Redcarmoose
Headphoneus Supremus
I agree that a single word has multiple meanings. Though I’m not sure that every dictionary will have exactly the same words? It’s normal, then take the esoteric audio world, and it gets worse. To tell you the truth I think it’s fine as long as the lion’s share gets it right? Meaning if 90% is understood then that’s fine. But your right it would be cool if someone started a thread with definitions. I don’t know how many glossary lists there are for our use?
I’m not offended at all, I’m just saying if you have difficulty relating to my list there may be others?
Edit:
A list of terminology is always going to be somewhat amorphous, and a work in progress; always evolving. There is no static list. Also many words are going to be new and maybe only used by the individual, regardless of being placed in a list. Is that bad? I think writing is about communication, so if a new word helps get the point across then it’s good. There will always be wild different words to describe audio at a place that the author feels is suitable? That’s the art part, where maybe what we write about is an art and a science?
Edit X 2:
There very well could be “shady ones” on my list. Even degrees of shade from some only slightly shady to full on words that would maybe not be very useful when they should be! Lol.
Maybe there are better lists for us to work with? Still 90% of it is good.
Edit X 3:
Every review I’ve read has an “off” section of wording where you can tell that the writer has wandered off course. That is OK as it seems that is the only way they know how to get their point across in a good way. Obviously some more than others. Adding the few off words is maybe what “creative writing is about? But maybe those words don’t get put in a glossary? Should they?
Edit X 4:
I have witnessed many new words get used on a regular basis. This is due to the perceived efficiency of the new word. It’s trendy as the human language is.
I’m not offended at all, I’m just saying if you have difficulty relating to my list there may be others?
Edit:
A list of terminology is always going to be somewhat amorphous, and a work in progress; always evolving. There is no static list. Also many words are going to be new and maybe only used by the individual, regardless of being placed in a list. Is that bad? I think writing is about communication, so if a new word helps get the point across then it’s good. There will always be wild different words to describe audio at a place that the author feels is suitable? That’s the art part, where maybe what we write about is an art and a science?
Edit X 2:
There very well could be “shady ones” on my list. Even degrees of shade from some only slightly shady to full on words that would maybe not be very useful when they should be! Lol.
Maybe there are better lists for us to work with? Still 90% of it is good.
Edit X 3:
Every review I’ve read has an “off” section of wording where you can tell that the writer has wandered off course. That is OK as it seems that is the only way they know how to get their point across in a good way. Obviously some more than others. Adding the few off words is maybe what “creative writing is about? But maybe those words don’t get put in a glossary? Should they?
Edit X 4:
I have witnessed many new words get used on a regular basis. This is due to the perceived efficiency of the new word. It’s trendy as the human language is.
Last edited: