436 posts / 0 new
Last post
fr0g's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 07/01/2008 - 18:38
Posts: 2936
RE: more 'snake oil'

group hug anyone?

Anonymous
Anonymous's picture
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

Covenanter wrote:

Andrew Everard wrote:

WinterRacer wrote:
Perhaps the magazine you refer to should add something like this to each review: "Note, although we've written this CD player presents voices brilliantly, revealing every subtlety and small inflection.

Anyone on WHFSV who wrote a sentence that bad, hanging and with no resolution whatsoever, would be given a stern talking-to by our leather-clad (well, occasionally), Stasi-like production desk team. And get a stern tutting from me.

I guess they wouldn't criticise somebody who starts sentences with a conjunction or uses words which don't exist in the English language?  ROFL

Chris

PS An "ad hominem" argument is one which attack the opponent rather than the opponent's argument, generally because of an inability to counter the argument.

That's interesting to know. Thanks.
CnoEvil's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 2 min ago
Joined: 21/08/2009 - 18:01
Posts: 12067
RE: more 'snake oil'

fr0g wrote:

group hug anyone?

Count me in, but be warned....I've got "Man Flu"! Sad

"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we should let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines."  Nelson Pass

proffski's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: 11/12/2008 - 18:44
Posts: 402
RE: more 'snake oil'

RobinKidderminster wrote:

Covenanter wrote:

pgoody wrote:

http://www.lessloss.com/blackbody-p-200.html

 

:wall:

I nearly had a heart attack laughing.

Chris

 

Brilliant read ! :cheer:

 

So did I, but would it add to their credibility if suddenly they started to spend a lot of money in advertising in Hi-Fi magazines and getting 5 star reviews?

the record spot's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 13/10/2007 - 14:36
Posts: 9252
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

Dynamight wrote:

Covenanter wrote:

Andrew Everard wrote:

WinterRacer wrote:
Perhaps the magazine you refer to should add something like this to each review: "Note, although we've written this CD player presents voices brilliantly, revealing every subtlety and small inflection.

Anyone on WHFSV who wrote a sentence that bad, hanging and with no resolution whatsoever, would be given a stern talking-to by our leather-clad (well, occasionally), Stasi-like production desk team. And get a stern tutting from me.

I guess they wouldn't criticise somebody who starts sentences with a conjunction or uses words which don't exist in the English language?  ROFL

Chris

PS An "ad hominem" argument is one which attack the opponent rather than the opponent's argument, generally because of an inability to counter the argument.

That's interesting to know. Thanks.

No prizes for guessing where this is going to go then folks....

omnibeard's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 1 week ago
Joined: 07/12/2010 - 13:44
Posts: 477
RE: more 'snake oil'

fr0g wrote:

group hug anyone?

I thought you'd never ask.

Paul.'s picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
Joined: 26/11/2010 - 21:44
Posts: 2954
RE: more 'snake oil'

Covenanter wrote:

Paul's opinion is his and he's allowed to have it.  I don't think many would agree with him.  the 50mm 1.4 is a much better lens.

Chris

 

Huh?  Did you even read what I wrote?  Much better than what?  I didn't compare it to anything for starters.

 

Paul Hobbs wrote:

I think in Photography there is a lot more balancing of compromise than in Hifi, because the measures are much more tangible.  You know that with your 50mm 1.4, if you shoot wide open its going to be a bit soft and dark in the corners, but that is ok as the super soft DoF pays off the compromise. 

 

This is all I said about the 1.4.  Which I have owned, twice, and love.  

 

To back up my point,  Here is a chart with vignetting for the 50mm f1.4,  2.7 stops at f1.4.  That is a lot darker in the corners.

Here is an MTF chart showing lack of resolution in the corners wide open:

Very poor in the corners.    (all charts from here:  http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/564-canon50f14ff?start=1)

 

But the point I was making, is that this is the compromise you pay for the lovely DoF.  Its a price I have paid willingly.  Even though it tests so badly, it takes lovely images like this:

steve_1979's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 14/07/2010 - 21:04
Posts: 3791
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

Paul Hobbs wrote:
But the point I was making, is that this is the compromise you pay for the lovely DoF.  Its a price I have paid willingly.  Even though it tests so badly, it takes lovely images like this:

I've just had a look at your Flickr page and you've taken some fantastic photos. Great stuff! :clap:

char_lotte's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 27/02/2012 - 17:13
Posts: 316
RE: more 'snake oil'

Can we keep the lolz coming please?

My top lol so far is a poster explaining to an accomplished journo , who I presume is well versed in teh internet, what ad hom means.

Its a lolocaust.

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 32 min ago
Joined: 08/01/2008 - 17:25
Posts: 22993
RE: more 'snake oil'

...whilst using a number of ad hominem arguments against journalists in a 'they would say that wouldn't they' sort of way. Yes, I liked that one.

I am stealing 'lolocaust' for future use.

The_Lhc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 8 min ago
Joined: 16/10/2008 - 13:23
Posts: 12873
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

steve_1979 wrote:
Paul Hobbs wrote:

I've just had a look at your Flickr page and you've taken some fantastic photos.

You'd kind of hope so really...

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 32 min ago
Joined: 08/01/2008 - 17:25
Posts: 22993
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

The_Lhc wrote:

steve_1979 wrote:
Paul Hobbs wrote:

I've just had a look at your Flickr page and you've taken some fantastic photos.

You'd kind of hope so really...

Oh I dunno - after all, just because somebody's been doing something for a living for a long time...

bigboss's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 37 min ago
Joined: 25/03/2009 - 21:40
Posts: 12694
RE: more 'snake oil'

I think people are missing the point here. There's a reason why What Hi-Fi is the largest selling magazine in its class, no mean feat in an environment where some have shut shop. Why will it change the winning formula? Remember what happened to coke when they tried to change their formula?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke

As they say....don't teach daddy how to f***!  Smile

Covenanter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 20/07/2012 - 10:16
Posts: 1225
RE: more 'snake oil'

Paul Hobbs wrote:

Covenanter wrote:

Paul's opinion is his and he's allowed to have it.  I don't think many would agree with him.  the 50mm 1.4 is a much better lens.

Chris

 

Huh?  Did you even read what I wrote?  Much better than what?  I didn't compare it to anything for starters.

 

Paul Hobbs wrote:

I think in Photography there is a lot more balancing of compromise than in Hifi, because the measures are much more tangible.  You know that with your 50mm 1.4, if you shoot wide open its going to be a bit soft and dark in the corners, but that is ok as the super soft DoF pays off the compromise. 

 

This is all I said about the 1.4.  Which I have owned, twice, and love.  

 

To back up my point,  Here is a chart with vignetting for the 50mm f1.4,  2.7 stops at f1.4.  That is a lot darker in the corners.

Here is an MTF chart showing lack of resolution in the corners wide open:

Very poor in the corners.    (all charts from here:  http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/564-canon50f14ff?start=1)

 

But the point I was making, is that this is the compromise you pay for the lovely DoF.  Its a price I have paid willingly.  Even though it tests so badly, it takes lovely images like this:

Paul

I bow to your greater knowledge and expertise.

Chris

Marantz PM8005 / SA8005 / KEF R700s / AKG K702

Covenanter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 20/07/2012 - 10:16
Posts: 1225
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

John Duncan wrote:
...whilst using a number of ad hominem arguments against journalists in a 'they would say that wouldn't they' sort of way. Yes, I liked that one. I am stealing 'lolocaust' for future use.

Actually I don't think I did.  The point was about the credibility of WHiFi "experts" to judge equipment and I don't think I said they were bad people or dishonest or indeed anything like that.  I did question Andrew's assertion that because they do a lot of it that makes them good at it, which is palpably not a sensible argument.  I did put in a throwaway line about journalists but that surely isn't a pejorative term, although it obviously touched a nerve.  You'd have thought I called them bankers (or whoever the current hate figures are).  Smile

The more I think about it the stronger is the analogy with "Top Gear".  There is obviously a market for subjective reviews of things and WHiFi seems to be filling that niche.  I guess that's fine but I remain concerned that some people might be spending large amounts of money on items which don't actually do anything on the basis of purely subjective opinions.  Caveat emptor maybe?

Chris

Marantz PM8005 / SA8005 / KEF R700s / AKG K702

Pages

Log in or register to post comments