Come on get reasonable. Yesterday I got in 6 tons of steel just to hold up my current stuff! And that is only for stage 1!
It may not be clear to people who aren't British exactly where the line lies between the evil end of a type of humor and just plain evil.
In particular, I find his statement, "your kind is absolutely rejecting the idea of creating one, by any other means than religious beliefs or hearsay," to be an unfunny rant, and a lie. By referring to, "my kind," he is referring to me, and I find his words highly offensive, and in extremely poor taste.
Given that the forum is an international one and not exclusively British, I think he should know better and conduct himself accordingly.
If you have a problem with Waly there is a red triangle on his post you can press to complain. He has offended many here so you are in good company. But he is right that many of those who claim super hearing, or super brain DSP refute 100+ years of scientific endeavor in hearing research and prefer to create their own definitions.
When you work in a company where refuting science in your day job would probably result in the scrapping of a couple of million dollars of mask set and a pink slip being issued you can see why he has little truck with woo and foo.
When you work in a company where refuting science in your day job would probably result in the scrapping of a couple of million dollars of mask set and a pink slip being issued you can see why he has little truck with woo and foo.
Bill, What you said is perfectly fine, as we both know. We also all know the difference between what you said and what Waly said. I hope Waly understands the difference as well.
Given that a phono section is essentially a low pass filter in most implementations where does slew limiting come in? I can see some argument for possible current limiting in the feedback driving a low feedback impedance. I would think that's a straightforward problem to address.
I guess the criteria is if you don't use any four letter words , its OK. But not really. Waly and Scott too and a few others are always ragging on me if I say anything about listening or hearing anything. yet, both are very book smart in their limited field. Just Scott has toned it down more than Waly.
Electronics is a very broad subject.... designing medical equipment, CT scanners, laser cutting tools, weapons, counter warfare, nuclear detectors, robotics, computers, communications --- and specialists in all areas. Here in DIY audio land, many people have over-lapping talents in electronics but their specialty is never exposed here.
Treating anyone like dirt is just stupid no matter what your expertise is.
-Richard
Last edited:
Richard, I think it has something to do with that fact that it's easy to see the other guy's faults, limitations, biases, etc., but much more difficult or impossible to see one's own. We are all human, with human brains, and no matter how smart and how educated, all make mistakes in our thinking.
To see and become frustrated with the faults of some people referred to as audiophiles is easy to understand. Sure, they are so crazy and intolerable, right? But, what about the crazy doctor who believes everything that can be known about human diseases is already known, or the crazy engineer who believes everything that can be known about humans and audio is already known. Each one can see the other's faults, but is blind to their own. (I know I didn't cover everything in the above paragraph, but it is a summary of psychological research contained in many books and voluminous journal articles. I will keep it brief unless there are questions.)
Getting back to the forum, so it's easy for the "serious" engineers to see the audiophiles are crazy and intolerable. So, the serious engineers get upset in an entirely human way, and respond in a way that may also be pretty crazy to an outside observer, but felt to be justified by the "serious" engineers. (Justification is a whole other large subject.)
So far, what I have described is well withing S.O.P for humans, but not necessarily unresolvable. Where it gets to be a problem is when it gets to the point that civil discussion is no longer possible. When the other side is perceived as evil, there is no point in talking. The only thing that can happen by talking is that they can corrupt you. So, talking about it is not permitted, it would be a violation of righteousness. (By the way, this same aspect of human nature discussed in this paragraph has been found to active in the prohibited subjects for this forum. However, when it rears it's ugly head in audio-talk, it may not be recognized for what it is. Again, the basis for the comments in the immediately foregoing come from a considerable body of research. For the sake of brevity I will conclude the summary here unless there are questions.)
Waly appears to be stuck in the stage where it is felt wrongful to engage in civil talk with the the "other side." Once there, there are a lot self-reinforcing mechanisms to justify and maintain it.
I don't know Waly other than from a few words in this forum, so while the pattern of behavior is recognizable (not just from Waly, but also from the way things were here when I first joined), I don't know how stuck he may be in it. That he isn't following the lead of others who have decided to lighten up a little would be a sign for concern.
In any case, he should conduct himself civilly, or avoid conversations where he can't. And if he continues to violate Rule 1 with his words, then red buttons may need to be pushed.
