Apology to Schiit team and everyone here

[PopPop]

My post was somewhat tongue in cheek. I'm not second guessing Truman's choice, I would never want the responsibility for that. But, hearing at least one of our current presidential candidates suggest that we should use one in the Mideast gives me pause for concern. Nuclear weapons should never be used on the basis of precedent, if ever. That's all I was trying to say.

[Allan F]

My post was somewhat tongue in cheek. I'm not second guessing Truman's choice, I would never want the responsibility for that. But, hearing at least one of our current presidential candidates suggest that we should use one in the Mideast gives me pause for concern. Nuclear weapons should never be used on the basis of precedent, if ever. That's all I was trying to say.

Only an ignorant nutcase candidate would offer such a suggestion and, in the minds of many, that individual has clearly demonstrated that he has earned that reputation.

[Allan F]

Perhaps nuking an uninhabited island nearby would have been enough to demonstrate the destructive power. Or maybe not. We will never know.

Given that it took nine days from the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima, six days from the bombing of Nagasaki, plus a declaration of war on Japan by the Soviet Union before the Japanese offered to surrender, that suggestion is highly dubious. But, we will never know for sure.

[17629]

Perhaps nuking an uninhabited island nearby would have been enough to demonstrate the destructive power. Or maybe not. We will never know.

 

 

Actually, we do know. First, we only had 2 bombs available to begin with, so it would be fairly risky to set one off for test purposes. What if one of them didn't work? From what I can see, these things are fairly difficult devices to build by today's standards. Back in the 40's, it was a miracle that they were built at all (and worked). But the reason we do know, as opposed to never knowing, is that Japan didn't surrender after the first bomb was dropped. If they didn't surrender after that, what makes you think they would have surrendered after nuking an uninhabited island?

[Solstice380]

Nope. Has it not ever occured to you that all "analog" recording is also an approximation of the music being produced? ...by definition. Nothing inherently superior about it to digital....by definition. The possibility that you may prefer it, is not relevant to the issue.

 

 

 

and the same goes for turntable setups and cartridges.

 

But analog isn't an "approximation"?

 

After further review of many of your recent posts, I have concluded that you are just out to lunch. All of them have taken a contrarian position to anything. Of course analog isn't an approximation, music IS analog. There may be various limitations to certain recording or playback equipment, but master tapes are still closer than anything digital. Or are you living on a different planet than the rest of us? Did I say anything about turntables? No, you brought that up.

 

During the lifetime of a certain product in my career we started with analog and transitioned to digital. It has been hell ever since trying to get anywhere near the performance. It's is a scientific instrument used for very precise measurements of resonance frequencies in superconductors. The digital gets us an approximation.

 

Good by and good luck!

[firedog]

Perhaps nuking an uninhabited island nearby would have been enough to demonstrate the destructive power. Or maybe not. We will never know.

 

Need a little realism here. The US had two bombs, and wasn't even sure they would work. You are speculating about a non-existent option. Again, hindsight is 20-20, in real time decisions have to be made based on best information.

[PopPop]

Oops

[PopPop]

After further review of many of your recent posts, I have concluded that you are just out to lunch. All of them have taken a contrarian position to anything. Of course analog isn't an approximation, music IS analog. There may be various limitations to certain recording or playback equipment, but master tapes are still closer than anything digital. Or are you living on a different planet than the rest of us? Did I say anything about turntables? No, you brought that up.

 

During the lifetime of a certain product in my career we started with analog and transitioned to digital. It has been hell ever since trying to get anywhere near the performance. It's is a scientific instrument used for very precise measurements of resonance frequencies in superconductors. The digital gets us an approximation.

 

Good by and good luck!

 

I used to have an old clamp on ammeter that I inherited from a friend. It collected dust for 30 years until I tried to give it to a repairman who was fixing our air conditioner. He had never seen or used one that had a meter instead of a digital read out. He said he wouldn't ever use it because he was sure it wasn't as accurate as his digital tool. SMH.

[firedog]

After further review of many of your recent posts, I have concluded that you are just out to lunch. All of them have taken a contrarian position to anything. Of course analog isn't an approximation, music IS analog. There may be various limitations to certain recording or playback equipment, but master tapes are still closer than anything digital. Or are you living on a different planet than the rest of us? Did I say anything about turntables? No, you brought that up.

 

During the lifetime of a certain product in my career we started with analog and transitioned to digital. It has been hell ever since trying to get anywhere near the performance. It's is a scientific instrument used for very precise measurements of resonance frequencies in superconductors. The digital gets us an approximation.

 

Good by and good luck!

 

Music is analog. All our attempts at recording and reproducing it are approximations of one type or another. It is your opinion that master tapes are superior to anything digital - but that opinion isn't a fact, and isn't shared by many, even some/many in the recording world. So I may not be on your planet, but I'm certainly on this one.

 

I have no argument with your personal preference for tape; I do when you state your personal opinion as some sort of fact universally agreed upon.

 

As far as your personal invective, you apparently didn't see numerous posts where other posters thanked me for helping them.

[徐中銳]

Recalling how years ago I watched many National Film Board of Canada's uploads, found the following blog for anyone interested, The Destroyer of Worlds, A Brief History of Nuclear Weapons :

« August 6 and 9, 2015, mark the 70th anniversary of the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To this day, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings remain the only instances of nuclear warfare, despite the ongoing proliferation of nuclear arms.

 

Learn about the history of nuclear weapons and the part they played in changing the face of humanity with three docs on NFB.ca.

 

The Strangest Dream

Nuclear history begins in 1939 in a New Mexico desert with the Manhattan Project.

This top secret R&D project recruited the leading physicists, engineers, and scientific minds in the world, gathering them together for one mission: to develop functional nuclear weapons before the Axis powers did.

While witnessing the Trinity test—the first detonation of a nuclear device—Robert Oppenheimer, the theoretical physicist in charge of designing the bombs, recognized the horror he had helped to create and later commented that it had called to mind a phrase from the Bhagavad Gita: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”

Eric Bednarski‘s documentary focuses on Polish physicist Joseph Rotblat, the only scientist to leave the Manhattan Project on moral grounds. Rotblat was labelled a traitor but went on to research the medical uses of radiation, helped create the modern peace movement, and eventually won the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

 

No More Hiroshima

Nicknamed Little Boy and Fat Man, the atomic bombs—deployed under executive order of President Harry Truman—instantly killed over 180,000 people and claimed tens of thousands more lives through radiation poisoning.

 

In 1982, director Martin Duckworth followed Hatsuko Tominaga and Tadahiko Murata, two hibakusha (surviving victims of the 1945 atomic bombing) who attended the second United Nations Special Session on Disarmament as representatives of the Japanese Peace Movement.

 

Armed with photos of the dead and fuelled with the stories of guilt, loss, pain, and suffering of their fellow hibakusha, Hatsuko and Tadahiko valiantly rallied for disarmament while emphatically proclaiming that history cannot, under any circumstance, be allowed to repeat itself.

 

 

If You Love This Planet

The threat of annihilation by nuclear war was a looming fear in the back of everyone’s mind during the Cold War. After witnessing the horrors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki radiation fallout, countries began stockpiling nuclear arms as a symbol of power to their citizens and a deadly warning to their enemies.

 

Ironically, the fact that several major countries developed nuclear weapons acted as a deterrent to nuclear war, as mutually assured destruction was all but guaranteed if a country was paranoid enough to actually deploy one of their weapons.

 

This paranoia is exactly what director Terre Nash captured in her Oscar®-winning short on nuclear pundit Dr. Helen Caldicott’s riveting 1981 lecture criticizing the arms race. Using archival footage of the bombing of Hiroshima and images of its survivors, Caldicott drove home the dangers posed by nuclear weapons, concluding with a very passionate message: disarmament cannot be postponed. »

[Allan F]

Need a little realism here. The US had two bombs, and wasn't even sure they would work. You are speculating about a non-existent option. Again, hindsight is 20-20, in real time decisions have to be made based on best information.

It would be more accurate to say that he is speculating about a rejected option. The possibility of a non-combat demonstration bombing was actually suggested in May and June of 1945, but was rejected for reasons that have already been outlined. Subsequent events most probably, if not absolutely, proved that decision to be a correct one.

[Solstice380]

Music is analog. All our attempts at recording and reproducing it are approximations of one type or another. It is your opinion that master tapes are superior to anything digital - but that opinion isn't a fact, and isn't shared by many, even some/many in the recording world. So I may not be on your planet, but I'm certainly on this one.

 

I have no argument with your personal preference for tape; I do when you state your personal opinion as some sort of fact universally agreed upon.

 

As far as your personal invective, you apparently didn't see numerous posts where other posters thanked me for helping them.

 

I do owe you an apology for that post. Yesterday must have been a bad day for me to read CA as I fired one off to Sal also and just finished apologizing to him! I hope you'll accept it sincerely, as this is turning out to be a pan-dimensional apology thread. LOL. And yes, I've seen you help people out. I think starting your previous post off with "has it ever occurred to you" rubbed me the wrong way. I don't speculate much and I do try to consider many sides of discussions.

 

As I said to Sal, referencing "reputable" engineers is just name dropping. If you have experience in a scientific or technical community that is understood and considered a way to get you ignored quickly. Unless you are reading the peer reviewed Audio Engineering Society (and other) peer reviewed papers, it's just marketing hype.

 

And it is important to understand the difference between precise and accurate. PopPop posted a good anecdote. People get filled with how precise digital can be, but it also can be precisely wrong.

 

On a somewhat related topic, have you read Paul McGowan's posts the last couple days on vinyl?

 

Now we can return to our war mongering discussion. Peace!

[Allan F]

Now we can return to our war mongering discussion. Peace!

A dictionary would serve you well. Mongering means the promotion of something. None of the posters have even remotely suggested that war is to be encouraged or that nuclear weapons should ever be used again. Quite the contrary. The posts deal with history.

 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

- George Santayana (1863-1952)

 

Now we can return to apologies.

[Solstice380]

A dictionary would serve you well. Mongering means the promotion of something. None of the posters have even remotely suggested that war is to be encouraged or that nuclear weapons should ever be used again. Quite the contrary. The posts deal with history.

 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

- George Santayana (1863-1952)

 

Now we can return to apologies.

 

Allan, I see it the other way... it seems everyone here must LOVE war because they know so much about why it was fought, how it should have been fought, etc.

 

You would do well to cease pontificating and making ignorant posts. :-)

[PopPop]

More flouncing. [emoji6]

[gmgraves]

Only an ignorant nutcase candidate would offer such a suggestion and, in the minds of many, that individual has clearly demonstrated that he has earned that reputation.

 

 

Amen to that! Luckily, that "nutcase" candidate has no chance of winning the election in November. Instead, we get another incompetent POTUS. Such are the choices that our system of choosing a leader presents us with. It's a damn shame. We used to get statesmen to choose from, now we get clowns and evil politicians with agendas that are not is the best interest of this country or the rest of the world.

[PopPop]

Perhaps we should amend the US Constitution to require that all presidential candidates must been breast fed. We seem to be lacking empathy.

[Priaptor]

Amen to that! Luckily, that "nutcase" candidate has no chance of winning the election in November. Instead, we get another incompetent POTUS. Such are the choices that our system of choosing a leader presents us with. It's a damn shame. We used to get statesmen to choose from, now we get clowns and evil politicians with agendas that are not is the best interest of this country or the rest of the world.

 

While I am no Trump supporter BUT will vote for anyone but Hillary if he turns out to be the "other" moronic candidate I don't think he said he "would use" nukes just not take it off the table. I understand the desire for all those who hate Trump to morph every one of his idiotic comments to mean more than they do but those attacks are getting tiresome.

 

In my opinion he is correct that you NEVER take any option off the table when it comes to your adversaries especially those that have declared you their mortal enemy and are close to nuclear capabilities themselves.

 

I guess history has been forgotten on some in this crowd. Reagan's election was immediately followed by the release of all hostages and the beginning of the end of the USSR; although to some posters on these sites I am assuming the latter would be considered a bad thing.

[17629]

A dictionary would serve you well. Mongering means the promotion of something. None of the posters have even remotely suggested that war is to be encouraged or that nuclear weapons should ever be used again. Quite the contrary. The posts deal with history.

 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

- George Santayana (1863-1952)

 

Now we can return to apologies.

 

Yes, but how are they going to know they repeated the past if they can't remember it?

[Priaptor]

Yes, but how are they going to know they repeated the past if they can't remember it?

 

1.5 generations is all it takes to forget the past.

 

As people become dumber my 1.5 generation rule will get shorter.

[sandyk]

Perhaps we should amend the US Constitution to require that all presidential candidates must been breast fed. We seem to be lacking empathy.

 

Perhaps better still, as this is an International Forum , that C.A.s constitution should be changed to ban discussion of U.S. politics ?

[wwaldmanfan]

Perhaps better still, as this is an International Forum , that C.A.s constitution should be changed to ban discussion of U.S. politics ?

 

The moderator has already stated that political discussions on this forum are inappropriate and not permitted. Members are expected to follow the rules. We're here to discuss computer audio and related topics. While some may be emboldened by their anonymity to post whatever they want, political views are off-topic and not relevant here.

[Allan F]

Allan, I see it the other way... it seems everyone here must LOVE war because they know so much about why it was fought, how it should have been fought, etc.

 

You would do well to cease pontificating and making ignorant posts. :-)

By your standard then, all historians are warmongers. That is the epitome of ignorance. Or, if you prefer, simply utter nonsense.

[17629]

1.5 generations is all it takes to forget the past.

 

As people become dumber my 1.5 generation rule will get shorter.

 

 

Here in the US its no more than 1 election cycle. Sometimes a lot less (Depends on the issue).

[PopPop]

Perhaps better still, as this is an International Forum , that C.A.s constitution should be changed to ban discussion of U.S. politics ?

 

Damn, I'm really stepping on my dick tonight. [emoji16]