![]() ![]() |
Search of Critic's Corner Enter your search criteria. Click here for tips on using our search |
For Sale Ads |
1: You are right. I just am offended by chips for chumps (11.80)
Posted by Norm on 2006-05-29, 16:39:17 (71.113.240.68)
I don't believe a word of what Kait's web site says, but I know that what I heard in the demonstration was real. I really would like to know what is going on and did have an explanation in private tha .......
2: Has anyone actually tried any of the tweaks? (11.80)
Posted by 4everyoung on 2015-08-24, 11:58:31 (72.133.34.30)
Remember the Chips for Chumps saga? Don't knock it 'til you try it....even if it sounds ridiculous :-) .......
3: It occurred to me after I wrote this... (11.47)
Posted by Jim Austin on 2007-02-08, 14:14:27 (72.73.83.124)
...that I did indeed once criticize ad copy on the pages of Stereophile, or something like that. I think this is a very good example of what you seem to be looking for. Chips for Chumps Cheers, Jim :: .......
4: I'm not trying to change Stereophile (10.88)
Posted by Jim Austin on 2009-08-10, 19:38:29 (67.244.254.73)
>>So despite your efforts with the "Chips for Chumps" article, nothing really changed at Stereophile at all. There should always be a diversity of views. Not everyone agrees with me, after all. I gues .......
5: Here's what you missed (10.88)
Posted by Jim Austin on 2011-02-15, 05:28:51 (74.78.40.200)
Yes, it goes back a ways. The relevance to the current article isn't great, but this will explain what others here are in a state about. Chips for Chumps Jim .......
6: Umm Charles... (10.80)
Posted by Wellfed on 2005-09-18, 09:14:57 (24.116.190.59)
Jim Austin has stated that he did listen for an effect from the GSIC. I am unclear on whether this was done before or after the Chips for Chumps piece. In any event, he did not discern the effect. ::: .......
7: Just trying to understand. (10.71)
Posted by hexenboden on 2006-05-30, 13:20:22 (205.231.151.87)
"There a lot in that Chips for Chumps that I cringe at ... I posed my objections at the time ... but noting to do with the bruised egos of industry prima donnas." What exactly does that mean? "The Aud .......
8: RE: "Chips for Chumps" Redux: (10.57)
Posted by Dave Pogue on 2011-02-14, 16:40:25 (69.138.241.105)
FWIW, a friend and I did test the device (single blind). I won't speak for him but I would definitely pronounce it worthless. We gave it every chance, in a very good system. .......
9: Thank you Rick--and--especially--BJH (10.30)
Posted by Jim Austin on 2006-05-24, 17:55:42 (70.16.65.101)
It's very gratifying to get a measure of support from someone I know disagrees with me on some things, including some of the things i wrote in that "Chips for Chumps" article that got me on Chuck Hans .......
10: You ignore/forget . . . (10.19)
Posted by Beetlemania on 2018-02-07, 13:22:44 (166.2.89.35)
that Hansen both defended *and* criticized Stereophile for many years, not just last year. Go back, for example, at the "Chips for Chumps" episode with Jim Austin. .......
11: RE: I never claimed... (9.77)
Posted by andy_c on 2009-08-10, 19:35:31 (67.176.45.150)
"The piece undermined some of the industry's most deeply held beliefs, and many in the industry didn't appreciate it at all. But as I already wrote, he didn't hesitate to publish it." I agree about .......
12: You've got the wrong guy (9.26)
Posted by andy_c on 2009-07-18, 11:30:13 (67.176.45.150)
Check out this review by Jim . It even uses one of my favorite analogies to audiophilia - "The Princess and the Pea". Here's a quote from it: "But weeks of comparative, level-matched listening throug .......
13: RE: If MQA is the "new world" of audio, I want no part of it - I'd rather dig ditches (8.30)
Posted by Jim Austin on 2017-10-21, 15:01:32 (160.39.32.96)
Did you forget about the "Intelligent Chip"? JA seemed thrilled to publish that, if I correctly recall our interaction. I seem to recall that you, on the other hand, weren't too happy when--long afte .......
14: Science? (8.06)
Posted by John Atkinson on 2006-05-29, 10:21:44 (4.237.92.30)
>"Chips for chimps" is certainly a derogatory and unscientific way of >saying YOU don't accept the science behind the IC... So far, no-one has offered any actual _science_ for the principle of the Ch .......
15: "Chips for Chumps" Redux: (8.03)
Posted by regmac on 2011-02-14, 12:23:29 (205.188.116.16)
Hello Mr. Curl: I have enormous respect for your work and zero interest in rehashing old grievances. But for those who weren't here at the time: IIRC, Jim Austin's chief mistake (as far as you and Ch .......
16: Your anger is misplaced. (7.89)
Posted by bjh on 2006-05-29, 18:13:30 (216.209.33.106)
You should be upset with those that provided the bullshit explanations that even you don't "believe a word of". That's the issue! Is anyone hounding Hansen because he says that wooden blocks under cab .......
17: RE: The real problem (long) (7.12)
Posted by Jim Austin on 2008-06-09, 08:48:33 (64.222.231.68)
In his reply below, Pjay says we should separate "real information from spin." But the "real problem" is that a big chunk of the audiophile community dislikes the idea that claims should be verifiable .......
18: That's exactly right (6.57)
Posted by John Atkinson on 2006-05-31, 17:52:55 (12.46.14.134)
>I could be wrong, and I have no idea of how John Atkinson would state >the case, but personally, I parse the "We" in Stereophile's "As We See >It" in neither the "Royal We" sense, nor as a conformist .......
19: Re: One very weak response (6.36)
Posted by Jim Austin on 2006-05-29, 04:30:06 (70.16.65.66)
>>You seem to think you are the scam police. If you don't see your self as one of the self-righteous missionaries of pseudo science who are going to save poor deluded souls from themselves, you are th .......
20: Re: Yep, it is pointless (6.22)
Posted by theaudiohobby on 2006-06-03, 07:00:21 (81.153.92.55)
"It is fruitless arguing about subjective opinions on the web or anywhere else, and on the web, lightly moderated boards like AA where folks share subjective opinions are simply a beehive of arguments .......
21: Re: not really fair to Stereophile, Andy (5.65)
Posted by andy_c on 2006-04-27, 20:18:52 (24.8.38.237)
Well, I read your post and pretty much agree with just about everything you say, except its title :-). Let me try to clarify my point. When reading TAS, I get the impression that I'm just reading a bu .......
22: I must say ... (5.40)
Posted by bjh on 2006-05-31, 08:09:14 (216.209.33.106)
that in the following you've provided a enormously lucid description of the ethos of the group commonly referred to as the Extreme Objectivist camp, what you call Measurement Fundamentalists and to wh .......
23: Hansen's 'X' - The *real* trouble with Jim Austin (5.19)
Posted by bjh on 2005-09-16, 12:17:43 (216.209.33.106)
Is is reasonable to doubt that Jim Austin is appropriately qualified to almost reflexively recognize the GSIC as sham. I don't think so. Try telling him that action at a distance or some other known b .......
24: I have rarely encountered such fuzzy thinking. (5.12)
Posted by regmac on 2011-09-14, 09:55:38 (64.12.116.16)
"I have never heard...two CD players that sound exactly the same." And based on that, you conclude that all the CDPs in question "sound different," even though you haven't compared and evaluated all .......
25: Re: Austin, you are truly a weasel (5.08)
Posted by Charles Hansen on 2006-05-24, 12:57:08 (204.144.130.66)
> (Uh, is this one of those "When did you stop beating your wife?" questions? Because I don't think it's accurate to say that I hate Austin, simply because I publicly challenge his public statements. .......
26: Re: I'm sure this will be hard for you to understand (4.61)
Posted by May Belt on 2006-06-04, 02:40:24 (80.177.28.171)
Because I want to reply to so many people simultaneously I will try the one reply. I agree both with Charles Hansen and unclestu52. This is also a reply to both 'bjh' and John Curl because both replie .......
Found total of 26 records, Query: chips +chumps in Critic's Corner, Time: 0 sec.