My System Featured in Latest HiFi+ (Issue 91)

whart said:

There is a funny article, with some pics, in the latest issue of HiFi+ magazine (along with a bad pic of me from behind). The system has gone through a few changes since the piece was written, but Alan Sircom was quite charming- we had a good time discussing music, the direction of the industry generally and many thing non-audio.
Not trying to plug the magazine, as such, but I used to really enjoy Roy Gregory's writing and bought all of the back-issues at one point.
The Absolute Sound/HiFi+ website was, last time I checked, still promoting the previous issue, but you can get the latest one by downloading the free app for HiFi+ on iPad, and paying for a single issue.
Enjoy.

Click to expand...

whart said:

Sorry, couldn't/wouldn't, given copyright issues. (I'm somewhat sensitive to that, given that i have devoted my profession to the copyright law). I don't know what facility HiFi+ has for eventually making articles and reviews freely available on their website, as Stereophile does. My sense is that it is not something they do. Tell you what, buy the issue on iPad and if you don't like it, I'll owe you the 3.99. Or since you aren't part of the Apple family, buy a hard copy at Barnes & Noble or whereever better magazines are sold .
We used to have tons of specialty magazine stores in NYC, not anymore. (And no, I'm not talking about 'those' kinds of magazines).

Click to expand...

whart said:

There is a funny article, with some pics, in the latest issue of HiFi+ magazine (along with a bad pic of me from behind). The system has gone through a few changes since the piece was written, but Alan Sircom was quite charming- we had a good time discussing music, the direction of the industry generally and many things non-audio.
Not trying to plug the magazine, as such, but I used to really enjoy Roy Gregory's writing and bought all of the back-issues at one point.
The Absolute Sound/HiFi+ website was, last time I checked, still promoting the previous issue, but you can get the latest one by downloading the free app for HiFi+ on iPad, and paying for a single issue.
Enjoy.

Click to expand...

whart said:

That's odd, since you can get the issue on the HiFi+ iPad app now. Don't know why it's not available, or even shown yet, on the AV Guide website, which ostensibly covers both the Absolute Sound and HiFi+ magazines.
The short version of the 'how it came to be' was my reaching out to the editor. They started doing profiles of reader's systems recently, and a contingent from the magazine was in NYC for the Waldorf show. One thing led to another.
FWIW, i think the publisher is now based in Austin, which is where I'm headed. (I start teaching in the Spring there).
The system will thus get broken down, and reassembled in Texas, once we are fully relocated. At that point, more changes are in the works, but I have some time to plan and marshall information and resources. One goal is to have a full-on horn system, including large horn loaded woofers. My preference would be antiquarian stuff, but we'll see. I would also like to finally get some of my vintage Quad stuff up and running again, including possibly, a stacked array of 57s.

Click to expand...

LenWhite said:

My digital subscription to HiFi+ is handled by http://www.nextnewsstand.com/ and I guess their schedule must be a bit different than the IPad app. I think the HiFi+ plan of profiling user systems is a great idea - how do I signup

. I'll look forward to reading the article on your audio system when it's available via my digital subscription.

Click to expand...

whart said:

NOrthstar, it's copyright infringement. Please don't do that.

Click to expand...

whart said:

NOrthstar, it's copyright infringement. Please don't do that.

Click to expand...

whart said:

NOrthstar, it's copyright infringement. Please don't do that.

Click to expand...

NorthStar said:

---- Don't fret 'bout it, I won't. :b

* But there are legal ways; and that is if another reviewer uses that article (by legal means) for the purpose of his own article (or review). ...Normally in pdf form. And that usually takes quite some time; no good for us. :b

BUT! You can freely give us the main tag lines. :b

Click to expand...

microstrip said:

Len,

I also get TAS from nextnewsstand. When a new issue becomes available I get an email with a link to download a pdf file. Is the HiFi+ subscription handled in a similar way?

Click to expand...

NorthStar said:

---For some reviews or articles (from some audio mags), you can have sometimes the permission to share a pdf file.

* Stereophile is ahead of the pack (everything is accessible after a certain time in their archives; good)! :b

Click to expand...

whart said:

Andre: I don't want to sound glib about it, but normally, reproducing a material part of a work without authorization under US law is copyright infringement, even if the usage is not done for profit. That is true even if the copied material is not further disseminated to the public, i.e. so-called 'private copying,' an issue which came up repeatedly in the early 'file sharing' cases, and which used to arise in photocopying cases as well, particularly in academic and institutional settings. The issue also comes up in the so-called interim copying cases, where someone will sample or mix material into a recording but manipulate it to such an extent that the end product is virtually unrecognizable. There, the copying occurs in an internal layer of production, but not in the end product. That's not the issue here, though, which would involve both copying and dissemination, either in the form of the distribution of copies or their public display, implicating two or three of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner.
As to the specific provisions of US law, it is largely addressed by section 106, which provides for the exclusive rights of the author: reproduction, adaption, distribution, public performance and display. Section 107 contains a barebones recitation of the so-called 'fair use' factors, which take into account the purpose of the secondary use (the copying activity), the nature of the copyrighted work (e.g. fact or fiction), the amount of material taken relative to the original work in its entirety, and the potential harm to the market for the original work should the unauthorized copying be widespread. Reposting the article would not qualify under these factors, and there is quite a bit of case law discussing their application in different fact settings. (Interestingly, the factors were in existence long before they were codified in the 1976 Act, and were articulated by Justice Story in 1840 in a case involving the unauthorized publication of letters of George Washington, in a case called Folsom v. Marsh). Posting a link to an authorized Internet publication is generally considered OK because you are not 'copying' but redirecting the browser to the site where the original appears (assuming that it is authorized in the first place, and not itself an infringement). But that's not the issue here. The law in other countries, while different in some ways, typically comes out to the same result. There are also some statutory exemptions which aren't applicable here, so we need not delve into those in detail now.
Professor hat off.
And apologies if this sounds like pontification. But you asked.

Click to expand...