kokorodoko wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:13 am

jfv wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 9:55 amI ask the question from the perspective of a horribly slow and inefficient reader; me picking up a book with the intent of completing it is a time commitment that is not insignificant.

That's fair. I will make it a point to interpret subsequent similar questions as them asking for a substantial description of the text, so as to better figure it out.

Yeah, or sometimes you just have a regular shit ton of reading, and you need to make calls. One type that comes up in scholarly work is when "important" authors keep retreading the same old arguments. Sometimes it's like, "I've read so and so's Such and Such; is their new one worth reading?" Then like, "Nah, it's all the same stuff except for chapters 'This' and 'That,' which make new points."

All of which may as well be its own grievance, unnecessary, career padding, cash-in publications that should just be one or two papers instead of a book or something.

Someone should make a website where you input a link to a youtube video of someone demoing some gear and it strips out all of the non music parts.

How is it possible I'm skipping around on a video and it keeps landing on talking, every time?

andyman wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 8:16 am Someone should make a website where you input a link to a youtube video of someone demoing some gear and it strips out all of the non music parts.

How is it possible I'm skipping around on a video and it keeps landing on talking, every time?

I don't know if it's the case for those things, but the community-ran YouTube Vanced is pretty good for this - can usually autoskip sponsor bits, unnecessary intros etc.

A_Man_Who_Tries wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 8:29 am

andyman wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 8:16 am Someone should make a website where you input a link to a youtube video of someone demoing some gear and it strips out all of the non music parts.

How is it possible I'm skipping around on a video and it keeps landing on talking, every time?

I don't know if it's the case for those things, but the community-ran YouTube Vanced is pretty good for this - can usually autoskip sponsor bits, unnecessary intros etc.

If it's a clip featuring playing it's usually easy enough using visual cues within the thumbnail. If it's a close up of a piece of gear, yeah, you're SOL and have to filter through blabbering.

It's a good idea, but only a fraction of my beef with gear demos (really generic playing, or just poor execution, are also deal breakers for me).

penningtron wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 8:37 am really generic playing

OK so here's how it sounds!

*meekly strums open G and D on clean sound, kicks on distortion and plays riff that would've been lame in 1982*

Thanks. Thanks a lot for that, really helpful.

MoreSpaceEcho wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 9:23 am

penningtron wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 8:37 am really generic playing

OK so here's how it sounds!

*meekly strums open G and D on clean sound, kicks on distortion and plays riff that would've been lame in 1982*

Thanks. Thanks a lot for that, really helpful.

Yep, exactly, with the gain set to 8 and lots of open string noise and crap underneath the Hot Licks™.

Surely more generic is more helpful as a demonstration? They're not auditioning for your band.

Sure, but I mean, when you pick up a guitar do you just meekly strum open G and D chords or plunk out a riff so pedestrian that it'd get you kicked out of your third rate NWOBHM band in 1981?

I wanna see people actually PLAY the thing.

VaticanShotglass wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 8:31 pmOne type that comes up in scholarly work is when "important" authors keep retreading the same old arguments.

But is it not rather that the arguments are retreading themselves and so on how should I put it?

kokorodoko wrote: Wed Oct 19, 2022 1:27 am

VaticanShotglass wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 8:31 pmOne type that comes up in scholarly work is when "important" authors keep retreading the same old arguments.

But is it not rather that the arguments are retreading themselves and so on how should I put it?

I remember hating to do anything approximating a research paper in school, because the teachers feedback was always "more citations". God forbid anyone have an original thought, or at least a thought from their own perspective. Well, jokes on me, because now everything on the internet is completely opinion-piece drivel lacking any credible sources whatsoever.