|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
220.175.84.214
Gen. Board,Truly puzzled by this and I guess I'm not the first to notice it. Nationwide in America, the British (or maybe I should say "English") are a small percentage - no figures at my fingertips to support this supposition, just never met one in America. Maybe the British/English audio reviewers can weigh in, here regarding their transatlantic choice of career work . .
Guy.
Follow Ups:
...
So I wouldn't say English are small percentage. By the way we are talking and typing English right now.So you might say I don't understand the question?
Are you saying they are British citizens living in American? If they became American citizens or were born here they are now Americans.
...
Besides relatives English people are everywhere. My mother has multiple blood lines so I am only part English. Most business people I know are either English or Jewish.
I'm surprised you know any in the general population (business people). I stand corrected.
Jes' funnin', y'all.
I notice that the original post is by someone identified as "Guy." I believe this is actually Guy Fawkes, risen from the grave, and intent on creating mayhem.
of people in the UK that think that Guy Fawkes had the right idea ! And anyway, why do the british celebrate Guy Fawkes night ? Are they celebrating the success of the authorities or lamenting the failiure of his plot? I think we should be told!
Wonder how you came to this conclusion.I was thinking there werent enough British reviewers in US.I would have liked to read David Praekel reviewing a Spendor, or James Hughes writing on the latest Rega turntable.I think only John Atkinson has come over for good.There may be lesser known writers but 'disproportionate'? No way.
Hi-I first don't buy into your premise. Other than John Atkinson, I can't think of any British-born, US-based audio reviewers.
From memory let me try to put together a list of on dead trees writers, ranked by my educated guess as to per-issue readership (so as not to penalize TAS' less-frequent publishing schedule). And I mean readership, not number of copies an unread column or review appears in.
Elvis is dead, but the King is: Sam Tellig. Born Fall River, MA, educated at Brown University in Providence: USA
John Atkinson: Born Brit, naturalized US citizen.
Miguel Fremer might have been born in Argentina, but Michael Fremer was born in the USA.
Harry Pearson: Arkansas, I believe. USA
Robert Harley: US, as far as I know.
Art Dudley: USA
There are many also-rans: Greene, Bolin, Deutsch (CAN), Pitts, Damkroger, Gader, J Marks and S Marks, and so on. Except as noted, all US.
So, what am I missing?
HOWEVER, were it the case that audio reviewers in the US were as a group more likely to be British-born than the population at large, I would specualte that the British educational system's tradition of practical skills (shop) training and the tradition of "tinkering" with wireless and gramophones, etc. was an important factor, as was the fact that the UK had a lead of about a decade at the outset of the development of high end audio, due in large part to the BBC.
Were one to risk kicking over the anthill, I would note that racking my feeble little brain, it would seem that in high end audio overall and not just journalism, there may be an "over-representation" of both Mormons and Catholics, an over-representation of German-Americans and perhaps even moreso Scandinavian-Americans, and an under-representation of people with Italian, Hispanic, Irish, or African heritage.
From which it would be proper to conclude: Absolutely nothing.
Cheerio,
...
keep piling those DACS, and SETS on top of each other to create the illusion that we can save this hobby and the future of of music listening as it pertains to most.....brits love a noble, if losing battle.
The famous British reviewer and editor Ken Kessler is American.Living in the UK he is forever pushing Ribbon tweeters, Beatles and Blues and all music except Classical.Very interesting to listen to at HE at editors meet the public.
....he does raise his pinky when he sips tea.
... are pointless questions like this?
"Music is the medicine of a troubled mind." -- Walter Haddon, 1567
...
nt
My speaker building site
nt
Best Regards,
Chris redmond.
.
what was that all about?
jim buck
You do knwo that John Atkinson became a US citizen years ago, right? Who's on your suspect list, and why should anyone care about the nationality of reviewers?
as well all expect a proper mix to life and when it's lop-sided, we ask why. Assuming it is lop-sided.Take care,
Guy.
Are you back - pedaling away from that assertion now? And you never answered the question: which audio reviewers appearing in US based media do you think are British? How can you be sure that there is a "disproportionate" number of them unless you've made a list of reviewers and what you think are their nationalities? How certain are you about your guesses about nationality? Lastly, by nationality do you mean actual citizenship or birthplace or family origin? I suppose that Mr. Atkinson has dual US / UK citizenship - do you rank him as one of the "disproportionate" British reviewers or as an American? JA clearly considers himself an American now; does his self - identification change his nationality on your list? You seem to have put some thought into your observation, please share your reasoning and evidence with us.
