On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:30:07 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 19:12:48 +0000, Goofball_star_dot_etal
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

No, YOU lose, because there's nothing there about "cutting the grass".

I've seen it, boyo. It was cut alright, mum knows her grass.. They
probably get some deaf sod like a classical performer to do it.

Have some mo
http://www.artsadmin.co.uk/artists/a...hesistext.html





BTW, I have no doubt that SOMEBODY has done it. People have certainly
done it with grain and corn and just about ANYTHING can be done in the
name of art (one artist designated a column of air above a certain
plot of land as "art"). Heck, artistic grass cutting is done at
American Football stadiums and baseball stadiums all the time.

I'm sure that Arnold thanks you for attempting to protect his mangling
of the English language though.

Hardly

Shame that you exposed your lack of
comprehension skills though.

Better than your welsh, I think.

"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message : Better than
your *welsh
, I think.
:
* so your real name could be Latte Tod Rats Labfoocgh ... interesting :-)
R.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be
hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

It's clearly a false statement.

Bad bet. Arny doesn't post things like this if he doesn't have data to back
them up.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Andre Jute wrote:
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

While in this thread I'm glad to see Poopie do some work for a change
rather than just carp uselessly, the context of Krueger's lie was not
about orchestral performers.

You're lying again. He specifically mentioned them.


In fact, Krueger doesn't know about which musicians he made this
blanket accusion of hearing damage because I never said which
performers I used.

Actually you did in at least one post.


That is why Krueger is being asked specifically to:

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Get used to the fact that if it's about audio, Arny will have data to back
him up.


Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue

And one you don't seem to possess.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Krueger, I know all that stuff below. But it is about orchestral
musicians and singers and jazzmen. They're not the musicians I used for
my tests.

THEN WHAT KIND OF MUSICANS DID YOU USE?


You rashly made a statement in a particular context about
musicians whose description you did not know. Now I'm asking you to
prove it. None of the stuff below is more than marginally relevant.
Stop wriggling and get on with your proof.

STOP PLAYING GAMES AND GI E SPECIFICS ON THE KIND OF PEOPLE YOU USED AND
YOU'LL GET A SPECIFIC ANSWER

So far data has been provided on many diffferent kind of perormers, what did
you use? People who play the Zither? Ducimer? Autoharp? Harmonica? Stop
being such a **** and get on with it.

You want a specific answer give specific data.

Andre Jute
Precision is the essential art of science

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also
cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the
high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while
practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri,
Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing
disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common
maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians
have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely
to be
hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

It's clearly a false statement.

Bad bet. Arny doesn't post things like this if he doesn't have data to
back them up.

It definitely separated the posers from the players.

"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass
can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't
make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

Again. ;-)

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 19:50:45 +0000, Goofball_star_dot_etal
wrote:

I'm sure that Arnold thanks you for attempting to protect his mangling
of the English language though.

Hardly

OK, so he DOESN'T thank you.

Ungrateful sod.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 15:57:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

Again. ;-)

As previously pointed out, nothing in there about cutting the grass.

So YOU lose.

Again.

Andre Jute a écrit :
Lionel wrote:

Dédé Jute a écrit :


Perhaps you're having a linguistic misunderstanding, Lee-oooh-knell. I
couldn't have "done an ass of himself" because the performers involved
were not orchestral.


Prove it !!!


You're getting hysterical, Lionel.

Arny Kruger told a lie about performers without knowing who they are or
what they play or where.

IMHO Arnold Krueger bring our attention on the fact that musicians are a
group of person "at risk" concerning hearing problems.
According to all the links posted it seems that musicians are more
subject than the rest of the population to "hearing problems".

"Precision is the essential art of science"

This is why I ask you to prove that in the panel of musicians you have
selected for your blind tests none of them were playing or have played
in large ensemble.
Moreover since you was *informed* that musicians are a population "at
risk" I suppose that you have requiered from them a recent *audiogram*
before engaging them in your test session.
Can you please confirm us these two points ?

