Yes so it seems , just an archaic term. "Frequency response" would cover it quite well in relation to decibel level.
"Sharpness""Tonality" et.al.....exist only to confuse or otherwise entertain readers. Writing concisely is quite frankly, boring. By sparkling things up with "new" & "different" words, one attracts attention.
By attaching that link to Psycho-acoustics, your trying to legitimize this marketing process. If Websters Dictionary can legitimize the word "bootylicious" by actually including in their latest Edition, well, all bets are off.
What's next? Do your fancy cables eliminate that bitter sound? Do you prefer that sweet sound instead? Do those "bad" cables have that sour sound in the upper registers?
____________________________________________________Rick.............
By attaching that link to Psycho-acoustics, your trying to legitimize this marketing process. If Websters Dictionary can legitimize the word "bootylicious" by actually including in their latest Edition, well, all bets are off.
What's next? Do your fancy cables eliminate that bitter sound? Do you prefer that sweet sound instead? Do those "bad" cables have that sour sound in the upper registers?
____________________________________________________Rick.............
Dictionaries don't legitimize, they document a language. Ask any lexicographer. If someone thinks a work is "legitimate" because it appears in the dictionary (or not), that is in the imagination of that person. A dictionary is not a language academy.
There was a famous wine review where the English wine critic said a wine had an aroma "like entrails of roast woodcock". Does anybody even know what roast woodcock smells like? I know they are small birds, but does one really roast them with the entrails still inside? I prefer to sautee mine in snake oil.
The funny thing is that it makes other people's lists as well. There's a lot of inside jokes there (e.g., who the hell is Brad Kane? What's the significance of Joe Dressner as importer?) given the audience at the time, but still, I think it holds up.
edit: I should note that the importer, Dressner, sold everything he had within a week that the review appeared. Nonetheless, he was furious with me and carried a grudge until the day he died. Joe was a superb importer, the sort where nothing he brought in was boring.
edit: I should note that the importer, Dressner, sold everything he had within a week that the review appeared. Nonetheless, he was furious with me and carried a grudge until the day he died. Joe was a superb importer, the sort where nothing he brought in was boring.
Audience Au24 SE interconnect | Stereophile.com
Description: RCA-terminated interconnect cable.
Serial numbers of units reviewed: NA.
Price: $1190/1m pair; upgrade from Au24e to Au24 SE, $220/1m pair. Approximate number of US dealers: 110.
"At one end, the Nordost Valhalla is sharply (
)focused and excels at reproducing transients. At the other end, the Nirvana S-X strips away electronic grunge, and beautifully conveys the continuity of the space and musical flow. The Au24e and Stereovox are near the middle and share many—but not all—of the others' strengths.......
........ As an engineer, I'm pretty hung up on accuracy; snafus like this are frustrating and really stress me. But I'm relieved to report that the news is all good. The Au24 SE interconnect sounded a bit different from the Low-Z phono cable but was every bit as good and, as before, a significant step up from the standard Au24 e interconnect. When I directly compared the Low-Z phono cable and the actual Au24 SE interconnect, I found that the main difference was that the phono cable emphasized temporal and spatial precision a bit more, whereas the interconnect did a better job of reproducing tonal nuances and subtle inner detail"
Okay that's enough blather on here, if you wish to have a good chuckle go read the rest of it for yourself.
Ahhhhhhhh yes thank you Stereophile for yest once more stretching the limits of credible reviewing.
Description: RCA-terminated interconnect cable.
Serial numbers of units reviewed: NA.
Price: $1190/1m pair; upgrade from Au24e to Au24 SE, $220/1m pair. Approximate number of US dealers: 110.
"At one end, the Nordost Valhalla is sharply (
)focused and excels at reproducing transients. At the other end, the Nirvana S-X strips away electronic grunge, and beautifully conveys the continuity of the space and musical flow. The Au24e and Stereovox are near the middle and share many—but not all—of the others' strengths............... As an engineer, I'm pretty hung up on accuracy; snafus like this are frustrating and really stress me. But I'm relieved to report that the news is all good. The Au24 SE interconnect sounded a bit different from the Low-Z phono cable but was every bit as good and, as before, a significant step up from the standard Au24 e interconnect. When I directly compared the Low-Z phono cable and the actual Au24 SE interconnect, I found that the main difference was that the phono cable emphasized temporal and spatial precision a bit more, whereas the interconnect did a better job of reproducing tonal nuances and subtle inner detail"
Okay that's enough blather on here, if you wish to have a good chuckle go read the rest of it for yourself.
Ahhhhhhhh yes thank you Stereophile for yest once more stretching the limits of credible reviewing.
If a dictionary is not the source of legitimization, then what is? Tell me of a body of words, a source, commonly available to the public. ???
I was "trained" as it were, in the Journalistic style, without the boatload of crap floating around, passing as "writing style". My Editor reveled in butchering my text with his red pen... A lesson well learned, the ability to see thru the "fog" & get to the meat of the meaning.
This is why I'm fully entertained by political speak & lawyer jargon, absolute garbage.
PS., The closest thing to a music/sound description using "sharpness" .......Abrupt., (Websters).
------------------------------------------------------Rick..........
Last edited:
The trouble is... Music is a very human thing, delicate sometimes, creates an emotional response. We all love the stuff!!
Now we know scientifically, just how music is put together, why it sounds the way it does. So, we have two diametrically opposed entities, fighting each other.
It's almost a left brain vs. the right brain thing.
We reach into other descriptions, soft, sweet et. al. looking to describe something we know not what.
Truly a no-win scenario.
_________________________________________________Rick...............
Now we know scientifically, just how music is put together, why it sounds the way it does. So, we have two diametrically opposed entities, fighting each other.
It's almost a left brain vs. the right brain thing.
We reach into other descriptions, soft, sweet et. al. looking to describe something we know not what.
Truly a no-win scenario.
_________________________________________________Rick...............
If inventing new words or new meanings was always a sign of creativity then I could understand why dictionaries are so keen to include them. Nowadays such 'invention' is more likely to be a sign of laziness, poor education or cultural imperialism.
I suppose dictionaries need to include things which people like me rarely encounter so we can understand what other people mean when they mangle our language, but they should at least mark them as a recent innovation and comment that an alternative already exists or point out an incorrect usage. That would clip the wings of those who try to claim dictionary legitimisation for their poor language skills. The alternative is an 'Alice' type world where words mean whatever the speaker wants them to mean; the end result is that no meaningful communication can take place.
I suppose dictionaries need to include things which people like me rarely encounter so we can understand what other people mean when they mangle our language, but they should at least mark them as a recent innovation and comment that an alternative already exists or point out an incorrect usage. That would clip the wings of those who try to claim dictionary legitimisation for their poor language skills. The alternative is an 'Alice' type world where words mean whatever the speaker wants them to mean; the end result is that no meaningful communication can take place.
DF, that's the basic argument of the prescriptivists. The descriptivists counter-argue that a language is not a fly in amber, it's something living and constantly changing, and that the purpose of a dictionary or grammar guide is to note and record those changes, to be a follower rather than a leader, as it were.
I think I am arguing for modified prescriptivism. Note the change, but note that it is a change and may be an unnecessary or mistaken change. In time the innovation will either fade away or become the new orthodoxy.
Taking descriptivism to its logical conclusion would mean that there is nothing for (native) language teachers to teach in school; just let the kids communicate as best they can using whatever words and grammar they choose to invent. Actually, maybe that has already happened. It would explain some of the posts on some websites, although thankfully on here most people can still manage some approximation to written English.
Taking descriptivism to its logical conclusion would mean that there is nothing for (native) language teachers to teach in school; just let the kids communicate as best they can using whatever words and grammar they choose to invent. Actually, maybe that has already happened. It would explain some of the posts on some websites, although thankfully on here most people can still manage some approximation to written English.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.