Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.music.makers.soloact > #15107

Re: a cautionary tale

Show all headers | View raw

"Jim D"  wrote in message news:2019042319043611649-Not@ThisAddresscom...

> I had a decent talk with her today. I was driving to a solo gig, she home 
> was doing whatever.   She started telling me about some young relative of 
> hers who is about to ruin her life ( move in with some loser ). Told me it 
> is tragic, that she wanted to warn the young girl off, but realized it was 
> a waste of time.

All one can do is make the attempt.

> I said I feel her pain, that anguish of knowing something, trying to get 
> others to take advantage of my hard earned wisdom, yet watching them 
> ignore me.  She knew EXACTLY what I was talking about, said so. Then it 
> came out. She told me she simply doesn't believe we are too loud. Said 
> that she doesn't believe the management when they say there are volume 
> complaints. She just doesn't believe anyone is complaining.  Because in 
> her opinion ..... we're not too loud.

But How can she PROVE the validity of what she's saying???

> So that's it.  Nothing will change her mind.  She, she ...... she .....SHE 
> ..... wants loud and the audience be damned.

*She* - should learn how to use an SPL meter!

> I replied that I see now it was a mistake to say " we're too loud ".  That 
> is opinion.  In this case, it's my opinion.  Saying we're " too loud " is 
> a judgment thing.  Everyone would have their own idea of what " right " 
> is.

But an SPL meter's measurements are OBJECTIVE and can be used to form a 
BASIS for correlating the psychology of sensation, i.e. Perception, to 
Reality!
That was one of the things I did for 11 years in the electroacoustics 
industry - we used plenty of subjective evaluation judgments...even had a 
listening room specifically for that, but accurate, objective, scientific 
measurements nonetheless still formed the basis for generating the hard 
parametric values for what we did.

> What would have been better would to have said the customer wants the 
> music lower.  Move it from personal opinion to simply the job 
> requirements.

That would be the best way to put it, because it literally uses the 'Burger 
King' approach for the customer - to tell them; HAVE IT *YOUR*  WAY!!!

> If she wants to work for someone, then she'll need to meet their 
> expectations.  Money for service rendered.

It would be much better to have things like that but most unfortunately - 
Tragically, our Public so-called *servants* in so-called 'government' 
certainly for the most part don't abide by that principle...yet they're 
still *allowed* to keep their jobs...i.e. they get paid for their 
DISservice!!!
Not a very good Example for giving the *customers* what they want - what 
they're paying for!

> Don't like that ?   Fine.  She can stay home and feel morally superior.

Maybe a 'vacation' is what she needs to think things over while feeling the 
results.

> I'll move on and be out there playing, and being paid for the same.


JimD

I hope she wakes up before that happens.

Ouisie 

Back to alt.music.makers.soloact | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-10 23:52 -0400
  Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-11 10:14 -0400
    Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-14 17:24 -0500
      Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-16 12:55 -0400
        Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-16 14:38 -0500
          Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-18 12:05 -0400
            Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-20 19:29 -0500
              Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-21 10:01 -0400
                Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-21 13:21 -0500
                Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-22 15:02 -0400
                Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-22 17:08 -0500
                Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-23 19:04 -0400
                Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-24 08:41 -0500
                Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-25 12:08 -0400
                Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-27 20:53 -0500
                Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-28 13:23 -0400
                Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-04-28 18:46 -0500
                Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-04-30 16:56 -0400
                Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-05-01 07:44 -0500
                Re: a cautionary tale Jim D <Not@ThisAddress.com> - 2019-05-13 10:49 -0400
                Re: a cautionary tale "Ouisie" <someone@anywheret.net> - 2019-05-13 17:55 -0500

csiph-web