Home Music Lane

It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Music Lane ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

RE: Seriously?

"Right below the first youtube link, RIGHT below it is the correct arrangement that is labeled 1933. So you may have been tired, you may have had a million things to do yadda yadda yadda but you didn't *have* to search for anything more than what you already searched for. It was right there."

Yes. I didn't. I clicked on the first result, it seemed good enough, I went with it.

"I have over 100 unanswered emails alone. I have limited time to spend on this crap."It is not my fault if you don't see the difference."

You are working way too hard to justify yourself.

Try *not* calling people -- or what they do -- stupid, and observe the results. You'll find I think that they become noticeably more friendly.

Debate the issue, not the man. It's a simple rule and, I find, a fairly effective one (though not completely so, since some people will become irate if you merely disagree with them).

"I don't want to be accused of misrepresenting your take on this whole thing "

As I said, I didn't take the time to look for the 1933 version. I was familiar with the 1933 version -- as it happened, so familiar with Tatum that I was able to identify anomalies in the Zenph recreation, which led to a letter in Stereophile -- about a disk which has as its first track the 1933 version.

"And you haven't even touched on the bigger point. that you justified posting the wrong arrangement by saying it still showed that the Yuja Wang performance was 'rhythmically wrong'."

Actually, what I did was respond to Chris's assertion that "BTW, the "silly rhythm" came from Tatum's original - Yuja didn't change a thing."

Here's my post, in response to that:

"I couldn't listen all the way through

"By way of contrast, here's Tatum doing it:

"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKb0Sc2lYVU

"I guess she deserves credit for trying, but you have to be some kind of masochist to try to equal that."

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/music/messages/19/195558.html

Should I have been clearer, or more dilligent? Sure. Do I have the time? No. It's already 10 o'clock and I've been at the computer since 6:30, accomplishing absolutely nothing of what I have to in life. I don't have the time to dot every "i" and cross every "t."

Scott, you were absolutely right to point out that it was the wrong version. My point is just that there are ways of doing that that don't involve a personal attack, or theorizing about what the other person did, or expressing doubt when an explanation is given.

It just so happens that by a fortuitous semi-coincidence, I have published evidence that I'm intimately familiar with the 1933 version, but such evidence doesn't usually come along and in my experience then accusations can lead to a flame war or at least distract from the actual debate. Unless the other person just overlooks them. I've noticed that many do do that successfully, but I'm not very good at it.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Analog Engineering Associates  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]