From: someone@anywheret.net   
      
   "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   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)