Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Audio News
Topic: Atkinson vs. Tektronix: first audio case in US Supreme Court

Page 1 of 1 (2 items)

Posted by Romy the Cat on 09-15-2005

cialis generikum

cialis 5 mg

Next week the United States Supreme Court begin it’s hearings of the extraordinary case Atkinson vs. Tektronix that might pave a new direction in audio awareness. Tektronix took legal action against Mr. Atkinson last year after John Atkinson (The Editor in Chief the Stereophile magazine) announced that he willing to merry his oscilloscope.

Mr. Atkinson’s attorney told us: “We carefully read US laws and we did not see any prohibitions of matrimony between the deaf or senseless AES members and a pile of electronic components secluded into a metal enclosure. Mr. Atkinson has mature and long lasting relationship with his oscilloscope. For years Mr. Atkinson used oscilloscope in into order to assess now the rectangular horns sound. Mr. Atkinson invented his “Stickability Concept” when he inserted his rectangular Tektronix into the rectangular mouths of the horns and then by measuring the sound-inflicted noise on the electron beam tubes he was pontificated about the sounds qulety of the horns. Eventually, John Atkinson’s connection with oscilloscope went deeper and now Mr. Atkinson can not imagine to live without his life-long partner”

The Audio Engineering Society, the IEEE and the countless disabled to hear and recognize music audio-professionals around the world are eagerly awaiting the outcome of Atkinson vs. Tektronix case as they feel that it might take the audio “accepted wisdom” at the very new, unseen before level.

Posted by Romy the Cat on 04-09-2012

I do not blame John Atkinson specifically. He is not better or worse than any other his idiot-colleges. Take a look the level of the moronity this time John Atkinson allows himself to fell. In his “review” of Lamm M2.1:

…John the Reviewer writes the following:

“Back home, it was apparent that I needed to apply a small amount of midbass boost to the WAV files to compensate for these mikes' farfield rolloff below 150Hz or so. When I used the Lamms set to "8–16" and judged by ear the amount of EQ needed, using Pure Music's Audio Plug-Ins function and the Bias SuperFreq-4 VST equalizer, there wasn't quite enough boost when I reset the Lamms' bias to "1–6." I'm not talking about much boost—a shelf of a few dB below 125Hz—but the point is that my judgment of how much boost was just enough depended on the M1.2's bias setting. “

Honestly, if the imbecile work for me and bring to me something like this than it would be the reason for instant disqualification. The idiot sat to “review” some kind of amplifier, drives it with a signal from his DAW and fucks everything up with digital EQ and file reader’s Plug-In! Why the retard plugs the Reverb Plug-In or Stereo Enhancer Plug-In and then writes about the “wonderful space” from M1.2?

I do not care that Mr. Atkinson is deaf do not hear how those Plug-Ins destroys absolutely everything – his deafness,  listening ignorance and gross incompetence is well know. My primary rage is that the idiot openly informs that he perform huge EQ of his playback and then try to express some “reviewing” point of views. This is preposterous!

The Cat

Page 1 of 1 (2 items)