Interesting, are you qualified, entitled, or feel an urge to quantify and/or otherwise evaluate other peer members activity on a public forum? We use to say here "mind your own business, please".
I was more thinking of the MC headamp thread. Whilst I understand that chasing SOTA noise figures for enjoyment of obsolete formats is a fringe part of the hobby there was a lot of good discussion and debunking the theory of LED driven solar panels as a low noise power source. [/quote]
I only follow selected things. It's a big forum after all.
The intolerance runs both ways and we've lost people from the objective side as well who have been hounded off the forum. Sad really given it's only a hobby.
I'm also slightly confused. If I state that soundstage depth is increased by wearing nipple clamps should I be taken seriously?
OTOH I will defend people's rights to prefer their own particular non-transparent presentation of audio behind closed doors.
I beg to differ. I'm not exactly SYN08's best buddy, we had discussions where
we had opposite points of view, as far as is possible on a rational ground, but
still we had a common ground. I think we could meet in a pub and get out
alive, both, with one or more to the good.
Not so with JC. Really, what are his achievements? That blowthing? A self-
fulfilment job with just enough market penetration that each of the project
participants had one or two, plus a few to bribe the reviewers? Was there a
single one that was sold at the published price? OK, a friend of mine used
to say, "The dumb one who buys it is already alive." There might be a dozen.
And you say, "achievement in audio electronics" as if that was something
wonderful. High Priests of a low cult. Is there anything that makes audio hard?
Other than dowsing rods? When I look for achievements, I look for Dobkins,
Bob Widlar, Barry Gilbert, Jim Williams, Stavic, Hollister and rest of the TEK crew.
And others I don't want to draw into this. People who changed the industry with
their ideas.
Face it. Audio electronics is an entry level playground. 16 year olds can have
some success, feel as gurus at least subjectively, and subjective success is
all that counts here, doesn't it? The Pros are subjectively even better, but would
you feel comfortable if you knew they had been retargeted to build the electron
spin scanner to decide if you really have pancreas cancer?
And what did HE ever bring to the forum other than pontificating? The original
poster of the Blowtorch thread is still waiting for his answer. Or probably not.
It seems he has given up after 10000 empty blablas.
Gerhard
This is exactly it. And to the DAC chip designers coming up with a way to push the state of the art is no doubt highly fulfilling too.
It's the 16 year old whom I would have far more trust in on this front too.
I find it laughable that anyone would take the subjective impressions from anyone relatively old seriously. At least without a high grade hearing test to see where their faculties are at.
It's like oh look another old man giving a subjective review on stereophile. Definitely best to avoid that.
I remember that the difference between 96K and 192K was much larger 20 years ago. I'm not sure if I can hear the difference of current top converters today...
I was shocked with the difference between DSD and PCM mode of EMM AD/DA converters 20 years ago. PCM sounded like a garbage compared to DSD. It was probably because of the intention of EMM to promote DSD. Another conspiracy theory.
I know, it is funny and a little sad that they think they have good enough hearing to be taken seriously, they say it doesn't matter, but they would wouldn't they?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.