"feel" once more

[Philpug]

I skied a DPS Foundation build ski back to back with one of the Alchemist builds. Same length and waist. The Foundation felt "warmer" while the Alchemist felt more high strung. Not that either of those are bad but, you're right, vocabulary is tough.

Warmer is one way. Analog verses digital?

 

[cantunamunch]

Analog verses digital?

We tried using that to describe carbon fiber feel at one point, didn't really work terribly well.

 

[David Chaus]

I skied a DPS Foundation build ski back to back with one of the Alchemist builds. Same length and waist. The Foundation felt "warmer" while the Alchemist felt more high strung. Not that either of those are bad but, you're right, vocabulary is tough.

I like to think of the Foundation as “precise and responsive” and the Alchemist as “preciser and responsiver.” I loved the Alchemist Cassiar 87 in the groomed runs and soft snow we had a Alta on that demo day at the Gathering, effortless and intuitive. OTOH the Foundation was less chattery in some refrozen crud, though I must say few skis would actually make those conditions “fun.”

 

[silverback]

Ski Canada seems to do the magazine review a lot better than Ski Magazine. The reviews here are great but could be more in-depth like Blister, I really like how they do the measurements, mount-points, profile photos, etc. Also, their deep dive comparisons, like a tag-team cage match, are helpful as there are a lot of choices out there in each quiever slot. Realskiers can fall into the marketing prose thing, especially over the past few years. I like how they seperate skiers by power and finesse "there are two sub-genres of experts: those who extend their feet from the body's centerline, tilt their skis to a high angle relative to the snow surface and drive the skis rather than just standing on them, versus those who keep their feet under their shoulders, use relatively low edge angles and allow their weight and speed to generate the force required to direct the ski."

The job is not an easy one. Skis feel and ski differently depending on length, tune, mount point, snow and terrain differences, skier size, style, and ability, etc.

 

[pchewn]

Hmm I use buzzy as the opposite of damp.

Luckily, we don't have to come up with our own word. Control theory specialists use three words to describe the response of a system to an impulse stimulus:

Critically Damped: Returns to equilibrium as fast as possible.
Over Damped: Returns to equilibrium slower than is possible.
Under Damped: Oscillates before returning to equilibrium.

 

[cantunamunch]

Luckily, we don't have to come up with our own word. Control theory specialists use three words to describe the response of a system to an impulse stimulus:

Critically Damped: Returns to equilibrium as fast as possible.
Over Damped: Returns to equilibrium slower than is possible.
Under Damped: Oscillates before returning to equilibrium.

The problem is that all those terms have popular language meaning and connotations - and people will fight us tooth and nail as ivory tower elitists (and worse) if we try to get them to reform their language use.

 

[Guy in Shorts]

Feel is the one bias that most skiers have little control. Tend to drift towards perfectly dampened skis that can driven with minimum edge angle. Made the comment to Brian Finch that I would ski on any skis from @Ron personal quiver and be happy just because I agree his reviews of serval skis. For a Steamboat based skier that I never met chances are the if he likes the feel of the ski so will I.

 

[Andy Mink]

Feel is the one bias that most skiers have little control. Tend to drift towards perfectly dampened skis that can driven with minimum edge angle. Made the comment to Brian Finch that I would ski on any skis from @Ron personal quiver and be happy just because I agree his reviews of serval skis. For a Steamboat based skier that I never met chances are the if he likes the feel of the ski so will I.

That's a great place to start. Find a reference ski or two, then someone who feels the same as you do and skis about the same and you have a solid start.

 

[Tricia]

My 14 year old was skimming it and asked "is this magazine written by the Atomic company?"

I've hears this many times this year.

Because feel can't be turned into a number or put in an excel spreadsheet. It's inconvenient. Most don't or won't take the time anymore.

This has been a part of our discussion many times. I think the numbers game is a disservice to the skis and the skiers.

That said, I'm not sure the one-line "Who is it for" always touches on what I want. It may be a start...but one-liners are not usually aimed at my particular issue.

How would you improve upon this? I'm asking because we want to continue to improve what we do without reinventing the wheel.
Who is it for? A woman looking for a daily driver with energy and finesse

Who is it not for? A woman looking for a damp cruiser

I really like the format of the reviews here as well, but when a review says a ski is or is not for the bigger, stronger skier, I always wonder if the stronger part relates purely to muscle or perhaps partly to technique. For me as a perpetually advancing intermediate and a Clydesdale, it would help if there was some finer differentiation.

Again, maybe we can improve on verbiage, but also, you have the benefit of having a conversation with the tester, which can clarify.
This is one of the reasons we feel that we differentiate from static reviews.

 

[Ron]

Feel is the one bias that most skiers have little control. Tend to drift towards perfectly dampened skis that can driven with minimum edge angle. Made the comment to Brian Finch that I would ski on any skis from @Ron personal quiver and be happy just because I agree his reviews of serval skis. For a Steamboat based skier that I never met chances are the if he likes the feel of the ski so will I.

Hey thanks. Are you in Steamboat? If so, let’s get together for beer with @Bruuuce

 

[Bruuuce]

Hey thanks. Are you in Steamboat? If so, let’s get together for beer with @Bruuuce

Beer is always good...

 

[tch]

How would you improve upon this? I'm asking because we want to continue to improve what we do without reinventing the wheel.
Who is it for? A woman looking for a daily driver with energy and finesse

Who is it not for? A woman looking for a damp cruiser

Hi Tricia,
I think your proposed language is better...but connotations being what they are, I might read "damp cruiser" as a lifeless, intermediate ski vs a ski "with energy and finess". For instance, I think a ski can be "energetic" AND damp. For me, what I'm looking for a ski that is, to use pchewn's words and description "critically damped". I also like an energetic ski that asks me to be reasonably on top of my game. So "cruiser" sounds unappealing -- like all I have to do is shove it around with some low angles -- whereas "finesse" sounds good.

I know car analogies are overworked and even cliche, but I often say I'm looking for an Audi A4 rather than a Miata. German vs. Japanese cars? Maybe some kind of analogy????

 

[laine]

Thanks all for contributing. But I've also wondered: what word IS the opposite of "damp"? For me, it's a "boingy", light, feel -- lots of vibration. Skis feel skittery, insubstantial, easily pushed off line. But I'm also aware that my words carry negative connotations, and that some folks LIKE this feeling of lightness on their feet, the sense that they can quickly alter their line. So...vocabulary for that feel?

Not to be proscriptive, but would it make sense to outline a list of descriptive terms and definitions that can be used across all the reviewers? That way, everyone is speaking the same language. Too much?