|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
73.133.90.39
In Reply to: RE: Hey John (Atkinson) - why do you bother "hanging around" this website? posted by John Atkinson on January 28, 2016 at 04:28:27
... in being an AA punching bag. You've tried to bring reason to the discourse and all it does is inflame the naysayers. I admire your steadfastness and willingness to engage, but really.
Follow Ups:
There is no such thing as 'bad' publicity when it comes to publications.
Stereophile has a VERY small market largely made up of opinionated a$$-&^%#$.
Speaking only for myself, every time I click on a thread mentioning Stereophile I have to resist the urge to rush off to my doctor's office to filch a year old copy of the magazine.
Just 40 years or so.As to "No bad publicity," tell it to the guy who bought (and is trying to sell) The new Republic.
And more pertinently, all that bad publicity sure did wonders for Peter Aczel.
Edits: 01/28/16
I wish Peter Aczel had posted here.
Regards
Bill
as that's what I have experience dealing with, buying ads as marketing type.
We created the ads and placed them. Our shop was 150-strong when i retired.
Ya know, while IMO there are certainly some ludicrous negative posts here about S'phile, its hardly the case that every complaint about the mag expressed on this forum is unreasonable or unwarranted.
Excepting instances where JA offers to help with things like subscription/delivery problems and occasional technical raps/questions, it seems to me that most of John's participation on Critics is about countering any/all negative posts about S'phile. Apparently he thinks that's worth the time/effort involved.
I don't ascribe his participation to altruism, nor do I see him as a long suffering punching bag.
My criticisms are all technical such as when was the last time each of the reviewers had a hearing test and what were the outcomes? That might be useful to know. Possibly having be exposed to loud sounds as audiophiles, many, even all of them may have suffered serious hearing loss over the years. To those with this condition anything they can still hear at all is a pleasing surprise.
nt
> when was the last time each of the reviewers had a hearing test and what
> were the outcomes?
I published the state of my hearing in my review of the Enigma Sopranino
supertweeter. (See link below.) Kal Rubinson has also published his hearing
test results. To the best of my knowledge, no other writers for any other
magazines have done so. Perhaps you should address your question to them.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Thanks John A. for your input. Just today, I am hooking up a pair of EnigmaAcoustics tweeters, and guess what? I got the same subjective response as was gotten by you guys, without previously knowing that you had reviewed this product. Thanks for your input, we audio designers depend on you for both accurate measurements and overall listening response. Keep on truckin!
> Just today, I am hooking up a pair of EnigmaAcoustics tweeters, and guess
> what? I got the same subjective response as was gotten by you guys,
> without previously knowing that you had reviewed this product.
Something that is always overlooked by the so-called "objectivists" is
that this kind of independent correlation happens all the time.
> Thanks for your input, we audio designers depend on you for both accurate
> measurements and overall listening response.
Thanks John. And in return, keep pushing the envelope in circuits and
parts.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Well, you are not'our dad' thank goodness. '-) For the record, we have known of each other for more than 30 years, but I doubt we have even contacted each other more than a dozen times. I do respect John Atkinson, AND HIS MEASUREMENTS, that I rely on to compare my designs to others. It just so happens that we both have a degree in physics, as well as other education and experience, so we usually have a more open mind about audio design than typical engineers and technicians.
nt
Don't worry Mark, I am famous enough at this point.
Let me see. Hmmm, you were part of the team that proved the existence of the Higgs Boson....No, that was done at Cern.
You were part of the team that devised a new laser spectrometer that will orbit the earth to make new geological measurements....No that was a collaboration between NASA and Jet Propulsion Laboratories.
Hmmm, AHA! Now I remember. You designed some tape recorders for Ampex and some preamplifiers and amplifiers for Mark Levinson and Parasound that people liked and got good reviews.
I'm going to have to make your pedestal a little shorter, in fact I think I can buy just the right thing. A vinyl composite floor tile is 3/16" thick. That should do it. Perfect!
After making Johns pedestal , don't forget your step ladder ... :)
Edits: 01/30/16
Yes, it's a long way down into that manhole. Negative frequency, the square root of minus one, anti matter, unpedestal.
Guessing your approximate age, a cutoff of 14.8 kHz is good. I'll bet a lot of audiophiles decades younger can't hear to nearly that frequency. Makes you wonder of what value so called "high resolution" or "high definition" which requires FR to far beyond 20 kHz depending on who is defining it could be. Seems like a lot of wasted money for something you couldn't possibly have heard even when you were younger and your HF hearing ability was better. So why does a sound system need to have FR extended to 40 kHz and beyond? I say it's a bunch of hooey.
I say it's a bunch of hooey.
Because you are operating on a false premise.
The primary advantage of high resolution digital recordings is to improve the phase response rendered by the (otherwise) brick wall filter required by 16/44.
some folks still don't get it. :)
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: