Art Dudley on audio companies and 'sledging'

What kind of journalism is that then?

IMO not very cerebral and technical. Too much fun and wank. What happened to the EE point of view in HiFi?
I wish Duddley, Philips, Mejias, Dorgay, Clark, Atkinson et all. wrote less about their listening preferences, carpets, wives, lunches and wrote more about our hobby, which is far more "technical" than it is "leisure".

I enjoy reading data! :tresbon:
 
IMO not very cerebral and technical. Too much fun and wank. What happened to the EE point of view in HiFi?
I wish Duddley, Philips, Mejias, Dorgay, Clark, Atkinson et all. wrote less about their listening preferences, carpets, wives, lunches and wrote more about our hobby, which is far more "technical" than it is "leisure".

I enjoy reading data! :tresbon:

You don't have to be cerebral to relate what you are hearing. Gear has gotten so good, vintage included, that technical specs - frequency response, THD, IMD, etc.- don't come close to describing how something sounds to the end user.
Without "subjective" impressions, there would not be much to discuss in our hobby.
 
You don't have to be cerebral to relate what you are hearing. Gear has gotten so good, vintage included, that technical specs - frequency response, THD, IMD, etc.- don't come close to describing how something sounds to the end user.
Without "subjective" impressions, there would not be much to discuss in our hobby.

This would be my utopia list:

1) manufacturers - scientific (EE)
2) journalists - objective
3) consumers - subjective

Now try this:

1) manufacturers - subjective
2) journalists - subjective
3) consumers - subjective

...and this gets to slip through the cracks.

1111listen.revive1.jpg
 
You seem to forget what we're actually discussing. Its A STEREO SYSTEM. Many people seriously do not want to, or need to, think about this stuff like its a job or like there are any dire consequences to something that sounds good to somebody even if it doesn't measure perfectly to somebody else. If there were a perfect correlation between specs and listening impressions I'd more get the point, but there isn't.

By the way, we're not even talking about journalism. They are opinion reviewers in a hobby magazine. Its entertainment discussion about entertainment electronics.
 
Last edited:
You seem to forget what we're actually discussing. Its A STEREO SYSTEM. Many people seriously do not want to, or need to, think about this stuff like its a job or like there are any dire consequences to something that sounds good to somebody even if it doesn't measure perfectly to somebody else. If there were a perfect correlation between specs and listening impressions I'd more get the point, but there isn't.

Now seriously... A man who's job is to give me his objective opinion on a topic in a technical hobby in the very same article promoted a finger painted plastic box with a diode as a Hi-Fi component. How can anyone read this article with a straight face?
 
Now seriously... A man who's job is to give me his objective opinion on a topic in a technical hobby in the very same article promoted a finger painted plastic box with a diode as a Hi-Fi component. How can anyone read this article with a straight face?

But it isn't a technical hobby. For most, its about people finding the best way to enjoy their music. They don't much care what is inside those boxes, as long as they make the music sound good.
 
Now seriously... A man who's job is to give me his objective opinion on a topic in a technical hobby

Where did you get the idea that that was his job? He's a subjective reviewer of components in the hobby of listening to music on stereos. If you don't want that, read elsewhere or discuss online with like minded people who care about things. Its like complaining that a Mexican restaurant isn't serving you Chinese food.
 
The device, a Schumann resonance device (whatever that means, but there's lots written a out it outside of Hifi mags) may or may not do anything audible in my system but I try to keep an open mind.
I'm reminded of the Carver Holograhic generator technology which solved a problem no one was really concerned too much about. This processing you could hear but I always found it confusing, but amusing. Completely, technically explainable but it did not enhance my listening experience. I'll take something that enhances my experience over understanding the technicalities "almost" every time.:D
 
A hobby is a regularly undertaken activity that is done for pleasure, typically, during one's leisure time. Hobbies can include the collection of themed items and objects, engaging in creative and artistic pursuits, tinkering playing sports, along with many more examples. By continually participating in a particular hobby, one can acquire substantial skill and knowledge in that area.

Generally speaking, a person who engages in an activity solely for fun is called an amateur (or hobbyist), as opposed to a professional who engages in an activity for remuneration, or pay. An amateur may be as skilled as a professional, the principle difference being that a professional receives compensation while an amateur does not.
Source: Wikipedia

Now I actually agree with John. Dudley is just like me, a Hi-Fi amateur hobbyist sharing his subjective listening experience and thoughts on Hi-Fi. Neither of us two should be taken very seriously. Each to his own.


:music:
 
This would be my utopia list:

1) manufacturers - scientific (EE)
2) journalists - objective
3) consumers - subjective

Now try this:

1) manufacturers - subjective
2) journalists - subjective
3) consumers - subjective

...and this gets to slip through the cracks.

Is it possible to describe how something sounds without being subjective? I don't think so, especially in audio where one man's trash is another man's treasure.

Many people have come to the conclusion that spec sheets have almost no value in determining sound quality. Not to mention that specs can, and have been manipulated by manufacturers to ill effect (e.g. the "THD wars"). This is still going on because manufacturers know that some people buy equipment based on specs alone.

I think your latter model is closer to reality then you think.
 
He is a professional writer and reviewer. Not an amateur writer and reviewer, like all/most of us. But he doesn't pretend to speak about anything other than his subjective opinion, and people buy the magazine expecting to get that.
 
This would be my utopia list:

1) manufacturers - scientific (EE)
2) journalists - objective
3) consumers - subjective

Now try this:

1) manufacturers - subjective
2) journalists - subjective
3) consumers - subjective

...and this gets to slip through the cracks.

1111listen.revive1.jpg

Ain't that much more in my Lehmann Black Cube, and it sounds great. Only reason I even know what's in my Black Cube is because mine is an older one that needs to be opened to select the right settings on the dip switches. It could be filled with magic fairy dust for all I care. As long as good music comes out!
 
I interpreted it as social commentary on the some of the "personalities" of the industry, rather than an ethical indictment of any significance.

If actions speak louder than words, he must not be too compelled by it in any case, as the Scottish manufacturer (if I guess correctly is Linn?) happens to make his current reference table (LP12) if I'm not mistaken.

Doh ! I guess even our heroes have feet of clay :D
 
OK, so I voted for 'Technical Knowledge', but wouldnt I be more likely to get that from diyaudio or similar ? AK does seem to have more in common with a fraternity than some other sites, although I admit that I dont spend much time in the vintage forums.
 
Back
Top Bottom