wwittman wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 08:26 |
I missed it... how was he "treated"? |
bblackwood wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 11:40 |
Simply put, we felt it was time to move in a different direction. Bruno Putzys has joined us and will be able to answer the same types of questions you had for Dan. Very few people in this world posses the mixed-signal knowledge that Dan has, but Bruno is one of them. Please drop by and give Bruno a warm welcome. |
Lucas van der Mee wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 19:38 |
Mr Lavry did not act like a moderator, he had an agenda, he was not mediating, presiding or acting like a chairman. He used a public forum to attack a competitor and a former employer, but not allowing the competitor to speak freely. Hence we decided to not take part in any of his discussions anymore and limit our responses to putting out fires when required. Lucas van der Mee Sr. Design Engineer Apogee Electronics |
Quote: |
Whatever I think of Mr Lavry is irrelevant but: This is called: "kicking a man when he is already down" in my book. Maybe you should have participated in the discussions instead of doing this. Not too classy, imho... malice |
Lucas van der Mee wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 13:38 |
CRM0992 said “Then Dan bashes Apogee because of their inability to defend their marketing claims, and drew the ire of the forum operators. And the mods may have disagreed with his tone or methods, but the unaddressed questions to Apogee in those threads are still valid questions today as people waste thousands of dollars on clock boxes to "clean up their audio.” Chris, There is no inability to defend our marketing claims. The problem you may have had in getting our point of view was because we weren’t allowed to fully defend or explain ourselves in Dan’s forum. Dan had no problem deleting our posts and other’s who supported our opinion, when he did not like the contents. If you’ll go through the thread again, you’ll see that Dan claims statements we never made, that Dan distorts Max’ and my words, whether intentionally or not and most of all continually keeps repeating the same questions instead of going into detail into what we really say. Mr Lavry did not act like an unbiased moderator, rather, like he had an agenda. He was not mediating, presiding or acting like he should. He used a public forum to attack a competitor and a former employer, while not allowing the competitor to respond freely. Hence we decided to not take part in any of his discussions anymore and limit our responses to putting out fires when required. Lucas van der Mee Sr. Design Engineer Apogee Electronics |
maxdimario wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 18:33 |
A friend who has been in the recording business for decades and has engineering and math degree once commented that 'just because you can build good converters it does not mean you are god' I have to agree that there was a little bit of an attitude in mr Lavry's approach.. and he did say some things which were contradictory and self serving, in a way. |
Lucas van der Mee wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 13:38 |
CRM0992 said “Then Dan bashes Apogee because of their inability to defend their marketing claims, and drew the ire of the forum operators. And the mods may have disagreed with his tone or methods, but the unaddressed questions to Apogee in those threads are still valid questions today as people waste thousands of dollars on clock boxes to "clean up their audio.” Chris, There is no inability to defend our marketing claims. The problem you may have had in getting our point of view was because we weren’t allowed to fully defend or explain ourselves in Dan’s forum. Dan had no problem deleting our posts and other’s who supported our opinion, when he did not like the contents. If you’ll go through the thread again, you’ll see that Dan claims statements we never made, that Dan distorts Max’ and my words, whether intentionally or not and most of all continually keeps repeating the same questions instead of going into detail into what we really say. Mr Lavry did not act like an unbiased moderator, rather, like he had an agenda. He was not mediating, presiding or acting like he should. He used a public forum to attack a competitor and a former employer, while not allowing the competitor to respond freely. Hence we decided to not take part in any of his discussions anymore and limit our responses to putting out fires when required. Lucas van der Mee Sr. Design Engineer Apogee Electronics |
crm0922 wrote on Wed, 22 November 2006 08:25 |
Can anyone explain why Apogee has this privelege and no one else (probably not even Dan) does? For example, I was not able to reply even to threads not marked "locked" in that forum. |
Revolution wrote on Wed, 22 November 2006 07:26 |
To be quite honest the only real looser here is Apogee. |
John Ivan wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 12:21 |
