#Like literally unsubstantiated nonsense

[vevasap]

Where do I end?

Fight, flight, freeze, or fawn.

-

Played in the pool for hours and hours,

never tiring though inevitably I'd succumb to sleep

the moment we'd head for home.

Though despite the time, the pruny fingers and the bloodshot eyes,

never did I learn to properly swim;

couldn't time my face in the water to each

stroke, stroke, breathe,

stroke, stroke, breathe,

stroke, stroke, stroke,

fuck.

They still said I was okay to be a lifeguard though

and in the eighth grade I was trained to save

a drowning person,

any drowning person.

Never put it to the test in a pool, but I can attest

to the first rule they taught:

that a drowning person will kill you in their panic.

Fight, flight, freeze, or fawn.

Maybe add fuck in there,

fuck if I know.

But the demarcation is not that clean,

in-fact, the absurdity of ascribing these to hard-set rules

is matched only by Kubler-Ross's bullshit.

It's all always, all at the same time, mixed perhaps

to different degrees, but just a sympathetic nervous

system soup, swirling into a whirlpool

of either confused action or action through inaction

as there is no true inaction, no matter

how you reach for the ledge, begging

for a quick reprieve.

-

"You",

it feels better to say "you",

that it was the attempt to save

pulled "you" down,

but you were never drowning.

It was always me

trying to save "you".

[amelisenta]

People, look around, where is this world heading... Look how hypocritical you have become. You are ready to destroy a person, to crush him morally. And for what? For unsubstantiated nonsense, from some unknown women, who were published by only one!!!, one single podcast, and the rest only picked up AFTER the projects were cancelled, against the backdrop of these rumors. The investigation is closed, there was no trial. There is nothing. So on what basis do YOU have the right to judge him? You, excuse me, who?! Judges, to judge? Or maybe you are a god, to punish? You are drowning in your anger, wishing death to Neil, demanding that his name be erased, demanding that his works not be read. And by what right do you demand all this? By what right do you pretend to be executioners when you are not? You claim that you love #GoodOmens, that you love an angel who has mercy, that you love a demon who, despite everything, stands in defense of everything that is dear to him... But you... All of you, you, are unworthy of this... You are worse than Hell, worse than Heaven, and worse than Metatron put together. Why? Because you literally erase a person from life, like from that notorious Book of Life in the series, when his guilt has NOT BEEN PROVEN! NOT CONFIRMED BY ANYTHING! There is nothing but vague, murky stories that are more like nonsense. And because of such strange accusations, in the end, the REAL VICTIMS of sexual abuse may not wait for help at all... There is a good phrase: "Judge not, lest ye be judged," and Jesus said: "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." And you know, reading your posts filled with malice and hatred, I understand that you are all probably sinless people, since you wish death on a person. At the same time, I am amazed and ashamed of your hypocrisy ... A year ago, you idolized him, said that you loved him, that you were proud of him, and then, believing in unsubstantiated nonsense, like a led herd, you turned to the punishing inquisition ... You do not deserve to be in the bright fandom #GoodOmens, because you have not learned anything from this beautiful story. The only thing that applies to you is that you are just people who do all the bad things themselves. And this is very sad. You can hate me for this, but everyone has the right to their own opinion, and you have been expressing your toxic opinion for several months now, I, tired of being silent, spoke out now. Time will put everything in its place, and God will judge you.

[tenebriskukris]

Oshi No Ko Chapter 163 - My Thoughts/Analysis

Three chapters before the end. I don’t expect anything more than a horribly written, badly paced mess of a final few chapters by this point, but maybe the manga will surprise me. By being even worse than I’ve come to anticipate.

Interesting way to start off the chapter. We’re back with Goro for some reason? And Sarina after what is likely some surgery? This definitely didn’t actually happen. It almost reeks of a happy “what-if” scenario right here.

The next few panels seem to solidify that. It’s some sort of delusional happy ending for Sarina and Goro. Neither of them were so lucky in their fates so as to almost get everything they wanted.

Sarina recovering and becoming a B-Koamchi idol alongside Ai…it’s cute and all, but I’m more interested in the why this is being shown rather than marvel at this pitiful attempt at moving the reader’s heartstrings. I’d be more willing to engage with the narrative and have more sympathy for everyone involved here except for the fact that all these recent chapters have just eroded my ability to care with some of the worst writing that I’ve seen in a piece of media since the later seasons of Game of Thrones. Actually no, that’s an insult to GoT—at the very least the earlier seasons of that show were actually good, while as much as people harp on about the earlier parts of OnK, that much is mostly because the anime carried its mediocre story.

Is this a dream? And now we’re back with Aqua and Crow Girl. Are we deus ex machena-ing now?

The world is a virtual image created by observation. Not everything is true. It’s like the world looked completely different before and after you were reborn. Crow Girl is Literally Just Saying Words. It’s so unsubstantial that it feels like I’m chewing on air. These words don’t even fucking relate to this entire dream sequence at large!

In the end, who was I? Are we going to finally get the nail in the coffin for people who don’t want to believe that Aqua=Goro?

Was this actually the wrong choice? AQUA YOU LITERALLY HAD TIME TO CONSIDER THIS POSSIBILITY WHEN YOU PLANNED THIS DOUBLE SUICIDE BULLSHIT. If you were hesitant in leaving everyone else behind, you could’ve, you know, not fucking went after Hikaru after Nino was captured? If he feels sad over leaving people behind there are so many ways for him to survive these contrived series of events that I’m sorry, Aqua you’ve done fucked up. He’s had more than enough time to plan out a series of events that doesn’t end with him dying, so Aqua “regretting” that he might’ve caused more trouble with his actions is just so stupid that it kills my suspension of disbelief faster than Goro falling to his death in the first chapter. 

Through reincarnation, you possessed Goro Amamiya’s memories and will [...] however within your body there are genetic factors that were inherited from Ai and Kamiki. Interesting that she doesn’t mention the concept of a soul here, but everything related to Crow Girl is just a nonsensical thematic mess half the time. Considering that she said that Ai’s children were soulless in one of her first appearances I’m surprised that people take these words to mean that Aqua=/= Goro when the rebuttal to that argument is given so early on in the manga.

This entire bit of Crow Girl hugging Aqua and holding his face and such…I dunno. I don’t quite know how to feel about it? What’s with all this sympathy for Aqua when she was sitting on the fence and giving out breadcrumbs to Aqua and Ruby? If she cared enough to stop this scenario she could’ve easily pulled enough strings as a fucking god to save him, since she is Right There to keep Aqua from dying. I would say that it’s almost out of character, but that gives this series too much credit because Crow Girl is more of a plot device rather than an actual character.

The rest of these scenes are nice except they feel too much like throwing a pity party when Everything that came before it was just so shite that this payoff tastes cheap. I’m supposed to feel emotions coming from this scene, but all I can think of is how fucking stupid these last few chapters were if this was the end result of that entire clusterfuck. It doesn’t hit its mark by a long shot. 

That was all of you, Aqua Hoshino. And with that, all that is left is the keychain. I’m sure that Ruby’s going to be holding onto that keychain for dear life alongside Aqua himself soon enough.

That’s it??? There are—were—four chapters in this blasted manga to get through and THIS is one of those chapters??? As heartbreaking and or heartwarming as this chapter was, it could’ve easily been folded into the last one simply because there wasn’t much substance from this chapter or the last! Hell, even putting that aside, with only a handful of chapters left in the series this chapter should’ve been focused on something more substantial rather than deal with character beats that should’ve been very well established beforehand!

Let’s get down to business. Do I think Aqua is going to live after this chapter? My answer hasn’t changed since the last chapter, but I do have more thoughts to give on it now that this chapter’s dropped.

There are only three more chapters left in this bloody series. Three chapters to wrap up the story as we know it so far. As much as I greatly dislike the way Aqua’s revenge plot has panned out, with Hikaru pretty much down for the count as of this chapter, I think plotline that much has been dealt with. That only leaves a couple of loose ends to wrestle with. If the manga is keeping up this breakneck pace to the end, then I do think it’s possible to wrap this whole mess up. It won’t be the best way to do so by a long shot, but it’ll certainly end. There’s just one thing that I think has to be addressed in the span of these final chapters.

An author has a responsibility to wrap up loose threads when a series inevitably gets closer to the ending. While this series has dispensed with many, many small plot threads that have headed nowhere in order to sprint towards the end of the manga, there is one plotline that I believe needs to be dealt with before the series concludes. The issue of Aqua and his love interests. For better or worse, this plotline has defaulted to one of, if not the main hook of the series since the revenge plot has been so shallow throughout a good majority of the series.

There needs to be a clear “winner” for the Aquabowl, so to speak. 

While fans on all sides will point to various chapters and say, Aqua has romantic feelings for Kana, or, Aqua wants to rekindle his relationship with Akane, or Aqua loves Ruby, the sheer fact that multiple of these interpretations exist within the context of the series itself this close to the ending needs to be addressed. Love triangles often soak the reader with intrigue and suspense before being dispensed of later down the line after it has served its narrative purpose. If the series isn’t going to pivot towards an open ending, then that needs to be addressed before the end.

Killing Aqua off here would render all that utterly meaningless. It would be unsatisfying in a way that would forever damn it simply because of the fact that it’s the equivalent of pushing the reader’s face into a plate of shit and the author saying, “Wow! That’s a good ending because it made you feel bad!”, when after such an event the reader would like nothing more than to refund the time investment they had in said media. It’s daft. It’s insulting. It is essentially telling the fans that all of the time they spent with this character and the romance angle—doubly so because of the fact that this little romance angle had little to no plot relevance for the vast majority of the series—was worth less than nothing because Aqua was going to die all along—and he even didn’t die dramatically, either, though maybe that would’ve softened the blow, but he died in a horribly executed confrontation that culminated in a half baked dream sequence where there were more than a handful of ways for him to come out of it alive.

While there are media that can intentionally make an unsatisfying ending work, with how these past few chapters have been, such an ending would likely fall flat for an abundance of reasons—but since we’re just talking hypotheticals, I won’t make any sweeping statements just yet.

Of course, all of this assumes that the authors are, you know, making good narrative decisions. The buckshot pacing and flow of the last ten, twenty, even thirty chapters have just been a complete garbage heap in quality. There are many things I can feel in predicting within a series that’s still ongoing thanks to performing enough media analysis and understanding how stories like OnK are structured as well as the tropes therein.

What I cannot predict are the authors making irrational(read: BAD) decisions and or torching the media and running. It’s why I was so vehemently against the idea that Akane wearing a fucking wig and disguising herself as Ruby to fool Nino. It’s why having both Aqua and Akane independently coming to the conclusion that Yura was murdered was such a surprise to me. It’s why Aqua meeting Crow Girl offscreen wasn’t something that I’d seriously considered before I read that chapter.

These are, quite frankly, objectively bad decisions. I’d made my disdain for these narrative beats known many, many times throughout my various analyses as well as given my reasoning for Why these decisions are bad, so I’m not going to go over them again, but suffice it to say that these are the type of plot beats that high school teachers tell their students what NOT to do. And yet they happened nonetheless.

I can only predict what a competent author that tries to give payoff to the various plot threads in a piece of media can attempt to do next. What I cannot predict, however, is someone who is haphazardly throwing plot threads and beats around like crumbs throughout the manga with little to no intention of following them up satisfyingly or has any desire to actually pace these chapters with any degree of competence. It’s the equivalent of asking a sane person to try to wrap one’s head around the mind of someone that’s on some of the hardest drugs in the world. There’s literally no use in doing so because both parties have fundamentally different thought processes. The fact that this slop is being published must mean that the editors for this literal godforsaken series must be high, drunk, or are being blackmailed. It’s an insult to all of the actual good manga writers out there that don’t even get a speck of popularity that this series has garnered.

That leads me to my next point. It’s also completely possible that Aqua just fucking dies here. It’d be a horrible decision, don’t get me wrong, but it'd be completely on brand for the series which has already made so many poor choices this close to the end. It’d just be one final shit pie to eat after the author cooked a buffet of garbage.

If that’s the case, I’d expect Ruby following Aqua soon after. Sad, I know, but that girl literally made it her mission to kill Hikaru after she found out that Goro was dead and was willing to go to lengths that Aqua just wasn’t in order to get her revenge. Losing the person she cares about most after finding out he was alive all along only for him to fucking die again??? I wouldn’t be surprised if Ruby just walks into the sea after she hears the news.

Completely unsubstantiated thought that just crossed my mind. Calling it now. Aqua and Ruby both die in the next handful of chapters before they reincarnate once more and then meet each other. It’d be almost an inverse of that whole, “two lovers that committed double suicide get reincarnated as twins” Japanese superstition that I’ve seen talked about. That’d be a godawful ending but we’re already scraping the bottom of the bucket with this series. I wouldn’t put it past this series. It is on the table, after all.

Three chapters left. I’ve lost all hopes for a good ending for the series for some time now, so I’m just sitting on the rollercoaster waiting for the ride to finally come to a close.

[creature-wizard]

Found this new age witch gal on YouTube calling herself Izza Cosmos; I'm listening to her video "13 Signs You Are Lemurian." Izza claims that Lemurians were inherently empathic and nonviolent, and generally very innocent. She claims that because of this, "it was very easy for other civilizations to manipulate, dominate, or overpower them." I have no idea whether Izza knows this, but this is literally the same thing Nazis claimed about German people. They painted Germans up as guileless innocents who were exploited by Jews. (This kind of rhetoric was very prominent in Atlantis, Edda & Bible by Hermann Wieland, which also claims that German people were actually descended from Atlanteans.) Izza claims that the Lemurians were very close to nature - and again, this is the same rhetoric often claimed about German people; allegedly they were very close to nature before modernity. This of course is tied into the whole blood and soil ideology of Nazis.

She claims that "consciousness travels faster than the speed of light," which is a completely unsubstantiated claim. She claims that the Lemurians were massively into "the healing powers of the cosmos," which basically equates to stuff like crystal healing and other forms of New Age faith healing and alternative medicine. The thing with this kind of faith healing and alternative medicine is, it's very much connected to the belief that if you fall ill it's your own fault - your vibrations were low, God is punishing you, you signed a soul contract experience this illness before you incarnated into this body, whatever. In the faith healing worldview, if faith healing modalities fail to heal you, it's once again your own fault - you haven't atoned for your sin, your soul contract said "more suffering," whatever. Beyond this the video is mostly your bog-standard "Do you have mystical, magical interests? Do you want to be yourself and follow your dreams? Then you might be X!" nonsense you see in basically every "Are you an X soul?" video.

[mrs-monaghan]

Tkkrs and army have gone insane.

https://twitter.com/wonniieee_kim/status/1659108754925789184?t=6wzGDshQPq2O815p2QEpdA&s=19

So how do they explain Elle magazine reporting on the news? I mean fuck koreaboo and all those other stupid ones that jump on rumors. But Elle??? He is their model, was literally on their cover.

Remember how BH and YG have never denied the Taennie rumors? U know how sus that is, right?

You think a magazine like Elle would publish unsubstantiated rumors? Would do this behind BH? YG?

Why is it so hard for people to think? If u wanna deny that was V and Jennie, then explain the managers??? Huh? I can't with this nonsense man

[lacking-hydration]

@flaralol​​ (GRABS YOU BY THE COLLAR) WAHOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

im actually considering making a long-term comic so ill try not to be TOO in-depth or anything but i basically i was really inspired by Hex, and whatever the lore proposed there was....

there’s this radio advert for Hex that discusses this other world or dimension that’s like ours, except everything is nonsensical and mystical and all of that, and i was so entranced by the idea of it being some dimension that’s intrinsically tied to our dimension, the right side, like a mirrored universe where everything that happens in our dimension happens there, just filtered through that dimension’s rules (or lack-thereof) and vise versa....

so the sort of like. the ICON to alton towers, the MR. ALTON TOWERS himself, is the earl from hex. (not the. real one obviously. i’m pulling this information from the ride about a fictionalized version of an already unsubstantiated legend.)

excuse the oatmeal like quality of this image.

this is sir alton talbot-eastmanvanshire. yes that his full name .not including all of the extraneous accolades and all of that. i made a ref for him and a bunch of his variants (more on that later) but this is just what he normally looks like. he’s sort of like this. all powerful (sort of.) entity who has complete control over the other side’s version of the land that used to belong to him when he was alive on the right side. He’s always searching for ways to entertain himself and bring people to his place of residence, that seems to be what keeps him happy. the things that he creates in his world are put into place on the right side, abstracted into coasters and rides and the like!

on the other side, there are a plethora of people who are like ride representatives, usually working on behalf of a corporation, institution, organization, some sort of group ect... All of them have ended up in Alton’s world, and most know him by a different name entirely. Characters that he’s invented to fit into those respective worlds, that he can easily slip into and out of.

The mechanics of the whole “variant” thing are a bit more complicated than that but. hopefully i can go more in depth about that in a more narrative form.

The world of Alton Towers is a weird. and complicated one, throughout each of the lands there’s a lot in-fighting, mainly with the members of the x-sector ruining it for literally everyone else.

thats just a little. snippit of stuff THANK YOU FOR LISTENING OR ASKING I dont feel super confident talking about this stuff often but i would like to because its one of my favorite instances of world-building that ive done.

[misshorrorotaku]

Most of your claims are unsubstantiated (or proven false already like "putting Palestinians on their tanks" bullshit) and you have no proof the actual death toll is 200k. Hamas is a group long proven to be constantly lying. 30k is already being generous, as that number comes from them. Feel free to provide some proof of your claims tho. And no Al-Jazeera, honey, propaganda machines are not proof.

And Israel is not an Ethno-state. XD there are literally a LOT of Palestinians and other arabs living in Israel with equal rights (there is literally a larger percentage of Arabs in Israel than there are black people in America). Israel is also the only reason the Jewish have not faced another in a VERY long line of genocides at the hands of Arabs. So yes, they are in fact defending the Jewish people. XD The rest of this nonsense is some real tinfoil-hat conspiracy shit. Get it from 4chan?

Right. Cuz knowing this is not in fact a genocide and Israel is not this cartoonishly evil villain is the same as being a citizen of the 3rd Reich who did nothing to stop the Holocaust. Totally the same.

just a reminder: since world war II, america has provided more aid to israel than to any other country.

$317.9 billion dollars.

just two years ago america committed over $3.3 billion dollars in assistance.

99.7% of those funds went towards their military.

whereas palestine has no land army.

[itsclydebitches]

Not to beat the literal dead horse, but gotta love how they wrote Clover as following orders against a core cast member once, botched the execution of it hard, then turned around and were like "Oh yeah no he totally would've followed through with an order to bomb a city of innocent civilians". Like, I'm sorry, did I miss a Volume? Or do they think they're implying things that really just aren't coming across? (Side note, don't know if you ever heard about this, but Eddy stated that apparently? Qrow teamed up with Tyrian for Ruby and Yang? I think the quote was something along the lines of "he did something he'd never do for the two people he'd only ever do it for: his nieces" and like... Great! Wanna show us that thought process maybe?)

Oh, anon, what is this blog if not an endless beating of that poor, dead RWBY horse? 😂

What gets me is that even if we ignore everything that happened in Volume 7  — because as the fans joke, only the current volume is canon  — that scene didn’t even try to justify this reading of Clover’s character. Even if we knew nothing about Clover outside of this moment, the moment itself doesn’t bother to explain the “would drop bomb” assumption. The logic can’t be “Clover was an Ace Op loyal to Ironwood and therefore would have dropped the bomb because orders” since 3/4ths of the surviving Ace Ops are now on Team Don’t Drop Bomb. The math implies that it’s far more likely that Clover would have gone “WTF, Harriet” along with Vine, not join her. So is it because he’s their leader? That doesn’t make sense either. Since when are leaders more obedient to outside authority than their subordinates? If that were the case, Ruby would be all for following the laws and regulations that she’s consistently fought against. The scene doesn’t introduce any intimate knowledge of Clover that would explain this belief  — “Ironwood was like a father to him. Clover would have done anything he asked without question and I’m going to follow in Clover’s footsteps!”  — and, as said, our previous volume outright contradicts this in the form of Clover pushing for diplomatic and peaceful solutions over a fight. That scene, combined with Robyn’s talk with Qrow, really just made a nonsense claim without bothering to even try to explain it.  

And omg. No, I hadn’t heard anything about that, but then I don’t follow Eddy’s social media, so. Obviously the real problem here is, as you say, failure to show any of that thinking within the story itself, but even if we take that justification at face value... it’s so stupid. Qrow’s ultimate goal is to reunite with his nieces then, yeah? That’s supposedly why he teamed up with Tyrian. He’ll do anything to get back to his family and make sure they’re safe! Hmm. Anything you say? 

📣 FLY AWAY 📣

Qrow can turn into a bird! If this was really about his nieces he should have just flown off the second they crashed, reuniting with them to face these hardships together. Fly off to get Robyn help. Fly directly to Ironwood to learn why he’d try to arrest you. Fly into the tundra until Clover gets sick of looking for you and you can sneak back into the city. These sorts of explanations don’t work when the writing has the characters ignore easy solutions to their problems. 

Hell, even if we did say something totally unsubstantiated like, “The trauma of Clover turning on him made Qrow forget his transformation ability” the “He did it for Yang and Ruby” is blown out of the water the second he’s put in jail. Qrow doesn’t mention them. He doesn’t care. He’s focused solely on killing Ironwood, not helping the girls. Absolutely none of this was about his nieces. 

[meetmeatthecoda]

I guess I like tortuting myself because I'm rewatching Misère and both crying and hysterically laughing at how both ridiculous and horrible everything that's happening on the screen, everything Liz is doing is.

And a fucking hallucination in the form of none other but Mr Kaplan (the first female character the writers did dirty big time, I believe? symbolic much, huh?) spurring Liz on being the reason she does all this destructive shit? It's peak ridiculous.

But also I've just reached the moment where Mrs French (on a side-note, I'm honestly convinced Mr French is just another alias of Red, therefore, Mrs French is a guardian he sent to watch over his girls as much as she can during these hard times and try to keep at least Agnes safe and comfortable and, ideally, help Liz come back to her senses) tells Liz that her love for her daughter will help her find a way out of this mess and that "Love wins" (same side-note: that phrase alone is such a blatant reference to the conversation Liz had with Red, so...) and Liz proceeds to act both as a selfish, jealous, heartless bitch and an idiot all wrapped in one and I'm not exaggerating when I'm telling you that I screamed at my laptop (i.e at Liz's face) "She meant by reconnecting with the father of your daughter and not by holding someone dear to him hostage and subsequently accidentally killing them, you foolish beetroot!"

Sorry for the rant but I just needed to vent to someone who's both willing to listen and is capable of understanding why I'm so upset and angry and I've always found you to be that person in this fandom.

Hey there, anon!! 🤩 Oh, sweet anon... bless you for re-watching literally any episode of season 8... I could never 🥲 And honestly? This reaction is e v e r y t h i n g. The episode was indeed "peak ridiculous" 😂😭 A Mr. Kaplan hallucination?! A character (yes, the first female character scorned, symbolic indeed, great point, my friend) who was initially so beloved to both the characters on the show AND the audience?!?! Being used as the motivation for Liz's nonsensical & unsubstantiated actions when she literally has no history of mental health problems (other than the memory manipulation naturally) but she's suddenly seeing dead people?!?!?! K. Sure. 😐 And Mrs. French. Oh, boy. (Side-note: The idea of her being hired by Red is a fantastic one that's about 1000x better than the actual canon of her being the wife of some dead contact of Katarina's? That was naturally good with children & took an instant liking to Agnes? So Liz left Agnes with her & took off in Red's jet literally 4 seconds after she met her? Yeah, whatever. That always grated on my nerves. Like, they didn't even try to come up with reasonable ways to get Agnes out of the way. Proof they shouldn't have included the pregnancy in the show to begin with but whatever, I digress.) Yes, the Red-esque "love wins" advice that went so whole-heartedly ignored was the best thing she had to offer 🙄 And when I tell you I cackled at you screaming at your laptop, anon, omg 🤣 Incidentally, "you foolish beetroot" is now my new favorite nickname for season 8 OOC Liz & I can't thank you enough for that 😁 Lastly, there's no need to apologize for your rant, anon, I'm flattered & delighted that you thought of me as your sounding board. Rest assured that all your emotions are valid & you're not alone, as I relate strongly to everything here 😥 Thank you again for sharing, anon, I hope you feel a little better & less alone, & much love to you, my friend!! ❤️

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

How come atheists are so full of hate? Like if you want to believe in Science, go off but where’s the need to tear apart other people’s religion? A whole hate blog, yikes

That’s kind of a weird way to announce to the world that you failed Social Studies/Civics class. Or never showed up at all.

It’s a very simple indicator and demonstration of the indoctrination conducted by religions. After all, where would they be if they didn’t drill into people that their beliefs are part of their very person, that they’re nothing without them? Instead of teaching people that they can, and should, change their beliefs and positions on ideas as new information is presented or found. A “dearly held belief” is not something to be proud of. It’s an admission of unreasonableness.

You only choose to regard this as a “hate blog” because it’s a personally convenient way of ignoring and dismissing the challenges it presents to your unsubstantiated superstitions, to your arrogant assumption of religiosity being the default, of being “right” by mere historical assertion. It’s an objection to people realizing religions are just ideas and that they’re open to examination, not to mention expectations of justification - beyond “cause mah book say so” - just like any idea. And that ideas don’t get respect by default.

The days of your superstitions extracting undeserved deference and reverence are over. Your ideas need to earn any respect.

To call it a “hate blog” is to admit you’ve never actually read anything I’ve ever written. It’s only hateful if you value beliefs over people.

This “Ask” is what’s called an ad hominem. It’s a fallacious way of avoiding having to actually have a valid point to make. Since, well, you don’t. If you call “hater,” you can pretend to skip away as the “winner,” the one occupying the high ground, without ever doing any of the work to make a coherent case, much less actually justify your point. The one you don’t have.

It’s not only fallacious, it’s outright dishonest, or at the very least ignorant. It’s a refusal to actually ask what the objections actually are, and instead commit blindly to a pre-constructed defensive narrative. Otherwise, you might have to actually consider them and potentially find yourself in a position where you should probably change your mind. It’s nothing but a risk-avoidance strategy. Curiosity and intellectual honesty are the enemies of religious thought.

So, in lieu of the questions you were too cowardly to ask, atheists hate poorly thought out, nonsensical ideas that require resorting to “faith” - which supports literally any belief - in order to believe them at all, since they have no merits of their own. If your beliefs can’t be shown to be true, why hold them at all?

I don’t need to “tear apart other people’s religion.” All I need to do is describe them accurately and notice they don’t make sense. And to do that, I can simply use the publicly available materials. It’s pretty easy to notice that a god who is “perfect” cannot be a god who needs worship. Or that a god who is all-knowing cannot be a god who grants free will. It’s not my fault the core mythology of these religions is self-canceling, nonsensical, contradictory, ridiculous and divorced from reality, and that the scriptural materials themselves - the only source of the god-existence claims at all - come from sources that are dubious at best. Such as anonymous authors who weren’t there, plagiarists who had access to the prophecies they created stories to fulfil, or prophets who self-declare and self-authenticate their own prophethood, “verifiable” only through the same prophet who self declared himself to be the prophet in the first place. And that they’re often times, cruel, immoral and disgusting. I’m just one of the many people noticing and pointing it out.

You’re misidentifying the problem and dishonestly deflecting, in order to avoid honest reflection about why anyone should believe this is actually true, and why one should worship the characters even if it was.

And why is it our fault for noticing all of this? Shouldn’t you be more concerned that what you believe doesn’t correspond to reality than the fact atheists are not convinced and can show you why? Why doesn’t it bother you more that you believe something for bad reasons, or that people only taught you to look inside the self-affirming ghetto for answers to the reasons your beliefs don’t make sense? Why are you shooting the messenger? Why do you think others should be obliged to support and facilitate your denial game?

We also hate the fact religious superstition holds humanity back from making progress. We hate that we’re lumbered with the burden of people’s inability to deal with their own mortality, and their wilful ignorance and lack of curiosity about the world around them. We hate that new discoveries are somehow subject to acceptance by superstitious people who don’t understand them and have a vested interest in not understanding them. That simple demonstrable facts and truths about our world cannot be stated without incurring the wrath of those who find them inconvenient to their arrogant claim of immortality and a celestial best friend. We hate that public policy and public activities are influenced by and designed to favor those with specific types of magical thinking, and disadvantage those who do not.

https://ffrf.org/legal/challenges

Atheists can hate the belief, without hating the believer.

And in many cases, we hate the beliefs because we don’t hate people. Because we see how badly religion harms. Not tolerating bad ideas is not anti-people. It’s pro-people. Pedophilia is a bad idea. Killing people because they are or think different is a bad idea. Putting baseless superstitions ahead of real humans is a bad idea. Hating things doesn’t make you a bad person. I hate puppy-torture. I’m kind of proud of that. And accepting and allowing everything doesn’t make you a good person.

Some of the posts I’ve gotten the most amount of religious hate for are the ones where I’ve gone on at length about the value of human life, the virtues of humanity, what we’ve achieved and what we’re capable of. Because I dared to put the humans above both the superstitions themselves and the invisible sky daddy who is the subject of it. Because I excised the space magician from the equation, noticed that it didn’t change the outcome, and gave the responsibility and agency to the humans.

Religion hurts people. It instills fear. It demands unquestioned obedience, both to the religion and to the deity the very human religious leaders claim to be speaking for. It makes people suppress their full personalities and live half-experienced lives in order to make a fictional Super Santa not despise them. It makes people hate other people. It makes people hate themselves. It makes people feel broken and damaged and unworthy of consideration, because they’ve been convinced that a magical cloud goblin is the only one who can fix them. Humans aren’t perfect, but we’re worthwhile without imaginary monsters.

https://religion-is-a-mental-illness.tumblr.com/tagged/nothing-without-god

https://religion-is-a-mental-illness.tumblr.com/tagged/religious-trauma-syndrome

https://religion-is-a-mental-illness.tumblr.com/tagged/victims-of-religion

It makes people avoid reality. It poisons their thinking, makes them root for other human people to be tortured for eternity - even if that torture chamber is imaginary. It “others,” putting boundaries up between people because there are the “believers” and there’s everybody else - the “others,” those outside the flock who are “not like us.” The chosen people, or the saved, or the clear, or the sheep, versus the sinners, the heretics, the unsaved, the damned.

It causes people to devalue human life because they’ve convinced themselves that people just re-spawn when killed. It justifies any immoral deed in service to imaginary creatures. What barbaric act can’t be - and hasn’t been - justified entirely because someone claimed their “god” commanded or endorsed it? Human life becomes cheep because imaginary deities authorize any kind of violence, and the worthy will be fine because they’ll end up in paradise. Kill everyone and let god sort it out.

Religion diminishes empathy and altruism, the sources of human morality. It convinces people that literal magic is a better explanation of our world, and solution to our problems. More than anything humanity has been able to verifiably discover. It causes people to think that sending telepathic poetry to the clouds is a replacement for doing anything productive, and when we point its verified lack of efficacy, we get anecdotes insisting that their space genie answers their prayers. Which necessarily means it won’t help people in much more dire need than the believer. Believers necessarily accept and approve human suffering, because if “god” isn’t helping you, then your suffering is either deserved or part of a “plan.” It dehumanizes both the believer and everyone else.

Hate of humans - desiring instead to glorify a magical space goblin they can’t even prove to be real - is the realm of the religious.

I mean, you demonstrated exactly this phenomenon by directing your little whine - what amounts to nothing more than a petulant sigh - at atheists, the people, not atheism.

Humans are better than these superstitions. And then someone like you comes around and happily throws suffering humans - children suffering under parents who won’t take them to the doctor, children raped by the pedophile their parents sent them to every Sunday, people praying to a creature who is not there for help that will never come - under the bus in order to excuse your superstitions. Because you need to protect your superstitious beliefs from disconfirmation by wilfully ignoring the argument that they’re neither true nor helpful, let alone even necessary.

In the choice between defending humans or defending beliefs, you’re kind of choosing rather poorly.

We don’t need to “believe” in science, since we can simply understand it. Science is the only reason you’re able to dump out your hurt feelings and proud ignorance via a device powered by electricity, connected to infrastructure with microchips, linked together by satellites in orbit, and derived from a dozen or more scientific theories and principles, ranging from electron theory to quantum theory to gravitational theory. Science can, and does, demonstrate its effectiveness, what it produces and why it works every single day of the week. You’re surrounded by the effectiveness of science all day every day, to the point of being dependent upon it. It requires no worthless “faith,” no unreliable “belief.”

It’s true whether or not you believe in it. Just as digestion, reproduction and evolution are biological processes that don’t require “belief” and are true even when you wilfully don’t understand it. Only things that aren’t true demand to be believed. Real and true things can demonstrated and understood.

Maybe you should start to care about whether what you believe is actually true. Instead of attacking people for simply noticing that it isn’t.

[greatwyrmgold]

Maybe I should clarify.

This post was prompted by a PM discussion with someone who will remain nameless unless they wish to identify themself. They started arguing that Tattletale is actually bad aroace representation. They made a bunch of unsubstantiated statements, I asked for substantiation.

They made a lot of noise about being misunderstood, and substantiated a few of their claims. And also made more ubsubstantiated claims. Arguments included:

The idea that lots of people were pissed off about this, which vanished from the discussion once I pointed out that literally nobody else had made this argument. And that a bunch of people had PM'd me to express their agreement. (Given the kind of anonymous "asks" I've started to get on my main and Worm-RP blogs, I'm not surprised the're PMing me.)

The idea that Wildbow introduced Lisa's sexuality specifically to stop people from shipping her with Taylor or (in Ward) Victoria.

The idea that Lisa is just a token ace character, a term they don't define.

The fact that Lisa's sexuality doesn't factor into the story of either Worm or Ward, which I see as a positive aspect which makes her less token-ish.

That Lisa's sexuality is just a plot device, which directly contradicts the above claim.

The idea of "betrayal," which when pressed they admitted was just "Wildbow betrayed you by writing bad representation," even though the "betrayal" thing was lumped in with arguments for why Lisa was bad ace rep.

"[I]t feeds into a pattern of wildbow stifling or shitting on sapphic behavior." The only conrete, substantiable argument made...and it's basically just asserting that Lisa is basically a lesbian.

Okay, after I pointed that out, the person specifically said they didn't think Lisa was a lesbian. They just made arguments which only make sense if Lisa is basically a lesbian with a layer of inconvenient aroace on top.

The person insisted that they were supportive of aroace Lisa in fanfics and stuff, that they just thought it was badly implemented in canon. But the only argument that went further than wild accusations and contradictory nonsense is that Wildbow making Lisa ace is shitting on "sapphic behavior".

The person got mad when I interpreted this as "Writing aroace characters is homophobic". But they also didn't explain why it isn't. I don't know how I was supposed to interpret it. How does that not sound like "Lisa is basically a lesbian in canon, saying that she's aromantic is homophobic"?

They performed the act of a good ally, someone who likes aromantic representation and stuff. But if you critically analyze their arguments, the foundation is the same as people who come within inches of saying that writing aromantic characters is homophobic.

The fact that they never quite say what they imply out loud is what really gets under my skin. If they admitted that they don't see aroace identities as being as valid/important/whatever as alloromantic ones, that would be straightforward. But they don't. They just make arguments that make no sense if you don't mix a little aphobia into the foundation.

The idea that Lisa and Taylor's interactions are sapphic enough that Lisa's aromantic identity is invalid...is bullshit. It implies that writing an asexual woman with close friends is homophobic.

...

I missed this during our conversation, but they also argued that Rachel was more aroace than Lisa, despite the fact that Rachel casually talks about wanting to sleep with guys in Worm (and enters a sexual relationship with Biter during the timeskip). Aromantic, maybe, but she is textually not asexual. Did this person even read Worm?

Smugbug shippers get through a conversation about Lisa's sexuality without implying that writing an asexual woman with close friends is homophobic challenge 2023

[ashleyonlane9]

Here’s my unpopular opinion of the day: You shouldn’t be using your faves as news sources. Even more unpopular? Your faves are not obligated to comment on political upheavals, social issues, or anything they don’t want to comment on. There are so many reasons why someone may be radio silent on Twitter or any other platform. It’s not your place to harass them into a reaction. If they stay silent, it’s “Use your platform!” “Why aren’t you saying anything?” “Spread awareness!” Colby tweeted that the situation was sad and he was worried. Well, that tweet wasn’t enough.

Apparently it was the bare minimum and some fans wanted him to do more. OK. Why? He’s a 24 year old guy, 2600 miles away from what was going on at the Capitol Building. I really don’t understand what they wanted him to do. Retweet resources? What resources? For what? If you want to know what’s going on, tune into a reliable news source. There’s an endless stream of TV channels, newspapers, Twitter accounts of actual politicians involved. There are plenty out there. He’s not a reporter. He’s not a political commentator. There’s jack shit that an influencer in Los Angeles is going to be able to do aside from saying, “Wow this is sad. It sucks.” He’s literally just throwing his two cents into the void like everyone else. But I also realize the majority of his fans are teenagers or barely in their early 20s who want to feel like they’re in the thick of what’s going on. As harsh as it may be to say, and as uncomfortable as it may be to hear, no, Brianna/13/Nowheresville Montana/ - no, your Tweet does not make you a key player in the events of the day. 

I can’t fault him for posting about that random old lady first either. He was out on a walk and had no idea what was going on. Paused to Tweet about a weird experience he just had and that was that, and fans just jumped on him all “read the room.”  Hell, I had no idea what was going on until yesterday afternoon, because, SHOCKGASP, I had shit to do and wasn’t glued to my phone/social media all day. My first reaction when I heard about what was going on was to turn on CNN and then see what the Washington Post and NY Times were reporting. My second reaction was to get a hold of my family (attorneys and political-adjacent folks) who live in the DC area to make sure they were safe.  Oddly enough it wasn’t Gosh, I wonder what Colby Brock has to say about the situation and if he’s doing enough to spread awareness through his sizeable platform. 

There’s so much misinformation and fear mongering on Twitter as well, which is why social media personalities shouldn’t be used as sources and shouldn’t be harangued into retweeting unsubstantiated nonsense. It’s the worst incarnation of the telephone game, because then you get crap like the photo above. That tweet makes it seem like the entire state of California was under siege last night when that very much was not the case. There were small “riots” in very specific areas. DTLA is not the the entirety of Los Angeles and LA is not the whole of California. Colby doesn’t live even remotely close to the chaos, and neither do I. I went out and had a nice walk with my dog. Aside from the usual harassment from some of the crazier homeless folks, it was status quo. My neighborhood was fine. There was no imminent danger. You need to go out? Look out the door! Tune into a reliable news source. What I’m saying is don’t always take Twitter at face value. It’s not gospel. 

I realize Jake was getting hassled too, and while yeah, snapping back is probably never a good idea, I get why he did. You can’t please these kids. Influencers are damned if they do, damned if they don’t. Damned if they do, but don’t do enough according to their fans’ arbitrary standards. It’s the price of living in the limelight. At any rate, 2021′s off to a banging start. Best of luck to us all! (Except sp00kybabyy. Just...nah.) 

[earthstory]

The 'hollow earth theory', a staple of archaic science fiction, suggests that worlds beyond our comprehension, filled with strange and mystical sights, exist inside the hollow centre of the planet. Such ideas are clearly nonsense, but they led to some interesting historical anecdotes.

The idea of a hollow earth in the Jules Verne sense, with humans living on the outside surface, is unsupported by the laws of physics - literally, as a hollow structure the size of a planet would instantly collapse under the force of gravity. But in the late eighteenth century a refinement of the theory was suggested by an eccentric American, Cyrus Teed, who postulated that humans lived on the inside surface of a hollow spherical space containing the entirety of the known universe. Such a model, where light travels in curves towards the centre of the space, would be experimentally indistinguishable from the convex model (assuming all physical laws were adjusted to act opposite to the normal fashion). The idea of the 'inside-out universe' became popular as a thought experiment, and was widely written about in the twentieth century; it seemed to gain particular credence in Germany, and it is known that Hitler was familiar with the concept. Unsubstantiated stories have emerged of Nazi expeditions sent to spy on the British fleet by pointing infrared cameras at the sky...

The concave hollow earth hypothesis never received any real support. As Martin Gardner says (in the book 'On the Wild Side', 1992), it can be discounted via the principle of Occam's Razor - the simplest solution to a problem being the most likely to be true. Its original proponent, Cyrus Teed, attempted to turn the radical idea into a religion - Koreshanity - after shocking himself with electricity during an experiment, having a vision that he was humanity's messiah. His supporters became quite numerous at the turn of the last century, but their sect is now extinct. Teed himself died in 1908, from the complications of a fight between Fort Myers men and his followers. He was buried on the Southern end of Estero Island, but shortly afterwards a hurricane washed his coffin out to sea.

-TJT

Read more about the evolution of various hollow earth hypotheses: http://www.wired.com/2014/07/fantastically-wrong-hollow-earth/ Image from the collections of the Koreshan State Historic Site - a depiction of Teed's concave earth model.

[taww]

Review: Bryston 4B Cubed Stereo Amplifier

Bryston 4B Cubed stereo amplifier

The Audiophile Weekend Warrior (TAWW)

TAWW Rating: 4.5 / 5

An honest, refined and easy-going amp that may leave many questioning if they need more.

PROS: Clean, smooth and clear with a hint of warmth; effortless power; superb bass; bulletproof engineering, build and operation; that 20 year warranty.

CONS: Excruciatingly long break-in; not as lively or dimensional as some of the audiophile competition; balanced input seems slightly compromised.

Bryston is a name that needs no introduction, and the company’s popularity is obvious every time I post anything about them on social media - those posts consistently get a ton of likes and comments. Perhaps for this reason, along with Bryston's no-nonsense pro audio heritage, elitist high-enders seem to shun the brand as too mainstream and un-audiophile to be taken seriously. This hasn't stopped their latest Cubed series of amps from garnering some solid reviews since its introduction in 2016, with some proponents in online forums putting it in the conversation with some of the more revered high-end amps under $10k. I was intrigued, and thanks to the graciousness of Bryston's James Tanner and their US marketing rep Micah Sheveloff I was able to spend a full year getting to know one of their most popular models, the 4B Cubed (MSRP $6,695), along with the BP-17 Cubed preamp. Read on about my long but rewarding journey with this workhorse.

Design, Features & Usage

Compared to typically-spartan, even downright crude high-end amplifiers, the Bryston 4B Cubed (4B3 in shorthand) has a number of nice features:

Switchable unbalanced RCA and balanced XLR inputs

Low (23dB) and high (29dB) gain settings

Bridged mono operation

Soft start with remote trigger option

The distinguishing aspect of the Cubed series vs. Bryston’s previous line (e.g. SST2) is the Salomie input buffer. Co-developed with the late Ioan Alexandru Salomie, the circuit is said to reduce noise and distortion by 10x vs. the previous implementation and excel at immunity to RFI and power supply noise, a critical factor in today’s world where literally every device imaginable has a microprocessor and/or switching PSU buzzing away. Much has been written about the circuit in other reviews and the objective proof is in the 4B3’s superb measured performance - 0.005% THD and > 119dB S/N at full power (300W) across the entire audible spectrum.

I got the amp in black, with standard 17” front panel (no rack handles). The status LEDs glow green, but apparently this can be internally changed to blue if the customer prefers. I found the remote trigger feature quite handy when paired with the BP-17 Cubed preamp, and the switchable inputs useful for preamp/interconnect comparisons. The binding posts are of the standard 5-way insulated variety to meet EU regulations, and worked well with different sized spades. An extra pair of posts would have been nice to aid bi-wiring or my REL subwoofer hookup.

All business inside.

The 4B3 consumes a reasonable 60 watts powered up at idle - certainly not EPA EnergyStar territory, but about the same as my 60 watt Ayre AX7e integrated and just warm to the touch thanks to the generous heatsinks and extensive use of aluminum. Ecological concerns aside, I had no qualms leaving it running 24-7 in an open shelf with just a few inches of clearance above. Should you decide to do the green thing and power it down between sessions, the 4B3 consumes under half a watt on standby, and powers up quickly and smoothly. You'll hear the distinctive clicking of the soft-start circuit, and sound will start flowing within a few seconds. From a cold start, the sound takes about a half hour to get the juices flowing, and maybe an hour to reach full potential.

Setup

Preamp: I had the good fortune of having 3 very different preamps on hand during my time with the 4B3 - the companion Bryston BP-17 Cubed, the tubed Valvet Soulshine from Germany, and the Pass XP10. I found the Bryston pre to be a reasonably good match, but the Pass and Soulshine were simply better musically and both worked well, my top choice being the Pass. The 4B3's RCA input impedance is on the low-ish side (30kΩ), not the 100k+ that many tube pres seem to favor, so something to keep in mind when matching. The Soulshine did just fine, others may not.

Balanced vs. unbalanced input: for some reason, I preferred the sound of the 4B3 through its unbalanced inputs, save with the Pass preamp which doesn't fare as well unbalanced. It's hard to control for all the factors, but I had identical model of cable (DH Labs Air Matrix, Audience Au24 SX) in both RCA and XLR, and contrary to expectations I found the RCA input to sound fractionally more open and dynamic, and equally as quiet. Normally balanced operation affords you these qualities but I heard no such advantage with the 4B3. One clue is in the specs, which show drastically different input impedances for the balanced terminals - 30kΩ for positive, and a shockingly low 6kΩ for negative. This seems to indicate that it's not a differential/complementary input circuit like you'd find with e.g. Ayre or Pass, and I'd imagine this lack of symmetry compromises CMRR and some other benefits of balanced operation. I inquired with Bryston about how the circuit was implemented but didn't get a response.

High vs. low gain: Some people have commented that you can "tune" the sound of the Bryston, with the low gain (23dB) setting sounding a bit smoother and more laid back, while high gain (29dB) is more dynamic and detailed. I agree they sound different, but I had a different take: to me, high gain sounds transparent, and low gain sounds subtly dulled and veiled. For me it's a no brainer - unless absolutely necessary to attenuate, I'd always use the high gain setting. It simply sounds more truthful to me. I also inquired whether the low gain setting adds an additional attenuator in the signal path (it sounded like it to me) but again, I didn't hear back.

All the preamps, plus a DAC.

Bridged mono operation: I didn't test it, at least not intentionally, as I only had one amp on hand. I did accidentally flip the bridging switch once during playback which fortunately did not cause anything to explode. One note: if you do bridge it as a monoblock, be aware the input impedance drops to a very, very low 7.5kΩ, which I imagine will make some preamps quite uncomfortable.

Power cord/conditioner: The Bryston comes with a standard but appropriately-heavy 14-3 power cord, and it sounds quite good with it and wasn’t particularly fussy about changes. That said, I felt it was really locked in with the latest version of the Twirling Gerbil Red Electrum, a really fascinating cord made by our own MGD - bass became even more grounded, the soundstage locked in place and everything just clicked. Given that this cord isn’t readily available though, I’d say it’s worth trying a few different things (e.g. the Audience powerChord was a bit nicer than stock) but don’t worry too much - as long as you don’t use something gimmicky or too light, your amp is still going to sound good. One thing was clear though - the Bryston perferred being plugged directly into the wall vs. my Audience ar6 TSSOX conditioner. Even though the Audience is designed specifically with low impedance and high current delivery in mind, the Bryston felt constrained running through it - give it as direct a connection to the wall juice as possible.

Speaker cables: I got the impression that the Bryston prefers having a very direct connection to the speakers, working better with the heavier gauge cables I had on hand like the Cardas Clear Light or DH Labs Q-10 Signature (both 10 gauge or larger), vs. the Audience Au24 SX. I have a completely unsubstantiated theory that high damping factor amps employIng more negative feedback are more effective when there’s less between them and the speakers, whereas low/zero feedback designs (e.g. Pass or Ayre) don’t care as much and are more amenable to being tuned/voiced with lighter cables. Whatever the reason, I’d recommend sticking to the heavy stuff to maximize the Bryston’s grip on the speaker.

Speakers: I had a few speakers on hand, all of the 2-way monitor variety - Silverline Minuet Grand and SR-17 Supreme, Audiovector SR-1 Avantgarde Arreté, Role Audio Kayak. I really wish I had had a big 3-way floorstander as I’m sure the Bryston would have flexed its muscles and flourished wrangling a big speaker. My comparatively small speakers don’t provide that much of a challenge, all being amendable to low power tube amps. That said, the Bryston showed no favoritism towards any particular speaker - its voicing is essentially neutral and you’ll hear what the speaker is capable of. This is in contrast to my Ayre AX7e integrated, which clicks with the Silverline while sounding thin and unengaging with the Audiovector. I really did not think the Bryston would work at all with the Audiovector, an ultra high-resolution speaker that will megaphone any solid state liabilities like brightness, hardness or lack of body, but the Bryston impressively held its own with the unyielding Dane. I wouldn’t call it the most organic or emotive pairing, but they were quite agreeable working together. The Silverline SR-17 Supreme with Cardas Clear Light wound up being my preferred pairing, the combo bringing out wonderful midrange density and great dynamics, and most of my listening notes below reflect that setup.

Pure conjecture - I think the Bryston would be killer with a speaker like the Role Audio Enterprise - something a bit on the warm side with an silky-smooth but still-detailed soft dome tweeter that complements the transparency of the 4B3, and with some meat on the bottom end that could take advantage of the amp’s grip and power (I'm a fan of Role’s transmission lines). I’d also be curious to hear the 4B3 with a relatively inefficient but neutral speaker like something from ATC - that could be a good one, and ATC has a similar pro-audio pedigree. I’d steer clear of pairing with more forward/harder-sounding speakers, e.g. Focal Sopra or B&W or Paradigm Persona - not because the Bryston does anything wrong, but I frankly find those speakers with their metal/diamond drivers and higher-order crossovers too brittle and aggressive and in need of something more laid back (e.g. Naim) to sound anywhere near balanced.

Counterpoint: a reader reports getting great results with the 4B3, Focal Electra speakers and Crystal Cable with primarily hard rock and metal. I could see how the qualies of the 4B3 would click in such a system, particularly with harder-driving material.

The Sound

Out of the box, things were not promising. Compared to the Ayre AX7e I had been using for some time, or even an old Bryston B60 integrated, the 4B sounded drab. It wasn't bad per se, but everything was a little lacking - dynamics were a little flat, soundstage lacked depth, highs were a little glazed, midrange wasn't very dimensional, etc... even my wife couldn't help but comment, "this sounds boring." I saw a comment online describe the 4B3 as "gray," apt given what I was hearing for the first several days. A couple weeks later things were slowly improving, but not to the extent I was hoping. I was starting to get a little nervous about the conversation I'd be having with Bryston.

I fought the urge to swap other amps back in, and fortunately things continued to get better - much, much better. Despite having 100 hours of burn-in at the factory, the first 100-200 hours in my system were not at all representative of what this amp is capable of. After a month of continuous operation, virtually all of the aforementioned detractions had largely faded away; after 3-4 months and perhaps 500+ hours of music, it really started to push all the buttons. All my comments henceforth shall refer to the sound of the 4B after 6+ months in my system, and are representative of the long-term ownership experience.

With that out of the way... a standout aspect of the Bryston was how it delivered its obvious power with an easy finesse and speed. The Bryston sounds good for every one of its rated 300 watts (and actually more according to my unit's factory spec sheet)... this is an amp that revels in being cranked up, and the more watts I asked for the better it seemed to sound. But it also delivered those watts with delicacy and articulation, effortlessly revealing tons of musical detail in recording after recording without the typical detractions of high-power solid state - the glazed or harsh treble, the hard or murky midrange, the lack of rhythm and pulse. It was equally at ease floating Magdalena Kozena's vocals over delicate period accompaniment on a Mozart Aria, as it was hammering out the bass line of a Depeche Mode track. The 4B3's ability to reproduce music at realistic volume levels without strain or loss of transparency was addictive and had me cranking up number after number and pushing the limits of my neighbors' tolerance.

The treble was surprisingly delightful. In the past I've found big Bryston amps to lack refinement and resolution there, but the 4B3’s highs caught me off guard with how silky and delicate they were. Violins had just the right amount of brightness, bringing out the steeliness of the E string without sounding tinny, and triangles had realistic tinkle without popping out of the fabric of the soundstage. There was enough detail to do justice to the extremely high resolution AMT tweeters on my Audiovector monitors, but at no point did the 4B3 come close to burning my ears off the way some detailed amps can. Compared to the ol' Bryston B60 integrated, a longtime favorite that sacrifices some detail for sweetness and musicality, the 4B3 has far higher resolution in the upper registers that will bring out more energy without glare. There's no euphonic give in the high frequency response either, so if you need an amp that'll take some zing off a problematic tweeter (metal domes, I'm looking at you), look elsewhere.

Another nice surprise was how smooth and grainless the 4B3 was in the midrange, with just a hint of richness in the lower mids on things like cello, baritone, french horn or piano. It's subtle, and nothing like the bloom you'd get from a tube amp, or the coziness created by the Bryston B60 for that matter - just enough to balance out the transparency and power of the frequency extremes and keep the otherwise ruler-flat response from sounding too dry. Bryston claims the 4B3's quad-complementary output stage "mimics the characteristics of a Class-A design, but with dramatically lower distortion"; while it's not as round and juicy as true Class A designs like the Pass Labs XA30 or Valvet A4, it does approach their naturalness and smoothness much more than I'm used to from a high-power Class AB amp. I've found most gear that isn't blatantly colored to tend toward the leaner side these days, which can really put you in a pickle if you don't have something to balance it out. The 4B3 has a relaxed, generous quality to it which will help keep your system from getting too lean and bright, one of the more common traps of a modern system. I think this character of the 4B3 is summed up well in Christian Punter's extensive review on hifi-advice.com, and while I wouldn't go quite as far as he does, my listening observations largely align with his.

That warm, smooth quality might sound at odds with neutrality, but unlike some amps I've heard (ahem tubes) this came without biasing or distorting the sound in any particular way. Tonality of woodwind instruments in particular was spot-on, with the timbre of reed instruments - oboes, clarinets and bassoons - coming through distinctly and realistically. The wide variety of instrument timbres in a symphony orchestra are the toughest test for any gear and at no point did I pick up on anything nasal, bright, muffled or otherwise colored with the 4B3. True to its pro audio heritage, it gives the sense of telling it like it is with minimal editorializing and exceedingly low distortion.

Bryston makes much of the extensive lengths it went through in the Cubed series to both minimize internally-generated noise while maximizing rejection of external sources (e.g. RFI and power line noise). Whatever they did, it worked a treat. While the 4B3 is quiet at idle - with no input and your ear pressed up against the speaker, there's barely any hiss and zero hum - it's really the lack of audible noise and grain imparted on the signal that makes it sound so true and clean. Most solid state amps, including the older Brystons, always sounded a bit cloudy and grainy compared to the likes of Pass or Ayre. With the Cubed improvements, much of that has been scrubbed away, giving music a newfound sense of openness and purity approaching those venerable marques. Combined with fast, clean attacks, everything comes across with great clarity. Jason Kennedy describes this quality, along with all the usual British flourishes about PRaT etc., better than I could in his excellent review for The Ear - I recommend giving it a read.

The 4B3 also produced some of the best bass I have heard in my system. I've known Bryston amps to have big bass, but perhaps lacking in subtlety and definition. I found the 4B3 to be powerful for sure, but also tight, fast, and musically balanced. It was deep and tuneful, creating a feeling of unflappable stability with big orchestral music and heavy rock tracks. Sometimes amps with very high damping factor can sound lean, but the Bryston complemented its slam and control with just enough juiciness and resonance. String bass sounded full and tuneful without bloat, bass drum whacks had realistic impact, and pop/rock tracks had relentless drive. Some Class D amps I've heard capture pitch a bit more evenly (maybe due to their switching power supplies which reduce 60Hz colorations), but the Bryston is nearly their equal in that regard. It gripped the 6" woofers of the Silverline and Audiovector monitors and coaxed low notes of remarkable clarity and power within their physical limits.

Nits & Comparisons

Okay, so what doesn't the Bryston do right? Mostly little flaws of omission - subtle things that seem like fluff to non-audiophiles, but that the fanatics among us go through inordinate lengths and expense to obtain in the name of musical nirvana. While it's very detailed, it does gloss over some fine instrumental texture and spatial cues. While it's plenty dynamic, there are more organic sounding amps that convey more emotional swing and nuance - the electrifying climaxes of Maria Callas in a Puccini aria, the ebb and flow of the Vienna Phil in a Strauss waltz, the emotional surge of cellist Alisa Weilerstein in the Elgar concerto. While its midrange is very smooth, it doesn't have the liquidity of a fine tube or Class A solid state amp that makes instruments flow from the recording to your room. And its soundstage is a tick or two less deep and open, its images less dimensional and tactile than what those amps can convey.

Things got a little out of hand with the comparison testing...

For the most part, these are things you need to pay a lot more money to obtain, but some aspects can be had in this price range. E.g. the $4k (before it was discontinued) Ayre integrated gets more of the presence and immediacy of a voice, the sense that there's less between you and the performer - little nuances like clarity of diction, articulation of a bow stroke, pauses between phrases are a hair more convincing. Some people call this "inner detail" - not the obvious stuff, but the little things. The Bryston was a little laid back by comparison - not veiled, just less forthcoming - which will likely come as a relief to those with an aversion to harsh, forward solid state sound, but it's an omission nonetheless. The flip side is the Ayre pushes a bit too much in the other direction, sounding a little on edge and over-articulate compared to the unflappable Bryston, particularly with hyper-articulate speakers like the Audiovector. The 4B3 also has a more solid "core" to its sound - a sense of solidity and anchoring in the midrange. This is most apparent with notes around middle C (262Hz), where the Ayre lacks the natural weight that the Bryston captures nicely without sounding heavy or slow... again, a very endearing quality to those traditionally allergic to solid state.

An amp that made for a fascinating comparison was the Valvet A4 Mk. II ($8k) - a handmade, Class A solid state monoblock from Germany with minimalist circuitry and real soul. Despite being rated at just 55W/8Ω, with a reasonable load and volume level the Valvet sounds just as capable of macro dynamics as the Bryston while being noticeably more expressive within the melodies and more holographic with its soundstage. Tonally they were surprisingly close, both sounding full bodied in the midrange and extended in the treble. But the Valvet really has a way of projecting a compelling image and conveying a natural, singing quality that showcases the beauty of a tune and really pulls at your heartstrings. The resonance and ring of a soprano or flute, the halo around solo instruments, the height of the stage, the harmonics of an oboe - the Valvet captued these nuances with an uncanny ease and conviction that made the Bryston sound a little restrained and disconnected by comparison. However the Valvet doesn't have the same slam in the bass, won't drive as wide a range of speakers, and will run out of steam well before the Bryston even comes close to breaking a sweat.

I'll have more to say about the Valvet in its forthcoming review, but this isn't meant to be an indictment of the Bryston in any way - on the contrary, it proved itself a very fine sounding and satisfying amp, and I was impressed with how well it held up musically to a very special, highly tweaked-out audiophile amp costing over $1k more.

Verdict

Maybe I'm not talking to the right people, but the Bryston 4B Cubed seems to be flying under the audiophile radar. It's a very, very good sounding amp - great, even. Once properly run in, it possesses a subtly smooth and warm sound with none of the coldness or harshness one might be prejudiced to expect from such a powerful and practical solid state amp. And while not cheap, it's downright affordable compared to the astronomical price points in today's high-end market. It would be my absolute first choice for a combined music/home theater system, where it would have all the power and reliability to handle the needs of TV/movie watching while having plenty of refinement for music.

