🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 8, 9:31 am, phi...@ue.aioy.eu (Philip Homburg) wrote:
> In article <1173369680.866857.202...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Karl Winkler <karlwinkle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker
> >placement, acoustical treatments, etc.
>
> How you expect that to work? "Where do I place speakers in my almost, but
> not quite square room?"
>
Why not?

> >But instead, they talk mostly
> >about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like
> >with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and
> >brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor.
>
> So you think that talking about speaker placement or acoustical treatments
> is much better use of ones time then talking about minute difference between
> hifi equipment?
>
Not necessarily - only that it's interesting in that the discussions
are so lopsided in favor of minutiae rather than information and
discussions most people can use.

> >> However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much
> >> easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example,
> >> photography techniques.
>
> >Yes, because photography techniques require work and real learning,
> >along with getting off one's duff and *doing something*, while
> >features of equipment requires rote memorization.
>
> No, just pointing a photo camera and pressing the button is much less
> work than listing the rather heavy high-end hifi equipment.
>
I assume you meant "lifting"? Sure it's easier. But what of it? Is it
easier to create a photograph that people would want to look at than
to just turn on your audio system?

> >> And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music
> >> or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion
> >> may not go anywhere.
>
> >True. However, it seems to me that more might be learned if people
> >talked about attempts they've made, the trouble they found in trying
> >it that way, the results they got, and what they learned.
>
> But how does that help? In talking about selecting hifi equipment or
> about photography is is hard work to come up with general principles, and
> most of those are already covered in books about the subject.

Perhaps, but the drawback of books is that in terms of the technology,
they are usually out of date. Not only that, but the style of
photographs is also out of date. Yes, general principals are well
covered in the books and anyone desiring to learn more about the craft
has a wealth of information from which to learn. But discussions are
different because they are interactive and there may be the
opportunity to hear from someone who has encountered your specific
situation or knows about what you are trying to accomplish.
>
> "What I did to take this picture", or "the hifi equipment I had in the past",
> just isn't likely to stimulate discussion.

Maybe not - but that's the core of this thread isn't it? Why aren't
those topics likely to generate discussion?
>
> Just saying 'brand X' is best, is guaranteed to generate fireworks.

Of course, but why?

-Karl