attenuated 3db
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2010
- Posts
- 1,348
- Likes
- 19
Quote:
You are correct on both counts, and I regret my previous tone. Ms. Heffernan is a talented and experienced journalist (I used to be one myself; well, I don't know about the "talented" part, but I got a paycheck from a big-city newspaper a few decades ago), who writes an excellent blog. You can read a short bio and see a picture of her about halfway down this page:
http://themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/
One thing I know from my newspaper (as well as advertising agency copywriting days) is that people are frequently handed assignments, with deadlines, and do not have as much time as they might like to self-educate themselves in a certain subject before they have to turn something in to their editors. Certainly preventing hearing loss is something we can all agree with, whether young or old, and the communal, as opposed to solitary, enjoyment of music has its place as a social activity, but her article seemed largely ignorant of the many responsible musical enthusiasts who find state-of-the-art headphones and their associated electronics to be a valuable replacement/alternative to conventional loudspeaker-based systems. For my own part, I can achieve greater musical fidelity at a lower cost using headphones, and it is critical that I don't disturb those around me, even when I am in my own apartment home, which has thin walls.
Anyway, I apparently made a factual error of my own implying that the Apex Pinnacle tube amp from TTVJ and Pete Millet could drive Stax C32 electrostatics. I just wanted Ms. Heffernan, who I am sure enjoys music, to see how thoroughly and faithfully it can be enjoyed via a state-of-the-art headphone system.
That's all. As Eric Burdon and the Animals used to sing, "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good; oh, Lord, please don't let me be misundesrtood."
I don't agree with several of you. A few veiled threats are not going to persuade anyone.
My approach is that Ms. Heffernan is intelligent and educated. ...
You are correct on both counts, and I regret my previous tone. Ms. Heffernan is a talented and experienced journalist (I used to be one myself; well, I don't know about the "talented" part, but I got a paycheck from a big-city newspaper a few decades ago), who writes an excellent blog. You can read a short bio and see a picture of her about halfway down this page:
http://themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/
One thing I know from my newspaper (as well as advertising agency copywriting days) is that people are frequently handed assignments, with deadlines, and do not have as much time as they might like to self-educate themselves in a certain subject before they have to turn something in to their editors. Certainly preventing hearing loss is something we can all agree with, whether young or old, and the communal, as opposed to solitary, enjoyment of music has its place as a social activity, but her article seemed largely ignorant of the many responsible musical enthusiasts who find state-of-the-art headphones and their associated electronics to be a valuable replacement/alternative to conventional loudspeaker-based systems. For my own part, I can achieve greater musical fidelity at a lower cost using headphones, and it is critical that I don't disturb those around me, even when I am in my own apartment home, which has thin walls.
Anyway, I apparently made a factual error of my own implying that the Apex Pinnacle tube amp from TTVJ and Pete Millet could drive Stax C32 electrostatics. I just wanted Ms. Heffernan, who I am sure enjoys music, to see how thoroughly and faithfully it can be enjoyed via a state-of-the-art headphone system.
That's all. As Eric Burdon and the Animals used to sing, "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good; oh, Lord, please don't let me be misundesrtood."