If not your :

"In my experience professional musicians in blind tests prefer tubes."

Is a big bull**** lie to which you can add your presomptuous :

"Precision is the essential art of science"

Obviously you can consider my questions with your usual contempt and
playing with my name up to the end of the night... You will remain a
sterile old braggart

Looking forward to hear from you... soon. ;-)



--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500

George M. Middius a écrit :

Andre Jute said to La Sale Salope:


I cannot imagine why you believe I should help slime like Arny Krueger
escape the consequences of his lies.


You've touched on the central mystery of la phenomene de Lionella, as it's
sometimes known on RAO. Namely, why does poor Slut have such an unfettered
dedication to Mr. ****? She ignores all of the Beast's nastiness, all of its
lies, all of its empty-headed and ignorant posturing about technical
matters. At the same time, Slut lunges viciously at anybody who dares to
mock Turdborg, let alone embarass him with facts or logic, as you've done in
this particular thread.

Sluttie tells us she's not a Kroopologist.

I never pretend that. :-D


In truth, under the literal
meaning of the term, she probably isn't one. But her unthinking and
reflexive defenses of the Big ****, as predictable as Old Faithful, have
buried her inextricably in a state of extreme Kroofulness.

And nobody knows exactly why Lionella chooses to ally herself with this
odious and craven kreature.


RAO is my bistrot, my FoxNews.
Without Arnold Krueger on RAO no George M. Middius, no Dave Weil, no
Arthur Tsechmeister/Sackman, no André Jute... and obviously no Lionel
Chapuis.
I *never* read what Arnold Krueger write, I just like to read what
others answer him.

You and so many others are just like these insects flying around the
lamp on summer evening. Arnold Krueger *attract* you.
The more you write about Arnold Krueger the more your are his
sockpuppet.

The object of my contribution isn't Arnold Krueger since I am not
interested in what he use to write. I just like to watch the mores and
behaviour of all the fauna which gravitate around him.
He makes you tell so much interesting things... ;-)

For example, George, according to your nomenclature André Jute is a
"Krooborg" since he was proudly refering to blind test like a
scientifical evidence of tube amps superiority.

George M. Middius is bantering with a Krooborg... Funny no ?

When I say you that RAO is full of surprise...
When I say you that in the end Arnold Krueger make you doing exactly
what he wants you do ! :-D


--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500

Lionel wrote:

Looking forward to hear from you... soon. ;-)

Isn't Jute one of Middius's sockpuppets?

Arny Krueger a écrit :
"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:


On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass
can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't
make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.


http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.


Again. ;-)

Louder !!!
....He is deaf. )


--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...
Lionel wrote:

Looking forward to hear from you... soon. ;-)

Isn't Jute one of Middius's sockpuppets?

El Dot misses the target again. What a shame, he has so much potential....
sigh

Dédé Jute a écrit :

There are three awful truths about the French which it is not
politically correct to mention:

First lie from Dédé.
It is worldwide known that "France bashing" is à la mode since Feb/March
2003.


1. They arrogantly think they have all the brains in the world.

Second lie from Dédé.
Which is obvioulsy wrong, the country is still open to the
immigration... ;-)


2. They are bullies.


That's true and moronic braggarts are our prefered victims.


3. They are ineffably stupid, best seen in their self-laceration, of
which Lionel several times assualting me after I demonstrated on his
skin that I am not a victim, is a good example.

Dédé Jute is not only a famous scriptwriter he is also a casting
director. Too bad that he is the only star he knows...


Dédé Jute

PS Be kind to Arny now that he has admitted he made a gross error. He
needs your loving kindness, George, and that of Margaret von B.

Conclusion : Dédé is an asslicker.


Hey Dédé, if you decide again to cross France in your old GS make a stop
in Saint-Etienne, I will pay you a glass of St Joseph.



--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500

Iain Churches said:

1. The violinists

Careful! It says "violists."

