taken a specific comment as an insult. In such a rare case one assumes the moderator would have excised the comment if he had perceived it as insulting. So, it seems to me this is a moot point.
I assume the moderator would take care of “snarky comments and personal attacks” with little hesitation. So, as far as I can see, this is a moot point.
I can’t speak for Elk. I think of Elk as more seasoned. Particularly with salt and garlic, seared to perfection with… oh dear, I’m so sorry.