Since English might not be Raul's first language, I'd like to recommend two words he might consider becoming familiar with: Redundancy, and brevity. I'm a giver... |
What it means to me is usually nothing.
When I like something I usually know it!
The problem is bias and habituation.
Like ski goggles- take them off and things look pretty weird for awhile.
Also, expensive things sound better, right?
Be honest, now.
-Mike |
Raul's post makes you wish Audiogon had a limit on post length so he'd be cut off, just like when you get cut off by some voicemails.
Reading his posts in this thread, I find it ironic that he has "enjoy the music" as permanent part of his signature, but insists that the music that I am enjoying through my tube amplifiers cannot possibly sound good since tubes are so inferior to solid state. Raul, perhaps you should change your sig to "Regards and enjoy the music, but only through solid state amplification, and a moving magnet cartridge"?
His campaign against tubes smells of the same bias espoused by those who dismiss(ed) analog technology as inferior compared to digital sound reproduction. It apparently also reached its limit and couldn't be improved. |
Dear Actusreus: Certainly not, I 'm not on any tube campaign, I just shared facts/information about that normally are unknow by some tube amp owners and that in some ways could works as " open eyes " tool . That's all.
+++++ " who dismiss(ed) analog technology as inferior compared to digital sound reproduction. It apparently also reached its limit and couldn't be improved. " +++++
IMHO only a " closed eyes/mind " or with low knowledge level can still thinking that analog is a superior technology against today digital one ( 24/176.8 ). Certainly it is not and for very good reasons that I hope you already knew.
The analog chain technology is almost at its limit but I'm sticky with because I'm still improving by my self that analog chain with un-imaginable improvements/discoveries that a couple of years I was unaware could exist. I think I can go on on this " improvement road ".
++++ " and a moving magnet cartridge" " +++++
Actusreus, about analog magnetic cartridge technology I know at least two alternatives: MC and MM/MI. I like both with its each one virtues and disadvantages. I own several top rated LOMC cartridges and more than one MM/MI gems.
What's wrong to recognize that exist two cartridge alternatives instead only one?, when we have more than one alternative and when we have the knowledge level and skills along the tools to achieve the best from both alternative: whom can ask for more?, these alternatives is a good way to enjoy MUSIC: don't you think?
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Any poster claiming "golden ears" is simply silly, and cloaking insulting and weirdly condescending opinion in "factoids" and phony courtesy is merely tedious. |
I think it's clear that most tube amp owners started with SS amps, and switched to tubes as they liked the SOUND of them, and maybe switched back...or not. Raul assumes these people need to be alerted to some Technology Update before they foolishly waste any more time with things he's deemed innacurate...a classic Church Lady. |
Certainly not, I 'm not on any tube campaign, I just shared facts/information about that normally are unknow by some tube amp owners and that in some ways could works as " open eyes " tool . That's all. Raul, As Lewm noted, it is impossible to have a rational argument with you as you're unwilling to consider others' experiences, and see past your own preconceived notions or selectively chosen specs to suit your convictions. I guess to you companies like Audio Research, BAT, VAC, Rogue Audio, Cary, just to name a few, are run by a bunch of ignorant nitwits and frauds who simply push an inferior technology on unsuspecting audiophile community to make a profit through customer ignorance. Perhaps you just need to reach out to all respected and successful designers of tube equipment and "share facts/information about that normally are unknow by some tube amp owners and that in some ways could works as " open eyes " tool."" IMHO only a " closed eyes/mind " or with low knowledge level can still thinking that analog is a superior technology against today digital one ( 24/176.8 ). Certainly it is not and for very good reasons that I hope you already knew. If this is your opinion, why do you even post in the Analog forum? Most if not all members here do believe analog is superior to the digital technology, however many bits it has, or otherwise they would not be cultivating their passion for vinyl as digital apparently continues to improve. What does it even mean digital is a "superior technology"? Because it has more bits? If it fails to provide me with a connection to music, which digital to me is miserable at, it is an inferior technology regardless of how many bits it has. |
Syntax, Your original post really opened up a can of worms: It's now SS vs tube and analog vs digital.
