I recall Kurt distributing this letter, or an earlier version of it, by hand, at a past meeting. Comments made to or overheard by me at the time uniformly reflected an attitude that this was Kurt's outlook and that it was strongly counter to the feelings of those other members.
I'm appalled that this letter and the attitude it expressed has led to people whose viewpoint is so valuable to the knowledge base and culture of ARSC have left it. We are the poorer for it.
It should not have been published without response in the same newsletter issue.
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Burgess, Scott
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 9:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] [EXTERNAL] [ARSCLIST] Comments on the open letter
Well-said, Gary. I'm chiming in as a fairly new member of ARSC, but I feel it important to lend my support to any effort to make this organization as open and welcoming as possible. (Chuck's first reply also says it well.) Not only is it the right thing to do, it is also vital to the continued survival and success of the organization and to the field of sound preservation for which you all have contributed so much. I'm part of two other fields that are currently undertaking a long-overdue reckoning of this sort, those of classical music and audio engineering education, and I'm encouraged to see this honest and respectful conversation happening here as well. Let's keep it that way. Kurt is free to express his opinions in whatever forum he chooses, but ARSC definitely needs to avoid the impression that this is the main POV of the organization. Giving his views so much public space and no counterpoint is troubling indeed.
Scott Burgess | Manager of Recording Labs and Live Sound | Lecturer
Dept of Music and Entertainment Industry Studies
University of Colorado Denver
[log in to unmask] | cam.ucdenver.edu <http://cam.ucdenver.edu/>
On 7/20/20, 7:20 AM, "Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List on behalf of Gary A. Galo" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
It was downright irresponsible for that letter to be published in the Newsletter, at least by itself. The Editor of the Newsletter should have, at the very least, sent that letter to a few other ARSC members, and the ENTIRE ARSC Board, for peer review, inviting them to offer their own views for publication in the same issue. Publishing that letter by itself could give readers the impression that Kurt's view is a prevailing one at ARSC, which is certainly not the case (I believe he speaks for a miniscule minority in our organization, at least I hope so). I would encourage other members, including members of the Board, to submit letters for publication in the next Newsletter, in the interests of offering a more balanced perspective on this subject, and upholding ARSC's reputation as an inclusive and welcoming professional organization.
Audio Engineer Emeritus
The Crane School of Music
SUNY at Potsdam, NY 13676
"Great art presupposes the alert mind of the educated listener."
"A true artist doesn't want to be admired, he wants to be believed."
"If you design an audio system based on the premise that nothing is audible,
on that system nothing will be audible."
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Corey Bailey
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 8:25 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ARSCLIST] Comments on the open letter
This message did not originate from SUNY Potsdam or one of its trusted senders. Do not open attachments, click on links, or provide your credentials if the source is suspicious.
In the last newsletter, there was an open letter to the ARSC membership titled "Letters to the Editor" by Kurt Nauck.
Anyone care to comment on that letter?
Corey Bailey Audio Engineering