|
Posted by Manitou on
11-08-2007
|
|
Hello!
Anything imagined, IS real.
Any questions?
Christopher.
|
|
|
|
Posted by N-set on
11-10-2007
|
|
i imagine you are right
|
|
|
|
Posted by paul williams on
11-10-2007
|
 Manitou wrote: | |
Hello!
Anything imagined, IS real.
Any questions?
Christopher. |
|
But I perceive that would only be true for you.
|
|
|
|
Posted by Manitou on
11-10-2007
|
Hello,
It is true that we 'create our own realities' within bounds, therefore being individual (in one/some sense). However, more Universally, there is nothing we can do/think/feel/imagine etc. which is not some 'subset' of all the Universal possibilities. Therefore, nothing is individual, if you believe it.
This may seem convoluted, basic or somesuch, but it absolutely relates to the main subject of this site.
All the best
C
|
|
|
|
Posted by Manitou on
11-10-2007
|
Hello,
You're right!!! (Obviously)
I have a slowly-building-theme which absolutely relates absolutely to the main reason for this site. I hope you stay interested. I imagine some significance will become apparent, given time.
I'm right I imagine.
C
|
|
|
|
Posted by paul williams on
11-11-2007
|
| Manitou wrote: | | Hello,
You're right!!! (Obviously)
I have a slowly-building-theme which absolutely relates absolutely to the main reason for this site. I hope you stay interested. I imagine some significance will become apparent, given time.
I'm right I imagine.
C |
|
Personally I feel it is in essence a distraction away from the majority of subjects within this site as there can be no viable consensus, except in the context of limited and oblique view points. These kinds of topics would perhaps be better discussed in one of the many online Philosophy Forums. However, if you do a search for either philosophical discussions in Audio Forums, or audio discussions in Philosophy Forums it will become quite clear that there is minimal interest. I ‘imagine’ vicarious outpourings revolving around id; ego and subconscious pleasure related to audio reproduction would elevate cable debates (usually the most boring & pointless type) to a high(er) level of regard. Of course you could ‘spice’ up you’re the thread by bringing in the ever present issues of instinct and the overall role played by our inherited fixed patterns of response as opposed to trans-intellectual intuition based on cognitive awareness.
Perhaps your personal direction of travel can be deduced from your login ID “Manitou” which in some Native American tribes is thought to mean the balance or connectivity of all things – then again perhaps not?
Whilst I’m not a prolific poster on this (or any other forum for that matter) I do enjoy following threads and the diversity of various discussions, but, I suspect this thread will be rather ‘slow’.
Perhaps Romy could create an area for circular debates destined to never be resolved.
|
|
|
|
Posted by Manitou on
11-11-2007
|
Okay,
First, thank you for responding so fully or roundly(?) to my reply.
Second, I apologise for any annoyance caused by my missive(s). I had my doubts at the time, and was a little fluey to boot. Not an excuse.
Third, the guarded apology bit. The 'Manitou' ID is correctly assumed to be tied to the Beliefs of most indiginous people, re: interconnectedness of all things (a future of Physics(etc)?) exploring our perception-vs-or, in relation to-'Reality' and arriving at potent, yet malleable conclusions (a future of Philosophy(etc)?). I've used 'Manitou' to attempt to describe a state of the art. I've been using it for years. My original company was and may again be called Manitou Audio. I intend to introduce something interesting soon.
Anyhow, being neither a Philosopher nor a Physicist (and certainly not a "New-Age-ist", whatever that is) but a sound/music lover, equipment designer and builder, I employ the aforementioned and other disciplines. To ignore anything possible in the persuit of sound/music transduction (from original sound source-to-ear and everything in-between) would, I think, be stupid. I feel that the more colours (probably metaphorically?) one has in one's palette (in the persuit of ANY given aim) the more realistically one can 'paint'. If one is serious, that is.
I imagine these things relate directly to the notion of this site. I don't do threads, I barely relate to the notion. I joined and contributed to this because I was interested in the apparent commitment of its creator to persue ultimate transduction, regardless of the trials, tribulations and hypemongers. I like the palette he seems to employ and his overall attitude to the art. I respect his enthusiasm.
I know what you mean about the thread (whatever that may be, kidding) being slow and about 'spicing-up' my(?) thread by introducing some notions of psycho-acoustics and the likes. Olson and others have pretty much covered the fundamentals though. The human-animal bit? Hmmm... I dunno.
I like something progressive, perhaps more joined-up, new even.
Elevating any element of the process of transduction above another is difficult to justify, although I have individually experimented with mercury/other cabling (interesting, but (mercury) truly awful overall) huge, battery-only supplies (not great) electrostatic and optically-based record pick-ups (varied) all manner of drive unit design (electrostatic/ribbon/plasma/integrated hybrids/etc........)(allsorts) and many other ideas. These experiments have substantially improved my knowledge and therefore I'm glad I spent so much time and effort trying them out. Eventually they seemed to lead to something more centered in terms of overall design which I value and am actively persuing now.
Finally, I don't think 'Romy' needs to do anything. This may already be an area of never to be resolved, circular debates. It may not. I don't know which of these possibilities has more value. Perhaps the enthusiasm of the debate itself is what does it for me!
...Venn diagrams...
Anyhow, thanks for your reply,
Christopher Jorna
P.S. Why Brimar???
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
11-11-2007
|
| Manitou wrote: | | I imagine these things relate directly to the notion of this site. |
|
Manitou, over the years the feeling that Perception is Reality has been a strictly dominating force of my awareness. I was a little surprise to see your invitation to debate it at this site, as I would like to keep it related to advance Sound reproducing techniques… or to the perception of the sound reproducing techniques. Still, it would be interesting to learn how your see “these things relate directly to the notion of this site”.
Regarding the subject itself I do not know if anything else could be said. I am at my 40 and these subjects were "in play" in my life (and I am sure in the life of many others) in our 15s-20s… I hardly anything has changed since then, and it is hardly anything changed since the second part of 19 century and the rise of German Subjective Idealism. I spent a LOT of time on the subject in my teens and I do not feel needs to revise anything in there…
Rgs, Romy the Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by Manitou on
11-12-2007
|
Hello Romy,
Thanks for your reply. I'm also of your age and I do agree that these other 'esoteric' subjects first rose up strongly when I was in my teens. However, since then I've realised those things have real value in terms of imagining, designing, testing, listening and ultimately judging the abilities of 'audio systems'.
I, like you have heard a lot of crap sound from a rainbow of equipment over the years. The people 'involved' in the selling of this inadequate equipment, seemed shamelessly unaware of their part in a spreading gulf between Perception being Reality, their trade being salesmanship, not sound transduction. I have been in the company of many so-called experts related to reproducing the audio arts and so-called enthusiasts, eventually wondering whether they liked music at all. Or understood it!
I strongly suspect that you are doing what you're doing for the 'right' reasons, I like your style and enthusiasm. I appreciated your section on the types of listening you do, especially the more trancendental/inspired "mode"(?).
Actually, I hope you read my whole message as I think it may answer some of your main questions?
I hope I make some sense, if not, I'll try to clarify what I mean...
All the best,
Christopher.
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
11-12-2007
|
The fact that Perception is Reality explains everything but provides answers to nothing. Actually it proves some applied answers but only in context of very specific and very narrow applications. However, in team of audio, I really care more about Reality of Perception then about Perception of Reality. Still, the “right reasons” of mine (as you put it) is all together very different subject and I not fully agree with your view as I know that the relevance of reasons is not a venture itself.
Rgs, Romy the Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by slwisier on
11-12-2007
|
|
and the anti-view of the concept that there is a truth that can be known. "Perception is reality" is a denial of any truth. So everyone has their own valid reality even someone like the person in the "Brilliant Mind" movie for example has a reality that is as valid as anyone else. This is what the concept of "perception is reality" means.
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
11-12-2007
|
Realty or Truth could not be understood or “processed” as is by a man. Realty can be only understood as a reflection through a prism of a person's mind – or the through the prism of perception. Truth can't realy be known, it could be just embraced or agreed upon… It is not to mention that the True Realty is infinitely-random concept that is biologically alien to human awareness…
Rgs, the caT
|
|
|
|
Posted by paul williams on
11-12-2007
|
| Manitou wrote: |
Second, I apologise for any annoyance caused by my missive(s). I had my doubts at the time, and was a little fluey to boot. Not an excuse.
Christopher Jorna
P.S. Why Brimar???
|
|
No need to apologise, especially as no annoyance was cause, indeed, perhaps I should apologise as my responses were calculated to illicit further more detailed thoughts rather than the initial one liners :¬)
As to why Brimar, its to do with that specific tube & my enthusiasm for it. Which in turn allows certain people on other forums to know who I am.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Posted by Paul S on
11-12-2007
|
I want to believe or live as though we already +/- settled with/about Hegel, Adorno and/or Benjamin with respect to aesthetics (if not perception vs Reality), but even if we didn't I still want to know how in the Hell you transmute this arcana into [Manitou] audio [products].
I admit that I am very much smitten with any number of smart audio aphorisms and also lots of the things that a few of the really bright guys in audio say; however I have to say myself that so far a good working rap has been no certain predictor of a good working audio product.
Good luck; I'm rooting for you.
Best regards,
Paul S
|
|
|
|
Posted by Manitou on
11-13-2007
|
|
Hello Paul,
Thank you for your message and your positivity! I was beginning to think that a certain sort of negativity ruled in the land of quality audio reproduction. Actually, I've always been aware of this problem (especially and generally in Britain) but I refuse to be limited by pessimism and/or people wishing to maintain a sense of 'elitism', justifiably or not.
I relate to what you say about some aspects of arcane European aesthetic thinking. I suppose that for me, some depth of understanding about things in general and audio equipment design more specifically, comes from the study and appreciation of aspects of Feynman, Olson, Wittgenstein and others in Western, modern thinking. However, what really does it for me on a day to day, inspirational, problem-solving and design basis, McKenna, Lodge, Confuscius and even Casteneda (and others of whatever ilk they are) figure more livelily. Blending the ideas of the first lot using the ideas of the second lot is what I try to do. I guess that could be the transmutation you were asking about. I hope this doesn't come across as 'flakey', I do take my work very seriously. I test the results of my ideas by loads of listening, testing and time. I am not an aphorism-monger, nor am I a person who lusts after 'the spoils of business'. I guess that's why I'm not generally known, depite being focussed on the task of at least measurably excellent, if not inspirational audio reproduction for ages (ever since I heard a first really exciting system in California at around 1980). I do this mainly for me, but I love it when other people like what I do too.
So, despite all the previous stuff sounding potentially/distinctly aphoristic(?!), I've tried to write a response to your message-honestly. You are absolutely right that cynical marketing DOES shift a load of crud. I personally believe that some stuff should not be allowed to be made! It tends to end up in landfills or incinerators or 'storage' eventually. It uses time, energy and materials sloppily. It's an insult to...ummm...stuff and things...!
O.K., apologies for the rant! I hope any of this means anything to anyone and look forward to further discussions about anything (especially audio-related!!!!!!)
Paul, thank you again for your message-as you may be feeling, it was much appreciated.
Christopherocious(?)
|
|