"George" wrote:

Why "accuracy"? For certain Usenet poseurs, this is the question
that dare
not speak its name.

Normals and 'borgs alike would surely accept that the purpose of an
audio
system is to enable us to enjoy listening to recorded music. Normals
choose
the pieces of a system that maximizes listening pleasure. How does
praying
to the god of "accuracy" help attain that end?

I believe I know the answer to my question, but that answer is
bizarre.
Rather than suggest my own answer, I ask the "accuracy" lovers to
explain
their choice.

Well done.

The important thing is fidelity, of course, which should be high.

You can explore an interesting and productive train of thought if you
start from the notion that your system is a musical instrument.
Consider the historical role of music and its means of distribution.
Accuracy is essential to live communication, but so too is sensitivity
to context and personal expression.

Reductionism has led precision to a dead end.

What's your "answer"? Don't be shy.

Ian

Ian Iveson said:

The important thing is fidelity, of course, which should be high.

There's something amiss in your newsreader's settings. Why people still use
Upchuck after all these years is beyond me.

You can explore an interesting and productive train of thought if you
start from the notion that your system is a musical instrument.

Paging Ferstler! Tweako-freako alert!

"George"

Ian Iveson said:

The important thing is fidelity, of course, which should be high.

There's something amiss in your newsreader's settings. Why people
still use
Upchuck after all these years is beyond me.

It's precisely how I like it, thanks.

You can explore an interesting and productive train of thought if
you
start from the notion that your system is a musical instrument.

Paging Ferstler! Tweako-freako alert!

You can explore an interesting and productive train of thought if you
start from the notion that your system is a musical instrument.
Consider the historical role of music and its means of distribution.
Accuracy is essential to live communication, but so too is sensitivity
to context and personal expression.

Reductionism has led precision to a dead end.

Ian

"George" wrote:
Why "accuracy"? For certain Usenet poseurs, this is the question
that dare
not speak its name.Surely, this question should be "Whose accuracy?"

[George's full post is below]

Surely the question should be, "Whose accuracy?"

The late unlamented Stewart Pinkerton used to claim that "Audio is
engineering, music is art" or some such rot, together with its express
corollary, "When the amplifier produces exactly what is on the master
tape, the designer's job is done." Clearly, that puts the the
recording engineer, the master of the master tape, in charge of the
outcome.

I can name some recording engineers I have known, including some I
employed, that I would like to throw down the stairs to remove them as
carbuncles from culture. They were soulmates of the execrably smug
Pinkostinko.

However, on the whole I think most recording engineers of the kind of
music I like are cultured men who do their best to reproduce the
musicians' performance and the ambience of the environment well. It is
not their fault that a precise reproduction of their master tape (as
through a Krell and Wilson multi-cones, for instance, by the
Pinkostinko definition definitely "blameless") fails to satisfy the
hedonist's desire for closer replication of the experience of the live
event. Many of them are acutely aware that the subliminal cues
experienced in the concert hall are missing from recordings but,
again, that is an *engineering* problem with the reproduction chain
and its fixation on the long-since irrelevant reduction of THD,
presently more for the sake of more because they lack the brains to
think of something else. ("Once we have minimized THD, the
reproduction chain is perfect so WTF are you whining about? We're
giving you ever-vanishing THD!"

Of course, we all have our own version of taste. Mine is simply the
sound I heard in the room on the day, with the performers on the
recording playing live. Peter Walker's "window on the concert hall"
has legs.

My contempt for the farm machinery mechanics among the meterhead
"engineers" is matched only by my contempt for self-acclaimed golden
ears among the "audiophiles" whose only reference is other amps they
have heard, whose definition of "better" is a more stunning sound than
the last amp they heard, regardless of the intrinsic dynamics of the
performance, who never go to concerts because they already know what
they like.

Yes, Virginia, you can have it both ways. There is a sane middle road.

Andre Jute
A little inaccuracy sometimes saves tons of explanation. --H.H.Munro
("Saki")(1870-1916)

Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review


"George" wrote:
Why "accuracy"? For certain Usenet poseurs, this is the question
that dare
not speak its name.

Normals and 'borgs alike would surely accept that the purpose of an
audio
system is to enable us to enjoy listening to recorded music. Normals
choose
the pieces of a system that maximizes listening pleasure. How does
praying
to the god of "accuracy" help attain that end?

I believe I know the answer to my question, but that answer is
bizarre.
Rather than suggest my own answer, I ask the "accuracy" lovers to
explain
their choice.

In article . com,
Andre Jute wrote:

Surely the question should be, "Whose accuracy?"

The late unlamented Stewart Pinkerton used to claim that "Audio is
engineering, music is art" or some such rot, together with its express
corollary, "When the amplifier produces exactly what is on the master
tape, the designer's job is done."

So why did Stewart drop out of the Usenet Groups, as indications are
that he has not departed this earth, or are the indications wrong?


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
In article . com,
Andre Jute wrote:

Surely the question should be, "Whose accuracy?"

The late unlamented Stewart Pinkerton used to claim that "Audio is
engineering, music is art" or some such rot, together with its express
corollary, "When the amplifier produces exactly what is on the master
tape, the designer's job is done."

So why did Stewart drop out of the Usenet Groups, as indications are
that he has not departed this earth, or are the indications wrong?

What are the recent indications with respect to Mr. Pinkerton?

Note that JJ has also totally departed Usenet, but traces of him can still
be found elsewhere. I suspect that he may become more audible once he is out
of litigation on behalf of his employer, Microsoft.

John Byrns said:

The late unlamented Stewart Pinkerton used to claim that "Audio is
engineering, music is art" or some such rot

So why did Stewart drop out of the Usenet Groups, as indications are
that he has not departed this earth, or are the indications wrong?

The one good thing you can say about Pukey is that he recognized Arnii
Krooborg for what he is.

So what are these "indications" you mention of Pukey's continuing life? I
hope you're not claiming to be his friend.

On Sep 4, 8:05 am, John Byrns wrote:
In article . com,
Andre Jute wrote:

Surely the question should be, "Whose accuracy?"

The late unlamented Stewart Pinkerton used to claim that "Audio is
engineering, music is art" or some such rot, together with its express
corollary, "When the amplifier produces exactly what is on the master
tape, the designer's job is done."

So why did Stewart drop out of the Usenet Groups, as indications are
that he has not departed this earth, or are the indications wrong?

Literary license. I wasn't suggesting that Pinko had kicked the
bucket; I imagine someone was vain as he was about his appearance will
live to be a very old, very crotchety, very boring pensioner for
several decades.

So why did Stewart drop out of the Usenet Groups

Because Phil and I exposed his ignorance about QUAD, I imagine. How
that undermined whatever trust anyone had left in Pinko took a while
to sink in. And meanwhile you and Patrick exposed his ignorance about
some really basic elements of audio design. Then he ignominiously lost
an audio design contest against me, surely the slackest (if luckiest)
amateur on the planet. Then Arny Krueger claimed to be his friend and
"peer", the final ignominy! Hardly the sort of thing to burnish the
pride of such a constant narcissist as Pinkostinko. But, considering
how much more intelligent Pinkerton is than Pasternack, and the
relative amounts of time it took each after the exposure of his
vacuous malice to catch on that he had worn out his welcome and to bug
out, I am not surprised at Pinkerton leaving when he did, a couple of
years faster than Plodnick.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Andre Jute
No real corpses were harmed in the assembly of my golem Worthless
Wieckless. Instead I stuffed a piece of cow-gut with offal to create
Worthless Wiecky. -- CE Statement of Conformity

In rec.audio.tech Andre Jute wrote:
On Sep 4, 8:05 am, John Byrns wrote:
In article . com,
Andre Jute wrote:

Surely the question should be, "Whose accuracy?"

The late unlamented Stewart Pinkerton used to claim that "Audio is
engineering, music is art" or some such rot, together with its express
corollary, "When the amplifier produces exactly what is on the master
tape, the designer's job is done."

So why did Stewart drop out of the Usenet Groups, as indications are
that he has not departed this earth, or are the indications wrong?

Literary license. I wasn't suggesting that Pinko had kicked the
bucket; I imagine someone was vain as he was about his appearance will
live to be a very old, very crotchety, very boring pensioner for
several decades.

And I imagine a bitter RAO nutcake like yourself will come to inhabit
many a killfile...or mine at the very least.

*plonk*

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

Stupey Sillybot gets shown up again.

Literary license. I wasn't suggesting that Pinko had kicked the
bucket; I imagine someone was vain as he was about his appearance will
live to be a very old, very crotchety, very boring pensioner for
several decades.

And I imagine a bitter RAO[sic] nutcake like yourself will come to inhabit
many a killfile...or mine at the very least.

Don't fret about offending Stupey, Andre. He's a major Kroopologist and a
gigantic hypocrite. Just ask him about his own process for selecting home
audio kit.