Is criticism to be frowned upon?
- Thread starter ack
- Start date
One statement you made was enough for me to dismiss you entirely .. and that was that you equalise everything flat at listening position.. you will be the only one to like that presentation.
Oh boy, here it goes. Another objectivist/subjectivist discussion. Can't you guys grow up and realize that the two can co-exist? One party feels threatened by the other and feels the forum is 'pushed' into a certain direction away from their favorite one. If you don't like the 'objectivist' posts, don't read them, and if you don't like the 'subjectivist' posts, don't read them.
Grow up: nobody and nobody's views 'threaten' anybody here. The forum doesn't have to lean one way or the other. Get over it.
Grow up: nobody and nobody's views 'threaten' anybody here. The forum doesn't have to lean one way or the other. Get over it.
It all depends on how the speakers are engineered. With many speakers that may be the case. And I never said I EQ my system for this. I simply don't manipulate the natural dispersion of the drivers. I let the drivers work as if they were running completely full range. The "house curves" you speak of are just to overcome shortcomings of speakers that have inadequate baffle step compensation.
Last edited:
I agree. I'm not on either side of the fence. I'm simply a hardware guy. I love listening to music as well, but I build audio products, so this is something I'm very passionate about. Some guys on here can't stand talking about what's under the hood. I don't go on their threads and tell them that what type of sound they should like to hear. Nor do I bash there opinions on equipment taste. I simply talk hardware the majority of the time.
So your 100% correct. Why should talking about hardware bother people who don't wanna know what's under the hood? Why can't they simply overlook these posts and stick with the subjecting listening threads?
How can you possibly make that assertion? My goodness - the narcissism. Extraordinary.
I do not think you could ever describe me as close minded, and I certainly would not describe Mike as close minded. Nor Andre. Nor Amir even. What is possibly wrong with describing what you are hearing.
Blizzard I invite you to do 4 things:
1. Post under your real name, not a nom de plum. I do, Mike does, Andre does.None of us hide behind an assumed identity.
2. Post photo's of your system and listening room, musical tastes and interests.
3. Describe to us your experience to help us appreciate your advertised genius.
4. Bring to market a product and let that do your talking.
Actually you do, and that is the problem.
You are the only one in the world that will recommend or like a flat response at listening position ..ok , maybe there are 2 of you
A house curve is essential at listening position..... a house curve is subjective..so if you like no bass and shrillness with a flat curve , so be it..
A house curve is essential at listening position..... a house curve is subjective..so if you like no bass and shrillness with a flat curve , so be it..
You just don't understand what I'm trying to say. You would have to come here so I could demonstrate. I had one guy telling me the same thing over and over again. He said only studio monitors are designed that way. Until he actually came and listened to my system. He was stunned at how rich and full it was from bottom to top. He said "Your right, this is totally flat, but it sounds incredible" The trick is adequate baffle step compensation. Most speakers built today simply don't have it. Because of the skinny front baffles, around 300hz and lower, the sound starts wrapping around the speaker. So the energy directed forward becomes very thin in this region. One solution is to make a really wide front baffle. But problem with that is, you must contour the baffle for good dispersion, and it simply doesn't fit in to most peoples decor. The other solution is to have an extra driver on the front baffle that is dedicated to compensate for this. This way it's full and rich at the listening position. With tweeters, you should never manipulate their natural frequency response. Off axis at listening position you will have a natural rolloff anyways in the high frequencies. Unless you toe them in too much.
If we take your Giya's for example. The single front midwoofer is crossed over at 220hz. What is providing the baffle step compensation at listening position? Nothing, this is why you prefer this curve.
Last edited:
None of your recommendations have any value to me. I get P.M's all the time from people who ask me questions and praise me for sharing the information I share.
1: I use this name because I have been using it for a few years. And who cares if I don't use my real name anyways. Anyone who I want to know it, I will tell.
2:I have photos of my system on several threads. I don't need to post anything in my signature, just because it's "status quo"
3: I have described my experience several times on many threads. I'm sorry if you just skim though the highlights and just pickup your "perceived" negative attributes.
4: I will bring my products to market when they are ready
And no I don't tell people what they should like, I offer them advice on tweaks that they would like if they were open enough to try them.
So basically the whole post was B.S
When the Paris attacks went down, my family and I were sleeping a few km’s away in the 5th arrondissement.
I came away very disturbed by those events. Not because my family or myself as Europeans were the “targets”, or were necessarily even in danger. I was disturbed by my own apathy in understanding the world I lived in and how to respond to it.
It would have been convenient (and knee jerk) for me to look for an easy target to direct my feelings of horror and despair toward. Militant radicalized fundamentalist terrorists would be the obvious choice.
But upon reflection, I’ve had to own up to the reality that scapegoating an individual, or indeed the ideology they represent is a half-measure at best.
This is an open forum allowing contributions from members in which the colour of our skin, our sexual, religious and political preferences, our wealth, status and body fat percentage are all irrelevant. That is a great, great thing from my perspective. It means that the only things we are judged on and asked to take responsibility for are the words we write and the attitudes and ideas we express.
But while Mike, Andrew and Andre might all have salient points that perhaps should be considered I’d like to make a distinction between two things often confused and conflated in discussions such as this.
Is Amir the problem? Is Blizzard? Am I?
Well, it would be convenient to think so. Certainly, by removing the individual, we’d no longer have to deal with whatever it is that annoys us.
But if I’ve gleaned anything in my forty-two times ‘round the sun, it’s that individuals are easy to kill. Chop off the head - done.
Culture? Oh wow, culture is a whole ‘nuther kettle of fish. Chop of the head, and another one grows in its place. See, if Amir is the problem, then the solution is simple. He gets cut from participation in the forum. If Blizzard is the problem, then we do the same thing.
But culture is more difficult to define, and therefore, more difficult to determine how it affects the individual and how the individual affects it. But my strong conviction is that we have a responsibility to work that out in whatever capacity we have.
I’d like to suggest that there is a clash of cultures (with apologies to Camus, Fukuyama, Said and Chomsky) prevalent on WBF (and no, it’s not the subjective/objective divide), and without identifying our part in shaping that culture - and most significantly, examining our own contribution through the attitude we express via our language and choice of words - we will only keep culling members until there is no one left.
Is the value of a forum defined by its diversity or its uniformity? Personally, I think Phelonious Ponk is one of the most valuable members here, and yet I disagree with almost every post he makes (hi, Tim!). Tim, from my perspective, however, has learned the art of understanding his worldview, articulating it without feeling too precious about defending it, and as far as I can make out, without seeking to remove the “offending head” that disagrees with him. Total kudos.
Recently, I asked another member to consider whether his choice of words could have been better chosen. I explained my reasons for my post (perhaps inelegantly), and attempted to contextualize it. He told me to go jump (hi, Andre!), and I completely support his right to do so. Modifying other people’s attitudes, beliefs or behaviour is of no interest to me.
What I’ve learned from my exchanges with Tim and Andre (and life in general) is that challenging other peoples ideas and attitudes is valid, but not always constructive unless they themselves are aware of the culture they inhabit and the effect it has on them and they have on it.
Amir, I could write a long list of things you could change for the betterment of the forum. But I could write a long list about most other people in my life too. The only thing that produces long-term change is self-reflection.
Perhaps rather than asking Mike, or Andrew, or Andre or anyone else what you could change in regards to the direction of the forum, can I suggest you ask yourself, “what could I do to influence the culture of the forum that sees more people want to participate and limit the amount of good people leaving the forum upset with the way they’re treated”? If we can influence a culture change via a process of self-reflection instead of knee-jerk self-justification, perhaps we would not only have a forum is which we enjoy participating more, we might find less to criticize one another for. After all, nothing in my experience suggests true leadership more than leading by example, and the ability of that individual to engage in a relationship of self-reflexivity.
Lest you feel I am singling you out, please know I personally feel we could all benefit from asking ourselves the same question: “How am I influencing the culture of the forum?”
For my part, posting less was part of my strategy for limiting the amount of invective that I let so easily flow from my keyboard, giving me time to consider my replies and temper my arrogance and ego. Nevertheless, I am sure there are still some who consider my contributions to be of little or no value. But I hope I am not the same person I was when I joined the forum; that would be a great shame.
That is a very interesting and fair question Re-reading my original critique I do not see anything in there which I would have been reluctant to say to Peter B face to face, if, for example, we had been on a panel discussion together or something. However, if I just passed him in the hallway I would not have launched into my entire essay.
In general I consider myself polite but direct. (As every WBF member to whom I have written directly knows I begin almost every email and most text messages with "Dear ___" and I end almost every email and most text messages with "Best wishes, Ron").
Writing that a statement is "manifestly illogical" is direct and strong, but, I think, not impolite. I am critiquing the statement, not insulting the speaker.
Fair distinction, Ron. I guess by face-to-face I rather meant a private discussion, not a public one, as a panel discusssion would be.
Precisely my point as well. But I am convinced that distinction will be lost on many when push comes to shove. It's human nature to take things personally rather than to step back and consider the argument itself.
This. A thousand times, this. I pretty much limit myself to the general audio and measurement-based forums here. I don't go to those sub-forums that are purely subjectivist, because I'd have nothing to add there that wouldn't be shouted down, and I'm really trying to stay out of the cat fights in the general audio forum, because expressing a point of view other than conventional audiophile wisdom, no matter how carefully, just escalates the angst. There is a lot of very thin skin around here.
Tim
Great thoughtful post... The tendency to want to uniformize is strong... Dissensions are not well seen .. If the vocal poster is on a certain side then it is ok ... else .. the poster is frowned upon.. and call for his/her head removal come in waves.
You can say that again.. Too many people are ready to bolt out at the first dissenting post... What is sad is that many of those who threaten of leaving are quite passionate and knowledgeable and their contribution is appreciated by even those who disagree with them... they fail to understand that this a Discussion forum and that congratulatory threads are the least useful.
I posted this question at least once, just recently: Is there only one acceptable way to be an audiophile? No one answered.
Alright, I'll answer: there are many acceptable ways. In order to recognize that, it just takes a bit of tolerance beyond one's own narrow viewpoint.
