Active VS passive – specific questions

[relocated]

"I shall take your advice under consideration and hope sincerel that will share it with all forum moderators you come into contact with. I'd also ask for contributions from anybody who can show examples of where debate has been stifled on this site recently..."

John,

I have not come across any other moderators. But if I do and they are as unbalanced as I find you to be, at times, then you can rest assured that I shall not shrink away from my keyboard.

You are unlikely to get examples of stifled debate because of the reasons why that debate may have been stifled in the first place. There are contributors on here who reveal, in other places, that they fear blocking by you if they push their point against you too hard. Some have even claimed specific warnings to that effect.

The power, real or presummed, to block people from future participation in this forum is a real inhibitor to many people and a power that should not be misused. However unintentionally.

 

[BenLaw]

Better or worse, I'd expect you could tell the difference, so an ABX test would be pointless....

(Re Max's last post)

 

[John Duncan]

"I shall take your advice under consideration and hope sincerel that will share it with all forum moderators you come into contact with. I'd also ask for contributions from anybody who can show examples of where debate has been stifled on this site recently..."

John,

I have not come across any other moderators. But if I do and they are as unbalanced as I find you to be, at times, then you can rest assured that I shall not shrink away from my keyboard.

You are unlikely to get examples of stifled debate because of the reasons why that debate may have been stifled in the first place. There are contributors on here who reveal, in other places, that they fear blocking by you if they push their point against you too hard. Some have even claimed specific warnings to that effect.

The power, real or presummed, to block people from future participation in this forum is a real inhibitor to many people and a power that should not be misused. However unintentionally.

You've got mail.

 

[Andy Clough]

Let's cool it guys. I think this one is in danger of running its course.

 

[Frank Harvey]

And available to buy at Frank Harvey HiFi??????????????????????????[and other retailers too, just for balance].

Maybe, maybe not - it's all subjective, isn't it?

 

[BenLaw]

Let's cool it guys. I think this one is in danger of running its course.

And at least relocated can now say he's 'come across another moderator'

 

[Anonymous]

Yesterday a friend and i were driving to the beach when i spotted a pretty lady, i said look at the bum on that she looked great from behind to which he replied: My ex girlfriend looks much better from behind. I said in your opinion! He said no, she looks better.

Whatever, i said, as i drove along, thinking how can he not know that better is subjective? And wondering how i could setup an ABX test

Don't you mean an A-B-ex [girlfriend] test ?!

 

[steve_1979]

Yesterday a friend and i were driving to the beach when i spotted a pretty lady, i said look at the bum on that she looked great from behind to which he replied: My ex girlfriend looks much better from behind. I said in your opinion! He said no, she looks better.

Whatever, i said, as i drove along, thinking how can he not know that better is subjective? And wondering how i could setup an ABX test

All in the name of science of course...

 

[BenLaw]

Yesterday a friend and i were driving to the beach when i spotted a pretty lady, i said look at the bum on that she looked great from behind to which he replied: My ex girlfriend looks much better from behind. I said in your opinion! He said no, she looks better.

Whatever, i said, as i drove along, thinking how can he not know that better is subjective? And wondering how i could setup an ABX test

Don't you mean an A-B-ex [girlfriend] test ?!

Groan!

 

[Bialykot]

IMHO, I think that actives at a certain price point provide better value than an equivalent passive system. I have replaced a fairly high-end Meridian and B&W Nautilus separates system with some ADM9s and the quality is at least as good at a fraction of the retail price. Just my opinion, of course, but both systems sounded excellent to my ears. It's just that the actives are so much more affordable.

My sister had £500 to replace her old amp and speakers and settled for some Mackie (8" driver) active speakers from a pro-audio shop, along with speaker stands and had change to spare. She is simply gobsmacked at how great they sound for the price and admits she would have had to spend significantly more for a passive set up.

 

[The_Lhc]

"I shall take your advice under consideration and hope sincerel that will share it with all forum moderators you come into contact with. I'd also ask for contributions from anybody who can show examples of where debate has been stifled on this site recently..."

John,

I have not come across any other moderators. But if I do and they are as unbalanced as I find you to be, at times, then you can rest assured that I shall not shrink away from my keyboard.

You are unlikely to get examples of stifled debate because of the reasons why that debate may have been stifled in the first place. There are contributors on here who reveal, in other places, that they fear blocking by you if they push their point against you too hard. Some have even claimed specific warnings to that effect.

The power, real or presummed, to block people from future participation in this forum is a real inhibitor to many people and a power that should not be misused. However unintentionally.

Have to say I think you're getting your moderators mixed up, I've never seen JD lock a thread because someone was arguing with him, I've seen threads locked because forum members were arguing with each other, although even that recently has become a rare occurance, the only one I can think of off the top of my head wasn't locked by JD either.

That being the case, there's no reason for people to feel "inhibited" if they hold an opinion that's counter to what a moderator may hold (and the mods are as entitled to their opinions as anyone else), the only reason you'll get blocked is if you break a House Rule (and seemingly not even then these days, grumble grumble) and everyone agrees to those (and reads them, of course) when they sign up. They're pretty clear, so if people can't stick to them that's their problem and I speak as someone who's been banned on more than one occasion myself, sometimes for good reason, sometimes not (a misunderstanding around a Beavis and Butthead quote once!).

Either way I don't recognise your description or the alleged descriptions from nameless others of JD as being accurate, although I do recognise a number of people who spend a lot of time in "other places" slagging WHF off at every available opportunity and then come back here and pretend everything's fine and dandy. That, frankly, boggles my mind, I wouldn't have the bare-faced cheek to be that hypocritical. And I can be very hypocritical when I feel like it...

Incidentally the bold type is somewhat over dramatic, imo.

 

[BenLaw]

"I shall take your advice under consideration and hope sincerel that will share it with all forum moderators you come into contact with. I'd also ask for contributions from anybody who can show examples of where debate has been stifled on this site recently..."

John,

I have not come across any other moderators. But if I do and they are as unbalanced as I find you to be, at times, then you can rest assured that I shall not shrink away from my keyboard.

You are unlikely to get examples of stifled debate because of the reasons why that debate may have been stifled in the first place. There are contributors on here who reveal, in other places, that they fear blocking by you if they push their point against you too hard. Some have even claimed specific warnings to that effect.

The power, real or presummed, to block people from future participation in this forum is a real inhibitor to many people and a power that should not be misused. However unintentionally.

I've never seen JD lock a thread because someone was arguing with him

Well, there was one a few weeks back, although I expect JD's take on it would be different.... Anyway, I'm on JD's side with this one and agree with most of your post. I can see why people may have felt inhibited (or at least frustrated) in the past, but the change in policy over the last month or so should have minimised that IMO.

 

[professorhat]

I do recognise a number of people who spend a lot of time in "other places" slagging WHF off at every available opportunity and then come back here and pretend everything's fine and dandy. That, frankly, boggles my mind, I wouldn't have the bare-faced cheek to be that hypocritical. And I can be very hypocritical when I feel like it...

It boggles my mind how people find the time to frequent so many forums - I don't even have time to keep up with this one...

 

[John Duncan]

Well, there was one a few weeks back, although I expect JD's take on it would be different.... Anyway, I'm on JD's side with this one and agree with most of your post. I can see why people may have felt inhibited (or at least frustrated) in the past, but the change in policy over the last month or so should have minimised that IMO.

Correct, I did lock one that was getting out of hand anyway, and the last straw for me was someone questioning whether I had a conflict of interest, which I thought was a bit unfair.

You'll notice I didn't ban them though

 

[relocated]

John,

I don't understand the "you've got mail" comment of yours at post at page 6 #2. can you enlighten me? Sorry I have to ask on an open forum but I know of no other way to ask you this.

 

[Andy Clough]

It means John has sent you an email.

 

[moon]

John,

I don't understand the "you've got mail" comment of yours at post at page 6 #2. can you enlighten me? Sorry I have to ask on an open forum but I know of no other way to ask you this.

Maybe you have an email

 

[John Duncan]

It means John has sent you an email.

To the email address you registered with...

 

[BenLaw]

Well, there was one a few weeks back, although I expect JD's take on it would be different.... Anyway, I'm on JD's side with this one and agree with most of your post. I can see why people may have felt inhibited (or at least frustrated) in the past, but the change in policy over the last month or so should have minimised that IMO.

Correct, I did lock one that was getting out of hand anyway, and the last straw for me was someone questioning whether I had a conflict of interest, which I thought was a bit unfair.

You'll notice I didn't ban them though

That someone must be an annoying little EDITED

 

[John Duncan]

That someone must be an annoying little EDITED

Complete arse.

 

[Lee H]

It means John has sent you an email.

To the email address you registered with...

Or you in some way remind him of either Tom Hanks or Meg Ryan?

Maybe it's a hitherto unkown form of AOL based tourettes?

 

[The_Lhc]

I do recognise a number of people who spend a lot of time in "other places" slagging WHF off at every available opportunity and then come back here and pretend everything's fine and dandy. That, frankly, boggles my mind, I wouldn't have the bare-faced cheek to be that hypocritical. And I can be very hypocritical when I feel like it...

It boggles my mind how people find the time to frequent so many forums - I don't even have time to keep up with this one...

That's why I don't bother with "the other place", it's just a massive sprawling mess of sub-forums, I wouldn't know where to begin and I can't be **sed with it, frankly and that's allowing for the fact that I spend most of my working day on the net!

 

[relocated]

It means John has sent you an email.

Thanks I will go have a look.

 

[Clare Newsome]

Well i'm a forum mod who uses active and passive speakers on a daily basis. And has bought a pair of AVIs previously: very good they were, too - as you'd expect from a WHF five-star product

Every product - regardless of brand or design - has to be judged on its individual merits and how they suit your system/music/taste.

[Cuts and pastes above sentence to clipboard for re-use in 101 other fractious threads]

 

[John Duncan]

That's why I don't bother with "the other place", it's just a massive sprawling mess of sub-forums, I wouldn't know where to begin and I can't be **sed with it, frankly and that's allowing for the fact that I spend most of my working day on the net!

Are we talking about the same other place?