CA Readers Are, "clueless, equally bitter and uninformed"

[Allan F]

Perhaps. But where does saying that CA Readers Are, "clueless, equally bitter and uninformed" reside on your scale? Where does calling for a boycott of the CA website reside on your scale? Where do his various tantrums in response to insufficient veneration reside on your scale?

 

I thought that I had made it crystal clear that, IMO, there is no justification for "Fremer's vitriolic reaction in print". Perhaps I should have said "overreaction". It is completely unacceptable and totally out of proportion to what led to his perceived slights. But, that doesn't change or excuse what I still consider to be inappropriate behaviour on Chris' part on the panel.

[wgscott]

I haven't read all the posts. Sorry. But there is a huge difference between how Chris's (possibly involuntary) facial expressions might be (mis)interpreted, and the verbal tantrums and onslaught, allegedly in response.

 

I obviously wasn't there, but from the evidence presented, there are no "two wrongs."

 

Chris did absolutely nothing wrong, as far as I can see.

 

What we have here I think is an audiophile variation on Sayre's Law: The attack is so vicious because the stakes are so low.

[BobSherman]

Where does calling for a boycott of the CA website reside on your scale? /QUOTE]

 

Courious... How bad do consider the above? Where is this on your scale?

[Paul R]

Political correctness has absolutely nothing to do with it, Paul. I question whether you understand the meaning of that term. I call things the way I see them. IMO, your speculation about Mikey's intention to set up a confrontation, without any evidence to back it up, shows your bias. If you can't accept divergent opinions, perhaps you should give your keyboard a rest.

 

Um - no. You don't call things "the way you see them" - you call things in a way to insinuate and aggrieve people. Definitely political correctness used as a weapon.

 

You are definitely snarking at anyone that arouses your ire, which is pretty much everyone these days. You really need to stop and take responsibility for your behavior. I assume since you post so many of these nasty cracks you have to know you are doing it and that you are doing it on purpose. You are obviously quite intelligent, and as to why you spend that intelligence sniping at people here, it is beyond me.

 

I doubt many people are interested in your negative opinion on everything, so why not take a break with it? You certainly don't mean those smiles you are sending along with your messages.

[Allan F]

Um - no.

 

Take a pill and welcome to my Ignore List. I've had my fill of your sanctimonious condescension.

[senorx]

Take a pill and welcome to my Ignore List. I've had my fill of your sanctimonious condescension.

Congrats Paul, I'm a little envious.

 

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

[Norton]

At this point, I think Chris's primary mistake was thinking you can negotiate with religious fundamentalist terrorists who care far more about their ideology (the inherent superiority of vinyl) than reality (no appreciable stereo below 200Hz, snap, crackle, pop, wow, flutter and large stupid ugly discs). People who believe that an archaic medium like vinyl is better,

 

If you think Fremer is a "religious fundamentalist terrorist" maybe you need to recalibrate your sense of perspective..(I wasn't aware an SME tone arm was the ISIL beheading weapon of choice).

 

135 posts so far on this thread:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/vinyl-challenge-forum-members-24710/

 

without a single forum member prepared to say digital outperforms vinyl...

[realhifi]

As I think I mentioned before, there is a lot more going on here than simply a slight on analog music reproduction. And make no mistake, it's about ANALOG vs digital playback here also....but....

 

I believe there is a vague general questioning of what makes an audio writer valid (or for that matter any published writer) and His deeper understanding of where high end audio has been, where it is now and how the writer has gotten his viewpoints and references.

 

It could very well be that Mr Fremer had a preconceived view of Chris and his writing along with his history and there was some element of that bias in his interactions with Chris. I think it went both ways though. These two just might not get along and a spirited back and forth (and written after comments) about digital vs analog is probably just the tip of the iceberg as to what they may think of one another. I could be completely wrong of course but what I saw was back AND forth from both parties and it sure didn't seem like it was super friendly from EITHER side.

 

Mr Fremer stated he does listen to and even "tolerate" (my word and quotes in jest) digital and gave some pretty insightful remarks on what he hears and doesn't hear from both digital and vinyl (or analog) and he may have simply took offense when Chris made a blanket statement that he thinks vinyl "sounds terrible" which I think the rest of the panel took as him kidding! They chuckled and then made a couple suggestions as to how he might improve his vinyl setup I think!

 

PS. I think there was some interesting conversation and quite honestly some pretty insightful comments from this group and sounded like they were one pretty well seasoned and informed group of audiophiles. Harley's comment about Keith and his recordings may have felt off the cuff but really gave some thoughtful interjection on the topic that was at hand.

[Allan F]

Chris did absolutely nothing wrong, as far as I can see.

 

Fair enough. That's your opinion. Not surprisingly, we disagree.

[senorx]

If you think Fremer is a "religious fundamentalist terrorist" maybe you need to recalibrate your sense of perspective..(I wasn't aware an SME tone arm was the ISIL beheading weapon of choice).

 

135 posts so far on this thread:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/vinyl-challenge-forum-members-24710/

 

without a single forum member prepared to say digital outperforms vinyl...

I've said it numerous times. You and the vinyl brigade just dismiss out-of-hand as uniformed, or with "your equipment sucks" anyone who disagrees with you. As an example, how many people who think digital is the way to go do you think are going to have spent an equivalent amount on an analog front end as they have on digital. You set up all these qualifications that must be met before their opinion means anything that no one can satisfy. You're a doofus, Ralph.

 

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

[wgscott]

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

[Norton]

I've said it numerous times. You and the vinyl brigade just dismiss out-of-hand as uniformed, or with "your equipment sucks" anyone who disagrees with you. As an example, how many people who think digital is the way to go do you think are going to have spent an equivalent amount on an analog front end as they have on digital. You set up all these qualifications that must be met before their opinion means anything that no one can satisfy. You're a doofus, Ralph.

 

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

 

Actually unlike the "vinyl haters" on this forum I think you'll find I have never criticised anyone else's choice of equipment. I like both vinyl and digital replay, just don't understand people who 1. seem to want to keep going on about how bad vinyl is when it's clearly untrue to me and 2. who are so worked up about it that they feel the need to jump in to others' posts...

 

I do love your logic though, actually not unlike that of a religious fundamentalist, which seems to suggest that only those unsullied by not actually listening to contemporary vinyl playback are somehow qualified to comment..

 

And I don't much appreciate your childish ad hominem remarks (unless you are a child of course)

[Allan F]

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

 

Good advice. You would do well to do the same, considering some of your diatribes.

[senorx]

Actually unlike the "vinyl haters" on this forum I think you'll find I have never criticised anyone else's choice of equipment. I like both vinyl and digital replay, just don't understand people who 1. seem to want to keep going on about how bad vinyl is when it's clearly untrue to me and 2. who are so worked up about it that they feel the need to jump in to others' posts...

 

I do love your logic though, actually not unlike that of a religious fundamentalist, which seems to suggest that only those unsullied by not actually listening to contemporary vinyl playback are somehow qualified to comment..

What does it mean to "jump into another's posts?"

 

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

[Norton]

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

 

I'm not convinced that's true. I can imagine all kinds of scenarios, perhaps involving a combination of quad electrostatic speakers and pets or small children that would qualify as an emergency..

[esldude]

If you think Fremer is a "religious fundamentalist terrorist" maybe you need to recalibrate your sense of perspective..(I wasn't aware an SME tone arm was the ISIL beheading weapon of choice).

 

135 posts so far on this thread:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/vinyl-challenge-forum-members-24710/

 

without a single forum member prepared to say digital outperforms vinyl...

 

Fairly self selective protocol in your other thread. If you need it, I can state it here or go put it in the other thread.

 

Digital outperforms vinyl, plain and simple.

 

I did not put that in your thread as I abided by your guidelines being the OP. Do I have both digital and vinyl front ends? Nope. I haven't a similar amount of money in my analog front end as my digital front end. The reason being I no longer have an analog front end. Haven't for over a decade. Do you think that is because I consider vinyl equal to or better than digital? That meant I haven't listened to both in the past week, because I don't have both.

 

I do have friends with quality vinyl rigs, I do hear on a somewhat regular basis. Digital is better than vinyl.

 

Vinyl can be very good, and is nothing to sneeze at. Digital is better.

 

If other people prefer vinyl, good for them, and hope they continue to enjoy it. The reason I don't is because digital is better.

 

I did mention in the other thread that you almost never get the same mastering in both formats. Making any "challenge" problematic.

 

So, do you want me to abide by the guidelines in the other thread or just I ignore them and explain how digital outstrips vinyl just for completeness of your thread?

[senorx]

Fairly self selective protocol in your other thread. If you need it, I can state it here or go put it in the other thread.

 

Digital outperforms vinyl, plain and simple.

 

I did not put that in your thread as I abided by your guidelines being the OP. Do I have both digital and vinyl front ends? Nope. I haven't a similar amount of money in my analog front end as my digital front end. The reason being I no longer have an analog front end. Haven't for over a decade. Do you think that is because I consider vinyl equal to or better than digital? That meant I haven't listened to both in the past week, because I don't have both.

 

I do have friends with quality vinyl rigs, I do hear on a somewhat regular basis. Digital is better than vinyl.

 

Vinyl can be very good, and is nothing to sneeze at. Digital is better.

 

If other people prefer vinyl, good for them, and hope they continue to enjoy it. The reason I don't is because digital is better.

 

I did mention in the other thread that you almost never get the same mastering in both formats. Making any "challenge" problematic.

 

So, do you want me to abide by the guidelines in the other thread or just I ignore them and explain how digital outstrips vinyl just for completeness of your thread?

I assume you know I've told kramden all this and it seems to fall on deaf ears. I can picture him with his ears covered up singing as loud as he can.

 

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

[Norton]

Fairly self selective protocol in your other thread. If you need it, I can state it here or go put it in the other thread.

