Ruphus -> RE: what ever (Apr. 19 2011 12:46:29)
|
Many useful and well observed comments here, I think. Most of guitar making people, repairmen and experts who I have communicated with privately, expressed a dismissing opinion to me about guitar forums and internet, similar to Anders in this thread. But is it really that the percentage of **** in forums was to be that high? I don´t think so. ( Not anymore. - Initially there used to be uncivilized times; at least in audio forums that I read in almost 15 years ago.) It´s been a long time since I saw urban mythologie like say the tale of tight grain allegedly indicating top sheets quality, or that a certain brand was to be the shizzniz of classical guitars on default, etc. Instead my impression over the past years is that the wisdom of specialists and experienced users seems to have raised the communitie´s ( hence: mine ) average knowledge by a fair measure, and that the overview of the community on products, sources and literature has helped the individual member. It definitly helped me a lot. ( Anyone here remember those times when all you had for product research was reflections of a tiny circle of consumers, clueless or sneaky sales clerks and pitching magazines?) Sure, when it is about peripheral or unrelated matters, like say recording techniques and means in guitar forums there will rather show lack of special information; but that mustn´t surprise or annoy. And what the internet is concerned ... Before it went public, reported on as communication network for the industry, I was too stupid at that time to estimate its general potential. Today it has long since become invaluable means of research, exchange of info and escape from marketing vertigo and societal distortion through concertated media. Right, how valuable it can be depends on user skills, but notwithstanding: It stays enormous and unique informational gift of late history without doubt. A tool for direct democracy like no other before. ( Which is in the same time, unfortunately, why there is already being worked on to slim it down, by selective mirroring etc.) - Also very true what Florian and others pointed out above. The term of marketing tends to leave bad taste in one´s mouth, because of all the slickness that it is justifiedly so associated with. But marketing can be a fair thing just as well. Promoting without misleading. Serving both, producer and customers who could actually be on for a good deal. Certainly can there be imployed enticing means without equalling unethical conduct. Tasty photographies, catchy layout, eloquent discriptions, highlighted features ... There should be no problem with it as long as there is no sly conceal of inferiour attributes, exaggeration and desinformation. Marketing at its best can be just fair information; even if so far wittnessed rather rarely that way. - I think that there have been some practically useful suggestions in this thread, which can either be made use of or ignored. Naturally. Ruphus
|
|
|
|