So, why exactly are you here?
I subscribe to the magazine & I also happen to like this site!
I like the forums & I have learned from the archive of articles here.

Suggestions for improvement are usually encouraged and welcome. What sort of improvements do you have in mind?

Then leave this irrelevant forum and relieve yourself elsewhere.

As Buddha said...

RG

Whereas I agree that the Stereophile forums are technically sub par to other forums on the Internet, contextually, they have their own charm. They're not as busy as they could be, but there is a sense of comfort and community. As with any community, there are disagreements and there's the village idiot, however, I find that overall, they've done a decent job. They should probably hire someone with a lot more technical savvy who can improve the functionality of the board, but given that the Stereophile readership consists of old fuddy duddies, what they have now may be good enough.

Do you work for Stereophile? I'm not real bright, so maybe you can tell me why you care how much advertising is on this site?
Are you a stock holder in the company or something?
Eric said it well!

Hey.!!! That's MY TROLL, don't be using that for some one else, especially one that ain't registered, I thought ya can't post if ya ain't registered? guess not.

Yeah...I don't get it. Exactly what makes an active forum anyway? Any time I ask a question I get a number of good answers. Anything I see that I might be able to help- I do. I mean, any more active and I personally question whether such "contributors" have lives.

More importantly, an Anonymous know it all critic says only one thing to me: coward with an axe to grind. Not a very welcomed individual on any forum.

It's hard to argue with anything that Mr. Fatigue has to say. I think he's fairly accurate. As I read JA's piece I didn't see it as bragging, but thanking his "web monkey" for what had been accomplished.

Yes, this Forum is very weak, with only a handful of regulars and the occasional newbie wandering in to ask a question. It's a shame, but it only takes one negative spirit to kill off a forum with high potential. I've seen it happen elsewhere a couple of times. It takes a broad cadre of sane, levelheaded supporters to build a thriving forum. It's too early to declare this forum dead, but life support would be useful.

However, not all is lost at www.stereophile.com. The archive of the reviews is very useful and surely generates good traffic. The blogs are good, but not great yet. (Unfortunately, some of the highest potential writers are committed to their own efforts, understandably). Still, when I do a Google or Yahoo search, I often find myself at Stereophile.com.

So, I think JA is right to be proud and happy. I think he's giving credit where due. The piece was not meant to be an evaluation of each aspect of the site, but just an overall attaboy to his "web monkey."

Who knows what'll happen over the next ten-years. Good luck to Stereophile.com and congrats on lasting ten-years.

Dave

Quote:
Suggestions for improvement are usually encouraged and welcome. What sort of improvements do you have in mind?

They are sleeping. Several years ago at about the same time they lost Gordon Holt and Corey Greenberg, after hiring MF, which was a just a commercial decision, the magazine being pro CD. They need new blood. They need a Corey Greenberg to fire up their readers. To their credit they had a much better publisher and owner back then.

Again I ask anyone, if you don't like this site, why are you posting here ?

Who says? I find it highly entertaining, soemtimes informative, sometimes it makes me laugh, sometimes it makes me mad. Who doesn't like it? It's interesting to see, read how the "other" side of reality thinks sometimes.

Quote:
Again I ask anyone, if you don't like this site, why are you posting here ?

No one said they don't like the site. I think it's just not living up to its potential as a forum. Audiogon.com, for instance, has several times as much activity. For Buying and Selling, Audiogon.com is really hard to beat. (I just bought a Conrad Johnson CA-100 for about half price with only 100-hours and had two to chose from, along with a Rowland Concerto intergrated).

Stereophile.com's strengths, in my view, are the review archives. The blogs have their good moments, but there's far more potential there.

In contrast, audiogon.com has mainly owner reviews (not the most reliable source). They also have useful links to other online reviews in many instances.

So, there's enough here for me to check in most days. It's not totally dead, just not active in comparison to other choices.

Dave

I think you're a bit of a bozo, but I was directing my comments to "anonymous" & others like him that don't seem to like it here. If you don't like it here, why be here?! Just to be an ass & bother others?
I haven't been here long, but I don't recall you(DUP) complaining about the site, have you? There can probably always be improvements made, but why be rude?

Now I'm really confused! How do you compare a site for buying & selling products to this site? Besides cds, products aren't sold here. This is the site of a magazine. Please explain.

Being rude,? Being rude would be not answer, no? I never said i didn't like it here, I thought you where refering to me, my confusion.

Who is old enough here to remember the food fights on the audio newsgroup, was it alt. or rec. something, 10 years ago. The wit, the sense of repartie, the intelligence, the writing skills and the knowledge of this group of people will never be replicated. I mean posting has to be fun, one can't be telling people how to handle their silverware when he is half educated and never learned to handle his in the first place. The new generation is a bore. It is part of the problem, too.

I really enjoyed the pre-browser (Netscape was the first), pre-web educational institutions and scientists only Internet. It was wonderful.

But there are great things on the Internet and web now as well.

Avoid/ignore the bad and take in the good.

Take a deep breath, go to your happy place and come back when you are feeling better.

i can't believe anyone can keep a straight face and compare tas (bush league at best)and stereophile's forums so the staff of stereophile should get a pat on the back for its creation. is it perfect? no but i have not found the perfect audio forum. has anyone else? i have read ja's editorial and i don't quite see what is causing the uproad in this posting. ja sounds like he is thanking the editorial staff, specifically jon iverson and a few others, for their contribution to creation of the forum and that it has grown since day 1 past expectations. that is no surprise to most of us computer hacks who 10 years ago would never have thought the internet would have been this big and powerful. so i guess i'm asking those who have commented so far and those who read this column...what am i missing??? i hope my ears aren't this blind!

Quote:
Now I'm really confused! How do you compare a site for buying & selling products to this site? Besides cds, products aren't sold here. This is the site of a magazine. Please explain.

So who's a bozo now, Bozo? Click on "Forums" and you'll see a very active Forum.

If you don't like people raising ligitimate questions, why do your read them???

Dave

Well first off, pay attention to who I'm replying to!!
I was calling a bozo DUP & not for anything he has posted on this topic!! Also, I've only been on Audiogon's site a few times & didn't realize they had a forum; that's why I asked smart guy!! I just now briefly looked at the forum & yes indeed it's active. Further most of my comments have been directed at those who are complaining about this site, ie, Anonymous. I don't think you were actualy complaining, perhaps I'm wrong.
As you stated, this site's strength is the archives though I also enjoy the forums. Again, if someone doesn't like it here, why be here?

Sorry I called you a bozo, Poor. As I reread your answer to DUP you seem to be responding to a couple of things, including things beyond what DUP said. I understand that.

Anyway, back to the orginal post. I think he makes some good points, but misconstrues the editorial as anything more than ataboys. Running a successful forum is a touchy enterprise that requires a touch of luck. I don't see it as Stereophile's main mission, so it's understandable if they're not real good at it.

Still, pointing out weaknesses is useful, IMHO.

Best regards,

Dave

Quote:
I thought ya can't post if ya ain't registered? guess not.

Sorry about that. When I created the December 2007 forum, I forgot to indicate the proper permissions. Fixed it.

Anyway, my sincere thanks go out to all of our forum members. You make this place what it is. And, yeah -- maybe this isn't always the friendliest place to hang out, and we do have our limitations (technical and other sorts), but overall I think we do an excellent job at providing a place where people can openly share their opinions and experiences. By and large, I am amazed by our members' intelligence, passion, consideration, and willingness to share. I've learned a lot, and I hope you have, too.

Thanks again.

Quote:
Anyway, my sincere thanks go out to all of our forum members. You make this place what it is. And, yeah -- maybe this isn't always the friendliest place to hang out, and we do have our limitations (technical and other sorts), but overall I think we do an excellent job at providing a place where people can openly share their opinions and experiences. By and large, I am amazed by our members' intelligence, passion, consideration, and willingness to share. I've learned a lot, and I hope you have, too.

Thanks again.

This indicates to me a institutional myopia par excellent.

That the audio hobby is somewhat uniquely characterized by it's not insignificant minority of discontents is beyond dispute. Yet what is puzzling is that an organization such as Stereophile seems to revel in pandering to this element. The infamous "Cancel my subscription" Letter to the Editor is an indication of such, something that has had institutional permanence going on decades; SF published a letter from a reader who produced a hilarious parody on the topic of the "Cancel my subscription" letter, they seem to have recognized the humor but sadly failed to absorbe the point!

The misguided emphasis seem to have naturally migrated to the forums as well, e.g. we have our "village idiot" running amuck unchecked. Who knows the rational behind such an apparent policy, perhaps editorial staff believe it is an indicative of tolerance on their part, or maybe respect for free speech?

Whatever the case it appears to me that when applied to the interactive medium of an internet forum such a policy has negative consequences. It sets the tone for exchanges, encourages a culture of combativeness with regular flare-ups as patience runs thin even for those normally recognized as restrained and composed... to expect composure in the face of an near endless stream of insults from someone who seem to delight in overt displays of contempt for fellow members is to expect saintliness.

I doubt very much that these forums will see much growth in membership as long as the current laissez faire "all idiots welcome" approach holds sway.

Quote:

Anyway, my sincere thanks go out to all of our forum members. You make this place what it is. And, yeah -- maybe this isn't always the friendliest place to hang out, and we do have our limitations (technical and other sorts), but overall I think we do an excellent job at providing a place where people can openly share their opinions and experiences. By and large, I am amazed by our members' intelligence, passion, consideration, and willingness to share. I've learned a lot, and I hope you have, too.

Thanks again.

I agree. Even though there are barbs exchanged and even tempers flare, overall, I enjoy these forums and I think you struck the right balance of not over or undermoderating these forums. Let's give credit where it's due.

All "idiots" welcome....As I READ YOUR post!!! (bjh not Alex) Now that's FUNNY!!!!! Is that a village idiot or a mere single housing unit idiot?

I enjoy reading this forum, and appreciate the Stereophile staff/organization for making it available to me. I also appreciate the tolorance level here. Sometimes folks get a bit repetitive, but I read fast and can skip what I don't want to spend time on. Most of the regulars here have taught me a thing or two including the much maligned DUP.

Quote:
Who is old enough here to remember the food fights on the audio newsgroup, was it alt. or rec. something, 10 years ago. The wit, the sense of repartie, the intelligence, the writing skills and the knowledge of this group of people will never be replicated. I mean posting has to be fun, one can't be telling people how to handle their silverware when he is half educated and never learned to handle his in the first place. The new generation is a bore. It is part of the problem, too.

I took it on the chin from the alt.rec.audio.high-end group, way back when(1993-94, BBS systems-before the internet)..as I argued why we needed a MINIMUM sampling rate of 225khz/20bit, just to encompass the one single aspect of human hearing, not all the rest we still don't understand. They treated me like crap. It turns out, I was correct. So that newsgroup can kiss my hairy white backside. It still PO's me, it seems.

And I think that this forum will pick up. It just takes a bit, is all. Maybe one more moderator to spend a bit of time and a developer to make it more slick. Slickitude is where it's at. Visual appeal. Critical.

The AVSforum works cuz the original graphics were slick. That color scheme and layout made that forum. I've still got over 7000 posts there and I haven't really posted in about 3-3.5 years. There was a time when I was #2 on the 'all time' poster's list. Now I'm just a punter there.

A simple thing here, is that there is too much crap required to be 'clicked' on to make a post. I want SINGLE CLICK 'open post reply' and a SINGLE CLICK 'post' button. No extra personal effort to set that up, as a initial member, either. Make it the default set up. Yah want people to post? stop making it tricky to do so.

And Dup, it wouldn't take much, dude. Just a tiny bit more self control. Just a little. Don't let that control slip, either.

I think we are mostly in agreement. Yes, I was responding to a few things in 1 reply, perhaps I should take one item at a time. I do like this site including the forums(guess I'm weird). Thanks though for rereading what I said! Yes, pointing out weakness is useful my main problem was with what seems to be the uppity attitude of some posters(not you dc).

Thanks buddy, I also like this site. I'm hoping that the forums will pick up steam in the near term. I think the moderators have a little house cleaning to do, maybe "weeding" is a better term, but the potential is here.

Several other features of the site are very strong. I plan to stick around and see where things go.

Dave

KBK

Good to hear from you here on this forum. If I remember your hobby was modifying CRT projectors.. You had an 7" Electrohome yourself.. I sold my G70 and have now a JVC RS1.. Did you switch to digital? What they lack here is a lotta more people like you, like DCS, so the mayonnaise can take. I gave you both one star!

Quote:
...I argued why we needed a MINIMUM sampling rate of 225khz/20bit, just to encompass the one single aspect of human hearing, not all the rest we still don't understand. They treated me like crap. It turns out, I was correct.

Not arguing, but I am curious: why do we need such a high sampling rate and who concluded that this is correct?

The only rigorous analysis I recall is that of Dan Lavry who concluded that 60kHz is sufficient.

(sorry if this is off-topic, I am not sure what the topic of the thread is at this point.)

Here's a partial answer for the moment:

Sony chose it (almost identical #'s) as their minimum for archival work (all the old A&M stuff, etc).

As for the full answer, I have to go and retrieve it off of the DIYAudio forum. It was a coherent enough response to shut down the 'animated discussions' of a room full of contrary engineers. Which is about as tough a crew to satisfy as exists.

Oh heck, I'll go and get it right now. Pardon the tone, it was taken from a 'contentious situation'

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Take a piece of paper.

Draw a triangle on it.

The three points represent the listener with respect to the two speakers.

Make the speakers 10 ft apart, with the listener 10 ft back.

Now.....audiophiles have been shown to be easily able to differentiate between signals..in that 'stereoscopic sound stage' , which is strung between the speakers..where the 'image point' seems to be over, from left to right, by approximately 1 inch, and less. Now, take that 'timing' information, and then apply it to extremely rich signals, in terms of the entire note structure. Harmonics count.

Take that information,and you add it to the fact that the ear hears, for the larger part, via the leading edge of the given transient, and it's timing differentials from harmonic transients, and the level of each.

If you go through the rather simple math..you end up with a minimal requirement to satisfy the better trained audiophiles (and I POWERFULLY stress that is is BELOW the capacity of the human ear!!! ..it is merely as well as audiophiles have managed to train themselves-nothing more)..of..get this:

500Khz sampling rate with a 20 bit word length. This as a MINIMUM. This specification is only taking into account one single aspect of the human human hearing function. One we ALL express, every single day.

As for cables, this means they must be capable of not altering a signal in any way, whatsoever..from actual DC...out to approx. 1mhz, with a +10db to -70db range of loading ..this..with ZERO phase distortion or alteration of the signal..in any way, shape or form. PERIOD. I'm not talking about a clean -3db down at 500khz, but 0db down. NO phase or complex LCR issues, at ANY point in that range. Harmonics and complex note structuring take these minimums up into the low mhz range!! This, with any level or consideration of signal loading.

This is not due to the single ear's function but as a stereoscopic pair, concerning timing issues.

Which is why tube amps and turntables work. Both have extremely low inter-channel phasing issues. Totally analog. Taken to another point of analysis, it shows why digital amps are generally considered...to the more learned ear...to 'suck'.

Digital falls flat on it's face.

But the ear-brain combo can pull 'intelligence' out of a 3.5 bit deep digital signal. This does not mean that it equals hearing function, but the exact opposite. We are incredibly good at figuring out complex and dirty aural issues, but we can also 'relax' into a perfectly represented signal, as well.

This is why we can hear differences in audio equipment and wires.

I've known this simple point since 1992. I've tried to educate the industry many times. But to no avail. I began trying on the old alt.rec.audio.high-end groups before the internet even existed. When 44.1/16 digital was the 'hot' thing and I told them what I'm telling you now.

The logic and the math sit there in plain sight...like a 9000lb gorilla in the middle of the room...and are ignored.

If you go through the effort of understanding this simple point, the whole entire audiophile argument makes 110% perfect sense.

Don't forget to consider the shape of the ear..and how that affects loading and signal recognition. This slams the final nails down into the argument coffins of the hardcore objectivists in a rather strong manner. Sorry guys. Nothing personal, but the truth is the truth.

The trick is, as usual, understanding that the more complex and difficult a situation is to resolve, then the more fundamental the mistake in the formulation of the question. In this case, it is an incomplete or ill thought out understanding of the human hearing function.

I've just outlined the very basic mathematical points and data required to get there and I've taken your metaphorical hand and marched you right to the point you've been needing to 'get'.

Hopefully .... some of you will 'get it'. If you want to argue the point after this....I might have to walk away and mentally label you as 'hopeless'.

earball triangulation

Quote:
Sony chose it (almost identical #'s) as their minimum for archival work (all the old A&M stuff, etc).

Sony chose what?

Cite?

Quote:
500Khz sampling rate with a 20 bit word length. This as a MINIMUM.

How is this derived?
Are you stating that Sony is archiving at 20 bit/500kHz?

The only rigorous analysis I have seen is Dan Lavry's. I haven't carefully gone through this for a couple of years, but I found it quite convincing at the time: http://www.lavryengineering.com/documents/Sampling_Theory.pdf

Sony is Archiving at around 225khz/24bit, IIRC. I found that it was an interesting specification to choose, as that is virtually what I proposed as a minimum - all those years ago.

To get to a point where there is little in the way of phase, or 'time' differential between the two given channels, a signal must have 'perfect' jitter spectrum (concerning clocking), which it will not have..the sampling must be at 225khz, minimum, at about a minimum of 20 bit depth of level resolution.

When considering cables, this means a lack of issues of any kind, from DC to 'mid frequency' AM frequencies, ie, 500khz or so. As 'cables' are rated at the '-3 db' point, insofar as spectrum rating, this means we need to hit about 1Mhz as the minimum of undamaged, perfect signal handling, ie, 0db down. As well, the handling of frequencies below about 1khz to about 400hz, and down, we have notable considerations of what goes on with respect to flow on the inside vs the surface of the cable. The geometry of that signal handling, has nothing in relation to the upper frequency issues. This essentially means, that the full spectrum necessities of a audio cable design have nothing to do with one another. Low frequencies require a completely different design than high frequencies. Due to this, all cables are a compromise in design. ALL. No exceptions. This goes for my own cables, as well. As the manufacturer of such, I think my compromise is better. Not an unusual thing to hear. My particular claim to fame, rides on the fact that my cable design has little to do with skin effect, and core-vs-skin transmission issues. It is an elegant and unique solution that does away with the very source of the problem(s) in audio signal transmission.

The necessities and design parameters of audio cable design are not in any textbook, and remain a 'non-entity' in the engineering circles. They don't think of it as a problem, as they don't really think things through much, on average. Of course, you don't hear from the thinking engineers on these issues, only from the ones who don't think.

Interestingly enough, the frequency point at which a signal travels from the core of a given conductor to riding at the surface.... occurs at almost the exact frequency that acoustical air sound transmission switches from particle to wave. Fancy that. Never whoulda guessed.

"As above-So below"