So it doesn't resolve the last few degrees of detail or stir the musical soul quite like the better high-end amps - the fuzz of the peach, the inner glow, the transcendent insight, whatever you want to call it. But those amps generally cost much more and/or have other limitations and compromises. For under $7k, the Bryston gives you musically satisfying reproduction that's easy to live with, and it will probably outlast every other piece of gear in your system. It's also a sound investment, maintaining resale value far better than average thanks to its durability, exceptional factor service and support, and of course that 20 year warranty.

Overall, I'd give the Bryston 4B Cubed 4 stars purely on sound quality, 5 for value, netting out to 4.5 stars overall. It's an amp you can set up and forget in most any system and just enjoy for years, and I came very, very close to purchasing the review unit. Ultimately my quest to get every last bit of that fuzz on the peach led me to continue my search for a reference amp, but there are times I wonder if I should have hung onto it... particularly now that I've moved to a larger space that could really benefit from the power, I have some pangs of regret sending it back. I enjoyed my time with the Bryston 4B Cubed and highly recommend giving it a listen - it might just be all the amp you need.

Many thanks to James Tanner @ Bryston and Micah Sheveloff @ WIRC Media for their generous loan.

[jeremycoatney]

Remember, nutritionist is an unregulated/unprotected title so literally anyone can use it and there’s plenty of completely unqualified people who do.

Dietician is the title of folks who have been properly trained and certified to know what they’re actually talking about.

So whenever there is an article talking about things nutritionists are saying; It’s highly likely to be unsubstantiated nonsense.

[nookishposts]

What do we say?

Last evening I was privy to a conversation among comfortable friends who agreed that as we have explored the years north of age 50, some things become easier. Like saying “No thanks” to an invitation without a sense of obligation, justification, or apology. I am paraphrasing one of those friends who said:” I only have so much energy and I am careful how I spend it.” She’s nailed it. We can still do most of what we have always done, but now we build in recovery time; not just physically but emotionally and even spiritually. Most of us in the age 55-60 range will admit that we feel we’ve earned the privilege of making choices with more self-interest than we once might have. There is a great strength and a knowing comfort in having acknowledged this age and stage of self-awareness, the newer self-appreciation that allows us to quietly disengage.

Saying no isn’t limited to social engagements either; it also applies to a lack of interest, favours that come with strings attached, and most bullshit in general.It doesn’t mean we become unkind, we still find patience with one another’s fanciful whims and will step up in support whenever we are genuinely needed. We listen to one another’s secret fears and nod knowingly in authentic solidarity without the need to “fix” anything. We laugh outright at one another’s nonsense in a way that only friends can...gentle admonishments served with a heapin’ helpin’ of “ I love you you big turkey!”

Saying “No” comfortably marks a kind of rite of passage. I wonder then if the same is true of saying “Yes” ? Our self-definitions and our needs naturally alter over time: “I am a parent”, “I am a daughter”, “I am a spouse”, “I am (insert any culture, hobby, profession or livelihood here)”: “I am this sum of many parts.” “I am a work in progress.”

We not only say “yes” to saying “No”, we also are saying yes to time for ourselves, both recovery and self-indulgence. We say yes to travelling places we haven’t been before because there was no room for that opportunity  while we were busy raising ourselves and others and all that entails. We say yes without guilt to asking for things for ourselves: “Honey I really need a couple of hours of downtime/a weekend away with the girls/ something to drive other than a Soccer Mom van. I’ll see you when I get back.” We need the people in our lives to acknowledge that we are still growing, still testing our limits, still curious and are finally taking time to play with all of that because we can.

My Beloved and I have undergone a journey over the last 18 months or so of figuring out what things that together or separately we are saying no and yes to. It has been in the hunt for a different kind of life, a quieter and simpler one, that we have discovered so much about what we don’t need anymore as well as those things that could be deal-breakers. We have said a resounding “yes” to purging our closets and our habits, sometimes because they are outworn and sometimes, to make room for new growth. A successful yard sale is one that means nothing you took out gets to come back in the house; if it doesn’t sell it gets donated, etc, which can feel like losing 200 pounds of ballast. We put half our stuff into storage in order to show and sell our home and we were amazed at how much lighter both we and the house itself felt. It was a bit unnerving at first to not have stacks of books on every shelf, momentos everywhere,  and a chair in every corner, but boy, did it bring a lot of light into our spaces, both literal and figurative. We each had the opportunity to go through “stuff” and decide what was truly worth keeping. It opened our attitudes a little wider in terms of where we might like to find ourselves next. We dearly love our families and community but do we really need to stay in the city in order to keep them? We love the work that we do, but do we really need to keep doing it full-time when there are other interests that tempt our attention ?

Leaving a job to devote my full energies to painting and clearing an entire house was both wonderful and not, because it took away part of my self-definition. In conversation people invariably ask: “and what do you do for a living?” Right now, I don’t. And that’s all kinds of weird. I write in my spare time, but I don’t make a living at it so I can’t really call myself a Writer. My massage table is packed away into storage with most of our belongings because we thought we would have a new destination secured by now, so I am not a practitioner either. My Beloved is happy to have me doing all the background stuff while she luckily earns enough to keep us both, benefits and all. But right now we aren’t at “home” in the traditional sense. We define ourselves and our choices often by the company we keep, the employment we have and the place we live. When one or more of those key things become ambiguous, it presents a quandary about exactly what and even when to say yes or no. We have found ourselves fine-tuning the definition of what “home” means exactly.

Over 11 years we’ve talked about living much more simply and harmoniously with the land around us; producing most of what we consume, using the energies of our minds and bodies, hopefully staying healthy and independent within our means for as long as possible. 10 years ago, we were all prepared to reclaim a brown-space and build ourselves a green-run straw-bale cottage. We took courses, helped heave and plaster bales on other people’s builds and constantly modified our designs. As we got older, we looked into adaptive technologies; maybe taking an old building and greening it to be more efficient and sustainable; lower cost, less waste. We compared design/build features, studied geographic land values and took a hard look at our resources weighed against our respective ages and abilities. In the past 18 months we have looked seriously at several different options along the spectrum and missed out on several of them because they were contingent on the sale of our own little city house. But really, they haven’t turned out to be losses so much as lessons. Each place offered a different set of possibilities, and we know that between us, we can make almost anything work as long as the structural bones are good and the soil is clean. We’ve said “Yes”  several different times. But the Universe seems to say “No, not yet”, even though each successive option brought us closer to our ideals.Once our city house finally sold, we quickly said “yes”, and changed it to a “no”; it the first place that came along  and we were impatient to move on. We certainly could have made it work, but there were hidden costs we decided we could not say yes to without sacrificing  part of what we’d learned we truly need. Most recently, we found a property we thought ticked the greatest number of boxes yet on our yes/no list, but one more time, it was not meant to be. Someone else got there first. We’ve come so close, a couple of times, only to find ourselves back again, still searching. There have been moments when it all feels quite personal though we know that it’s not. We know the pieces are bound to come together but the patience is hard.

At ages 58 and 53, we are blessed to have the luxury of saying yes or no. We are technically without a home though we have been made very welcome and comfortable at a friend’s house for as long as we need one. We have politely said “no” to people who’ve suggested we are crazy and should just let go of the dream. We have said “yes” to every creative idea presented to us, no matter how outlandish or daunting they might sound, because we have many loved ones who genuinely want to see us have a crack at making magic, and who very much want to come along for the ride. We’ve never felt like we were doing any of this in isolation. Our cheerleaders are just getting louder. The most resounding “yes” always comes from our own contemporaries who are also giving themselves permission to stretch and learn and say “yes” to their own dreams.

And while we continue our search, there are so many things to always say “yes” to: the company of old friends, the laughter of “I knew you when” and the communal dissecting of ourselves as 50-somethings who know damned well we are a long way from done. To the decent wines, and using the good china, to the shredding of old hurts and the letting go of mouldy baggage sitting too long in the back of the cupboard. We finally have the courage to bring the shadowy bits into the light and watch them dissolve as so much night mist, because that’s how unsubstantial they have become. We give away things we once treasured to someone we know will discover new joy in them. We make space to expand our perspective as we fine-tune our focus. We adjust our sails, knowing that the wind will change again anyway.

There is such beauty and such hope in the luscious and judicious use of the words “yes” and “no”. Say yes to tears of loss and longing, then dry them with another “yes” of new people and experiences. Say “no” to the obligation of events you don’t want to attend and “yes” to the ones you’ve always been curious about. Contradict yourself now and then, it certainly is humbling to get caught in your own clumsiness and have to regain your footing. “Oops” , and “oh well” also come in handy. We all fall. We get up, usually with a little help , and we just get on with it. Yes, yes we do.