Reactions to HP's review of Antique Sound Lab amp?

Zaikes,

OK. Thank you for you well thought out response.


Yes, I know that I pushed you pretty hard this week. But I've always thought you could take it, know that you can, and we both know cognitive agility is not the issue.

As you know, Zaikes, there are always minds that you can find in ally, like 914Nut, who will say all kind of things to keep from taking just that extra step, the one that looks at the source of the music, or Music. Their "I" will cite irelevancy, impatience, disrespect to others reading, obfuscation (non-sequitor), lawyer reference, moi reference, magnanimous posture, retreat but not retreat, misunderstanding, ideas not worth effort, why care, you ruin life-fun and its only fun (is that really true?), and on and on, all negative energy directed back as you leave.

All that I asked you - Socratically moving you to where you could find none of the above excuses not to answer - was what is the nature of the silence in the mind where we hear deep musical meaning from?

What could be more relevant?

I know you are not quitting, you have a ferocious heart, but I will tell you as you go (back to where?) that I never considered you a "losing proposition". That's why I stay with you so long. It was always "communion"...

Take care,

Mark

I looked back through HP's Hurricane review last night - admittedly I only skimmed it last week - and I am beginning to see what you all are saying as to the unbridled conviction. Stronger than I thought in toto, and particularly up front in the text. Did anyone notice that the review started out, almost starting out too much, with the "philosophy" angle, as if it was what was being talked about and not the amp?

A theory too much in search of an empiric result?

I told HP about these ideas ten years ago concerning envelopes of dimensional space carrying varying energies, and, hence, experienced by the listener differently in a dynamic sense (and, in conjunction with discontinuousness - lack of "symmetry" as I put it at the time, in print for galley, but strangely not published...), so I know what he is try-ing to get at ten years later. I just wonder whether the observation has more to do with the mind's try-ing rather than what that mind is able to perceive...

So, boys, is that "entertaining" enough?

Talking about the last issue of TAS, what I actually found even more interesting is Valin's comment towards the start of the Kharma speaker review. He talks about how his recent review of the Rockport Hyperion and addresses why he is not using it as his personal reference. One of his reasons is costs, but then he comes right out and says he could do it if the manufacturer sells him a "demo" pair. Big name reviewer in big name audio magazine will tout component as his reference if manufacturer gives reviewer pair at favorable price. I think this is outrageous. I know that reviewer pricing is common place, but the audacity of putting it in print is astonishing.

Ohn: Yea, you got it.

I agree. JV was once the bright, shining hope of TAS, the clear heir-apparent to HP in the days before the lame-o Fi experiment. I loved reading his reviews. But since his return, he's been almost a parody of a high-end reviewer and has lost a ton of credibility in my mind.