Mr. Doorack,I've respected your well-reasoned postings in the past, so I'm sadly noting a departure from form on my post.
I NEVER made an "assertion" (granted this is a subjective label). In my original post, I (humbly) granted that I didn't have any figures to back up my 'claim'. I was thinking of "Stereophile" magazine and its two Britsh-born/raised writers (JA and JM). Considering this magazine's importance in the high-end audio world, TWO in number might be worth more than TWO (if you follow my drift).
Lastly, you seem to be truly splitting hairs on the issue (which was never meant to BE an issue). To most persons, 'upbringing' or 'childhood years' would be the *defining* point of ones nationality, and this conclusion/judgment of mine is supported by mountains of social science research on the issue of the socialization process FORMING an individual (i.e., where you spent your childhood is where you are from, essentially).
Thanks for you interest, in any case.
Yours,
Guy.
> > I NEVER made an "assertion" < <Really? "A *disproportionate* number of U.S. audio reviewers are British" sure seems like an assertion.
> > I didn't have any figures to back up my 'claim' < <
So why did you bother to post the claim in the first place? If you didn't have any solid numbers how could you claim that British reviewers were "disproportionate?"
> > I was thinking of "Stereophile" magazine and its two Britsh-born/raised writers (JA and JM) < <
And you were wrong about John Marks, he's American. Further, you didn't originally limit your claim to Stereophile , you carefully wrote "U.S. audio reviewers", not " Stereophile reviewers". Counting all the web 'zines and the printed periodicals there may be over 100 full or part time US based audio reviewers. Drawing a broad conclusion about "U.S. audio reviewers" based on one magazine - and getting it wrong about that magazine's staff! - is pretty silly, don't you think?
> > To most persons, 'upbringing' or 'childhood years' would be the *defining* point of ones nationality < <
Hmm. That's a pretty dubious point. JA for example clearly considers himself to be an American. He's a US citizen, he votes in our elections (something that can't be said of half of all native US citizens), and he is more knowledgable about the US government and politics than most Americans. Insisting that he's still British is as wacky as those Minutemen a@@holes who claim that US citizens of Mexican descent - some of whom have been US citizens for 3 or 4 generations or longer - are really Mexicans. What counts is not what you think I am but what I think I am.
and where you're brought up (including John Marks) is what frames and forms your ENTIRE outlook on life. Please read up on the socialization process by any competent social science researcher or educator or psychologist or sociologist (so many professions for you to choose from).I've met many Americans who were naturalized during their adult years and *call* themselves "Americans." Their motivation (in the standard case) is national pride. I won't take their national pride away from them; I won't take their right to be American away from them. I won't take their right to be a good American away from them. I won't take their ability to be better Americans than those native-born away from them. I only take their (wrong-headed and misplaced) self-description away from them.
Lastly, your determination that my post is a "troll" is meaningless even if my post is incorrect in fact or assumption. Mistakes (which you've tried earnestly to point out even AFTER I admitted to a mistaken assumption which only shows your need to point out others' errors) do not make a post a "troll".
Guy.
> > I won't take their right to be American away from them. I won't take their right to be a good American away from them. I won't take their ability to be better Americans than those native-born away from them. I only take their (wrong-headed and misplaced) self-description away from them < <I hope that someday you can grasp how seriously screwed up, digusting, and elitist your conviction that "birth place determines identity for life" really is. You're denying that people can change, that the completely random accident of birth over which no individual has control dooms each one of us to being just one thing for our entire lives. It's remarkably patronizing too to argue that even though some foreign - born Americans love this country so much that they're willing to join its Army and put their lives on the line for it - a depth of commitment to America that the current President and Vice - President never made - you still insist that those foreign born patriots can never really be Americans. It must be nice to be so omnipotent that you know more about what people you've never met think, and to be uniquely qualified to judge how "wrong-headed and misplaced" a stranger's sense of self is.
> > Mistakes...do not make a post a "troll" < <
No they don't. But posting patently ridiculous and argumentative claims that are absurd on their face like "A *disproportionate* number of U.S. audio reviewers are British" is the very definition of a troll.
nt
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: