Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Return to Critic's Corner

Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG

74.111.124.109
Posted on October 20, 2009 at 07:04:30
TeddiJackEddie
Audiophile

Posts: 1068
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Joined: January 2, 2004
 As I read Art Dudley's bashing of BassNut, I was reminded of how it used to be in the old days - before the internet. People used to write letters to the editor complaining about one thing or another - sometimes totally right, sometimes totally wrong.

One such editor, who shall remain nameless (but could star on the show 'The World's Biggest Loser'), used to take a month or two to come up with a clever retort. Then people with supposedly high IQs all over the world, while reading the Letters to the Editor, would say "boy, he really nailed that complaining SOB in the Letters section, didn't he!"

I've been away for awhile, but I must say that when I used to go round and round with John Atkinson, he was a mighty adversary and he didn't have the luxury of a month to think of a clever retort - usually only minutes.

I read Art Dudley's pieces and I generally enjoy them and half-heartedly agree with some of what he says, but I think trashing RBNG with RBNG being unable to defend himself was really bad sportsmanship. A throwback to audio's yesteryear.

Has anyone checked to see if Art has gained 150 pounds and is sitting alone in a dark listening room, farting, burping and cutting out coupons?

TeddiJackEddie

RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 25, 2009 at 07:51:49
mazort
Audiophile

Posts: 47
Location: San Antone
Joined: February 28, 2003
 Art is great (and so was this thread, I haven't laughed so hard in years...), and we (and JA) are lucky to have him. He's been around, he knows what he's talking about, he can hear, he's actually edited one of the best hi-fi magazines that ever existed and (unlike most) Art can write!
this has been a real battle of wits, posted on October 22, 2009 at 16:23:24
hifitommy
Audiophile

Posts: 9503
Location: shaky sylmar calif, orig from buffalo ny
Joined: June 9, 2000
 some armed, and some not.

...regards...tr

RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 22, 2009 at 02:42:17
Myles B. Astor
Reviewer

Posts: 147
Location: New York City, NY
Joined: April 12, 2000
 Who gives a crap about this stuff? Let's all grow up. There are too many people here who get off on starting arguments. Just taking up more bandwidth with this.

What ever did happend to the olde days of AA (or TAN) where we actually talked about our audio equipment and/or music rather than bashing each other and denigarting high-end audio? There are just so few forums left reading that are of any use.


Myles B. Astor
Audio ???, posted on October 22, 2009 at 05:32:14
TeddiJackEddie
Audiophile

Posts: 1068
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Joined: January 2, 2004
 Before I left here the last time, I thought you'd gone totally over to the land of television. Art Dudley made a joke in his column about folks watching soaps in the afternoon. Is that what offended you? This is quite a turnaround from your usual A/V agenda. Isn't there a plasma out there that requires your immediate attention?

RE: Audio ???, posted on October 22, 2009 at 19:28:15
Myles B. Astor
Reviewer

Posts: 147
Location: New York City, NY
Joined: April 12, 2000
 Are you on acid?
Myles B. Astor
No, but when..., posted on October 23, 2009 at 07:03:06
TeddiJackEddie
Audiophile

Posts: 1068
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Joined: January 2, 2004
 I listen to your bullshit, I think I must be. After all, I'm not the person who listened to Dark Side of the Moon ten times a day and then called his dorky friends to discuss it. Now that sounds like somebody on acid. But I suppose it's just somebody who's not really a music listener, as borne out by how you acted when you had audio and abandoned it for video.

You accused me of ruining "our" hobby above. You were the worst poster boy for audio there ever was, as shown every other month in Stereophile. Instead of being embarrassed, you think you're cool. Let me tell you, you should be embarrassed.

Then you say I'm making nasty comments when I'm only commenting about Art Dudley's nasty comments. Miles, please say NO to LSD.

RE: No, but when..., posted on October 23, 2009 at 08:55:30
Myles B. Astor
Reviewer

Posts: 147
Location: New York City, NY
Joined: April 12, 2000
 TJE writes: I listen to your bullshit, I think I must be. After all, I'm not the person who listened to Dark Side of the Moon ten times a day and then called his dorky friends to discuss it. Now that sounds like somebody on acid. But I suppose it's just somebody who's not really a music listener, as borne out by how you acted when you had audio and abandoned it for video.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Really? Where did you ever read about me listening to DSOM 10 times? Give me the specifics. Huh? Huh you know you can't. You think you really know me while you hide behind your computer screen. Have you ever met me or even been to my home. As always, you don't know what you're talking about.

TJE writes: You accused me of ruining "our" hobby above. You were the worst poster boy for audio there ever was, as shown every other month in Stereophile. Instead of being embarrassed, you think you're cool. Let me tell you, you should be embarrassed.


Get the spelling right dork.


Myles B. Astor
To answer a few..., posted on October 23, 2009 at 13:23:25
TeddiJackEddie
Audiophile

Posts: 1068
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Joined: January 2, 2004
 of your questions:

Yes, in fact, I have met you and emphatically NO, I never want to come to your house.

So I'm not sure if it was DSOM or some other dorky test record (perhaps Casino Royale) - people only need to go to the Stereophile website and look up your ex-wife's articles about your "odd" behavior.

I guess if you were a true music lover, she wouldn't have had much to write about all those times. Are you now watching 'Top Gun' ten times and calling your dorky friends?

Great tactic - attack someone's misspelling when you can't defend yourself any other way. I guess the truth hurts.

I'm ending this conversation with you. So you may have the last word, because even writing to you is creepy. See ya around.

RE: To answer a few..., posted on October 23, 2009 at 15:44:34
Myles B. Astor
Reviewer

Posts: 147
Location: New York City, NY
Joined: April 12, 2000
 YES I'm the Antichrist. Run away....

BTW, another one of your incorrect assertations. Show me when I ever abandoned high-end audio. You've made the allegations and it's up to you to back up what you've written. Why don't you also check your facts? Why let the facts get in the way of a good story. Go to the SP website and show me where any of the Astorplace articles exist. You know you can't because they don't exist. So much for facts.

Oh and for the record, I've never had anything but a passing interest in video -- as in having a TV to watch movies and the much beloved Giants and Yankees. Oh and since I've abandoned high-end audio and music, my LP collection has swelled to 10,000 LPs and now numbers around 75 15 ips/2-track reel to reel tapes (along with smattering of CDs). Guess I don't listen to music. Nor do I go to concerts in the city that probably has the most musical events of any in the country.

Next time, know what you're talking about.

Your friend,

Freddy
The Devil reincarnate
Myles B. Astor
RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 20, 2009 at 20:59:56
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 "Has anyone checked to see if Art has gained 150 pounds and is sitting alone in a dark listening room, farting, burping and cutting out coupons?"

No, but he may be getting old, which is often accompanied by hormonal changes (even in men) and increase in bitterness and paranoia (grumpy old man?)

Just Joe

Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
A question JJ (for you) that RBNG never answered, posted on October 21, 2009 at 12:42:56
lancelot
Audiophile

Posts: 1232
Joined: March 23, 2001
In the big hoopla over Art Dudley's comments concerning RBNG , I found Art's reflections on why someone would obsessively post on a forum devoted to something they ( RBNG) fundamentally disagreed with, the most interesting. As Art says, " A pathetic desire to shape the likes and dislikes of others". IMO, the man has *issues* and deserved to be called out

AA is an enthusiasts forum that welcomes divergent opinion while, at the same time, assuming some mutual interest and agreement on the big picture ( components can sound different from each other ).

I understand that your opinions also do not reflect the vast majority of posters here. I have no problem with that. But you and others seem hell bent on trying to save us from ourselves when we never asked for help.
I'm not sure that says way more about you than us.

So , why are you here?

RE: A question JJ (for you) that RBNG never answered, posted on October 21, 2009 at 22:03:17
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 "AA is an enthusiasts forum that welcomes divergent opinion while, at the same time, assuming some mutual interest and agreement on the big picture ( components can sound different from each other )."

So...I never said components can't sound different from each other.
They absolutely can.
Whatever gave you the idea I think otherwise?
Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
Why I am here, posted on October 21, 2009 at 21:49:10
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 It beats watching the crap on TV.
Barely.
Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
Hmmmmmm......maybe you should consider, posted on October 25, 2009 at 08:03:45
Bruce Kendall
Dealer

Posts: 26637
Location: SoCal
Joined: February 4, 2005
Contributor
  Since: February 4, 2005
 listening to music instead.



Sounds like Art Dudley is projecting., posted on October 21, 2009 at 14:41:19
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 7558
Joined: June 20, 2000
 Sir Lancelot
" As Art says, " A pathetic desire to shape the likes and dislikes of others". IMO, the man has *issues* and deserved to be called out"

Sounds like Art Dudley himself! It certainly doesn't describe Richard Greene, who doesn't much care about the audio likes and dislikes of other people.

"Probability is the very guide to life."---Cicero
"getting old, which is often accompanied by ... bitterness and paranoia", posted on October 21, 2009 at 11:50:42
Rob Doorack
Audiophile

Posts: 4706
Joined: May 26, 2000
 If that's true then your Svengali Peter Aczel must be especially bitter and paranoid since he's at least 20 years older than Mr. Dudley.

RE: "getting old, which is often accompanied by ... bitterness and paranoia", posted on October 21, 2009 at 12:07:10
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 Of course he must be. He writes somewhat crankily. But he is an educated man, who shows great discrimination in his reviews. If he likes something, he likes it, and here's the important thing:
He doesn't like EVERYTHING HE reviews. In fact he doesn't like most audio gear, and only like some of it.

Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
RE: "getting old, which is often accompanied by ... bitterness and paranoia", posted on October 21, 2009 at 12:14:50
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 > In fact he doesn't like most audio gear, and only like some of it.

WTF are you talking about ... he thinks that most amplifiers, preamps, CD Players, etc. sound exactly the same... in fact he seems to only bother listening to stuff that has obviously inferior measurements, the rest it seems doesn't even warrant a listen bucause, a priori, all such sound identical.

This has been discussed many times, resplendent with examples and quotes... you just don't seem to have the slightest clue!

Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
Some would say that 52 is pretty far from young, too - wouldn't you say?, posted on October 21, 2009 at 08:17:28
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 You do realize that those hormonal changes apply to you as well, right?
RE: Some would say that 52 is pretty far from young, too - wouldn't you say?, posted on October 21, 2009 at 11:08:18
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 Never said I wasn't grumpy.
I just don't attach people in print.
Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
So your being grumpy, paranoid and attacking people here is somehow different? (nt), posted on October 21, 2009 at 12:30:16
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 15929
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
Contributor
  Since: December 28, 2003
 (nt)

RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 20, 2009 at 17:53:31
Dave Garretson
Audiophile

Posts: 1620
Location: New Jersey
Joined: June 14, 2005
 The mere fact of RBNG as subject of a Stereophile column validates recent cancellation of subscription.

RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 21, 2009 at 07:47:25
Gerry E.
Audiophile

Posts: 1655
Location: Hartford, Connect-I-Cut
Joined: February 19, 2000
Contributor
  Since: March 2, 2004
 "The mere fact of RBNG as subject of a Stereophile column validates recent cancellation of subscription."

LOL! I am struggling with a renewal notice I just got. Even though my subscription doesn't end until the May, 2010 isuue, the renewal letter wording makes it appear that it ends tomorrow.

The deal isn't bad, about $12/year for up to three years. However, will they even be around in one year, let alone three? Of course the my biggest beef with them is the review component "value argument".

Gerry

Are they asking for money in advance?, posted on October 21, 2009 at 21:47:02
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 "However, will they even be around in one year, let alone three?"

Are they asking for money in advance for a 3 year subscription? If they are, that is an indication they may be folding. I doubt if they are making any money. I haven;t read high end rags like s-pile in years. Are they getting any sort of ad revenue anymore...I mean is there an audiophile manufacturer who has made enough money to advertise there? Or are they relying on retired dentists to finance ads for the first few months of said Dentists' new "audiophile business" ventures, before these high rollers figure out that high end audio is a major money losing "business"?
Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
RE: Are they asking for money in advance?, posted on October 22, 2009 at 04:35:12
Rob Doorack
Audiophile

Posts: 4706
Joined: May 26, 2000
 >>If they are, that is an indication they may be folding<<

That's amazingly stupid. What magazine offers a pay - as - you - go subscription? Here's how subscriptions work on our planet: you pay in advance for a certain number of issues over a certain amount of time, then the company sends you magazines on a regular basis.

Of course you might have been referring to the audio community's experience with your guru Peter Aczel, who sold subscriptions to The Audio Critic and then disappeared for a decade or more.

I meant are the yasking for a THREE year subscription, posted on October 22, 2009 at 04:43:21
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 instead of a 1 year. I should have been more specific.
Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
Plenty of magazines offer 3 year subscriptions., posted on October 22, 2009 at 05:59:59
Rob Doorack
Audiophile

Posts: 4706
Joined: May 26, 2000
 An offer of a three year subscription implies exactly nothing about a magazine's financial stability; it's just a way for a magazine to lock in a reader for a longer time. Magazine Publishing 101: the price of an ad in a magazine is based in part on the number of people who will view it, and it costs less for a magazine to retain a current subscriber than to recruit a new one, so it's to the magazine's advantage to offer long term subscriptions.

So are my speculations true then?, posted on October 22, 2009 at 08:46:04
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 has stereophile's ad revenue fallen over the last year or two?
Do tell.

Just JOe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
RE: So are my speculations true then?, posted on October 22, 2009 at 10:54:28
John Atkinson
Reviewer

Posts: 1900
Location: New York
Joined: November 24, 2003
 >So are my speculations true then? Has stereophile's ad revenue fallen over the last
>year or two?

Yes, the magazine's gross revenue has fallen somewhat 2009 compared with 2008
but in case you hadn't noticed, the economy is not in good shape right now. Even so,
according to our research department, we have actually increased market share for
advertising. In fact, they tell me that more than one in three ad pages from audio and
video manufacturers that are published in US consumer magazines appears in
Stereophile. And that one in two ad pages appears in Stereophile and its sister
magazine Home Theater.

It would appear, therefore, that your predictions of Stereophile's demise are
incorrect. I note that in another posting, you say you are tired of people defending
Stereophile - perhaps you should stop publicly fantasizing about the magazine,
therefore?

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 21, 2009 at 08:27:18
Dave Garretson
Audiophile

Posts: 1620
Location: New Jersey
Joined: June 14, 2005
 My decision to cancel was price-independent.

Apart from the occasional boilermaker, it's generally a bad idea to mix spirits with beer. But if Stereophile really wants to make print journalism from forum noise, there's probably no one better suited for the job than Art-- whose column gives new meaning to the term "sub-woofer"(no disrespect intended to RBNG.)

He he he he, posted on October 21, 2009 at 21:53:00
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 "Art-- whose column gives new meaning to the term "sub-woofer"(no disrespect intended to RBNG.) "

he he , you just said Art is lower than a dog. he he

funny.
:)
Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
A mighty adversary?, posted on October 20, 2009 at 17:23:33
Diode
Audiophile

Posts: 310
Location: SE Wis
Joined: September 11, 2005
 ""I've been away for awhile, but I must say that when I used to go round and round with John Atkinson, he was a mighty adversary and he didn't have the luxury of a month to think of a clever retort - usually only minutes.""

A mighty adversary? John Atkinson can be awfully quiet and mouse-like when confronted on the issues. I've challenged Atkinson a couple of times on the appropriateness of allowing Stereophile columnists and writers to express their misguided leftist political views in their columns and reviews, and Atkinson has remained silent on the issue. A mighty adversary indeed.
Now I will admit that Stereophile pages aren't packed to the ceiling with political commentary, but politics is a touchy subject these days, and in my opinion any political commentary at all is too much commentary and has no business appearing in a non-political magazine devoted to the review of stereo equipment. When reading a review about a piece of stereo equipment I don't want to have to sift through the caustic comments of a reviewer that hates Republicans and conservatism.

Now on the other hand if you were to say that Sterophile columnist Michael
Fremer is a mighty adversary, then I would whole-heartedly agree with that statement - I've gone a couple of rounds with Fremer over his expressing his misguided political views in his column, and Fremer came at me with a hatred and a vengeance that was breathtaking to behold... not to mention a crude and vulgar vocabulary that would make a sailer blush. Fremer doesn't seem to possess too much of that vaunted liberal tolerance for other peoples' opinions and viewpoints.
Unfortunately after all was said and done Fremer remained clueless on the inappropriateness of expressing political views in a magazine devoted to the review of stereo equipment, which is a pity, because until editor in chief John Atkinson makes a policy change I for one will continue not subscribing to or reading Stereophile magazine.

RE: A mighty adversary?, posted on October 21, 2009 at 21:51:39
powermatic
Audiophile

Posts: 5600
Location: central oregon
Joined: November 24, 2005
Contributor
  Since: March 1, 2008
 Actually, if JA's posts here are any indication, he's much more a master of debate than your heroic Fremer-if there's any truth to the statement that 'he who loses his temper first, loses the argument', Fremer is a sad and lamentable adversary. Kudos to JA for his quiet and articulate reasonings. And that's from someone who doesn't necessarily agree with JA, or disagree with MF-but in in a war of words, style and articulation are dominant.



"dammit"
Well ..., posted on October 22, 2009 at 12:48:25
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 JA did call me a crackhead once, now was that nice?

LOL
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
RE: Well ..., posted on October 22, 2009 at 15:32:29
John Atkinson
Reviewer

Posts: 1900
Location: New York
Joined: November 24, 2003
 >JA did call me a crackhead once, now was that nice?

I did say it politely :-)


John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
RE: Well ..., posted on October 22, 2009 at 18:34:27
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 "I did say it politely."

Hmmmm....? Missed that... must be my lack of objectivity.

:)
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
wow, this is tedious, posted on October 21, 2009 at 08:37:23
Bruce from DC
Bored Member

Posts: 18019
Location: U.S. Capital
Joined: October 13, 1999
Contributor
  Since: March 1, 1999
 I happen not to share Messrs. Fremer and Dudley's "misguided leftist political views" but I don't read Stereophile for political commentary. So, it's just "noise" that I pretty much ignore, or you could say that it's part of their respective personalities.

As for your claim that Fremer was a "mighty adversary" who unleashed a fusillade of language that would make a sailor blush, well in MF's defense, if I were in his shoes and some person unknown to me started lecturing me on my misguided political views, I would probably do more than quietly ask him to "reconsider the substance of his potentially unfortunate comments," too!

Lighten up while you still can.


very tedious, indeed, posted on October 22, 2009 at 16:14:21
rbolaw
Audiophile

Posts: 653
Location: NYC
Joined: December 28, 2004
 John Atkinson puts out a (presumably still at least somewhat) profitable general circulation magazine. That used to be hard to do. Now it is very, very hard to do. He does it without publishing any stories about Jennifer Anniston or reality TV contestants, or any photos of women displaying their genitals. Even more remarkably, he publishes articles that often string together more than six consecutive grammatical English sentences. Yet his magazine is still on the newsstands.
I too find political pundit pronouncements, both from the left and from the right, tedious, mainly because we are bombarded with too many of them these days. However, if Mr. Atkinson thinks they help Stereophile's circulation numbers, who are you or I to second guess him?

Re: "...without publishing any...photos of women displaying their genitals.", posted on October 23, 2009 at 19:04:24
Neil49
Audiophile

Posts: 7973
Location: Northern Virginia
Joined: June 13, 2003
 Glad about that. Can you imagine how much more they would charge for my subscription if they did?

Hey, Bruce, what's with the photos?, posted on October 21, 2009 at 16:00:21
TeddiJackEddie
Audiophile

Posts: 1068
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Joined: January 2, 2004
 I guess I missed it in my absence. It's probably already been discussed. In one picture (the one with the shades and beret) you look like Che Guevara. In the other picture, you look like a guy who would have paid to have Che assasinated.

I'm not picking a fight with ya, I just wondered. Plus, I don't want to pick a fight with the guy in the shades - he might be packin'.


TJE

RE: Hey, Bruce, what's with the photos?, posted on October 21, 2009 at 21:35:35
powermatic
Audiophile

Posts: 5600
Location: central oregon
Joined: November 24, 2005
Contributor
  Since: March 1, 2008
 He was called out for his resemblance to Spiro Agnew. Apparently great discomfort and shame ensued, hence the regression to a stink-bomb spouting hipster beatnik.

Agreed its a wide disparity-but those amongst us who've not led disparate lives are those who've not really lived.



"dammit"
RE: Hey, Bruce, what's with the photos?, posted on October 26, 2009 at 13:11:00
Bruce from DC
Bored Member

Posts: 18019
Location: U.S. Capital
Joined: October 13, 1999
Contributor
  Since: March 1, 1999
 Excellent analysis, PM! "Just so," as they say in Britspeak.


RE: Hey, Bruce, what's with the photos?, posted on October 21, 2009 at 17:26:36
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 > In one picture (the one with the shades and beret) you look like Che Guevara. In the other picture, you look like a guy who would have paid to have Che assasinated.

OK - that's pretty funny.

I could be wrong but I think Bruce is the guy in the "other picture".
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
Don't even try to understand.nt, posted on October 21, 2009 at 09:15:35
jamesgarvin
Audiophile

Posts: 4074
Location: southern ohio
Joined: July 9, 2004
 nt

"his misguided political views", posted on October 21, 2009 at 03:54:04
Wendell Narrod
Audiophile

Posts: 7966
Location: Louisville, KY
Joined: June 2, 2000
 Definition: Any view in disagreement with yours. What a tool!


-Wendell
RE: A mighty adversary?, posted on October 20, 2009 at 19:45:31
John Atkinson
Reviewer

Posts: 1900
Location: New York
Joined: November 24, 2003
 >A mighty adversary? John Atkinson can be awfully quiet and mouse-like when
>confronted on the issues...

Oh dear. That's terrible!

>...A mighty adversary indeed.

Thank you :-)


John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
One gets the impression you'd be, posted on October 20, 2009 at 17:31:26
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 fine with Republicans and/or conservatism views.

Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
Ah yes, perspectives seldom seen..., posted on October 20, 2009 at 18:17:24
Ozzie
Audiophile

Posts: 2122
Joined: August 1, 2002
 in the Globe and Mail, eh bjh? As one with a government controlled media, you wouldn't know any better.

When it comes down to it, regardless of a person's political views, it is foolish to voice them to your customers / readers as you may offend half of them. Many US corporations look down on their employees sharing their political views with outside or inside customers as such practices may adversly compromise relations.

Hmmm ...? Doesn't seem to hurt SF much, maybe something to do with the majority of the readers, who knows? nt, posted on October 20, 2009 at 19:36:54
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 As as far as the home situation goes, forget the press, I just wish someone would tell that F'in dimwit PM of ours that the Neocon Revolution has left the building!

LOL
Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
RE: Hmmm ...? Doesn't seem to hurt SF much, maybe something to do with the majority of the readers, who knows?, posted on October 22, 2009 at 16:10:53
lord addleford
Audiophile

Posts: 336
Location: new england
Joined: July 5, 2005
Contributor
  Since: April 11, 2006
 interesting pairing: neocon and revolution. you valorize the neocons at the expense of the revolutionaries, such that remain, or who long ago went into 'deep cover" and/or became liberals. yeah, mf coulda been a Weatherman, back in the day; didnt he hang out up at columbia? as for fremer's and dudley's left wing views, they are now democratic liberals, nothing more, nothing less; they are harmless; there is absolutely nothing to fear from them; no real and meaningful change do they support just more of the same old stuff. that they would joust with troglodytes is momentary fun. at least they have not found highly evolved new age pablums. let them rant and rave on any topic. no matter. i am having fun listening to my rb stuff and i have no immediate need or desire to find true religion in the vinyl world (though i do regret sending off my vinyl collection to good will, way back when.

aint this thread fun.


Seeing What You Want To See...., posted on October 20, 2009 at 17:54:27
Diode
Audiophile

Posts: 310
Location: SE Wis
Joined: September 11, 2005
 ""One gets the impression that you'd be fine with Republicans and/or conservatism views.""

One gets the impression that you see hear what you want to hear and see what you want to see. From my post:

""....and in my opinion any political commentary at all is too much commentary...."

Did you catch the word "any" in my statement? Is that not clear enough for you? Here, let me try it this way so that there will be no doubt as to what my position is: In my opinion, ANY political commentary what-so-ever, whether it be conservative in nature, or liberal, or independent, has no business being included in a publication devoted to the review of stereo equipment.

If that's not clear enough then please PM me and I'll try to explain it in simpler terms for you.



You're wasting our time, posted on October 21, 2009 at 12:08:48
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 Arguing with BJH.
Listen to some music instead.
:)
Just Joe
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
I meant wasting YOUR time, posted on October 21, 2009 at 12:09:39
JustJoe
Audiophile

Posts: 128
Location: Essex
Joined: July 8, 2009
 NT
Blind testing of gear works: If it doesn't sound better with your eyes closed, then it doesn't sound better!
Yes, but I also caught the usage of "misguided" *twice*, and not in reference to just *any* political commentary!, posted on October 20, 2009 at 19:31:41
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 11876
Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: November 22, 2003
 You ought to watch that little telecasting thing you got going.

Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!
RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 20, 2009 at 11:43:43
Sordidman
Dealer

Posts: 9245
Location: San Francisco
Joined: May 14, 2001
 Thanks for posting those comments, - I'm betting that it sparks some interesting thoughts to mull over.

Does this mean that weapons wielded by the heavy hitter paper printers yield so much less now that folks in the cloud can step up and take a few swings of the bat? Personally, I have a lot of respect for some posters here who clearly have a lot of experiences, and have expressed them for all of us to learn from; if we so choose. Clearly some writers are more skilled at describing what they are hearing, analyzing a products' overall value, comparing that product to other similar items, (putting it in context), and/or rendering an aesthetic opinion.

Someone who is getting paid for their work, (even if it's very little), in a print magazine would/should garner so much more respect than the ranting bully, who is working against the advancement of knowledge: this is completely independent from the paid pro's credentials, experience, training, and body of previous work. Each type of person, and many more, have graciously been permitted to post here. Yet we all know and separate out each type of writer, or do we?

Bullies like a preaching RBNG, did nothing, contributed nothing; and existed to disrupt, and disrespect: he lived outside reason. On the other hand, a Socratic position of exposing dogma, always has, at its foundation, reason.

Rod and the Bored set the rules of these forums; (RBNG clearly and consistently violated those rules; then, either cluelessly or on purpose; laid down completely opposite claims of persecution).

Print magazines also have their rules and guidelines. Did Dudley briefly mention some news, or did he "attack" RBNG? We all know what RBNG would say. At the end of the day, my take is that Dudley writes with validity and he's a professional, - (whether or not some regard him as not a very good one). Dudley is a CONTRIBUTOR to knowledge. Someone like RBNG, did nothing, contributed nothing; and existed to disrupt, and disrespect: he lived outside reason. Hopefully, no one will ever think that a ranting, forum-bully, like RBNG would carry as much validity as Art Dudley.

In any case, there is and should not be any debate. It is not like there are two critics, designers, pundits here representing two different approaches or positions a la tube vs solid state.

What is going to happen when we don’t have to type anymore, and can speak into a microphone that gets posted as text? Or worse, - we could be watching videos of posters. Thank goodness we don’t have to see and hear RBNG; I can only imagine the horror.



Surrendered to self preservation,
From others who care for themselves.
A blindness that touches perfection,
But hurts just like anything else.
I find this offensive, posted on October 20, 2009 at 09:42:36
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 >Has anyone checked to see if Art has gained 150 pounds and is sitting alone in a dark listening room, farting, burping and cutting out coupons?<

I do this all the time and I've NEVER written a letter to any editor! Can't you just leave us farting, burping, coupon cutting fat guys ALONE???? Hah???

Post of the day :-) nt, posted on October 20, 2009 at 16:33:41
Rick W
Audiophile

Posts: 6107
Joined: October 3, 2001
 nt

RE: Art Dudley vs. Predator RBNG, posted on October 20, 2009 at 08:24:22
musetap
Audiophile

Posts: 6371
Location: San Francisco
Joined: July 8, 2003
Contributor
  Since: January 28, 2004
 RBNG could defend himself. However, due to his behaviour he can't defend himself here because he isn't allowed to post here.
If his behaviour wasn't what it was (and is), AD wouldn't have had the material for the piece and RBNG wouldn't need to
defend himself against it.

I suppose he can always write a letter to the Editor.

Life is just so... circular...

“ Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination. ” -Michael McClure
It still is the old days in that BassNut could still write a letter to the editor, posted on October 20, 2009 at 07:09:35
keith_d
Audiophile

Posts: 931
Joined: June 15, 2002
 What's new is that online forums give people like BassNut (and me) a bigger voice than just letters to the editor provide.

You've got the causality here exactly backwards.

That's exactly what I was implying - we are in agreement, posted on October 20, 2009 at 07:14:55
TeddiJackEddie
Audiophile

Posts: 1068
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Joined: January 2, 2004
 NT

No we are not in agreement, posted on October 20, 2009 at 15:26:01
keith_d
Audiophile

Posts: 931
Joined: June 15, 2002
 Here's your conclusion:

" but I think trashing RBNG with RBNG being unable to defend himself was really bad sportsmanship"

Here's my conclusion:

BassNut was able to attack via the internet - that what's new in the equation, the net as an equalizer between press and readers - and can defend now by writing a letter to the editor. Tough for BassNut in other words.

Page processed in 0.145 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ] [ Go Green ] [ Take5 ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]