Visit to Chris to See Magico M9 and VYGER and Pilium in Southlake, Texas

[Audiohertz2]

Yea ,

Mostly circular as oppose to exploratory ...

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron, if you would have put your disclaimer into the video, we would not have had to have this discussion.

No disclaimer is necessary. Why would this Canon camera recording be any different than any of my other Canon camera recordings? My views on the representativeness of videos are well known.

A little common sense, and a little courtesy, should've been enough for members to know that this is not the place to litigate videos for the 75th time.

(This reply is not directed solely at you. I'm answering in reply to your post only because you asked.)

 

[cjfrbw]

litigate videos for the 75th time.

You must realize that litigation never ends.

 

[treitz3]

It should. The plain fact of the matter is that a video will NEVER replicate what you hear in person. No if's and's or but's.

EVER.

This argument gets pounded into the sand way more than it needs to be.

Tom

 

[PeterA]

It should. The plain fact of the matter is that a video will NEVER replicate what you hear in person. No if's and's or but's.

EVER.

This argument gets pounded into the sand way more than it needs to be.

Tom

no one has ever, EVER, made that claim. EVER.

 

[treitz3]

Yet, what this does is open the door for ridicule.....

Then arguments....

Then rebuttals...

It is this that gets old because it's seemingly present, argue, rebuttal, rinse, repeat ad nauseam.

Same pile of chit. Different day. Different thread. Same flies.

Tom

 

[Al M.]

no one has ever, EVER, made that claim. EVER.

And yet, people have offered videos as "good representation of the sound" of a system.

Which they are NOT.

EVER.

 

[treitz3]

How about we set the ship straight again and go back to this post, instead of getting into the video thing for the umpteenth time, shall we?


Tom

 

[Al M.]

How about we set the ship straight again and go back to this post, instead of getting into the video thing for the umpteenth time, shall we?

View attachment 127791
Tom

Well, the thread started with a video of a system playing music. How could we not get into the video thing eventually?

At first the thread was remarkably quiet about the sound anyway, but eventually it started when someone said they could hear no bass.

The whole thing could have been avoided with making a bunch of still photos of the system instead.

 

[treitz3]

....or people simply listening to the video without making comments about themselves to look like the savior to the audio world?

In other words, take things for what they are?......I know. To much. Too soon. I'll digress.

(Yes, there is a tad bit of sarcasm in there for those that haven't followed)

Tom

 

[Kingrex]

I don't understand why people take a video of a playing stereo. Booring. I would much rather the video be the owner explaing the system, what they were trying to achieve and how close have they come. And where do they go next. I wouldn't turn the stereo on during the video. Especially if the person taking the video doesn't believe in analyzing a phone video to understand how a system sounds. It makes no sense. Now if the author felt a video gave a deep insight into what it sounds like in person, then.great. post video of stero playing to your hearts content.

 

[bonzo75]

And yet, people have offered videos as "good representation of the sound" of a system.

Which they are NOT.

EVER.

can you please tell us what you think about videos? It is not clear

 

[nirodha]

I think I am the only one that has never commented on videos so here I go: watch them if you like, don’t if you don’t. Don’t pretend anything making them and don’t pretend anything watching them

 

[tima]

Yet, what this does is open the door for ridicule.....

Then arguments....

Then rebuttals...

It is this that gets old because it's seemingly present, argue, rebuttal, rinse, repeat ad nauseam.

Same pile of chit. Different day. Different thread. Same flies.

Tom

I agree it gets old. Not only does it get old, it degrades discussion.

I suppose blaming forum members (flies?) for their responses to a post is a perspective. Another perspective is to ask what in the post might have caused those responses.

I see a visit to an audiophile's home to hear his system and talk with hm about it in a video as a different sort of animal from a 15 minute visit to a dealer's showroom.

In this thread the dealer is not interviewed on camera. Rather than learning about the showroom from the dealer's description a video is posted along with Ron Resnick's subjective opinion about the room, but not about the system. The video has the camera walking around a room showing different components in the system while overlaid by a montage of audio recordings of the system being shown. At first blush, without written or verbal comment about the showcased system, it seems that it is the job of the video to speak for the system in the room. Once someone asks "where's the bass?" we are told the audio portion of the video is not representative of the actual sound of the system and only included for casual musical accompaniment. (Which is rather odd as we have plenty of posted videos with decent bass.)

Then responses to that come from forum members. As usual it is ****** who turns the discussion from the dealer or the system to editorialze about videos in general. (That is not an attack but a statement of fact.) That devolves into talk about DACs. Then the thread goes this way then that as do many threads when the discussion gets off topic, when it turns to videos -- not about the subject of the video, but the truth-value of the video and all videos. People have different opinions.

WBF could disallow system videos -- harsh perhaps but effective. Or WBF could say posts that discuss the truth-value of videos or the representativeness of system videos will be deleted. Or WBF could say that only system videos are allowed where the video maker attests that the video is representative and discussion about whether someone believes any video can be representative will be deleted. WBF has many options to act in its best interest -- it censors out politics and religion, why not talk about the general value of videos? It is personal choice to watch a video or not. Simply railing about the redundancy of the video topic gets nowhere and as long as such discussion is available, people will continue to react.

 

[Ron Resnick]

a 15 minute visit to a dealer's showroom.

It would be nice if you would at least read and process what I actually wrote: "Due to a time constraint I was able to spend only about 15 minutes relaxed and enjoying the music."

I would love to have spent a full day or two days in each of Chris' two rooms. I asked Chris to let me visit on short notice. The time-slot we had in common allowed for me to visit for only 120 minutes. That's only 60 minutes for each of two very elaborate rooms with loads of exciting components.

The video work took half of that time, which left 30 minutes per room to listen to music. I was accompanied by Billy Franklin who also wanted to listen to music. That left me with about 15 minutes per room to listen to my own tracks in as relaxed a manner as I could muster at the moment (which was not very relaxed).

This is how, unfortunately, I had only about 15 minutes to listen to my own tracks in each room.

I was more interested in hearing the Alsyvox than the Diesis, and Chris very kindly obliged me by making sure the Alsyvox was set up. Unfortunately the turntable in the Alsyvox room was not available.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I cannot imagine any aficionado of dynamic driver loudspeakers not being completely blown away by the M9s.

 

[tima]

It would be nice if you would at least read and process what I actually wrote: "Due to a time constraint I was able to spend only about 15 minutes relaxed and enjoying the music."

I did -- where do you think I got the 15 minutes? You set the context and said nothing about other activities.

 

[spiritofmusic]

You must realize that litigation never ends.

The last two audiofools on Earth...what do you think they'll be arguing over?
"When Litigation Ruled The Earth".

 

[Ron Resnick]

I did -- where do you think I got the 15 minutes? You set the context and said nothing about other activities.

No . . . I said 15 minutes listening to music. I never stated how long I was in the dealer's showroom in total.

You converted 15 minutes listening to music into "a 15 minute visit to a dealer's showroom."

 

[tima]

No . . . I said 15 minutes listening to music. I never stated how long I was in the dealer's showroom in total.

You converted 15 minutes listening to music into "a 15 minute visit to a dealer's showroom."

Thanks to Chris Hesse for letting me visit! Due to a time constraint I was able to spend only about 15 minutes relaxed and enjoying the music.

Sure reads like that was your visit.

You said nothing about other activities -- why not? I had no reason to interpolate. You had plenty of opportunity to be clear about your activities. Only in retrospect are you adding to your story.

edit: and Ron, if you want to fuss about reading and processing, look unto yourself. You should note I never mentioned you in my contrast. A stand alone sentence...

I see a visit to an audiophile's home to hear his system and talk with hm about it in a video as a different sort of animal from a 15 minute visit to a dealer's showroom.