|
Grex > Music2 > #291: Music retail again: SKR Uptown (Classical) & Downtown to close |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 194 responses total. |
scott
|
|
response 106 of 194:
| 
Jan 27 01:10 UTC 2001 |
Well, yes, to the extent that some folks prefer truly antique triode designs
using directly-heated cathodes. I'm finding I care less and less these days
about tubes, although my little guitar amp still uses them.
|
gull
|
|
response 107 of 194:
|
Jan 27 05:45 UTC 2001 |
I think it makes a difference in guitar amps, where you're routinely
(and intentionally) driving the devices into distortion. In a hi-fi
amp, the circuits should be designed so you never get anywhere near
those regions of the tube or transistor curves, so there's not much
difference in sound -- other than lower hum levels in transistor gear.
|
dbratman
|
|
response 108 of 194:
|
Jan 27 17:08 UTC 2001 |
David Brodbeck is right: many classical fans actually do despise CDs.
And there are markets to cater to them: I have seen new high-end
classical LPs for sale as recently as last year. The used classical
recording collectors' market is still over 90% LPs, and half of the
reset is reel-to-reel tapes.
Many other classical fans, however, flocked to CDs in droves, much to
the disgust of the LP purist minority. That certainly was a major
component of the classical CD boom, which was the original point.
Orinoco is also right: it's always easier to compare apples to apples.
But then, of course, there are those who insist a Red Delicious can't
be compared to a Pippin, and so on and so on. I find this in
discussing fantasy literature a lot: people say a book must be judged
on its own terms, but then in practice they'll define "its own terms"
as "whatever it takes to define this book as good."
Granted that "classical music should have an interesting structure" is
too simple a definition, there is still classical music that
deliberately dispenses with interesting structure, and claims that it's
good on different terms.
If Michael Delizia's cryptic #101 means he thinks I should do his job
for him and post a list of aesthetically valid ways to judge music, he
is mistaken.
|
brighn
|
|
response 109 of 194:
|
Jan 27 18:44 UTC 2001 |
(#100> You'll note I didn't claim that "disappointing" doesn't carry a value
judgment. The implication -- if I didn't say it -- is that "appalling" carries
a stronger and more patronizing judgment than "disppointing." Cf: "I'm
appalled at your behavior." vs. "I'm disappointed at your behavior." Sure,
both imply that you shouldn't be behaving in such a manner, but [to my ear,
at least] the latter implies a personal expectation and that latter, a social
expectation rooted in personal opinion. But that *is* splitting hairs, which
is why I took "disappointing" off the later list... it was an implicit
concession on that term.)
|
mary
|
|
response 110 of 194:
|
Jan 28 14:18 UTC 2001 |
I have no problem at all with brighn being appauled at John
having used the word appauled. It simply adds to the enjoyment
of this fine item.
|
brighn
|
|
response 111 of 194:
|
Jan 28 23:15 UTC 2001 |
Yeah, but I imagine that's because you know I'm just goofin'.
=}
|
dbratman
|
|
response 112 of 194:
|
Jan 30 21:52 UTC 2001 |
Paul: The difference between the value judgment carried by "appalling"
and the value judgment carried by "disappointing" is a good example of
what I was calling hair-splitting. That one is stronger than the other
is undeniable. But to condemn John for using the first, while actually
recommending the second as a replacement, is ... putting a giant moral
difference on a relatively tiny distinction. In other words, hair-
splitting. IMGDAO.
|
brighn
|
|
response 113 of 194:
|
Jan 31 01:39 UTC 2001 |
Eh, so I retract "disappointig" as a suggestion. *shrug*
|
davel
|
|
response 114 of 194:
|
Jan 31 14:25 UTC 2001 |
I'm appalled that this discussion is going on so long.
|
brighn
|
|
response 115 of 194:
|
Jan 31 14:29 UTC 2001 |
But you shouldn't be shocked. =}
|
ashke
|
|
response 116 of 194:
|
Jan 31 15:07 UTC 2001 |
Nah, I think we, or at least I know you a little better than that, to be
shocked by it
|
mcnally
|
|
response 117 of 194:
|
Jan 31 22:14 UTC 2001 |
re #115: Perhaps we shouldn't me, but nonetheless I am shocked, shocked!
to find nit-picking taking place in an on-line discussion..
|
ashke
|
|
response 118 of 194:
|
Feb 1 00:41 UTC 2001 |
heaven forfend!
|
mcnally
|
|
response 119 of 194:
|
Feb 1 01:11 UTC 2001 |
115s/me/be/
|
brighn
|
|
response 120 of 194:
|
Feb 1 04:18 UTC 2001 |
TV's got them images
TV's got them all
Nothing's shocking
*slow dirgelike bass lick*
Everybody everybody everybody-y-y-y-y
Nothing's shocking
|
ashke
|
|
response 121 of 194:
|
Feb 1 14:57 UTC 2001 |
Jane's Addiction?
|
brighn
|
|
response 122 of 194:
|
Feb 1 20:56 UTC 2001 |
Hey, speaking of snide songs written about specific people (see the Stupid
Music Item, or whatever it's called)... yeah, Jane's Addiction's "Ted, Just
Admit It," a paean of sorts to Ted Bundy.
|
swa
|
|
response 123 of 194:
|
Feb 3 21:50 UTC 2001 |
I'd already left Ann Arbor by the time Schoolkids closed, but on the
occasions I was back in town I generally gravitated toward Schoolkids-
in-exile rather than the expanded SKR store. Still, this is saddening.
Anyone know when it was that Borders expanded? I too used to really
like going there, and don't really anymore...
It's strange now, living in a smaller town where there aren't a lot of
chain stores. I find that I don't really miss them, and am glad to be
able to shop in the independent places in town, but at times it seems
like my little corner of the world is cut off from the rest of America.
|
scott
|
|
response 124 of 194:
|
Feb 8 02:43 UTC 2001 |
Just to throw an anecdote against the "Borders is now crap" tide:
A couple weeks ago I was in Borders looking for Astor Piazzolla CDs. The guy
at the info counter was a classic, wearing a beard and a beret and in his 40's
or so. He dug around in the racks and under the racks, finally finding that
the labels on the racks were off a bit. Definitely knew what and where to
look, which was encouraging.
Not all the true Borders employees are gone, it seems.
On the other hand, I don't feel that confident about the people in the
computer section. It's interesting that while Borders has had computer
terminals for lookups for many years (I remember them from high school visits,
back in the early 80's), only recently have the things become available to
customers to use.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 125 of 194:
|
Feb 8 04:15 UTC 2001 |
Borders is leading the way in this "Turn the tube around" technology.
The realization that many customers are computer/keyboard & mouse savy has
brought about the new Title Sleuth stations.
|
ashke
|
|
response 126 of 194:
|
Feb 8 04:18 UTC 2001 |
Which is a shame in my opinion, because you have employee's who don't have
to do it, and you put the responsibility on the customer. Just like in
libraries. Anyone with young kids in school, do they still learn the card
catalogue?
|
brighn
|
|
response 127 of 194:
|
Feb 8 04:33 UTC 2001 |
What's the point of learning the card catalog? In a few years, that will be
like learning to use a slide rule.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 128 of 194:
|
Feb 8 12:03 UTC 2001 |
what's wrong with the customer taking responsibility?
i like the title sleuth...and if you want *great and
knowledgable special helpers* to work at borders then
they should pay a liveable wage.
|
slynne
|
|
response 129 of 194:
|
Feb 8 14:57 UTC 2001 |
Actually it doesnt put the responsibility on the customers, it just
gives them another option. I have never had any trouble getting a staff
at a Borders to help me find a book.
|
slynne
|
|
response 130 of 194:
|
Feb 8 14:59 UTC 2001 |
But Barry is right of course, if you want *really* good special helpers
at a bookstore, the company would have to pay them more which means that
you and everyone else would have to pay more for books. I think American
consumers as a group have generally chosen price over service.
|