Perhaps those debates should be moved off of this thread. Thanks for your opinions Raul, but could you start another thread about those other topics. |
Dear Wolf_garcia: Not all, I switched from tubes to SS. Learning trend, as my ignorance level goes down as tubes goes disappearing step by step from my system.
IMHO ignorance level is what makes that we be sticky from some kind of technology or some kind of myths. In the other side as higher our each one ignorance level as more closed mind/attitude we promote.
Information, true information gives " freedom " and increment the joy of listening music.
regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
What's wrong with canned worms? The ebb and flow of free minded discussion shouldn't be restricted by topic or context...it forces me to pay attention, sit up straight, and spit out my gum. Nobody wants that... |
Dear Actusreus: How could you understand " japanese " language if you only " speaks " english one?
The each one ignorance level preclude or not to have a rational argument to have a rational discussion. You are sticky on your tiny audio world because your audio ignorance level. Nothing is perfect and all of us have our each one ignorance audio subjects levels. Which yours? are you aware of that level or your level is just " I like it "?
Please don't go or follow speaking on digital today technology because for what you posted IMHO in that subject your ignorance level is to high and you can't argue almost nothing about or even enrich the discusion.
Always is better to argue or discuss on subjects where we , with facts, have the " hairs in the hands ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Peterayer: Well, I'm not alone here. My posts were answers to other people posts.
Maybe you can start not a new thread but a new forum in the net with only one subject audio threads, I'm sure that in that way you will not learn to much but you will be happy.
No, I don't start new threads yet because the discusion, very good indeed, is here. Maybe could be better if you add some " fun " here participating on the overall discussion: why not?
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Wolf,
I guess so we could focus on the issue raised. Otherwise, why not just have one big board with no topics and just random thoughts. Hmm, might work.
I really did want to find out other thoughts on the use of reviews, especially those who dont have the opportunity to audition much, and either have to buy and sell to hear a product, or rely on the internet for such sage advice as we receive from Raul and others. |
I give up...condescending asshats are too taxing to engage. |
Raul,
Aha! I now understand why your posts are so painful to read and understand - you write them in Japanese!
You're preaching as if you were some sort of an audio oracle. You are not. You're just another audiophile with too much time on his hands who thinks he knows everything and he's always right. You may have quite a bit of audio knowledge, but you completely lack the ability to convey it, at least in my opinion. Perhaps it's your Japanese, I'm not sure, but I've learned very little from your essays on here, while I've learned a ton from others.
You keep calling everyone ignorant, but you come off as perhaps most ignorant poster on this board, your signature notwithstanding. |
Wow. This is real informative!
-Mike |
Dear Actusreus: Well, I can't say the same from you because here I learned from you as I learned from any of the other persons posted here.
Certainly I know very well my ignorant level on audio different subjects and through my posts I only share what were my first hand experiences and what I learned from other audiophiles. If you can't understand my " japanese " well: is up to you.
Now, that you can't understand my " japanese " is only saying that you have to learn " japanese " to understand or stay " steady /no answers " till you learned.
Aha! I now understand why you don't understand: you need to learn Japanese, easy!. Please do it and when you learned come back and share your new experiences that will be " colored " by the Japanese you learned.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Raul, Since you prefer digital to analog now, have you abandoned your tonearm design? I have been waiting for your arm and Dertonarm's (Daniel's) arm designs for quite some time now. Where are the details? Has anyone heard or seen these two highly anticipated tonearms?
Since this is a thread about reviewers, perhaps someone has read a review of them. |
Dertonearm's tonearm is out and about, for about US$14K, if memory serves. (My memory does not always serve, so check it out for yourself.) Raul's is not far off, or so I am told privately. |
In this month's Absolute Sound, Robert Harley responds to a letter writer with an explanation that sums up the review process very well. Anyone interested should give it a read, but essentially, a review is one persons opinion of a product heard at a certain time in a certain place with certain associated equipment and should only be used as a starting place, if at all, to narrow candidates for further investigation. He went on to say that he felt that the hi end audio press puts too much emphasis on reviews of equipment and that the only advantage to a professional review is perhaps the ability to form proper sentences, more exposure to different equipment, and the time to spend with a particular unit.
Anyone can do it, given enough dedication, but thats true of anything. I could probably pole vault if I tried hard and long enough. But being good at anything takes more than effort, it takes talent, whether its being a good writer, or a good listener. |
Manitunc, I saw that paragraph by Robert Harley, and I thought he hit the nail on the head. His statement pretty much sums it up, and I agree with him. Too bad that some of his own staff don't get it as well as he does.
As someone else also has experienced, TAS seems to continue to send copies to me, even though my subscription expired a few months ago. This is a sad commentary on the state of the business. Because of Harley's little editorial, I thought it would be only fair of me to pay for another year of the magazine. I did not deliberately let my subscription lapse; I only failed to renew it when they kept asking me to renew well in advance of the expiry date. That did and does bug me, until finally my subscription did in fact expire.
And then I read some of the reviews in this current issue. I found more factual errors and hyperbole than you can shake a xerostat at. Just for one example, JV states twice that a certain phono stage can or cannot "drive" a certain cartridge. I cannot believe he does not know that the cartridge drives the phono stage, so why confuse the novice readers? In another review, of Technical Brain amplifiers, he states that the "current" in the US electrical system was responsible for bringing down some earlier model of TB amplifier that was notorious for unreliability. Assuming that said amplifier was set up for 60Hz AC and not 50Hz, I have no idea what he could be talking about. The amplifier is responsible for drawing an amount of current at a certain voltage; the current drawn from the wall is determined by its topology, not the power company. Voltage spikes, maybe, but not current, could bring down a badly designed amplifier. If the amplifier is being killed by the current it draws, that can only mean that some critical part in the amplifier is under-specified for its current tolerance. There were much worse misconceptions promulgated elsewhere. |
I like that Raul says what he thinks. And that his views change over time as he learns as well.
I usually get the gist of what he says. Does that mean I now understand Japanese? :^)
A little humility like admitting one does not have all the answers can also go a long way, especially on social media sites like this.
Beware the "AHEE"........ |
Dear Peterayer: That IMHO the digital medium is a superior source music a top analog does not means I left analog. I posted that I'm still sticky with analog trying to find out the last " frontier " quality level analog has. In the other side I own several analog recordings that are invaluable if for no other thing because I can't get on any other medium.
Our tonearm design is already finished and we are in the tonearm surrounded customer " presentation ": package, white papers, type of promotion and the like. As soon I can show it I will do it.
We are really proudly on what we achieved, IMHO the design fulfil any cartridge needs and fulfil my audiophile expectations and self needs. We have no doubt that the design is a a clear an precise " border " where at the border side of our design exist only our design.
Analog as digital are alternatives and IMHO we all are lucky to have both.
Regards and enjoy the muisc,
R. |
Lewn,
Interestingly, I received both TAS and Stereophile this week and was able to go through both in a few hours. Ususally it takes me a few days to get through TAS especially. Both issues were heavy on digital and electronics, which is probably why I had little interest. Both issues did have reviews on the Ortofon Anna cartridge, and both reviews were similar in their findings.
It seems that unless there is a fair amount of analog editorial, I'm not that interested. I like reading Dudley and Fremer on whatever they write about. Dudley especially is entertaining as he writes about vintage stuff and hands on repairs and refurbishing.
Maybe next month we will have an analog issue. |
"We are really proudly on what we achieved, IMHO the design fulfil any cartridge needs and fulfil my audiophile expectations and self needs. We have no doubt that the design is a a clear an precise " border " where at the border side of our design exist only our design."
Translation: It's SOTA!!!
Wait until the evil AHEE get one to review! They must be conspiring as we speak on how best to rip RR a new one!
Of course, the contempt of the AHEE will only make the product more attractive, right? :^) |
It is not clear to me that Raul wants a review of his tonearm in the mainstream press. They do have some requirements about dealer networks, availability, etc. And then there is the advertising budget and audio show debuts...... |
A mainstream press review would be very entertaining, kinda like a good pro wrestling match, but I suspect RR would get powerbombed by the evil AHEE in the end, regardless of product's merit. |
10 years (!) ago one of my friends asked me about my opinion because he thought about starting a High End Audio shop. And only with real good sounding components, some which really moved something (he had good knowledge and the money for it). I said, that he will fail when doing it. The customers today (Y2K) are no more the same from 1980, today you will only survive with a pocket calculator, people want review winners, will catch your time and will look in the internet where they can get it cheaper. But that was only my opinion so I asked a well known professional reviewer about the way to go with such products (he has 2 opinions, one for business and one for his own) and his final comment was "Syntax, when your buddy really cares for sound, he will fail"
He was right, all my good dealers are out of business, very sad... |
Good dealers. Really. I think the issue with high end shops is they refuse to engage the public with any creative energy. Almost NO effort is put into actual music (very interesting musicians are available to play at their shops...for promotion only in many cases, or they could charge a small cover), seminars for gear heads, promoting and sponsoring concerts...they simply don't do these things, they don't care...they're LAME. They cater to their small world of the already converted, whine when they lose a sale to the internet, and pretty much get back exactly what they put into it. A nearby VERY high end place doesn't use a computerized mailing list to let you know about the rare occasions when they actually have a gear rep coming around, and one of their sales dudes once expressed how he hates the "audio societies" members as they're too opinionated or something. They also are often utterly clueless about local shows featuring world class musicians. Don't care, don't know...and they will remain that way as that's how it's always been. |
Harry Pearson 2013: Ironically, I had sold the magazine to save it, from my ineptitude in business manipulations, to someone accomplished in such matters and someone whom I presumed I could trust to put the love of music ahead of the love of considerable profits. In return, I was to put out a first class magazine that continued to define the art of high fidelity.
I was told I would still be in complete editorial control. But I was not. I had been replaced by those who had turned my magazine into something I would not subscribe to....
The Absolute Sound was no longer what I had dreamed it would be: A magazine about the love of music and the highway to an appreciation of the real thing. But the highways, the audio equipment, had become more important then the real thing, and had become an end in themselves.
Understand I have nothing against TAS. But it no longer seems to adhere to the principles for which I founded it: Namely, to promote music as the goal of all audio equipment. The audio gear is a highway that can lead to the music, not an end in and of itself. I also have nothing against advertising per se, just against its use in exchange for favorable reviews. And one thing as controlling editor for TAS, I had always refused to do, was arrange swaps of reviews for advertising.
... we decided to go at it online, and named it HP Soundings. I knew I had the reputation, based on long-time credibility. I knew I had the right partner in Mr. Weiss. I knew we shared the same philosophy to carry it on; that of the love of music itself. I believed then, as now, that the music needed me, but not, perhaps, as much as the other way around.
Well, what can I say? Never read anything better and honest in the last 10 years. Kudos Harry |
Sad news indeed.
I think the main goal of audio magazines and websites is to
create product awareness.
But we need to hear to believe what they say. |
Dear Syntax: He was and is part of the AHEE and he really was " punished " for his owns rules that belonged to that AHEE " cancer ".
Certainly that is sad that the " company/enterprise " you started and where you worked so hard is the one that gave " thank's " to you that are the owner.
Those HP words said it his huge emotional disapoint with the people that in some ways he " formed/developed ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Not all what he writed there is totally true or at least not exactly what he wants we believe, we have to remember that for several ( a lot ) years ( between other same facts. ) HP reference system loudspeakers were the top high price ( 150K ) ISR Infinity Reference ( 4 towers. ) loaned by Infinity.
Till today I can't remember not a single non-biased reviewer and HP certainly IMHO was/is not the first one.
R. |
I can think of at least two reviews in which the reviewer states clearly that he hopes he can work a deal out with the manufacturer so that he can "keep" the review sample. By "keep" I suppose he either means: on an indefinite long term loan or an extremely good accommodation/industry insider price. These statements were expressed in the concluding paragraphs of the reviews.
I guess we are supposed to think from this that the reviewer really, really likes the component. But it also comes across as an overt request for a prid pro quo. |
Now, when a reviewer reviews a $50,000 speaker or turntable that he really loves, and would love to own, but because he cant afford it on his meager reviewer income, does that mean he is not allowed to get an industry discount, or must he refuse such discount to avoid the impression of bias. I wish I could afford some of the stuff I see and hear, but alas, I cant. But I would only want it in the first place because I liked the product, not because I could get it cheaper. |
The reviewer's income is and should be no one's business. Also, how he or she acquires a component should not be anyone's business either. Once it is asked for in a review though, it creates an impression of bias, in my opinion. That's all.
A condition of wanting something usually means that we also like it. But if we like two components roughly equally, we usually buy the one that is less expensive. Now in the case of a reviewer, are we to assume that his/her reference system is comprised only of the components that he/she gets the best accommodation deals on? What does that tell us? |
... and would love to own, but because he cant afford it on his meager reviewer income, does that mean he is not allowed to get an industry discount, or must he refuse such discount to avoid the impression of bias. Of course he can buy any item for the socalled "reviewer pricing" (there are more steps out there than the usual Distributor, Dealer, MSRP ...) A lot of them do this "job" to find their personal peace with Hardware. But of course some units are still expensive, even with all those rebates..so he can dream about it or he can write, that he would buy them when he would be able to afford....what is that sentence worth? Nothing of course. But it sounds competent. And that is what's all about. |
Interesting. I would be more prone to respect the integrity of a reviewer that is open about the fact that he hopes to be able to buy the review unit at discount; and impression of bias be damned. That would tell me that he/she probably doesn't do too much funny stuff behind the scenes that we would never really know about. |
A reader should be able to know if a reviewer did not purchase his reference components. Getting audiophile quality components as a gift or long term loan is a potential conflict. |
So, he should only buy the cheap stuff he can afford, and then review megabuck equipment through that cheap system. What difference does it make where a reviewer gets his reference system, so long as it is good enough to allow him to hear the differences in the equipment he reviews. |
When a Reviewer "likes" something...
...it seems to me that he has three choices: he can return it, he can buy it for some price he can afford, or he can borrow it for some period of time.
There are plenty of "long-term" loans out there. |
"Also so how he aquires a component should not be anyone's business either."
I totally disagree with this statement. How a reviewer aquires equipment is a concern because most reviewers are equipment whores and this creates biased reviews. |
It's kind of frightening, but I find myself agreeing w Rrog. |
Life is good ...
When they write...
(They mean ...)
In spite of the measurement anomalies, this speaker is clearly a state-of-the-art product.
( It didn't sound broken when we gave it our top rating )
It was definitely borderline Class A.
( It isn't that good, but it's sooo expensive, and they're letting me keep it --- G-d I feel so cheap! )
Better than amps costing three times as much.
( I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I like the amp )
Light years ahead of the competition
( The competition won't give us a review sample )
Despite it's slight problems at the extremes, the products strong point
was it's rendition of the all-important midrange.
( This thing has no bass and treble that actually hurts! )
We hire only the best writers.
( We'll hire any audiophile who recognizes a pencil two out of three tries )
This is an incomplete but promising design from a talented young designer.
( The product sucks but he has some money left in his advertising budget )
This product had me pulling one record after another from my collection.
( I listened to all five of my records )
The images in the soundstage had that elusive and seductive sense of palatable presence.
( I haven't had sex since my wife left me and I'm starting to hallucinate )
This product lacks some of the subtle refinements we've come expect from a designer of this caliber.
( The product stinks but we don't want to piss off this famous manufacturer )
Better than amps costing three times as much
( I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I like the amp )
This preamp is the new reference
( We aint giving it back, and we aint paying' for it either )
|
