Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2009 17:00:11 GMT
Thanks Lunaman! After you pointed that out, it was obvious to pick out the huge guard, falchioned shaped tip and the little curve in the handle. =D
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Sept 23, 2009 17:04:19 GMT
All the same, there are still certain sword models that pretty much every one agrees on.
pretty much everybody who likes the type of sword represented will like the V.A. AT304s or AT 303s. the people who don't like them are few and far between and generally just don't like that TYPE of sword. so one good way to go is find the most popular reviewed sword of the type you like and take the plunge. buying from Kult of Athena with their great return policy is never a mistake either.
in this way you will start to understand how your opinions compare to the forum's and a particular reviewer's
movie reviews are subjective but we still like them. it's really about the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by wiwingti on Sept 23, 2009 17:07:35 GMT
Talking to a brick wall, but the choice of words can give an impression that may not have been intended. “ I dunno Kid... the guy just joined, and his very first message is a 'We need to find a better way to do reviews...' Not 'Hi, how are you guys, I'm a sword collector as well' he just jumps right in and starts saying what we are doing wrong. “ One might interpret that as meaning something like…. "Boy, you ain't been here long enough to speak to US without being spoken to first. Keep yer mouth shut, yer eyes open, and study on our vast and sage knowledge. You may ask US questions if you do it in a manner WE old timers consider polite and respectful. Who knows, you may just learn something. After a time, when WE think you have learned sufficiently, WE will then allow you make suggestions to US. ““ Also, what is this 'We' buissness... that was his first post! There is no 'WE' yet, you just got here! “ One might interpret that as meaning something like…. “ 'We' ?....WE ?!!!. WE old timers will let you know when you can consider yourself to be one of US ! "“ At the very least, I think the OP is rude and assumptive and arrogant... at most, pure 100% grade A troll. “One might interpret that as meaning something like…. “ Because if you say something that one of WE old timers think is a bit pushy, you must expect to be spoken down to in a rude, judgmental, assumptive and arrogant fashion by WE members who have been here for soooo long. And remember, this is a Friendly Forum, the most friendly on the interNETwebz. “
Recieved a PM and i have to apologize guys. when i wrote i was completely agree with Alvin on that up here, i tought it was directed at the original post. since this wasn't directed at the original post, i will not comment because , it seems that i missunderstood the way it was going or where or to whom it was directed at. marc
|
|
Avery
Member
Manufacturer/Vendor
"It's alright little brother... There are more!!!
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by Avery on Sept 24, 2009 2:06:12 GMT
All other speculations aside ( which I have as well) Heres an idea. Instead of creating a robotic arm or some such thing, how 'bout this.
Place a blade in a padded vice edge up. Then set a spring arm next to it that operates with centrifugal force, that way it enters the blade in an arc. Use a torque wrench to set and measure the arm, then release and see how it cuts. May not be the best idea, and safety must be considered, but the only variable is the blade.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2009 3:11:11 GMT
All other speculations aside ( which I have as well) Heres an idea. Instead of creating a robotic arm or some such thing, how 'bout this. Place a blade in a padded vice edge up. Then set a spring arm next to it that operates with centrifugal force, that way it enters the blade in an arc. Use a torque wrench to set and measure the arm, then release and see how it cuts. May not be the best idea, and safety must be considered, but the only variable is the blade. True...but do you think your average new sword buyer (especially the younger ones) or hell even most of the regular members will able to do such safely? Quite frankly if we had to resort to such for reviews, I won´t be writing another review again as my mechanically set up is likely to explode and kill somebody. My aptitude for mechanical engineering was 32...out of 150. In any case for some something like that, I´d rather just barrow the mythbuster´s robotic arm then hope that nobody´s home made rig doesn´t end up killing somebody.
|
|
|
Post by sparky on Sept 24, 2009 20:02:16 GMT
It may be because I'm a novice sword guy, but more than half of the time I read the specs. as blah blah blah. I am more interested in the opinions of the reviewers, how it feels and handles kwim. I bought a sword awhile back 'cause the manufacture was donating money to SBG, hadn't planned on buying it but hey it's a sword right. Well to make a long story long, it felt really good in my (inexperienced) hand and is now one of my favorite. All because of the feel of it. I'd have to look up the specs. on it to give length, weight, p.o.b, etc etc etc...... Again this is just me and I am a complete novice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2009 21:06:47 GMT
I think that whatever kind of Rube Goldberg device you can think up to test swords, you'll never do better than the ol' human touch. It just takes many reviews of the same sword to get a concensus that will be meaningful to someone who is first considering buying said sword. You read reviews, you judge the reviewers experience, you decide which reviewers you like and trust, and if they do a review of the sword you're considering, you read, ask questions, and decide based on the information you get. It may not be a perfect system, and you may decide to buy or not based on other factors such as stats or looks or whatever. No review system will be perfect because we all decide what we like based on different data. It's all subjective anyway!
|
|
|
Post by YlliwCir on Sept 24, 2009 21:15:16 GMT
I think a review as such is always the opinion of the reviewer. For example a movie review, book review, restaurant review ect... What is being suggested here is a standardized test of some sort which is usually left to another entity as is done on automobiles like crash tests and such. I don't think it's in the reviewer purvey to do such tests.
|
|
|
Post by wiwingti on Sept 24, 2009 21:21:55 GMT
I think a review as such is always the opinion of the reviewer. For example a movie review, book review, restaurant review ect... What is being suggested here is a standardized test of some sort which is usually left to another entity as is done on automobiles like crash tests and such. I don't think it's in the reviewer purvey to do such tests. another thing,, who will buy swords just to destroy them and show to people till what degree it can endure lol. better take the money and trow it directly to the garbage.
|
|
|
Post by YlliwCir on Sept 24, 2009 21:24:39 GMT
another thing,, who will buy swords just to destroy them and show to people till what degree it can endure lol. I believe you refer to Paul Southren.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2009 22:34:57 GMT
Ya, who needs Rube? We got Paul!!! ;D
|
|
Avery
Member
Manufacturer/Vendor
"It's alright little brother... There are more!!!
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by Avery on Sept 24, 2009 22:47:18 GMT
All other speculations aside ( which I have as well) Heres an idea. Instead of creating a robotic arm or some such thing, how 'bout this. Place a blade in a padded vice edge up. Then set a spring arm next to it that operates with centrifugal force, that way it enters the blade in an arc. Use a torque wrench to set and measure the arm, then release and see how it cuts. May not be the best idea, and safety must be considered, but the only variable is the blade. True...but do you think your average new sword buyer (especially the younger ones) or hell even most of the regular members will able to do such safely? Quite frankly if we had to resort to such for reviews, I won´t be writing another review again as my mechanically set up is likely to explode and kill somebody. My aptitude for mechanical engineering was 32...out of 150. In any case for some something like that, I´d rather just barrow the mythbuster´s robotic arm then hope that nobody´s home made rig doesn´t end up killing somebody. A valid point. Plus an idea like this wouldn't be feasible wide scale. Again, maybe not my best idea.
|
|
|
Post by wiwingti on Sept 24, 2009 22:53:03 GMT
another thing,, who will buy swords just to destroy them and show to people till what degree it can endure lol. I believe you refer to Paul Southren. Hell yeah man, if it wasn't of Paul a lot of us would still be buying crap everywhere, and i wouldn't be a seller neither. He is the man for that but, as everyone,, there is a limit to try to destruct swords just for fun,, anyway, who have the money to do it? lol i think that the way the review have changed and are now,it is great that way, and commenting (on the first two post) saying WE was very insulting for all of those who have past a lot of hours on writing reviews and tried to be the most (between positive and negative) neutral? lol as far as the ( we need) i personally do not say it and i am here since more than a year. so,, to the newbee, take your time before trying to tell (we) how to do or not lol that forum Paul created is great and helpfull. and all what people have to do, is read the review the good way, and think about the fact that the person who do it will describe the most possible things on it that he/she can for people to decide if they want it or not. it can be positive and it can be negative but, if read correctly, you can make a choice to want it or not. hope i didn't repeat too much and explained well lol when it comes to details like that i let myself go and click on post because if i read it back i get all mixed up mouhahahahahaha ;D marc lecompte
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2009 0:20:02 GMT
I believe you refer to Paul Southren. Hell yeah man, if it wasn't of Paul a lot of us would still be buying crap everywhere, and i wouldn't be a seller neither. He is the man for that but, as everyone,, there is a limit to try to destruct swords just for fun,, anyway, who have the money to do it? lol i think that the way the review have changed and are now,it is great that way, and commenting (on the first two post) saying WE was very insulting for all of those who have past a lot of hours on writing reviews and tried to be the most (between positive and negative) neutral? lol as far as the ( we need) i personally do not say it and i am here since more than a year. so,, to the newbee, take your time before trying to tell (we) how to do or not lol that forum Paul created is great and helpfull. and all what people have to do, is read the review the good way, and think about the fact that the person who do it will describe the most possible things on it that he/she can for people to decide if they want it or not. it can be positive and it can be negative but, if read correctly, you can make a choice to want it or not. hope i didn't repeat too much and explained well lol when it comes to details like that i let myself go and click on post because if i read it back i get all mixed up mouhahahahahaha ;D marc lecompte Amen, my fellow citizen of Quebec +1 Karma
|
|
|
Post by wiwingti on Sept 25, 2009 0:53:26 GMT
thanks tall sebastian ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2009 1:11:17 GMT
I think a review as such is always the opinion of the reviewer. For example a movie review, book review, restaurant review ect... What is being suggested here is a standardized test of some sort which is usually left to another entity as is done on automobiles like crash tests and such. I don't think it's in the reviewer purvey to do such tests. Agreed 100%
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2009 4:42:06 GMT
I move that there's nothing wrong with a pro/con system as long as a con isn't "not a color I like".
Perhaps we could add a "moot" category regarding those?
M.
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Sept 25, 2009 8:26:40 GMT
I move that there's nothing wrong with a pro/con system as long as a con isn't "not a color I like". Perhaps we could add a "moot" category regarding those? M. I doubt its nessecary... a con that is obvously due to personal taste is normaly very easy to see as such... and most reviews I have read with something like that always mention it as such. Example: "Con - Fake Hamon. Some may not mind this, but my personal taste I prefer a hamon to be real, or not be there at all." I have seen cons listed like that many times... where the reviewer makes it clear that its his/her own personal taste that they didn't like that aspect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2009 11:52:24 GMT
Swords are basically a shaped piece of metal. These objective testing theories are not really feasible. A swordsman needs to be trained on how to use this sharp piece of metal. Historically, training has always been the way to knowledge. The trained swordsman will make his sword perform, whether thrusting, slashing or cutting.
The Japanese sword is often dismissed as a thrusting sword but in trained hands it is perfect for the job.
You cannot test a sword that is devoid of the experience of someone using it to the sword as a static object(throwing stuff at it). In east and west there has always been training to animate the object, the more training the more deadly and useful the weapon would become.
Physics is useful but so is Quantum mechanics. Raven
|
|
|
Post by brotherbanzai on Sept 25, 2009 16:24:04 GMT
I second raven's suggestion that we evaluate swords with quantum mechanics. We put a water bottle in a large box, suspend a sword (held in place by a string that will be automatically cut when a Geiger counter detects the radio active decay of an atom that has a 50% chance of decaying) over the water bottle. Then we close the box, thus placing the bottle in a superstate of being both cut and not cut. We can also test POB by slapping the pommel and seeing if the blade moves as both a wave and a particle. JK I know that's not what was meant. But raven makes a good point. Even if we could come up with objective tests that anyone could do, they wouldn't necessarily tell us much about the sword because how well the sword functions as a sword wouldn't likely be accurately determined by someone who doesn't really understand how it's supposed to function. And even that will vary from person to person. For example, I could do a review of a rapier. I could say if it was potentially good based on a general knowledge of swords and their construction. But I couldn't say if it is any good because I have no training in the use of a rapier. Furthermore, I could also evaluate a long-sword; which I am trained in. I could say whether or not it was a good sword and how good because I know how it's supposed to be used. Yet even then, to some extant, that only applies to those that are trained the same way I am. A long sword can be perfect in every way but have a grip that is too short rendering the entire sword useless for it's intended purpose for me, but not necessarily for someone who trains differently. More objective tests would be great, but difficult for everyone to do (not everyone wants to spend money on mats or has easy access to bamboo for example) and only just so useful anyway. As others have mentioned, multiple reviews of the same sword by different reviewers is a great idea.
|
|