Was this Arny again? Maybe he has special information
relating to baroque (pre-classical) ensembles, where the
viol, with six strings, was indeed used.

But, there again, perhaps he just can't spell:-))

Krooglish is the ideal dialect for whitewashing small differences. :-)

In , Schizoid Man wrote :

Lionel wrote:

Looking forward to hear from you... soon. ;-)

Isn't Jute one of Middius's sockpuppets?


Are you also giving attention to these paranoid considerations ?


--
"Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?"

Dave Weil, Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15

Are you the Andy Cowley who is ****ed off at me because I potted your
wife's countryman, the little Serbian fascist Choky?

Andy Cowley wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:



Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue


Second to honesty, but you wouldn't know about that.

It appears that your accusation about Arnie is in
fact Jute Lie No. 1.618 * 10^99. Orchestral
musicians _do_ indeed suffer from noise induced
hearing damage. Care to apologise?

Not at all. You see, your bumbuddy Krueger spouted off about a group of
people without discovering which group of people they were. I carefully
didn't tell him which class of performers I used for my tests. They
weren't orchestral musicians.

Now Krueger, who pretends to be a scientist, having spouted off on a
subject, is running around trying to discover what the subject was.
Neat little experiment to discover what Krueger is made of, don't you
think? He clearly has no understanding of scientific method, for a
start.

For another thing, if Krueger had any decency, he would have admitted
his error immediately and apologized. Instead he tries to cover up with
personal abuse.

You're idiot for trying to defend the indefensible, Cowley. You're a
hypocrite, Cowley, for defending indefensible scum like Krueger who is
caught out in a gross lie -- because you have some personal beef with
me.

Andy

Unsigned out of contempt
Science is an impersonal art without room for personalities

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Andre Jute wrote:
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

While in this thread I'm glad to see Poopie do some work for a change
rather than just carp uselessly, the context of Krueger's lie was not
about orchestral performers.

You're lying again. He specifically mentioned them.


In fact, Krueger doesn't know about which musicians he made this
blanket accusion of hearing damage because I never said which
performers I used.

Actually you did in at least one post.

Really. Then why didn't Krueger talk about them? Why did Krueger talk
about a subject of which he knew nothing and then, when it was pointed
out to him, start trying to find out if the subject was orchestal
layers, piccolo players, singers, etc, etc, a whole long list.

Tell me Mr Mickey McMickey, does even a stage fool like you speak on a
subject you pulled out of the air, and give irrelevant references, and
abuse everyone else in the conversation, and then be forced to ask,
"Eh, what is the subject under discussion anyway?"

That is what Kruger did.

He doesn't know which performers I was talking about because I
carefully didn't tell him. It was a test I devised to discover if
Krueger honours the scienitific method. He clearly doesn't. Krueger has
no idea of scientific method. Krueger merely likes hearing the sound of
his own voice.

Krueger is a proven liar, and a clumsy oaf like you cannot prove
otherwise.

That is why Krueger is being asked specifically to:

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Get used to the fact that if it's about audio, Arny will have data to back
him up.

I've already proven that Krueger is a pretend-expert. Knowledgeable
people don't throw a lot of scare stories into the air and hope to hit
a target. They chose the target and then aim their information at it.
In this instance Krueger is still running around in circles like a dog
on bad dope, trying to find out the target.

You should know that I've already asked my professional associates to
look at Arnie's socalled ABX site. When their reports are in I shall,
if that site is still up, make and publish an analysis of Krueger's
gross misunderstandings and errors in placebo testing.

Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue

And one you don't seem to possess.

Oh, I'm demonstrating it to the satisfaction of all the better minds
than yours. That is why no one of any consequence tries to defend
Krueger. He has made an irretrievable error which displays at once his
ignorance and his lack of scientific rigour, his vicious character and
his deceitful debating method. I have a mailbox full of admiration from
my peers for another clever piece of work out of my online motivational
laboratory. I have won a lot of money in bets by predicting what
Krueger will do next.

You are blinded by love, Nyobe, Queen of Darkness.

Andre Jute

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

You should know that I've already asked my professional associates to
look at Arnie's socalled ABX site. When their reports are in I shall,
if that site is still up, make and publish an analysis of Krueger's
gross misunderstandings and errors in placebo testing.

I have no ABX site.

Jute, you lose!

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likelyto
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Krueger, I know all that stuff below. But it is about orchestral
musicians and singers and jazzmen. They're not the musicians I used for
my tests.

THEN WHAT KIND OF MUSICANS DID YOU USE?

At you're getting a glimmering, Mike. I knew that if we explained it to
you often enough, you'd
You rashly made a statement in a particular context about
musicians whose description you did not know. Now I'm asking you to
prove it. None of the stuff below is more than marginally relevant.
Stop wriggling and get on with your proof.

STOP PLAYING GAMES AND GI E SPECIFICS ON THE KIND OF PEOPLE YOU USED AND
YOU'LL GET A SPECIFIC ANSWER

After Krueger, spouting off without knowing the subject, has already
given a hundred wrong answers.

Is that how you do science in America these days, Mike?

Let's look at that again:

STOP PLAYING GAMES AND GI E SPECIFICS ON THE KIND OF PEOPLE YOU USED AND
YOU'LL GET A SPECIFIC ANSWER

Eh? After all these lies from Krueger on a subject even you now admit
he was igorant on, how do you expect us ever to believe him again?

In any event, I already have the answer and Krueger doesn't. He is
still trying to find out what the question is -- after he spouted off a
hundred wrong answers.

So far data has been provided on many diffferent kind of perormers, what did
you use? People who play the Zither? Ducimer? Autoharp? Harmonica? Stop
being such a **** and get on with it.

Excuse me? I expose an abusive liar who postures as an expert -- and
you call me a ****?

You want a specific answer give specific data.

Try again, Mickey. I already have the answer. Krueger doesn't even have
the question -- you're trying to help him get the question -- but he
lies about the answer to question he has never heard.

I don't need the help of a pretend-expert like Krueger. None of us do.
You don't either.

Andre Jute
Precision is the essential art of science

Below my signature is a listing of all the anwers Krueger gave to a
question even his loyal sidekicks now admit Krueger didn't know.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site" -- Hi-Fi News & Record Review

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also
cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the
high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while
practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri,
Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing
disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common
maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians
have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

Yup. And on and on and on irrelevantly drones Mr Arny Krueger,
pretend-expert

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Lionel wrote:
Dédé Jute a écrit :

Perhaps you're having a linguistic misunderstanding, Lee-oooh-knell. I
couldn't have "done an ass of himself" because the performers involved
were not orchestral.


Prove it !!!

You're getting hysterical, Lionel.

Arny Kruger told a lie about performers without knowing who they are or
what they play or where.

He didn't tell a lie you stupid ass. He gave data that was applicable to
many different kinds of musicans. That whatever people you claim to have
tested aren't on the list is not a lie.

It is up to him to find out who they are and
what they play and where. Then it is up to him to prove his lie about
them.

Provide the information about who they are.

I cannot imagine why you believe I should help slime like Arny Krueger
escape the consequences of his lies.

I can't imagine why you would not state what kind of musicans you are
talking about unless they don't exist or you already know there is data that
backs up his point.

If Krueger were a decent human being, or a moral person, or a
Christian, he would admit he made a terrible mistake, apologise and
promise to improve his behaviour. Instead he's launched on a campaign
of name-calling.

If you were a decnet human being you'd stop the stupid charade and state
what kind of people you tested. Your refusal to do casts you in a bad light
not him.

"Precision is the essential art of science"

Indeed, as I am demonstrating, in competent hands precision is a
rapier.

And you're being cut to shreds.


PS : you can go to bed now, you will start to lie again in few hours. ;-)

The inane grimacing picon won't save your hero or you, you wretched
little piece of sewerage. The difference between you and me is that I
prove every point twice over. I have proved that Krueger is a wilful
liar.

The only thing you proved is you are **** and von artist.

You can try to prove that I ever told a single lie or you can
apologise now for calling me a liar. One or the other or you're scum,
and I shall be reminding the world of it.

The only thing you're doing is proving once again what a scummy piece of
**** you are.

Unsigned out of contempt

You are contemptable that much is true.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Andre Jute wrote:
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely
to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

While in this thread I'm glad to see Poopie do some work for a change
rather than just carp uselessly, the context of Krueger's lie was not
about orchestral performers.

You're lying again. He specifically mentioned them.


In fact, Krueger doesn't know about which musicians he made this
blanket accusion of hearing damage because I never said which
performers I used.

Actually you did in at least one post.

Really. Then why didn't Krueger talk about them? Why did Krueger talk
about a subject of which he knew nothing and then, when it was pointed
out to him, start trying to find out if the subject was orchestal
layers, piccolo players, singers, etc, etc, a whole long list.

Tell me Mr Mickey McMickey, does even a stage fool like you speak on a
subject you pulled out of the air, and give irrelevant references, and
abuse everyone else in the conversation, and then be forced to ask,
"Eh, what is the subject under discussion anyway?"

That is what Kruger did.

He doesn't know which performers I was talking about because I
carefully didn't tell him. It was a test I devised to discover if
Krueger honours the scienitific method. He clearly doesn't. Krueger has
no idea of scientific method. Krueger merely likes hearing the sound of
his own voice.

Krueger is a proven liar, and a clumsy oaf like you cannot prove
otherwise.

That is why Krueger is being asked specifically to:

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Get used to the fact that if it's about audio, Arny will have data to
back
him up.

I've already proven that Krueger is a pretend-expert. Knowledgeable
people don't throw a lot of scare stories into the air and hope to hit
a target. They chose the target and then aim their information at it.
In this instance Krueger is still running around in circles like a dog
on bad dope, trying to find out the target.

You should know that I've already asked my professional associates to
look at Arnie's socalled ABX site. When their reports are in I shall,
if that site is still up, make and publish an analysis of Krueger's
gross misunderstandings and errors in placebo testing.

Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue

And one you don't seem to possess.

Oh, I'm demonstrating it to the satisfaction of all the better minds
than yours. That is why no one of any consequence tries to defend
Krueger. He has made an irretrievable error which displays at once his
ignorance and his lack of scientific rigour, his vicious character and
his deceitful debating method. I have a mailbox full of admiration from
my peers for another clever piece of work out of my online motivational
laboratory. I have won a lot of money in bets by predicting what
Krueger will do next.

You are blinded by love, Nyobe, Queen of Darkness.

Andre Jute


You are demonstrating that you are a blustering ****head without as ****ing
clue aobut the scientific method or simple decency.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...
Lionel wrote:

Looking forward to hear from you... soon. ;-)

Isn't Jute one of Middius's sockpuppets?

Most likely.

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...
Lionel wrote:

Looking forward to hear from you... soon. ;-)

Isn't Jute one of Middius's sockpuppets?

El Dot misses the target again. What a shame, he has so much potential....
sigh


Said another sockpuppet.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely
to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Krueger, I know all that stuff below. But it is about orchestral
musicians and singers and jazzmen. They're not the musicians I used for
my tests.

THEN WHAT KIND OF MUSICANS DID YOU USE?

At you're getting a glimmering, Mike. I knew that if we explained it to
you often enough, you'd
You rashly made a statement in a particular context about
musicians whose description you did not know. Now I'm asking you to
prove it. None of the stuff below is more than marginally relevant.
Stop wriggling and get on with your proof.

STOP PLAYING GAMES AND GI E SPECIFICS ON THE KIND OF PEOPLE YOU USED AND
YOU'LL GET A SPECIFIC ANSWER

After Krueger, spouting off without knowing the subject, has already
given a hundred wrong answers.