Brad, am I to understand that Dan was ASKED to leave? Over this Business with this Max clown? and Fletcher, who I think is a great great cat but who I think over stepped? Is this because a certain digital Audio company is not happy? I'm not accusing, simply asking. |
malice wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 14:27 |
He was not hidding his aggenda, as Brad is not hidding his crusade against the "mastering mafia" as Fletcher is not hidding his bias toward the gear manufacturers he doesn't pimp, as Steve Albini doesn't hide his dislike of majors. |
Fletcher wrote on Wed, 22 November 2006 14:37 | ||
To whit we have our next contestant on "As the Hard Drive Turns"
Fletcher works at Mercenary Audio. As of January 1, 2006 he no longer held the "center office". That office belongs to Jay Fitz. Fletcher has a desk in the "Redrum" [the 'marketing' department]. That office is shared with Samara Krugman, M-A's director of marketing and public relations. I spend the lion's share of my time in a little room in the back of the building just off the warehouse. That room is called "The Methods and Applications Laboratory". You will hear more about it as days go on as I spend my time in that room developing content for the website that will be going up sometime in the spring of '07. The main thrust of that room is for me to work on product development with different manufacturers [can you say "Mercenary Edition"... I thought you could] as well as auditioning and devising application notes for new product to be carried by M-A. Get it... "Methods and Applications Laboratory"... where I devise "application notes" for the stuff Mercenary sells. If you think my "bias" towards manufacturer's that Mercenary doesn't sell isn't because their gear isn't up to my standards, or because their gear isn't something special [like I have 3 things in my rack that do 98.7% of what this new thing does which in my book makes the new thing irrelevant] then you need to do some serious fucking soul searching. One of the reasons I got this gig was because I'm usually pretty good at separating church and state. As I am the arbitor [for the most part] of what M-A does and does not carry from the sonic/technical perspective [Jay Fitz deals with the political aspects... I have no fucking patience for that shit anymore], I would say that it is a pretty safe bet that the reason that M-A doesn't pimp their shit is because it don't measure up... but its cool if you want to read some kind of evil conspiracy theory into the fold... we are in the entertainment business, if that entertains you all I can say is "Mazel Tov" |
Fletcher wrote on Wed, 22 November 2006 15:38 |
I agree that having opinionated moderators isn't a problem... and the reason Lucas was allowed to post in that thread was so he could respond to Chris's query... call it equal time or whatever you like but that was the reason behind it. Dan makes a fine product and has a passion for the science that is shared by few in our industry. On a personal level I'm not so sure he understands the "music" aspect of the endeavor but he definitely understands the science as well as anyone involved with that level of digital audio. I will reiterate that the sacking of Mr. Lavry was based purely on his inability, and the inability of the President of Lavry Engineering to work and play well with others. Nothing more, and certainly nothing less. Peace. |
Logichead wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 03:20 |
Fletcher's comment about the "music" aspect of gear was right on - I agree that Dan is able to argue the technical details in very fine detail, but I have seen him time and time again ignore the "music", getting caught up in the technical reason something is better, when in application it doesn't sound better, or as good. |
Lucas van der Mee wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 13:38 |
...Dan had no problem deleting our posts and other's who supported our opinion, when he did not like the contents. |
Logichead wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 04:20 |
I got into one of these kerfuffals with Dan awhile back - my point was that I heard a sonic improvement when I added a Big Ben to my rig. Do I know or care what the jitter measurements were? It sounded better! |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 02:12 |
1) Lavry calls Fletcher & Herman shanda fur die goyim... to which Fletcher laughs... Lavry is ongepotchehket. 2) Lavry says that Mercenary was fired when the TRUTH was that Lavry said "we only take Mastercard and Visa" to which Mercenary said "fershtinkiner, tsutcheppenish took our checks before? Vus mach da?" 3) Shmendrick was removed uncermoniously because ceremony was unbefitting the occurance. Who's the shtunk? Who knows? Who cares? 4) Lavry the svantz continues to make a tsimmes out of it continuing to call Fletcher a shanda to which Fletcher gets ver clempt [sarcasm]. 5) It's a zetz to thinking people that you allow the messugina yenta to front your company. 6 & 7) [because I'm getting bored of this] Lavry can go fuck himself. Mr. Lavry, please go mind your shop. I agree with Mr. Herman [who FYI isn't the owner here, but he's still my boss as I used to be your boss until my boss sent you and your mishegos packing]... you need to be gone. |
malice wrote on Wed, 22 November 2006 22:36 |
otoh, he makes killer converters. And clocking lesser ones with them results in significant improvement. |
Revolution wrote on Wed, 22 November 2006 22:51 |
I guess Mr Lavry is the latest victim along with Mr Oram and Mr Neumann to fall fowl of the Pro Audio Maffia. |
sui-city wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 01:46 |
I have heard a Big Ben improve the quality of audio myself, but nobody has explained why without their being some VERY liberal marketing-interpretations of science. |
Ashermusic wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 02:34 |
Fletcher your stereotypical use of Yiddish is about as funny as Michael Richard's tiraded and can only lead to one conclusion; You are a potz. |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 09:18 | ||
Which ironically goes against the original premise that "internal clocking is significantly superior to external clocking". |
Yannick Willox wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 12:36 |
New here is an interesting idea: who dares to put this question about external ref clocks in the new forum ? |
malice wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 04:14 |
But in the end, within a 100% geek forum, I guess you should be able to backup your claims with numbers, epecially if you're a designer. |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 15:12 | ||
I am sure there is palpable and identifyable science to support the claim but I dare say it will involve psycho acoustic phenomenon which is probably over the head of most folk here... but psycho acoustic phenomenon is also what is behind things like "phase shift" we find musically pleasing in transformers, it also encompasses frequency response characteristics as well as headroom characteristics. The "science" is a means to an end, that end being the musical sounding presentation of recorded product. Yes, it is was a "geek" forum, but it is a "geek" forum in the middle of a set of recording forums. Dave Hecht's tech forum is also a "geek" forum as is Klaus Heyne's mic lab, etc. The part that is missing is that somewhere between "jitter" specifications and why people like NOS "Mullard" tubes better than Sovtec tubes is the music... which is what we built this place to serve... the music. I think it would be a great thing for this question to be raised in Bruno's forum... and I would welcome Mr. Lavry to contribute to the thread as it will be moderated by a man of science with absolutely no alligence nor agenda. Peace. |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 16:12 |
I think it would be a great thing for this question to be raised in Bruno's forum... and I would welcome Mr. Lavry to contribute to the thread as it will be moderated by a man of science with absolutely no alligence nor agenda. Peace. |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 10:18 | ||
Which ironically goes against the original premise that "internal clocking is significantly superior to external clocking". |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 10:18 | ||
With all due respect, I know I've made quite a few records in my lifetime, during that time I have recorded a whole lotta music but never any specifications. As a layman I would reckon that the reason you found the Big Ben improve the quality of the audio is because it puts some distortion [jitter] in a region you find musically pleasing... which at the end of the day is all you [or at least all I] can ask from any tool involved in the music making process. BTW, I think they both, Lavry as well as Apogee are buried by the iZ Radar so what the hell do I know except how to hit some buttons and record a record. |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 08:18 | ||
I always spelled it "putz" but that's cool. I'm not really fluent in Yiddish... learned a little bit from my father when I was growing up... almost enough so I could hang in Walter Yetnikoff's world during the early 80's when it was still CBS but not enough to hold a conversation in real time. I saw Michael Richard's shtick a dozen or so years ago [pre-Seinfeld] at the Laugh Factory on Sunset... he wasn't funny then either. I have no idea how he has ever landed a comedic gig... but if I really understood the ways of Hollywood I'd be rich now. All I can say about your post is "he started it". |
Ashermusic wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 17:46 |
For a lot of folks here when hooking up a Big Ben, which is only a clock (and if I am wrong someone please correct me because then my argument falls apart) to a single decent audio interface i.e. a RME Fireface which adds more jitter to the converrsion, which unlike analog distorion no one has ever claimed is aesthetically pleasing, |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 09:12 | ||
I am sure there is palpable and identifyable science to support the claim but I dare say it will involve psycho acoustic phenomenon which is probably over the head of most folk here... but psycho acoustic phenomenon is also what is behind things like "phase shift" we find musically pleasing in transformers, it also encompasses frequency response characteristics as well as headroom characteristics. |
The original questions |
I. QUESTION: WHICH SOLUTION PROVIDES LESS JITTER AT THE AD LOCATION? 1. A REASONABLE FIXED CRYSTAL 2. BIG BEN DRIVING A CLOCK INTO A CHASSIS EQUIPPED WITH A PLL VIA A 10 FOOT CABLE? II. QUESTION: CAN ONE EVER CANCEL OR REDUCE A RANDOM NOISE AT ONE END OF A CABLE WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT KIND OF JITTER ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING AT THE OTHER END? (can one cancel, remove or reduce the receiver and PLL noise, some of it unknown, some totally random, by driving it with a clean low jitter clock? Driving it with any clock?) |
Lucas said in Dan's locked forum |
The answers to those questions we have given several times before in this thread. But to make it easy for you and not have to search for it I’ll say it again: Jitter at the converter chip will be lower, in most cases, when clocked to internal. There is no doubt about that, no mystery, we never claimed anything else. However, we do say a number of things that are beyond this question. 1. Big Ben is an excellent solution if you need a master clock. It is low jitter and offers a lot of features the competition does not have. 2. If you need to clock to a jittery source, for instance a SPDIF output of a computer or a commercial cd player, having the Big Ben re-clock the data first, will very often improve the sonic and MEASURABLE quality of the converter used. The amount of improvement is all dependent of the quality of the PLL circuit of said converter. In other words, the better the PLL, the least improvement will be noted. 3. For this one I will be quoting Max, because he put it so well: “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.” I would like to add to this: There are numerous examples in technology, where we find that an actual reduction in performance of one parameter can lead to a perceived and sometimes actual improvement, in others. A good example in audio is dither, (noise shaped especially). By adding dither we actually reduce the dynamic range, yet we improve the perceived noise floor by masking the annoying noise of rounding errors. My last word on this topic is, people do perceive more than science can explain. Our senses are intrinsically subjective, however the more experienced we become, the more we train our perception, the more OBJECTIVE we can become and obviously, your mileage may vary. Lucas van der Mee Sr. Design Engineer Apogee Electronics |
Quote: |
I. QUESTION: WHICH SOLUTION PROVIDES LESS JITTER AT THE AD LOCATION? 1. A REASONABLE FIXED CRYSTAL 2. BIG BEN DRIVING A CLOCK INTO A CHASSIS EQUIPPED WITH A PLL VIA A 10 FOOT CABLE? |
Quote: |
II. QUESTION: CAN ONE EVER CANCEL OR REDUCE A RANDOM NOISE AT ONE END OF A CABLE WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT KIND OF JITTER ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING AT THE OTHER END? (can one cancel, remove or reduce the receiver and PLL noise, some of it unknown, some totally random, by driving it with a clean low jitter clock? Driving it with any clock?) |
Tritony wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 20:37 |
Hello, Hello. I cannot believe this. Are you guys just ranting and not reading? The answer to your question is in Lucas' reply. It is here you dummies!: "Jitter at the converter chip will be lower, in most cases, when clocked to internal. There is no doubt about that, no mystery, we never claimed anything else". He said it, it is in print! Now get over it. Sheesh.... |
Tritony wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 20:44 |
The thing is that if Apogee claim that their Big Ben clocking process is either applying some kind of Dither noise shaping or some other proprietary method I can accept that it may sound "better" in some kind of way. And would even audition one on that premise. After all, the ultimate aim is good sound. But the continuing ambiguity and evasiveness on the simple questions asked just comes across as suspicious. Leading us all to draw our own conclusions. So you think Cola Cola has the duty to release their secret recipe, becasue you like to drink it? Does a waiter have to tell you how the wine was made in order for you to like it? You guys are so insecure... |
Tritony wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 22:16 |
The analogy is wrong but I will take it and run with it For what I know, wine makers use all kinds of tricks to make wine taste better, nowadays. They have methods to make lower quality grapes better by treating them in special ways. That is why almost every below ten dollar bottle tastes great. Every vineyard has their own secret recipe, so I think the analogy still flies. Sorry about the "dummies", I thought this was the insult section of PSW Peace. Tony |
Quote: |
So who are you? |
Ashermusic wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 16:45 |
And if it doesn't it cannot be improving the sound of a single decent clock, which most are nowadays, unless one prefers the more blurry sound of more jitter because of speaker/ear deficiencies that it masks. |
bblackwood wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 22:52 | ||
Pardon me, but who made you the final arbiter of what sounds 'good' or doesn't? Last I checked, audio was quite subjective. And no, I don't use any external clocking nor do I use anything Apogee. |
Ashermusic wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 17:15 |
What sounds good is subjective. What jitter does to sound is objective and I will say the hated word, sciencific. |
Quote: |
This was Dan's point overall. I f you think it sounds better more jittery fine but don''t say something improves sound because it improves the jitter when it does the opposite. He merely tried to de-mystify this, which is I believe is part of the heading of someon'es forum here. |
Tritony wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 15:37 |
Hello, Hello. I cannot believe this. Are you guys just ranting and not reading? The answer to your question is in Lucas' reply. It is here you dummies!: "Jitter at the converter chip will be lower, in most cases, when clocked to internal. There is no doubt about that, no mystery, we never claimed anything else". He said it, it is in print! Now get over it. Sheesh.... |
bblackwood wrote on Fri, 24 November 2006 09:21 |
as Fletcher stated above - this is NOT about bowing to an advertiser, etc. Apogee has never been an advertiser in PSW and will not be for the foreseeable future. |
Fletcher wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 19:18 |
Oh, and there is generally only 1x"f" in Mafia... unless you know something I don't know [besides, there is no Mafia... I could introduce you to a couple of guys I know who are connected to LCN and they'll swear up and down there is no such thing as the "mafia"]. |
bblackwood wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 23:41 | ||||
Sure, as is the distortion that a Neve pre adds, yet many people prefer this in certain situations, regardless of measurements...
Nice sarcasm, let's keep it on point and not try to make weak pot-shots. Define 'improves'. |
Ashermusic wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 23:57 |
[Oh come on, Brad, you are far too knowledgable to compare analog distorion which people have foiund aesthetically desirable for over 40 tears to digital jitter which no one has claimed is aesthetically desirable that I am aware of. This argument is beneath you. |
Tritony wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 12:37 |
Hello, Hello. I cannot believe this. Are you guys just ranting and not reading? The answer to your question is in Lucas' reply. It is here you dummies!: "Jitter at the converter chip will be lower, in most cases, when clocked to internal. There is no doubt about that, no mystery, we never claimed anything else". He said it, it is in print! Now get over it. Sheesh.... |
bblackwood wrote on Fri, 24 November 2006 13:18 | ||
No, it's not 'beneath me'. Fact is, there are folks who prefer digital clipping over limiting (or even leaving the signal alone). That's a process which creates everything but pleasing harmonics yet some folks like it. IME, any time you change a signal it can be better or worse - it's not automatically worse, but more often than not it is. But this is entirely a subjective discussion. The point isn't whether or not I think more or less jitter sounds better it's the fact that Apogee sells a product which claims to make stuff sound better, and Dan went on to discuss it in his own forum where he made the point over and over that subjective issues were not to be discussed. While Apogee tried (and by many account here, failed) to discuss on a technical level what they were doing, the fact is it was a discussion that was based entirely on a subjective experience! Are you going to tell (insert famous mastering engineer) "it's beneath you" because he claims to prefer some form of clocking? It's about the sound and we (Fletcher and I) admit we made a mistake by allowing Dan to disassociate his forum from reality - that we work in a business that is almost entirely subjective and to divorce the 'art and science' of design from how it actually sounds doesn't help much. While I understand people's frustrations; that it appears impropriety abounds, that Apogee was allowed to duck and run, that Dan was kicked off due to Apogee's influence - none of this is true. So let me quickly (and finally) repost what we've said about this issues: the discussion to remove Dan started long ago, as he (and company) required more hand-holding and baby-sitting than the rest of the mods combine, by a long shot. Fletcher makes a little money here, I make nothing, so, and I don't mean for this to sound dismissive or callous - forgive us for not wanting to keep someone on who took constant 'supervision'. I tried to be nice in the way I worded it up until now, but Fletcher's description was far more accurate. Suffice to say that when someone asks me if I'm anti-Semitic because R/E/P's parent company puts out 'Church Sound Magazine', they've crossed the line. That's one of many examples. Now please, I prefer we move forward. If you wish to discuss Apogee products, feel free to post about them in Bruno's forum - he's as honest and knowledgeable as anyone. If we were caving to Apogee, we certainly wouldn't suggest that you start the same thread again (the people seem to be focused on, even though we've said time and again it had nothing to do with Dan's departure) in the new forum. We feel this is an upgrade for R/E/P and hope you enjoy his forum. |
Ashermusic wrote on Thu, 23 November 2006 11:46 |
I see. Let's all meet at midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil and mix up some potions and spin some dead cats around so we can REALLY make some good sounding stuff. |
myNameIsGeorge wrote on Sat, 25 November 2006 08:41 |
and the reaction from some guys around here is funny sad world.. too much ignorants. |
Mark Herman wrote on Fri, 24 November 2006 18:51 |
As in many situations there are black and white viewpoints and many shades of gray depending on what angle one views the proceedings. My viewpoint on this subject is from a website management perspective. I made the decision to close the forum. .... There is no conspiracy factor, no money issue, no secret forum, no religion, no technical disagreement, no commercial motive and no hidden agenda from PSW in regards to the individual forum closure. It just didn?t work out for the reasons I have spelled out. Mark Herman ProSoundWeb |
Quote: |
Glad you are here to raise the level Wink malice |
bigaudioblowhard wrote on Sat, 25 November 2006 09:40 |
Thanks to Mr. Lavry for being so generous with your time and knowledge. I shall continue to use your products daily and look forward to your web presence elsewhere in the future. bab |
bigaudioblowhard wrote on Sat, 25 November 2006 08:40 | ||
Thanks for taking the time out to check in on this issue Mark. I personally found it quite refreshing to visit Dan's subjective free green zone, where pretense and marketing hype was contraband. I applaud his vigorous enforcement of this rule, which was frustrating on occasion, but he ran a tight ship. Obstinance (sp?) and genius go hand in hand. Thanks to Mr. Lavry for being so generous with your time and knowledge. I shall continue to use your products daily and look forward to your web presence elsewhere in the future. bab |
danickstr wrote on Sat, 25 November 2006 16:55 |
Dan Lavry is passionate about his work, and that can rub some meatheads the wrong way. |
bblackwood wrote on Fri, 24 November 2006 08:18 |
...(Fletcher and I) admit we made a mistake by allowing Dan to disassociate his forum from reality - that we work in a business that is almost entirely subjective and to divorce the 'art and science' of design from how it actually sounds doesn't help much... |
wwittman wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 21:25 |
I think i said, in one of my last posts there, that in my view the great technical people explain why we hear what we hear; the not so great ones try to tell us what we hear is "wrong" |
malice wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 12:41 |
I'm merely saying that sometimes, your ears might deceive you. Your mind might deceive you. And not being able to explain a phenomenon with science does not necessarely mean the simplest explanation is not the one you should embrace : there is nothing to hear at all, because there is no improvement, at all. malice |
wwittman wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 15:25 | ||
sounds utterly reasonable to me. In fact, after being told once or twice that my experience didn't matter because the forum wasn't "about" what things sound like... that's why i just stopped ever looking at that board. I think i said, in one of my last posts there, that in my view the great technical people explain why we hear what we hear; the not so great ones try to tell us what we hear is "wrong" |
wwittman wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 13:14 |
and: anyone who thinks 96k digital recording doesn't sound better than 44.1 needs to spend less time selling gear and moderating forums and more time making records (or watching people make them) |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 16:57 |
And I think Dan's point about converters was 96/88.1 vs 176.2/192 was not a necessary jump. |
crm0922 wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 18:19 |
You were simply asked to discuss your subjective opinions elsewhere. The forum was about the technical side of things. I don't understand why this was offensive or difficult to abide by. |
wwittman wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 18:52 | ||
and I did so. and ultimately the 6 people who think this makes for a better discussion had a great time. I guess I also benefited by "getting away from" snarky passive agressive comments like yours. huh? If I hear something as "better", telling me, in essence that, I'm "wrong. it's not" is pointless. That's not being "technical". That's being arrogant. |
wwittman wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 23:48 | ||
NO, I think his "point" had to do with 96k being "not really better" than 44.1 or something along the lines of there being "no REASON it should be better..." |
wwittman wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 23:52 | ||
and I did so. and ultimately the 6 people who think this makes for a better discussion had a great time. I guess I also benefited by "getting away from" snarky passive agressive comments like yours. huh? If I hear something as "better", telling me, in essence that, I'm "wrong. it's not" is pointless. That's not being "technical". That's being arrogant. |
Ashermusic wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 18:27 |
I don't think he really was that negative about 96 but 192 he dismissed as marketing hype, which it surely is. |
wwittman wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 16:48 | ||
NO, I think his "point" had to do with 96k being "not really better" than 44.1 or something along the lines of there being "no REASON it should be better..." |
wwittman wrote on Tue, 28 November 2006 10:48 |
NO, I think his "point" had to do with 96k being "not really better" than 44.1 or something along the lines of there being "no REASON it should be better..." |
Fletcher;991827 | ||
Wow. Okely dokely... I will be as brief as possible. David Manley was part of a company called "Vacuum Tube Logic", I believe his son still has something to do with it. Somehow they parted ways and "Manley Laboratories" was born. David decided that the inside of a bottle was more attractive than wife and company so he fell off the face of the earth in said bottle leaving the wife behind with a bunch of debt [which David didn't help very much by buying a warehouse full of Neve Post by: crm0922 on November 28, 2006, 01:04:36 AM Obviously he takes her side, and it is probably the right side from the sound of it. Why does that post bother you so much? I have friends who have been in relationships with drunk shitbags and I wouldn't hesitate to call them out as such either. Chris Post by: Revolution on November 28, 2006, 01:15:22 AM
Just don't think it's appropriate to either side to have this stuff brought up in internet forums. I think it just shows lack of character. While im not saying Dan Lavry, David Manley, John Oram, EveAnna are good people or not. It's just cheep. Post by: Fletcher on November 28, 2006, 08:36:56 PM FWIW, I also thought it was particularly bad form that their moderators edited the posts subsequent to my making my post, and edited them in a manner that removed all dissenting viewpoint that EveAnna "stole" the company from the drunken pant load... which, seeing as EveAnna is one of the moderators over there I found to be exceptionally bad form. I also spent a good portion of my afternoon lobbying one of the moderators of the forum to either kill the thread or move it to "The Moan Zone" [in other words to get a non-audio related discussion out of an audio forum]. As for the junior Oliver Stones in the "let's lynch Fletcher/Dan Lavry love fest"... I don't know how much clearer Mark Herman's post [it's back on page 6] could have been... while I was the guy that brought Dan in I had nothing to do with the final decision to show Dan out. Y'all can cry whatever conspiracy theory you'd like, and you can cry it all day long... but that my friends don't make it so. The fact of the matter is that the Lavry divorce from Mercenary Audio was made by Jay Fitz [official title: "Capo di tutti Capi" (which literally means "boss of the bosses")] because of somekind of issue where Lavry Engineering would no longer take Mercenary Audio's checks for product and Mercenary Audio doesn't have a corporate Mastercard or Visa [but much like the Olympics... the Lavry's don't take American Express which is the only card we have for things like paying for product and/or airline tickets... we get frequent flyer bonus points with that card which is how our crew gets to AES Europe every year... but I digress]... the PSW divorce was just a timing issue as Mark had enough of the nonsense at the same time Jay did. Coincidence? Maybe. Probably. I dunno... more importantly, I don't care. Chris wants to talk about "ABX" tests... bro, have you ever sat through one of those things? After about 3 tries I wouldn't know if it was live, memorex, 44.1, 96, or two cans with a string in the middle. I have been forced to sit though more of those than I will ever hope to face for as long as I am on this planet... in fact, if I have to sit though another one of those things I'm doubling my appearance fee rate... or blowing my brains out. What an abject waste of fucking time and resources... if I wanted to be confused and/or disoriented again I'd go back to doing drugs... which ain't on my list of shit to do today [unless ya got some that is]. That said, I am making an excecutive decision... something I'm actually fairly good at from time to time. Today's executive decision is that this thread is going to say "nighty night" and go to sleep. You may feel free to start another thread all about the closing of this thread... but this sumbitch is done. ...which brings us to the close of yet another broadcast day... thanks for stopping by... hope to see ya around reeeeeeeeel soon. Good night... and good luck. |