 

Digital outperforms vinyl, plain and simple.

 

I did not put that in your thread as I abided by your guidelines being the OP. Do I have both digital and vinyl front ends? Nope. I haven't a similar amount of money in my analog front end as my digital front end. The reason being I no longer have an analog front end. Haven't for over a decade. Do you think that is because I consider vinyl equal to or better than digital? That meant I haven't listened to both in the past week, because I don't have both.

 

I do have friends with quality vinyl rigs, I do hear on a somewhat regular basis. Digital is better than vinyl.

 

Vinyl can be very good, and is nothing to sneeze at. Digital is better.

 

If other people prefer vinyl, good for them, and hope they continue to enjoy it. The reason I don't is because digital is better.

 

I did mention in the other thread that you almost never get the same mastering in both formats. Making any "challenge" problematic.

 

So, do you want me to abide by the guidelines in the other thread or just I ignore them and explain how digital outstrips vinyl just for completeness of your thread?

 

 

If I said any current digital component must be inferior to vinyl because I heard a CD player 10 years ago and didn't like it much, I wouldn't expect my views to be taken seriously, so yes I do want people to abide by the guidelines laid out in my thread. As I've said ad nauseam I regularly listen to and like both formats, I'm just calling out those who make outlandish criticisms of vinyl ( and clearly contributed to the impression of this forum, however wrong, detailed in the title of this thread) to back up their comments with some evidence based on comparisons of their own systems in their own homes today, just as I would expect to see from posters comparing the merits of one current DAC vs another

 

If someone meets the conditions of the thread and state that their digital front end "easily outstrips" their vinyl, that wouldn't match my experience, but I would at least respect their opinion as based on some form of recent comparable experience. Not seeing it so far though...

[senorx]

Actually unlike the "vinyl haters" on this forum I think you'll find I have never criticised anyone else's choice of equipment. I like both vinyl and digital replay, just don't understand people who 1. seem to want to keep going on about how bad vinyl is when it's clearly untrue to me and 2. who are so worked up about it that they feel the need to jump in to others' posts...

 

I do love your logic though, actually not unlike that of a religious fundamentalist, which seems to suggest that only those unsullied by not actually listening to contemporary vinyl playback are somehow qualified to comment..

 

And I don't much appreciate your childish ad hominem remarks (unless you are a child of course)

 

Your appreciation is no concern of mine. Call 'em the way I see 'em. Maybe you could get Chris to ban me. Or you could......add me to your IGNORE list (stunned silence followed by incredulous murmuring). You're a piece of work Kramden.

[esldude]

If I said any current digital component must be inferior to vinyl because I heard a CD player 10 years ago and didn't like it much, I wouldn't expect my views to be taken seriously, so yes I do want people to abide by the guidelines laid out in my thread. As I've said ad nauseam I regularly listen to and like both formats, I'm just calling out those who make outlandish criticisms of vinyl ( and clearly contributed to the impression of this forum, however wrong, detailed in the title of this thread) to back up their comments with some evidence based on comparisons of their own systems in their own homes today, just as I would expect to see from posters comparing the merits of one current DAC vs another

 

If someone meets the conditions of the thread and state that their digital front end "easily outstrips" their vinyl, that wouldn't match my experience, but I would at least respect their opinion as based on some form of recent comparable experience. Not seeing it so far though...

 

How about the opinion of Wilma Cozart Fine when she was asked about digital vs the LP of the Mercury recordings.

 

Yes, my husband always said that the sampling rate was too low. But the CD's are closer to the masters, the original tapes, than the LP's.

 

Of course that was more than 10 years ago, and she was comparing to the original master tapes. Maybe it was the master tape throwing her off.

 

MERCURY RECORDS Living Presence - Wilma Cozart Fine and 50 Years Mercury Recordings

[Daudio]

You're a doofus, Ralph.

 

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

IGNORED for blatent assholery

[Norton]

Your appreciation is no concern of mine. Call 'em the way I see 'em. Maybe you could get Chris to ban me. Or you could......add me to your IGNORE list (stunned silence followed by incredulous murmuring). You're a piece of work Kramden.

 

Why would I want you banned? But for your own sake you may want to reflect on why you get so het up about the relative merits of music formats that you throw grade school insults around on public forums.

 

I have no idea what an "Ignore list" is..

[senorx]

IGNORED for blatent assholery

 

Cool, now I only have to work on Allen F, Kramden, and a few others.

 

That, however, is the first time I've been called an assholery.

[senorx]

Why would I want you banned? But for your own sake you may want to reflect on why you get so het up about the relative merits of music formats that you throw grade school insults around on public forums.

 

I have no idea what an "Ignore list" is..

 

I'm not sure if I'm het up or not 'cause we don't learn that term until middle school where I live.

[Paul R]

Take a pill and welcome to my Ignore List. I've had my fill of your sanctimonious condescension.

 

(grin) Thank you thank you thank you! Even if you won't see this.