R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Digidesign White Paper  (Read 19586 times)

Fletcher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3016
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2006, 08:02:58 am »

Ronny wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 01:40


"Censorship can never be a good thing."

Exactly.

Not only does PSW censor members that don't post agreeable posts to the moderators, but they delete some of the moderators posts when they aren't agreeable with the owners. We aren't dumb asses, we know that you make money on the advertising and over cater to some manufacturers who pay the bills. It's obvious what's been happening for quite a while now.


Actually Ronnie, I didn't want to get into this, especially on this forum because this is a non-tchnical topic [which in my opinin is best suited for the "Saloon"... but that is my opinion and we will leave this quandary in the hands of this forum's moderator as to the disposal of this thread].

Let's hit the "rewind" button for a couple of minutes and look back to the formation of PSW's recording forums back in like 2001.  

I was contacted by Ken Berger who at the time was the owner of PSW to put together a set of recording forums.  I took the challenge for a monthly stipend and complete autonomy.  I received an adequate stipend, and the complete autonomy [which to me was actually more important than the stipend part but I wasn't set to tell that to management at that point, and seeing as I had both all was good].

Within a year we built a pretty good environment.  We had "Mixerman" and "Harvey Gerst", "John Klett" and "Seva".  We were able to build a site that was based around the community that at the time was indeed "professional audio".

Time went by and the infamous "Mixerman Diaries" lifted the fame and I dare say infamy of the old "recpit" to the point where in January of '04 it was decided that the recording forums had to split.  1/2 of the "recpit" became "MARSH" led by "Mixerman" and his crew.  Its a pretty cool site on the more social aspects of what we do.  It is a place where there is a social order and structure which R/E/P doesn't have where mud can be slung with out penalty nor much backup from the management of that section of the website.

When the "recpit" split R/E/P was formed as a more technically oriented site where decorum was not only expected but enforced.  When George Massenburg first opened his forum he had a pretty strict policy that you had to include your name and professional affiliation to post.  Anyone could read, but to contribute you had to be A) identifiable; B) accountable for your statements.

Klaus Heyne has continued that tradition in what I feel is absolutely the most authoritative forum on the subject of microphones in the world.  Ross Hogarth, Terry Manning, Dave Hecht, Steve Albini, and yes, Mr. Lavry have produced what I would like to think are the most civil and authoritative set of audio production forums available on the internet.  These forums are indeed about facts and opinions that have a basis in fact more so than myth.

What happened with the original thread was that Mr. Lavry decided to edit several posts made by Lucas (sp?) from Apogee Electronics.  Now Lucas is also a respected design engineer, he too should have had the ability to voice his full statements without interdiction from the forum's moderator.  This did not happen, which in my opinion diluted the value of the thread in question because of the censorship of a view that opposed Mr. Lavry's view.

Whether Lucas's words were spot on or not is a matter for greater minds than mine to decide.  It is my job and position to see that those words were available in the thread as this site, and these forums are to enable open discourse on any topic by those qualified to make those comments.  It was indeed Mr. Lavry's censorship of the fore mentioned statements that prompted not only the closure of the original thread [by me] as well as the thead's subsequent repositioning in "The Saloon".

Had Mr. Lavry refuted the statements with his own words and not the reactionary censorship of the words of a colleague this discussion would never have taken place.  

When Mr. Lavry was added to the R/E/P forums I took a tremendous amount of pressure from several manufacturers as well as one of our former moderators and would not waiver on my stance that Mr. Lavry had a right to be heard.  When Mr. Lavry edited the posts of a fellow designer that poisoned the thread in my opinion, which meant that the thread was no longer of fact but skewed in a manner that only supported Mr. Lavry's position.  Right or wrong, all voices should be heard on these forums in their entirety or these forums become nothing but a shill point for their moderator's firm.  I won't permit that on my own forum, I will not permit that on any other forum on the R/E/P board.

To this day, my stipend, while greatly reduced from what it was when we started this project is still in tact.  To this day my autonomy on these decisions is still mine and mine alone.  I have people with whom I consult on these matters, like Mr. Blackwood my co-administrator, but when the rubber meets the road these decisions are mine and mine alone.  The buck stops here.

I do not bend to threats from manufacturers [of which there have been many], I do not bend to threats from moderators [of which there have been fewer than those from the MFG's but they have existed none the less].  I enjoy full support for my decisions from the upper management of the PSW site and its parent company Huge Universe Inc. [which I think was just sold but it doesn't affect me or our forums in any manner other than the neat little symbols that now accompany each forum].

Again, this kind of bullshit has absolutely no place on a technical forum such as Mr. Lavry's.  Y'all requested an explanation so an explanation is what you have received.  This is indeed an abridged version of that explanation but suffice it to say that there are absolutely no commercial motives in any of my decisions as it applies to the administration of these forums.

Peace.
Logged
CN Fletcher

mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid


"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.  
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and  they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too.  It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm

Tom C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2006, 09:13:32 am »

Fletcher, is the version down in R/E/P Saloon the censored
or the uncensored one?
Logged
Tom

.signature failure

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #17 on: October 20, 2006, 09:19:46 am »

Tom C wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 08:13

Fletcher, is the version down in R/E/P Saloon the censored
or the uncensored one?

It's the edited one - once the posts are edited, the info is gone.
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

Brent Handy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 171
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #18 on: October 20, 2006, 12:47:07 pm »

danlavry wrote on Tue, 17 October 2006 19:57

It would be worth noting that the new digidesign product, the Venue, is basically a 48KHz rate unit. It certainly does not support 192KHz. How does Digidesign explain it? I guess I will have to wait a year or 2 (similar to the clocking issue) for them to come around with a paper stating that 192KHz is not really needed, again, rehashing all that I said as if it were discovered by them.


The Venue is a live sound platform.  There are no common sense audio quality reasons to go above 48.  Consider the environment, speaker system limitations and concert SPL/human ear masking effects.

The Venue is set up to interface with PT HD, so in my case, where I am capturing audio for video (Avid, which uses 24bit/48kHz AIFF), I require no extra math processing.

There are a couple 96kHz consoles, but I think that it is a waste.  Any sonic or processing advantages are going to be lost in a PA system operating at 10-20% THD, in the average shed, stadium, etc.
Logged

danlavry

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 997
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #19 on: October 20, 2006, 02:59:37 pm »

Fletcher wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 13:02

Ronny wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 01:40


"Censorship can never be a good thing."

Exactly.

Not only does PSW censor members that don't post agreeable posts to the moderators, but they delete some of the moderators posts when they aren't agreeable with the owners. We aren't dumb asses, we know that you make money on the advertising and over cater to some manufacturers who pay the bills. It's obvious what's been happening for quite a while now.


What happened with the original thread was that Mr. Lavry decided to edit several posts made by Lucas (sp?)...

When Mr. Lavry edited the posts of a fellow designer that poisoned the thread in my opinion, which meant that the thread was no longer of fact but skewed in a manner that only supported Mr. Lavry's position.  

Peace.



Fletcher,

First. you said that you do not respond to spouse’s emails. I sent you an email which you did not respond to, telling you how I feel about moving the thread to Saloon. When you did not respond, I asked, Priscilla, the CEO of Lavry Engineering to help. You did not respond to my emails, and you did not respond to mine.  

Now you wrote a long post repeating over an over that I censored Lucas (Apogee engineer). That is NOT TRUE! I did not censor any of Lucas statements!!! In fact, at some point I censored Max (Apogee sales and marketing) because he was just being offensive. I told Max to have apogee engineering come in and state thier position. I AM THE ONE THAT INVITED Lucas (or any Apogee engineer) in, and Lucas was NEVER CENSORED!

So all your long argument is based on a wrong premises.

And then you said: “When Mr. Lavry edited the posts of a fellow designer that poisoned the thread in my opinion”.  

That is wrong. And BTW as a moderator, I do not have the access to edit other posters massage! I CAN DELETE a post, but I CAN NOT EDIT the content of a post. You Fletcher, should have known that "little technical fact", and realized that accusing me of editing posts is wrong.  

Your long thread about how I censored and even edited posts is wrong. YOU are the one that is doing the censoring. You accuse me wrongly for censoring and editing, while you are the one doing it. There is only one proper way to fix it: repost the thread now, without any alterations.

Dan Lavry
http://www.lavryengineering.com
Logged

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2006, 03:05:09 pm »

danlavry wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 13:59

And BTW as a moderator, I do not have the access to edit other posters massage! I CAN DELETE a post, but I CAN NOT EDIT the content of a post.

Not true.

From the Admin action-log viewer:
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

danlavry

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 997
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2006, 04:16:58 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 20:05

danlavry wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 13:59

And BTW as a moderator, I do not have the access to edit other posters massage! I CAN DELETE a post, but I CAN NOT EDIT the content of a post.

Not true.


Brad,

You are correct. I just checked it out and the edit button is active on all posts. I seem to recall that in the past I could only edit mine (I may be worng).

But BACK TO THE POINT OF DISCUSSION: I have been under the impression that I can only edit mine. I NEVER EDITED ANY POSTS!!! Changing content is like fraud. Fletcher said that I edited posts. I NEVER EDITTED ANY POSTS!  

Regards
Dan Lavry
http://www.lavryengineering.com  
Logged

Fletcher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3016
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #22 on: October 20, 2006, 05:29:13 pm »

I just called Lucas, there was no editing of his posts by Mr. Lavry.
Logged
CN Fletcher

mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid


"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.  
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and  they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too.  It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm

Max

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #23 on: October 20, 2006, 06:57:10 pm »

While it may be true that Dan did not edit any of Lucas' posts, he did delete a number of posts I had put up to address the issues. I am the spokesperson for Apogee Electronics and anything I say is wholly endorsed by engineering, making the distinction between myself and anyone in our engineering department moot.

In principle, a moderator who is also a manufacturer should not be allowed to delete posts by a competitor that the moderator is attempting to impeach. To do so only imparts bias to the reader and promotes the moderator's agenda at the expense of a fair and open dialogue.

As for this white paper, there is nothing claimed in there with respect to jitter that we at Apogee do not agree with or goes against any of our previous claims. Apogee never stated that Big Ben provided lower jitter than a converter on internal clock. What we did say was that Big Ben can improve performance of many external converters across the quality spectrum.

There are things we tried to express that Dan Lavry and others purposely omit in these clocking arguments. Yes, Jitter is a deficiency that causes a certain type of distortion to the signal. However, the ear, being a non-linear device with respect to frequency, will not hear all jitter the same. It is very easy to create a scenario whereby two signals can be induced with jitter, one of which has significantly more jitter than the other, but sounds audibly more ACCURATE to the ear. The distortion due to jitter on the one with more jitter can be relegated to frequencies that are entirely out of the human audible spectrum in various ways, whereas the other can have far less jitter, but at frequencies that are much more audibly apparent.

It is certainly possible to design an external clock in such a way that the increased amount of jitter that results will have less of an audible impact than the internal clock by itself. For this reason one cannot claim that an internal clock will always be more accurate - merely that it will theoretically always have less jitter. There is a significant difference between the two, and the testimony we have been seeing on the market and in our own testing with respect to Big Ben over the last few years certainly attests to this.

Logged
Max Gutnik
Apogee Electronics

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #24 on: October 20, 2006, 07:14:51 pm »

Hi Max, to be clear, Dan deleted one post in that entire thread...
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

Max

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #25 on: October 20, 2006, 08:08:13 pm »

Actually Dan deleted a number of responses that I posted that were directed at his attacks on Apogee:

danlavry wrote on Tue, 22 March 2005 01:03

Max,

You said: Dan had deleted a number of our responses in this regard, so we have opted not to continue this discussion in his forum.

I deleted some of your repetitive salesman, non-technical responses but none of Lucas's.


Dan also deleted posts by Nika that agreed with Apogee's point of view, and subsequently banned both of us from posting. If you recall Brad, you were the one who reinstated us:

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 29 March 2005 14:18

Well, we're all about free speech here, but sometimes mods have a different perspective than the masses. That being said, Nika has brought up some good points which should be heard.

This will be dealt with, and we thank you all for your thoughts.


bblackwood wrote on Tue, 29 March 2005 18:13

Both Nika and Max have been un-banned.


As to whether my responses were any more repetitive salesman, non-technical responses than Dan's comments about Apogee should have been left up to the reader. Again, a moderator should not be allowed to delete posts by a competitor that the moderator is attempting to paint in a negative light.

And for the record, Apogee has never been an advertiser on Pro Sound Web.
Logged
Max Gutnik
Apogee Electronics

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #26 on: October 20, 2006, 11:47:22 pm »

Max wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 19:08

Actually Dan deleted a number of responses that I posted that were directed at his attacks on Apogee:

I can only go on what the Admin action log viewer from the forum software shows me, and that's exactly one deletion in that entire thread. And zero edits.

Thanks,
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2006, 02:14:05 am »

Is anyone surprised that external sync was worse?

That would be news.

DC

Jon Hodgson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1854
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2006, 06:42:37 am »

Max wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 23:57

It is certainly possible to design an external clock in such a way that the increased amount of jitter that results will have less of an audible impact than the internal clock by itself. For this reason one cannot claim that an internal clock will always be more accurate - merely that it will theoretically always have less jitter. There is a significant difference between the two, and the testimony we have been seeing on the market and in our own testing with respect to Big Ben over the last few years certainly attests to this.



But the external clock is not fed directly to the converters is it? It is used to drive a phase locked loop which includes and internal clock, so what you would end up with is the jitter on the external clock, smoothed out by a degree dependant on the quality of the phase locked loop, PLUS the jitter of the internal clock.

So as far as I can see you're not exchanging the jitter of the internal clock for the possibly subjectively superior jitter of the external clock, rather you are increasing the jitter of the internal clock.

Hard to see how this could be in any way more ACCURATE, though some people might find it pleasantly more fuzzy.
Logged

Jørn Bonne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
Re: Digidesign White Paper
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2006, 08:00:54 am »

Max wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 02:08

Actually Dan deleted a number of responses that I posted that were directed at his attacks on Apogee:

danlavry wrote on Tue, 22 March 2005 01:03

Max,

You said: Dan had deleted a number of our responses in this regard, so we have opted not to continue this discussion in his forum.

I deleted some of your repetitive salesman, non-technical responses but none of Lucas's.


Dan also deleted posts by Nika that agreed with Apogee's point of view, and subsequently banned both of us from posting. If you recall Brad, you were the one who reinstated us:

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 29 March 2005 14:18

Well, we're all about free speech here, but sometimes mods have a different perspective than the masses. That being said, Nika has brought up some good points which should be heard.

This will be dealt with, and we thank you all for your thoughts.


bblackwood wrote on Tue, 29 March 2005 18:13

Both Nika and Max have been un-banned.


As to whether my responses were any more repetitive salesman, non-technical responses than Dan's comments about Apogee should have been left up to the reader. Again, a moderator should not be allowed to delete posts by a competitor that the moderator is attempting to paint in a negative light.

And for the record, Apogee has never been an advertiser on Pro Sound Web.


I was one of the people who followed the wordclock thread in Dan's guest forum. I also posted once, supporting Max's and Lucas's rights to rectify some of the desinformation being launched against Apogee product.

I was stunned to see a guest moderator yelling at people at length using caps for long sections, continously putting down a competing company's products, their "young engineers", "sales people" etc. and all the while promoting himself and his own product.

The interesting thing was that he got away with it!!! Neither Fletcher nor Brad seemed to mind this utter lack of moderating skills on PSW. On the contrary, soon after Dan was promoted and had his own permanent forum.

I have noticed that Dan's moderating skills have improved somewhat since, though!

I posted a comment on Dan's behaviour in a thread on PSW where this was discussed. I think it was on Fletcher's forum, if memory serves. And yes, my post was deleted immidiatly after I posted it, as this one may well be.

Like Ronny said, Dan's forum is down on my list of priority, though it does offer interesting stuff from time to time.

J
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Up