In Reply to: RE: You have summed it up succinctly posted by E-Stat on January 8, 2025 at 11:35:02:
I didn't read the whole thread before I posted and I've just noticed that earlier you used the phrase 'beaten into submission with correction'. Now, I think we now each other well enough by now that I am duty bound to distance myself from any insinuation that negative feedback does anything bad. What is does is (or should be) well understood and reduces distortion/artifacts. But the listener at home might not like the results, which I see as their problem to deal with rather than negative feedback's problem. I like your use of the term relevancy, I just used the analogy on PFM that jet engine thrust will not tell how enjoyable your flight will be but it does tell a lot about how well the airplane works as an airplane (yes, you could argue that low thrust means a longer flight that might be less enjoyable, or more enjoyable if you have time for another gin & tonic).
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- A disclaimer - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 13:36:33 01/10/25 (7)
- RE: A disclaimer - E-Stat 13:41:24 01/10/25 (6)
- RE: A disclaimer - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 14:53:50 01/10/25 (5)
- Choose as you will - E-Stat 15:14:15 01/10/25 (4)
- You shall not Pass - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 16:19:14 01/10/25 (3)
- Merely one of many - E-Stat 17:15:33 01/10/25 (2)
- One of the most ignorant posts you've made here. - goryu 05:37:21 03/08/25 (0)
- Just as you feel about correction, I feel we'be beaten this topic into submission (nt) - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 17:36:49 01/10/25 (0)