Why "accuracy"?
"JimC" wrote in message
t...
A more helpful line of questions would have been, what does Middius mean
by the term "borg," "normals", "Kroogism," etc.;
One reason why I don't feel threatened by the Middiot is that he speaks in
code. Most newbies aren't going to take time to learn it. Therfore, he's
acting like a transmitter with no active receivers.
and why has he been spending all that time, year after year, attacking
those who disagree with him on this ng?
Lack of a life to keep the Middiot busy in productive tasks.
"Black magic-subjectivism" is the philosopy Mr. Middius adheres to and
promotes.
I don't favor sullying subjectivism by characterizing it as being relevant
to Middiot postings.
It is characterized by personal attacks on those who introduce logic into
discussions of audio matters, and in particular, those who have some
knowldge of the relevant principles of physics.
In short, the Middiot attacks people who are better-educated, and think more
clearly than he does.
The point I was making (which I suspect you knew full well in the first
place) was that listening to music in on a system capable of reproducing
the music with greater fidelity to the performance (greater "accuracy")
is, for most audiophiles, more satisfying and enjoyable than listening to
the same music reproduced by a system with minimal accuracy, e.g., a small
table radio.
In other words, greater "accuracy" generally provides a more satisfying
listening experience. YOUR interjection of the suggestion that I somehow
expect or require that we listen to Beethoven, or the RSs or whoever,
"precisely and correctly as they intended to be heard" is, of course, your
own invention. - I never said or implied such a thing. - And I'm well
aware that there are limits to realistic reproduction of an orchestra or
rock group in the home. My point was that most of us generally derive
greater pleasure from listening to good music reproduced with accuracy
(higher fidelity to the original performance) than we do with less
accurate reproduction, e.g., listening to the same music reproduced by a
small table radio.
Nope. I'm just saying that, in general, accuracy is in fact a useful and
desirable quality in audio, and that, in general, it results in a more
satisfying and enjoyable listening experience.
Let's imagine an alternative universe where all audio gear is built
according to Middiot ideology. In the Middiot universe every piece of audio
gear has performance that is tailored by the chief engineer of the company
that builds it, to make all music that passes through it sound the way that
the companies' chief engineer prefers.
In the Middiot universe then, every amplifier has vastly different frequency
response. They all sound different, ironically as Borg and his posse say
they do right now.
In the Middiot universe there are no frequency response specs, no distortion
specs, no noise specs. You have to listen to every amplifier on the market
if you want to make an informed choice, and somehow have a precise memory of
how each amplifier sounds.
So, if you buy a new amplifier in the Middiot universe, your choices are
tremendously limited if you want your system to sound at all the way it did
with your old amplifier. There may be no amplifiers that you can buy without
completely changing the whole rest of your system.
In contrast, consider our present-day universe. Amplifiers tend to sound
pretty much the same within their power ratings. If your old amplifier is
not powerful enough you have a lot of choices as to what your new amplifier
will be.
I guess we can conclude that the Middiot is against people having
alternatives to choose from.
|