A safe place for "experts."

[Phelonious Ponk]

In the early days, WBF had a few industry experts who had their own subforms, and were regular contributors. I haven't spoken with them to confirm, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet most of them stopped hanging around because of the dominance of subjectivists who would argue any datapoint that didn't support what they want to hear. This, it would seem, would be a safe place for them to hang out, and their knowledge would be wonderful to have here. In particular, I'd love to see Sean Olive here spreading his gospel of good sense based on sound science. Any chance we can get our experts back?

Tim

 

[Purité Audio]

Yes ! Wouldn't that be wonderful, I find though that really serious engineers are a, probably pretty busy, and b, shun the spotlight and are self effacing.
I am always suspicious of the 'I' designer ,I did this,I did that.
I like Daniel Weiss' manner and Bruno Putzeys ,I believe Dietmar Brauer is a competent engineer ,even if he did kick me off.
Keith

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I want Olive back. It would be great to have Bruno Putzey here. Both would spend much time talking over my head. My lips would move as I read their posts. But eventually, small bits of knowledge would seep in.

Tim

 

[dallasjustice]

Subjectivists are "experts" too. They love to use "expert" terminology. Caesar said his system was "flat." I think Keith ruffled his feathers by asking to see a REW plot.

Michael

 

[amirm]

For sure we would welcome them. There is an issue for them though. They need to see a return for their time and as such, our forum needs to grow a bit more and establish itself. Let's use this thread for ideas of who might be good candidates and if anyone has a relationship with them.

AXPONA show is also coming up so if any of them are there, I can chat with them about it.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Subjectivists are "experts" too. They love to use "expert" terminology. Caesar said his system was "flat." I think Keith ruffled his feathers by asking to see a REW plot.

Michael

...yeah, like PRaT, and superb and musical and analog...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

For sure we would welcome them. There is an issue for them though. They need to see a return for their time and as such, our forum needs to grow a bit more and establish itself. Let's use this thread for ideas of who might be good candidates and if anyone has a relationship with them.

AXPONA show is also coming up so if any of them are there, I can chat with them about it.

Sean Olive, Vincent Kars, Mark Seeton...in a dream? Siegfried Linkwitz, Bruno Putzey, Bob Carver...

 

[amirm]

No it is not a dream. I know the first three of course. Keith and Michael, how good is your relationship to Bruno in this sort of thing?

 

[NorthSky]

Methinks that good students with the right questions (us) attract good experts (them).

 

[amirm]

Makes sense. Now where do we get the good students?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I'll be a good student. But let me start a thread for it....

 

[Liberal Democracy]

yea we need experts else folks get way to passionate about merely 'what they recon' not recognizing the absence of knowing

 

[tomelex]

Perhaps JJ can come here, he is tops too. Also hello to Ethan W.

 

[amirm]

Ethan is here already. I can ask JJ but not sure if he will have interest.

 

[March Audio]

Yay! Finally a sane forum !

Now, I wouldnt want to make this place unfriendly towards subjectivists. To care for their psychological well being I suggest that during signup there be a tick box to indicate subjectivist or objectivist so that a "hurt feelings report" can be emailed to them ready for submission to the mods when they inevitably become upset by some midly sarcastic comment implying they may have spent thousands on a placebo product.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2714617/Hurt-Feelings-Report.pdf

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Yay! Finally a sane forum !

Now, I wouldnt want to make this place unfriendly towards subjectivists. To care for their psychological well being I suggest that during signup there be a tick box to indicate subjectivist or objectivist so that a "hurt feelings report" can be emailed to them ready for submission to the mods when they inevitably become upset by some midly sarcastic comment implying they may have spent thousands on a placebo product.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2714617/Hurt-Feelings-Report.pdf

Sarcasm isn't required to hurt some of them. They can be horribly wounded by a bit of information. I agree, though, that they should be welcome here, I'm just not sure how we handle it when they get their britches in a bunch. I have no interest in the strict objectivist limitations of a hydrogen audio. That's not even good for discussion. I don't even mind the "what I hear" posts, but they need to have a bit thicker skin for questioning - even "what they hear." And the one's who just want to tell you if you don't hear it your ears, or your gear, sucks? There are plenty of boards for that nonsense.

Tim

 

[Purité Audio]

We have to lure them in, subjectivists, not experts, although with the righ tours that might work too.
Think of the most ridiculous tweak ever , something Will Ferrell would be proud of, they won't be able to resist.
Keith.

 

[Liberal Democracy]

We have to lure them in, subjectivists, not experts, although with the righ tours that might work too.
Think of the most ridiculous tweak ever , something Will Ferrell would be proud of, they won't be able to resist.
Keith.

i put blu tac in the spare fuse area of the fuse holders in the back of my kit??!! too cheap to lure my kind though...

i like being the only one, it makes me feel special

 

[amirm]

I think ultimately what we/I want is to avoid extremes of both ends. Objectivity pushed to the end limit does stifle discussion and discovery of excellence. And subjectivity to the extreme denounces science and engineering of audio. If we leave those two alone, then the rest of the spectrum more or less is fine.

 

[Julf]

Objectivity pushed to the end limit does stifle discussion and discovery of excellence.

But the important distinction is that an "objectivist" generally believes in the scientific method, so actual evidence is all it takes to silence him/her. The problem is that by definition, nothing anybody else says can change the mind of a subjectivist.