View Single Post
  #56 (permalink)  
Old September 7th 07, 06:23 PM posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tubes,aus.hi-fi
Steven Sullivan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 74
Default Why "accuracy"?

In rec.audio.tech Peter Wieck wrote:
On Sep 6, 2:58 pm, Steven Sullivan wrote:


And again: do you have any 'closely held' beliefs, in any sphere? Or have you simply defined
'closely held belief' as, 'whatever I don't think is true'?


Of course I have closely held beliefs. And I can be rather single
minded in my pursuit of them. But they are entirely and only mine, not
to be foisted upon others as Holy Writ.



Again, this is more rhetoric than substance. How do you distinguish 'Holy Writ'
from other modes of rhetoric? Is stating an accepted scientific fact 'foisting
Holy Writ'? Where is the line drawn for you?


I am glad to express my
beliefs, again as mine alone.


Are you 'closely held beliefs' peculiar to you, or are any of them closely held
by others too?

And even give what evidence I have to
support them. And I think no less of someone who might vehemently
disagree with me as long as they are not espousing said disagreement,
again, as Holy Writ.


So, would you say it come down to *attitude*, rather than facts behind
the argument? (personally, I find arguments that employ Capitals
for Emphasis to be rather Off-Putting and Pretentious)


I also have equipment that I can differentiate blind with a bad cold
and dual ear-infections, that I also like but for different reasons.
And I would be the first to admit that sighted testing has problems as
does blind testing. Neither is entirely satisfactory as neither can
account for the effects of long-term listening in the "home" or
whatever is the final target environment.



And what makes you think blind testing *can't* do that? If long-term
listening in the target environment is required to 'imprint' the *real*
audibole differences on a person -- which is waht you seem to imply -
what 'problems' does a blind test done *after the imprinting has occurred*
have?

This ain't nohow religion. It is a hobby to be enjoyed.



It is a hobby with a notably technical underpinning. That may be why
subjective preferences so often bleed into technical claims, in the hobby.


for something that did. But Kimber has its place in the Choir, even if
I do not sing to that tune. Others do, so they should have the
opportunity.


Are the cable faithful really being denied opportunity to sing hosanna?
Seems to me it's *objectivists* who are in teh minority, in the usual audio
forums. They're the 'atheists', after all. The mainstream is 'religious',
in audiophile cutlure as in wider culture.

In the words of Pogo (first, Howland Owl, now Pogo): We live in a
country where a man is free - even to make an idiot of himself.


But if one suggests that I *must* sing to a certain tune, or my not
singing to that tune makes me wrong... that raises my ire.


No one can 'make' you sing any of these tunes, so your fears seem
more than a bit overblown.

Full, free, pointed and vigorous debate is worthwhile. Opposing points
of view are necessary for any progress of any nature. If we all agreed
on everything the world would be Vanilla with all the consequential
dullness. Striking sparks while debating can be, mostly is, a
necessary and good result on any issue of substance. But a level of
mutual respect for those in the fray is also required. And ultimately
a failure to convert the other side must be accepted... without losing
respect.


And to trot out another cliche, there's no need to reinvent the wheel.
Some things really *don't* need to be argued about.

Let me put it in context when it comes to Mr. Krueger in particular:
It is not that I necessarily disagree with anything or everything he
has to write. I do disagree with what I perceive as his pontifical
fanaticism in presenting it. "My" fanatics are just as dangerous,
poisonous, pitiable and contemptible as "your" fanatics.


Again, you disagree with attitude and rhetoric.

As to "cause and effect"... how would you perceive these statements
that I have made as a claim on more than a few occasions:


a) I find that the Sylvania Mil.Spec. 5751 blows the socks off of even
smooth-plate Telefunken 12AX7s.
b) I have found that replacing low-value electrolytic caps (2uF or
less) in most audio circuits with film caps improves the sound, both
in solid-state and tube circuits.


They are based on my experiences and experiments. No more.


As stated, I would find them both merely anecdotal, with all that implies.
Were you to expand on the nature of the 'experiments', and bring in other
facts to bear, I might 'upgrade' them.

Here's a claim of mine: people tend to overestimate their ability accurately establish cause
and effect.



___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason