Tremendous article on High-End Audio Industry

[wgscott]

Audiodoctor,

 

It's likely only a matter of time before your post is deleted.

 

In the meantime, comments like yours, even if absolutely true (and I don't know Ken that well), should never be posted publicly.

 

You should know better.

 

Joel

 

Yet it is ok to troll people with this article, and just tell people to ignore most of the content?

[miguelito]

How can you claim what you do in your first paragraph regarding "hardly get turned on". Nonsense. WBF is filled with people with megabuck systems that get turned on plenty.

Many rich people buy systems to show them, not truly listen to them. That's many of my friends.

 

As to law of diminishing returns per $ spent show me what isn't. I don't understand that point either. If anything I could understand the point that more $ doesn't necessarily equate to better sound.

Simple: The improvement from 20k to 200k is much smaller than the one from 10k to 20k. That's what that means. And yes, you can spend 500k and get terrible sound.

 

As to setup etc that has nothing to do with $ but desire and room. I have seen many systems both "cheap" and "expensive" that by picture alone are setup like crap.

 

Time to get over the $ issue.

I have no issue with the $. See my system. I am not price sensitive. But when I spend the amount I do, I would like someone knowledgeable to help me set up. My dealer did not.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Yet it is ok to troll people with this article, and just tell people to ignore most of the content?

I see nothing trolling about posting this article.

 

Its like you are blaming terrible comments on Joel because he posted the link and at the same time blaming Ken Kessler for peoples' lack of self control.

[NOMBEDES]

He should take to twitter! He'd be in "good" company.

 

Point taken.

[wgscott]

I see nothing trolling about posting this article.

 

Its like you are blaming terrible comments on Joel because he posted the link and at the same time blaming Ken Kessler for peoples' lack of self control.

 

I'm not blaming anything on Joel, except being a wee bit disingenuous about wanting to stir the pot.

 

Funny, it is the one thing Priapter and I seem to agree upon. It's like the http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/why-do-objectivists-get-so-upset-28978/ thread. It is designed to provoke a response, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I'm not blaming anything on Joel, except being a wee bit disingenuous about wanting to stir the pot.

 

Funny, it is the one thing Priapter and I seem to agree upon. It's like the "Why do objectivists beat their wives?" thread. It is designed to provoke a response, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

I know Joel from our numerous conversations on and offline. None of his posts are intended to stir the pot. Period. It may come off that way because other people stir the pot in a similar way, but trust me, Joel isn't that type of person. I'd say Joel has no interest in stirring the pot.

[wgscott]

I personally don't think stirring the pot is a bad thing. It does chafe just a wee bit if someone, for example, would link to Protocols of the Elders of Zion and then just tell me to ignore the antisemitism and historical revisionism.

 

Admittedly, it isn't close to being in the same league, but some of this stuff is quite remarkable:

 

This quasi-socialist attitude has affected, too, the manufacturers who produce $100,000 loudspeakers or amps, for they, by and large, are of the same left-wing/socialist hypocrites. Like them, many of these manufacturers loathe the very people who can afford their goods. Trust me: at least half the hi-fi industry, from retailers to journalists (especially the journalists, the worst hypocrites of all) to manufacturers, are currently in mourning because Bernie Sanders lost out to Hillary.[

 

and then this:

 

just like the passengers in those first-class seats in the airplane subsidise your economy ticket. And you hate them for it.

 

(Turns out it works the other way around on most airlines.)

 

Then we get into the pure bigot mode:

single-parent Somali immigrants and Lesbian buskers on welfare and refugees from Syria and underpaid avocado pickers do not buy moving-coil cartridges and air-bearing tonearms.

[NOMBEDES]

oooh, I thought the avocado picker line was good. I hate the PC wasteland we now inhabit.

[Priaptor]

oooh, I thought the avocado picker line was good. I hate the PC wasteland we now inhabit.

 

Lol

 

I'm with you, obviously!!

[joelha]

Joel

 

You have a habit of posting things that have a certain "slant" or "evocative perspective" and then claim you don't want it to degenerate down the path you post.

 

I think it's pretty clever on your part and like it. Hard not to read the article you post and NOT get caught up in "the politics" as most of the article is pretty "political" hitting on some of the big social issues of that divide us.

 

Having said that I really liked the article and agree with KK despite Audiodoctor's comment to the contrary.

 

Howie

 

Priaptor,

 

The previous thread I'm guessing you're referencing for which I am the OP is "Why do Objectivists Get So Upset?"

 

There's nothing overtly political about that topic. So when the thread went political, I called it out and asked to return to the topic. Was the topic provocative? Yes. But I never denied that point.

 

For this thread, I opened by saying that the political sentiments should be put aside.

 

I think I've been pretty straight forward in both threads.

 

What on-topic path did I not want either thread to take? You'll have a hard time finding an example.

 

Joel

[The Computer Audiophile]

I personally don't think stirring the pot is a bad thing. It does chafe just a wee bit if someone, for example, would link to Protocols of the Elders of Zion and then just tell me to ignore the antisemitism and historical revisionism.

 

Admittedly, it isn't close to being in the same league, but some of this stuff is quite remarkable:

 

 

 

and then this:

 

 

 

(Turns out it works the other way around on most airlines.)

 

Then we get into the pure bigot mode:

What, YOU don't think stirring the pot is a bad thing? Only joking. I like the way you stir the pot 99% of the time :~)

 

With respect to this thread, if people can focus on what the author said, then I'm all for it. Any conversation related to that, whether I agree or not, is encouraged here at CA.

 

When we get off in the weeds about politics unrelated to the words in the article then things get repetitive and boring.

 

 

Back on topic. Do you really think it's bigotry that's driving the statement "single-parent Somali immigrants and Lesbian buskers on welfare and refugees from Syria and underpaid avocado pickers do not buy moving-coil cartridges and air-bearing tonearms." Is there a chance that his statement is true (within reason, if one person in a category purchases the item then he is false, but I don't think he is making that argument despite his words)? Does anyone on CA know a single-parent Somali immigrant, or a Lesbian busker on welfare or a refugee from Syria, or an underpaid avocado picker who purchases moving-coil cartridges and air-bearing tonearms?

 

Or, even if his statement is true, is it the fact that the mentioned groups of people have nothing to do with his argument and are mentioned for another purpose?

 

I lean toward his statement being factual, but inflammatory. As if the industry has been advertising to "Somali immigrants and Lesbian buskers on welfare and refugees from Syria and underpaid avocado pickers" but striking out in terms of sales. Yeah right.

[joelha]

Yet it is ok to troll people with this article, and just tell people to ignore most of the content?

 

Bill,

 

Nothing in the article justifies a personal public attack like AudioDoctor posted. Nothing.

 

That aside, who is trolling?

 

Joel

[joelha]

I'm not blaming anything on Joel, except being a wee bit disingenuous about wanting to stir the pot.

 

Funny, it is the one thing Priapter and I seem to agree upon. It's like the http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/why-do-objectivists-get-so-upset-28978/ thread. It is designed to provoke a response, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

Bill,

 

Chris knows my interest in this particular topic and referenced a previous conversation we had about it.

 

I don't know how you know my intentions better than I do.

 

Joel

[joelha]

I know Joel from our numerous conversations on and offline. None of his posts are intended to stir the pot. Period. It may come off that way because other people stir the pot in a similar way, but trust me, Joel isn't that type of person. I'd say Joel has no interest in stirring the pot.

 

At the risk of appearing to kiss up to the creator of this site . . . Thanks a lot, Chris.

 

Joel

[The Computer Audiophile]

oooh, I thought the avocado picker line was good. I hate the PC wasteland we now inhabit.

 

Lol

 

I'm with you, obviously!!

I'm not a fan of political correctness either, but that's not to say I like some of the people who are champions of the non-PC cause. I'm a fan of the truth. If avocado pickers are underpaid and not likely customers of Magico loudspeakers, then I'm totally fine with a conversation about it, but I have issues with using such a sentence when it makes no sense in the context of the discussion. I don't think any HiFi manufacturer is advertising on the sides of buses in avocado country. I believe Ken is using creative license to be provocative at the expense of others and to feed the beast that is the people who eat that stuff up (no pun intended).

 

I also like to keep the following in mind - If you're not pissing off someone, then you're not doing your job. As someone who writes quite a bit, I always remind myself of that statement. Pleasing everyone, pleases nobody.

[Priaptor]

Priaptor,

 

The previous thread I'm guessing you're referencing for which I am the OP is "Why do Objectivists Get So Upset?"

 

There's nothing overtly political about that topic. So when the thread went political, I called it out and asked to return to the topic. Was the topic provocative? Yes. But I never denied that point.

 

For this thread, I opened by saying that the political sentiments should be put aside.

 

I think I've been pretty straight forward in both threads.

 

What on-topic path did I not want either thread to take? You'll have a hard time finding an example.

 

Joel

 

Joel,

 

I was actually referring to both this and the other thread. This article is hard to ignore the politics when reading it the other thread you refer to always degenerates into what it did by the very nature of the topic.

 

No big deal. I was giving you kudos for doing it in a clever way. If it was not your intent I take back you being clever.

 

Howie.

[joelha]

Joel,

 

I was actually referring to both this and the other thread. This article is hard to ignore the politics when reading it the other thread you refer to always degenerates into what it did by the very nature of the topic.

 

No big deal. I was giving you kudos for doing it in a clever way. If it was not your intent I take back you being clever.

 

Howie.

 

Fair enough, Howie.

 

I'd rather be genuine than clever.

 

Joel

[Priaptor]

Fair enough, Howie.

 

I'd rather be genuine than clever.

 

Joel

 

Well I think your both.

[Priaptor]

I also like to keep the following in mind - If you're not pissing off someone, then you're not doing your job. As someone who writes quite a bit, I always remind myself of that statement. Pleasing everyone, pleases nobody.

 

I couldn't agree more.

[joelha]

Well I think your both.

 

Hey, how can I not say "thanks" for that, Howie?

 

Thanks very much.

 

Joel

[wgscott]

oooh, I thought the avocado picker line was good. I hate the PC wasteland we now inhabit.

 

I think it is funny too. But then I think Ann Coulter has a good sense of humor. But we shouldn't pretend that it is something that it isn't.

[wgscott]

Priaptor,

 

The previous thread I'm guessing you're referencing for which I am the OP is "Why do Objectivists Get So Upset?"

 

There's nothing overtly political about that topic. So when the thread went political, I called it out and asked to return to the topic. Was the topic provocative? Yes. But I never denied that point.

 

For this thread, I opened by saying that the political sentiments should be put aside.

 

I think I've been pretty straight forward in both threads.

 

What on-topic path did I not want either thread to take? You'll have a hard time finding an example.

 

Joel

 

 

Why not have titled the thread something like "Why do objectivists and subjectivists get so upset at each other?" if you are going to pretend to be neutral?

 

It isn't that you are advocating one side that I happen to disagree with that is the issue. It is that you are pretending it isn't a loaded question. That's not genuine.

[wgscott]

If you're not pissing off someone, then you're not doing your job.

 

I should be raking in enough overtime to buy something high-end.

[joelha]

Why not have titled the thread something like "Why do objectivists and subjectivists get so upset at each other?" if you are going to pretend to be neutral?

 

It isn't that you are advocating one side that I happen to disagree with that is the issue. It is that you are pretending it isn't a loaded question. That's not genuine.

 

When did I ever say I was trying to be neutral?

 

I honestly believe it's the objectivists who get more upset. I made my case for that point.

 

The thread was my attempt to find out why that might be the case.

 

That's really it.

 

Joel

[AudioDoctor]

Audiodoctor,

 

It's likely only a matter of time before your post is deleted.

 

In the meantime, comments like yours, even if absolutely true (and I don't know Ken that well), should never be posted publicly.

 

You should know better.

 

Joel

 

Wow, suggesting Ken is a PoS as a human being because of a piece of entertainment journalism he wrote, may say much more about you than him.

 

M if you don't care about something, why write that you don't care? Do you go on knitting forums and write that you don't care? The editorial clearly wasn't written for you if you don't care about the topic.

 

As a consumer you actually can do something about it. You can communicate with companies and other consumers her on CA or elsewhere and you can vote with your dollars. Based on your comments it simply seems that you don't care. That's OK too.

 

I stand by what I said too. There are any number of ways he could have made his point, he chose the one that clearly shows what a piece of shit he is as a human being.

 

Joel, I have as much right to my opinion as Ken does to his. You can't tell me he can declare his while telling me I can't share my rebuttal...

 

Chris, I do vote with my dollars. I don't buy mega buck systems, but it isn't because of this article, or their marketing, or any other reason, it is simply because I don't want to. What gives me a right to tell someone else how to run their business?