To see and become frustrated with the faults of some people referred to as audiophiles is easy to understand. Sure, they are so crazy and intolerable, right? But, what about the crazy doctor who believes everything that can be known about human diseases is already known, or the crazy engineer who believes everything that can be known about humans and audio is already known. Each one can see the other's faults, but is blind to their own. (I know I didn't cover everything in the above paragraph, but it is a summary of psychological research contained in many books and voluminous journal articles. I will keep it brief unless there are questions.)
Getting back to the forum, so it's easy for the "serious" engineers to see the audiophiles are crazy and intolerable. So, the serious engineers get upset in an entirely human way, and respond in a way that may also be pretty crazy to an outside observer, but felt to be justified by the "serious" engineers. (Justification is a whole other large subject.)
So far, what I have described is well withing S.O.P for humans, but not necessarily unresolvable. Where it gets to be a problem is when it gets to the point that civil discussion is no longer possible. When the other side is perceived as evil, there is no point in talking. The only thing that can happen by talking is that they can corrupt you. So, talking about it is not permitted, it would be a violation of righteousness. (By the way, this same aspect of human nature discussed in this paragraph has been found to active in the prohibited subjects for this forum. However, when it rears it's ugly head in audio-talk, it may not be recognized for what it is. Again, the basis for the comments in the immediately foregoing come from a considerable body of research. For the sake of brevity I will conclude the summary here unless there are questions.)
Waly appears to be stuck in the stage where it is felt wrongful to engage in civil talk with the the "other side." Once there, there are a lot self-reinforcing mechanisms to justify and maintain it.
I don't know Waly other than from a few words in this forum, so while the pattern of behavior is recognizable (not just from Waly, but also from the way things were here when I first joined), I don't know how stuck he may be in it. That he isn't following the lead of others who have decided to lighten up a little would be a sign for concern.
In any case, he should conduct himself civilly, or avoid conversations where he can't. And if he continues to violate Rule 1 with his words, then red buttons may need to be pushed.
Mark: spare us the new york Times bestsellers list analysis and face facts
1. This is the lounge
2. This is not your forum
3. The moderators are awesome
If you don't like it or your skin is not thick enough, then this is not the forum for you. But I don't want it or the people to change. I'm not interested in Richard's car collection or art project kitchen, but he is free to discuss it in this area. Likewise Richard is not interested in the things I do. Free world, free forum and hoorah for that.
But BS can and IMO should be called out.
In other news I heared about the first (for me) 9.1 Atmos recording of classical music being released. The future, or just another multichannel dead end?
1. This is the lounge
2. This is not your forum
3. The moderators are awesome
If you don't like it or your skin is not thick enough, then this is not the forum for you. But I don't want it or the people to change. I'm not interested in Richard's car collection or art project kitchen, but he is free to discuss it in this area. Likewise Richard is not interested in the things I do. Free world, free forum and hoorah for that.
But BS can and IMO should be called out.
In other news I heared about the first (for me) 9.1 Atmos recording of classical music being released. The future, or just another multichannel dead end?
Hilarious, I have chosen to stay out of anymore of these discussions the technical content is minimal and the mistakes, misconceptions, and downright nonsense come back in a circle every few weeks.
^ Every once in a while Gerhard drops a circuit or noise analysis on this thread, but that's been the last technical for ages. When I did the lit review a few weeks ago -- well, that was a waste.
Years ago I proposed to rename this thread to 'John Curl's Blowtorch and Solder Bar' but somehow it didn't stick. But one can hope ;-)
Jan
Jan
People have tried to modifiy (or P on) this thread for more than a decade. I have striven to keep the thread open to subjective or even 'unproven' opinions about audio, but it was continually demoted finally to the 'lounge'. I certainly did not want this, but I have had to live with it. Still, even in 'lounge' mode, my actual opinions about what is important for successful audio design is often debunked, yet I remain a successful contemporary audio designer, one of the best, in fact. Maybe I have something useful to contribute? '-)
For example, I have seen several schematics of inexpensive phono stages that run rings around the last schematic posted here. It may not be obvious, but years of experience and actual implementation of various circuits over the decades have shown some circuits work better than others. This is what we should be discussing, not just throwing personal insults at others.
For example, I have seen several schematics of inexpensive phono stages that run rings around the last schematic posted here. It may not be obvious, but years of experience and actual implementation of various circuits over the decades have shown some circuits work better than others. This is what we should be discussing, not just throwing personal insults at others.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.