This thread should act as an example of an honest misreading and misinterpretation of a quote/statement of an industry expert. The ensuing confusion and effrontery is also a good reminder to all that we can benefit from fact checking, ask reasonable questions to affirm statements, and be quick to correct ourselves, as the OP has.
I thought the assertion sounded "off". Having read Jim's book and found many insightful things in it I did not think he would be of a mind to make such a statement. In fact the website does indicate the idea that one's ears are no good after 50 to be spurious.
Quick to question, slow to condemn is good policy that I myself break occasionally and need to relearn. The irony here is that Jim questions the worthiness of info gleaned online. Here we see mistakes, objections, counter-information, etc. Just looking at the discussion one would not know what to make of it, who's right and who's wrong.
The nature of the Forum beast, and an authentic example of Jim's very point in his "ACK" article! :)
I thought the assertion sounded "off". Having read Jim's book and found many insightful things in it I did not think he would be of a mind to make such a statement. In fact the website does indicate the idea that one's ears are no good after 50 to be spurious.
Quick to question, slow to condemn is good policy that I myself break occasionally and need to relearn. The irony here is that Jim questions the worthiness of info gleaned online. Here we see mistakes, objections, counter-information, etc. Just looking at the discussion one would not know what to make of it, who's right and who's wrong.
The nature of the Forum beast, and an authentic example of Jim's very point in his "ACK" article! :)