Is that how you do science in America these days, Mike?

Let's look at that again:

STOP PLAYING GAMES AND GI E SPECIFICS ON THE KIND OF PEOPLE YOU USED AND
YOU'LL GET A SPECIFIC ANSWER

Eh? After all these lies from Krueger on a subject even you now admit
he was igorant on, how do you expect us ever to believe him again?

In any event, I already have the answer and Krueger doesn't. He is
still trying to find out what the question is -- after he spouted off a
hundred wrong answers.

So far data has been provided on many diffferent kind of perormers, what
did
you use? People who play the Zither? Ducimer? Autoharp? Harmonica? Stop
being such a **** and get on with it.

Excuse me? I expose an abusive liar who postures as an expert -- and
you call me a ****?

You want a specific answer give specific data.

Try again, Mickey. I already have the answer. Krueger doesn't even have
the question -- you're trying to help him get the question -- but he
lies about the answer to question he has never heard.

I don't need the help of a pretend-expert like Krueger. None of us do.
You don't either.

Andre Jute
Precision is the essential art of science

Below my signature is a listing of all the anwers Krueger gave to a
question even his loyal sidekicks now admit Krueger didn't know.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site" -- Hi-Fi News & Record Review

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also
cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the
high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the
high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while
practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri,
Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994;
Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing
disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common
maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger
halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to
crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran
opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians
have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

Yup. And on and on and on irrelevantly drones Mr Arny Krueger,
pretend-expert

So far he's demonstrated far more audio expertise than you have.

Mickey, how many languages do you speak? I'll give you half-credit for
English as a starting point.

Isn't Jute one of Middius's sockpuppets?

Most likely.

Is "Most likely" Tamil for "duh"?

Krueger has admitted his guilt so stop wasting everyone's time with
your slothlike devotion to a proven charlatan. -- Andre Jute

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Lionel wrote:
Dédé Jute a écrit :

Perhaps you're having a linguistic misunderstanding, Lee-oooh-knell. I
couldn't have "done an ass of himself" because the performers involved
were not orchestral.


Prove it !!!

You're getting hysterical, Lionel.

Arny Kruger told a lie about performers without knowing who they are or
what they play or where.

He didn't tell a lie you stupid ass. He gave data that was applicable to
many different kinds of musicans. That whatever people you claim to have
tested aren't on the list is not a lie.

It is up to him to find out who they are and
what they play and where. Then it is up to him to prove his lie about
them.

Provide the information about who they are.

I cannot imagine why you believe I should help slime like Arny Krueger
escape the consequences of his lies.

I can't imagine why you would not state what kind of musicans you are
talking about unless they don't exist or you already know there is data that
backs up his point.

If Krueger were a decent human being, or a moral person, or a
Christian, he would admit he made a terrible mistake, apologise and
promise to improve his behaviour. Instead he's launched on a campaign
of name-calling.

If you were a decnet human being you'd stop the stupid charade and state
what kind of people you tested. Your refusal to do casts you in a bad light
not him.

"Precision is the essential art of science"

Indeed, as I am demonstrating, in competent hands precision is a
rapier.

And you're being cut to shreds.


PS : you can go to bed now, you will start to lie again in few hours. ;-)

The inane grimacing picon won't save your hero or you, you wretched
little piece of sewerage. The difference between you and me is that I
prove every point twice over. I have proved that Krueger is a wilful
liar.

The only thing you proved is you are **** and von artist.

You can try to prove that I ever told a single lie or you can
apologise now for calling me a liar. One or the other or you're scum,
and I shall be reminding the world of it.

The only thing you're doing is proving once again what a scummy piece of
**** you are.

Unsigned out of contempt

You are contemptable that much is true.

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...


Mickey, how many languages do you speak? I'll give you half-credit for
English as a starting point.

Isn't Jute one of Middius's sockpuppets?

Most likely.

Is "Most likely" Tamil for "duh"?

Not likely.

It could be the same animator for the person who used to post as BJ
Quackenbush.
Not that you couldn't all be the same "person."

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
Krueger has admitted his guilt so stop wasting everyone's time with
your slothlike devotion to a proven charlatan. -- Andre Jute

Jute lie number 12,258. He admitted no such thing.


wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Lionel wrote:
Dédé Jute a écrit :

Perhaps you're having a linguistic misunderstanding, Lee-oooh-knell. I
couldn't have "done an ass of himself" because the performers involved
were not orchestral.


Prove it !!!

You're getting hysterical, Lionel.

Arny Kruger told a lie about performers without knowing who they are or
what they play or where.

He didn't tell a lie you stupid ass. He gave data that was applicable to
many different kinds of musicans. That whatever people you claim to have
tested aren't on the list is not a lie.

It is up to him to find out who they are and
what they play and where. Then it is up to him to prove his lie about
them.

Provide the information about who they are.

I cannot imagine why you believe I should help slime like Arny Krueger
escape the consequences of his lies.

I can't imagine why you would not state what kind of musicans you are
talking about unless they don't exist or you already know there is data
that
backs up his point.

If Krueger were a decent human being, or a moral person, or a
Christian, he would admit he made a terrible mistake, apologise and
promise to improve his behaviour. Instead he's launched on a campaign
of name-calling.

If you were a decnet human being you'd stop the stupid charade and state
what kind of people you tested. Your refusal to do casts you in a bad
light
not him.

"Precision is the essential art of science"

Indeed, as I am demonstrating, in competent hands precision is a
rapier.

And you're being cut to shreds.


PS : you can go to bed now, you will start to lie again in few hours.
;-)

The inane grimacing picon won't save your hero or you, you wretched
little piece of sewerage. The difference between you and me is that I
prove every point twice over. I have proved that Krueger is a wilful
liar.

The only thing you proved is you are **** and von artist.

You can try to prove that I ever told a single lie or you can
apologise now for calling me a liar. One or the other or you're scum,
and I shall be reminding the world of it.

The only thing you're doing is proving once again what a scummy piece of
**** you are.

Unsigned out of contempt

You are contemptable that much is true.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 14:23:21 GMT, Patrick Turner
wrote:

drive 80 miles with the window down
to bonk a sheila, and oops, my ears rebelled, bigtime.

Well, we won't ask what you were doing to this woman with your ears.
Patrick. Better not to know.

On 15 Dec 2005 05:51:44 -0800, "Andre Jute" wrote:


3. They are ineffably stupid, best seen in their self-laceration, of
which Lionel several times assualting me after I demonstrated on his
skin that I am not a victim, is a good example.

Is the misspelling "assualt" to check if we're reading the full text?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

Just for the record, Arny said "classical performers" not
orchestral musicians. There is a huge difference as Jenn pointed
out.

It's just more defensive hair-splitting.

Nonsense, my dearArny. You are the one who is constantly
rattling on about precision, so please be precise.

Fact is that musical instruments and voices can easily be loud enough that
they will damage any ears that are nearby, especially after protracted
exposures.

The same applies to motor cyle engines, car engines, cement mixers, or a
million other sources of noise at high level.

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

Agreed.

Iain

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Iain Churches" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Jenn wrote:

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"... Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".
2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Careful! It says "violists."

Was this Arny again? Maybe he has special information
relating to baroque (pre-classical) ensembles, where the
viol, with six strings, was indeed used.

Someone would have to hit you with one to damage your hearing!

Indeed.

Henry VIII referred to the viol as "The most gentle and pleasing
instrument of musicke"

Iain

Dédé Jute a écrit :

Krueger has admitted his guilt so stop wasting everyone's time with
your slothlike devotion to a proven charlatan. -- Andre Jute

"Make sure you shout down and ridicule anyone who criticizes your
hypothesis (chuckle), your method, or your conclusion."


--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500

Iain Churches a écrit :
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...


Just for the record, Arny said "classical performers" not
orchestral musicians. There is a huge difference as Jenn pointed
out.

It's just more defensive hair-splitting.


Nonsense, my dearArny. You are the one who is constantly
rattling on about precision, so please be precise.


Just do like most of the contributors have done. The number of links and
example posted in this thread have clearly demonstrated that people on
RAO have the urgent *need* to kill what could be a dramatic a priori.

BTW you will note that the person at the origin of the statement :
"In my experience professional musicians in blind tests prefer tubes."
prefers to not divulgate the *scientific* method which has allowed the
recruitment of his listening panel in a group of people recognized "at
risk" concerning hearing problem.


Did you request for precision ?
You are right : "Precision is the essential art of science"... :-D



--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500

Iain Churches wrote:
"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Iain Churches" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Jenn wrote:

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"... Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".
2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Careful! It says "violists."

I dislike that word intensely. It conjures up all the wrong images. We
were talking about it once and Keith Pascoe of the Vanbrugh SQ said,
"Not me. I've had too much beer already."

Was this Arny again? Maybe he has special information
relating to baroque (pre-classical) ensembles, where the
viol, with six strings, was indeed used.

Someone would have to hit you with one to damage your hearing!

Indeed.

Henry VIII referred to the viol as "The most gentle and pleasing
instrument of musicke"

I can just see Krueger, after a quick foray into Google, claiming those
were all viola da gamba, and misconcluding that *therefore* (his
favourite word of misdirection and miscomprehension) they were *big*
and *loud*. In fact, perhaps I should have waited for him to do so...
The name is misleading; at the time it applied to any viol played on
the lap or between the legs; none of them were the size of later the
instruments segueing (1) into the size we know today.

Iain

Andre Jute

(1) Last month I was discussing a script with a film director. The word
segue is used for a particular kind of transition employing sound
overlap to establish location- or time-shift. In da moom pitchers it is
pronounced sea-gew. I asked him about it. He didn't know there is a
musical connotation or another pronunciation. "Those musicians steal
from everybody," he assured me earnestly. I invented a sudden
inspiration that could only be satisfied by an instant walk alone along
the beach where he couldn't hear me laugh.

Andy Cowley wrote:

Jenn wrote:

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Yes, deafened - having their hearing capabilities diminished.
Deafness is not an absolute but a whole spectrum of impairments.

Yes, you just don't just go deaf, like some turning down the volume control.
Young people think that's how it happens, and there will
always be a volume control to turn up to compensate.

Ah no, ppl get all these noises in their ears, bad enough to send ppl crazy,
or destroy social life.
And perhaps slight noise becomes crashingly loud, so you can't even wash the
dishes
without thinking the clank of the plates is "deafening".

Being blinded means having one's sight removed,
usually blinded means just that, no sight, so we say partially blinded
or sight impaired, we should say the same about hearing....

Patrick Turner.



Andy

Andre Jute a écrit :


Andre Jute

(1) Last month I was discussing a script with a film director.

5. If people are watching just inflate a little bit more your ego and
use it as a screen.


--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500

paul packer wrote:
On 15 Dec 2005 05:51:44 -0800, "Andre Jute" wrote:


3. They are ineffably stupid, best seen in their self-laceration, of
which Lionel several times assualting me after I demonstrated on his
skin that I am not a victim, is a good example.

Is the misspelling "assualt" to check if we're reading the full text?

Now, do I sound like the sort of fellow who would play a sly trick like
that?

Nah, I blame the French for that slip of the fingers. I was sitting
here thinking in French so that the froggie slut could understand me
clearly and not mistake kicks to the goolies for a light bitchslapping,
then translating back into English so as not to give the false
impression that French is still a world language. Think in French for a
minute or two and you will see where the spelling error arises.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site" -- Hi-Fi News & Record Review