• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

what is the most "misleading" things you have heard about HiFi's??

Tell you what, since 'several valid definitions of the word' now exist, you pick the definition of obsolete which you like best. As you point out,
"that one definition favors your notions doesn't mean the others are invalid." ....except all definitions other than yours are inherently incorrect and anyone who disagrees with you is being 'difficult'.

And I thought this thread was about the most "misleading" things you have heard about HiFi's??
I would say "Yeeesh!" but it would be deemed 'unseemly'.
 
Racketeer said:
....except all definitions other than yours are inherently incorrect and anyone who disagrees with you is being 'difficult'.
Click to expand...


I haven't said definitions other than the one I'm using are incorrect nor have I implied so, nor do I need to since the other definitions don't conflict with the one I'm using but simply add refinements. You don't understand the terms of the argument or the logic involved.

In any event if the use of records meets the characteristics of but one definition of the word obsolete then it is, by definition, obsolete. That's it. How can one then argue that it's not?
 
Last edited:
I haven't said definitions other than the one I'm using are incorrect nor have I implied so, nor do I need to since the other definitions don't conflict with the one I'm using but simply add refinements.
Click to expand...
Therefore, if my definition differs from any of yours, it must be wrong, so you are indeed implying that other definitions are incorrect.
"..other definitions don't conflict with the one I'm using." So those definitions must only be valid if you say they are. Nice to see you're not being arrogant about it at least.

If it all depends on one's own definition of the word 'obsolete', then why not simply mention that to begin with? As a self-proclaimed expert on the terms of the argument and the logic involved, I thought you might have known better.

In any event if the use of records meets the characteristics of but one definition of the word obsolete then it is, by definition, obsolete. That's it. How can one then argue that it's not?
Click to expand...

Yes, by one of those definitions, of your choosing, it is - and "that's it!" Indeed - how on earth can anyone argue that it's not? All it has to do is meet but one definition of the word and, by that definition - it is so! Who can argue with that level of 'logic'?
 
tubeornotube said:
'Rare'usually means'they'never have seen one before..Which would account for anybody,so as a result there are plenty of rarities.:D

Matt .......tubeornotube
Click to expand...

Agree; it usually says more about the ignorance of the seller than it does about the nature of the equipment.
 
Racketeer said:
Yes, by one of those definitions, of your choosing, it is - and "that's it!" Indeed - how on earth can anyone argue that it's not? All it has to do is meet but one definition of the word and, by that definition - it is so! Who can argue with that level of 'logic'?
Click to expand...

I can't believe I'm jumping into this pi$$ing match..

I hate to tell you, but if you have met one definition, any definition, of a word, then you've met it. The fact that it may have other definitions doesn't really matter, you only have to meet one for it to be true.

bs
 
:sigh:"sounds like your'e there" "Brings the sound of a concert hall right into your living room" "better sound through research" HTIB.
 
I hate to tell you, but if you have met one definition, any definition, of a word, then you've met it.
Click to expand...
True. If you've met one definition, then you've met that one definition.

The fact that it may have other definitions doesn't really matter, you only have to meet one for it to be true.
Click to expand...

It doesn't really matter if you don't really care, but meeting that one definition, any definition, actually makes a thing true?
 
Racketeer said:
Tell you what, since 'several valid definitions of the word' now exist, you pick the definition of obsolete which you like best. As you point out,
"that one definition favors your notions doesn't mean the others are invalid." ....except all definitions other than yours are inherently incorrect and anyone who disagrees with you is being 'difficult'.

And I thought this thread was about the most "misleading" things you have heard about HiFi's??
I would say "Yeeesh!" but it would be deemed 'unseemly'.
Click to expand...

I have to say that Tom Brennan knows more about being difficult than most, so if he thinks you are being difficult, you probably are.
 
Always the bose haters around. Another classic piece of bs...
No highs no lows must be bose.
Always hated that statement.
 
"If you are reading this then you know what a rare and iconic piece this is".
That one usually sets my BS detector screaming.
 
Often times when I read the Amazon reviews, I see:

"these speakers sound larger than they are!".... well if you push them loud enough...all speakers will sound large. It's about how natural they sound without compression...

And another favorite:

"I consider myself an audiophilist/enthusiast..." then they list off Bose, Skull Candy, and other big box store brands they compare with...without listing any high end brand names....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom