How do you judge another's credentials?

bzr

bzr

Active member
Joined
Nov 19, 2014
Messages
2,033
There is a "thing" that I noticed quite a while back that I was doing & that was looking at someones signature to judge by the stature of their gear the validity of their comments. I was actually amused at my own fickleness but also realised it is a typical audiophile trait for some. This is the reason I deleted my gear list & stopped trying to solve the forums problems.

What peculiarities do you, or have you noticed?
 
When I look at someone's credentials, I look at them to make sure they are authentic and that they have been validated. Credentials are usually presented with a signed letter by a known and respected audio authority which lends more credence to the credentials. :rolleyes:

Seriously, I don't get hung up on what people have in their systems unless they start posting lots of nonsense about how more expensive systems don't sound better than their system they paid $2k for in 1980 and we are all just a bunch of suckers. I personally don't list my system in a signature line, but I also have been quite open and honest about the components that make up my system in any given point in time and I have posted pictures of my room and gear. I have also posted YouTube videos of my system playing music for whatever that's worth. That way, people who want to judge your opinions by the gear you own judge away. I have nothing to hide.
 
Interesting Mark, as you are probably prone to more flack than most when people realise your affiliation.
 
bzr said:
Interesting Mark, as you are probably prone to more flack than most when people realise your affiliation.
Click to expand...

The thing is, people who read my threads are pretty much up on what gear is in my system. I don't claim anything I don't own and paid for. Stuff under review is stuff under review and I keep that separate from gear I own in terms of listing it in my system. I'm not against listing all my gear in a tag line, I just haven't done it.
 
A sig list is a good thing as it can prompt like discussion. I don't think its necessary to list every last piece of wire or tweak though.
 
How do you judge another's credentials? this will come off as being trite, but they should know their history. at some time or another drank TAS' koolaid, hung on HP's every last word and couldn't wait to get the next issue. has owned or attempted to acquire at least half of the LPs on his super disc list. knows what a blue back is, 6-eye vis-a-vis a 2-eye. can identify from 100 paces which is a Magnepan a sound lab, and an acoustat. owned an amp that weighed at least 100 lbs and (drum roll) still owns a turntable. the last one carries a lot of weight with me.

what's in a signature line? a reflection of a person's sensibilities, an aesthetic in which they like to experience reproduced music. I like the fact that in 2014 we can go out and buy horn speakers and SET amps and still remain true to the 'high-end'. What annoys me? noobs with seemingly endless funds that own a collection of "recommended components" or flavor of the month gear at or near seven figure cost. It's not that they can afford such gear that bothers me, its the pontificating and snide remarks aimed at those that can't or won't spend that kind of scratch (luckily few are this way).
 
bzr said:
There is a "thing" that I noticed quite a while back that I was doing & that was looking at someones signature to judge by the stature of their gear the validity of their comments. I was actually amused at my own fickleness but also realised it is a typical audiophile trait for some. This is the reason I deleted my gear list & stopped trying to solve the forums problems.

What peculiarities do you, or have you noticed?
Click to expand...

If nothing else, listing ones gear in the signature line provides a frame of reference. Tubes, ss, digital, analog, horn, stat, dynamic speaker lover. Different strokes, different folks.

There's also another value that I perceive in this day and age of the net and dissemination of information. Someone reading your post might notice in your signature line a piece of gear they are interested in knowing more about. They can easily PM the person with any pertinent questions.
 
puroagave said:
How do you judge another's credentials? this will come off as being trite, but they should know their history. at some time or another drank TAS' koolaid, hung on HP's every last word and couldn't wait to get the next issue. has owned or attempted to acquire at least half of the LPs on his super disc list. knows what a blue back is, 6-eye vis-a-vis a 2-eye. can identify from 100 paces which is a Magnepan a sound lab, and an acoustat. owned an amp that weighed at least 100 lbs and (drum roll) still owns a turntable. the last one carries a lot of weight with me.

what's in a signature line? a reflection of a person's sensibilities, an aesthetic in which they like to experience reproduced music. I like the fact that in 2014 we can go out and buy horn speakers and SET amps and still remain true to the 'high-end'. What annoys me? noobs with seemingly endless funds that own a collection of "recommended components" or flavor of the month gear at or near seven figure cost. It's not that they can afford such gear that bothers me, its the pontificating and snide remarks aimed at those that can't or won't spend that kind of scratch (luckily few are this way).
Click to expand...

I've been thinking about the HP influence quite a bit since he has passed. I'm 40 and have been into the high end since I have been out of school and have been able to afford it. In other words, in the internet era only. HP has never been a relevant part of my audio world. Ever. I've ebay'd some early TAS and have been amazed at what they packed into those journals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
kev313 said:
I've been thinking about the HP influence quite a bit since he has passed. I'm 40 and have been into the high end since I have been out of school and have been able to afford it. In other words, in the internet era only. HP has never been a relevant part of my audio world. Ever. I've ebay'd some early TAS and have been amazed at what they packed into those journals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You can pick up the original issues of TAS on ePay. The first 20 issues really make for interesting reading and the evolution of high-end audio manufacturing/design as well as audio reviewing. HP was good for many years but you can see when the fire went out of his belly. Just like how struggling artists have that hunger in their stomach; once they make it, they're rarely the same. And one person who hasn't really gotten credit for Harry's success, especially in editing his copy and getting him to write and get pieces in on time, is Sallie Reynolds.

Same goes for finding the early reviews of Stereophile when JGH ran the mag. Prefer Harry though in the end. Never really agreed with JGH's choices though he was a tremendously nice person.
 
Thanks, Myles. I may do that. I've enjoyed the old issues that I've read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You also might be able to find (and read) issues from another old (but obscure) audiophile mag called Ultimate Audio :hey:
 
You know, this wasn't specifically about a signature gear list, it was more my reaction to one & was wondering what other peoples thoughts & fickleness were, from a self mocking view.
 
bzr said:
... ahhh, so you're the one that hasn't got one. :snicker:
Click to expand...
??

I don't recall mocking or even commenting on anyone's gear list (or lack of one). I do find it useful and infomative when it's posted, mostly just for illustrating the variety of systems people have.
 
rbbert said:
??

I don't recall mocking or even commenting on anyone's gear list (or lack of one). I do find it useful and infomative when it's posted, mostly just for illustrating the variety of systems people have.
Click to expand...

i think he meant turntables.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top