Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #6   Report Post  
BD
 
Posts: n/a
Default

So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for something it
did not do and get away with it, just by using the 'such as' clause? I
think not:

The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an article on the
quoted piece of gear.... regardless how much 'slippery' wording is
used.

  #7   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"BD" wrote in message
ups.com
So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for
something it did not do and get away with it, just by
using the 'such as' clause? I think not:

The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an
article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how
much 'slippery' wording is used.



Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording, or
what have you:

http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html

"Mpingo Discs are small, ebony discs that measure about 1
(5/8" in diameter and about 1/2" thick. They're meant to be
placed face- (logo-) side down on turn-tables and all
front-end electronics; eg, CD transports, DACs, preamps.
Like all Shun Mook products, the Discs are directional. They
cost $50 each, so you can buy a few to experiment with in
your system and then buy a few more, which I know you'll do
after hearing them. The Mpingo I use on the large, flat VTA
adjuster knob on the Forsell Air Force One Mk.II gives an
excellent effect; I've placed three of them in a triangle
around the turntable's platter, tangent to the direction of
platter spin.
"On some turntables, it works better to orient the Mpingos
in toward the spindle. We entertained a friend from another
audio magazine the other day, and as I lifted the four
Mpingos from the Forsell and then replaced them, he was in
awe: With the Discs in place, the sound was richer and more
extended, and all aspects of the soundstage reproduction
were enhanced---you don't need gold-plated ears to hear the
difference.

"I've got a Mpingo on the top of my CAT preamp; I move it to
the top of the Jadis JP 80 MC's chassis near the line-stage
tubes when that sexy French preamp is in the system. (It
becomes a strange-looking beast with its Mpingo and Ensemble
Tubesox in place.) There are three Mpingos on top of the
Timbre Technology digital processor---its case is rigid and
damped by design, and it takes all three to make the
difference here, although usually one is sufficient on
electronics. I've also got a Mpingo slotted in between the
twin pair of speaker binding posts on each Jadis JA 200, and
move them to the same or similar positions when switching
amps.

*Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of this
Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and stranger
and stranger...


  #8   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield Optimizer" with
the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer". This is akin to confusing the
Green Bottle of "medicine" with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old
traveling "Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.

Let me ask the question again:

Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the "Shakti
Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve the sound quality of
an audio system?

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol. 19 no.2 and vol.
19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to such do-nothing
frauds?

Is that clear enough, Mr. Atkinson?

John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
wrote:
How can a product such as the "Shakti Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" possibly improve the sound quality
of an audio system?...Why does your magazine give
positive reviews to _such_ (my underlining) do-nothing
frauds?

When was that, Mr. Welch?


Wow, ever see an editor go backwards that fast over such
a major issue? ;-)


It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


  #9   Report Post  
Len Moskowitz
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Arny Krueger wrote:

http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html


This was published back in 1994, written by Jonathan Scull.

I don't have a problem with a writer talking about how something that
seems patently irrational to many of us affects their perception of
music played back over their audio systems.

The whole article is clearly subjective. I can't argue with what people
say that they perceive.


I don't see a single measurement there, and nothing that I would call
misleading.

Personally, I don't believe that the Mpingo disks do anything at all,
but I don't have any problems with folks who don't agree with me. If
they want to spend their money, God bless 'em.

I particularly liked the last two sentences:

"Beware of imitations that won't stand an A/B test!" intoned
Mr. Ying. Bill usually doesn't say much, but when he does talk, he
roars.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
  #10   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



BD said to DebatingTradeBorg:

So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for something it
did not do and get away with it, just by using the 'such as' clause? I
think not:

The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an article on the
quoted piece of gear.... regardless how much 'slippery' wording is
used.


The "debating trade" is not recommended for sane persons. Please be cautious.



  #11   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Len Moskowitz said:

I don't have a problem with a writer talking about how something that
seems patently irrational to many of us affects their perception of
music played back over their audio systems.

The whole article is clearly subjective. I can't argue with what people
say that they perceive.


I don't see a single measurement there, and nothing that I would call
misleading.

Personally, I don't believe that the Mpingo disks do anything at all,
but I don't have any problems with folks who don't agree with me. If
they want to spend their money, God bless 'em.


Talk like this will kill your induction into the aBxism priesthood, and it will
likely get your Hive membership revoked. Also, if you want the Krooborg to
recognize you as a sicicccncndcitits, you'll have to show the proper obeisance
to religious authority.

  #12   Report Post  
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
wrote:
How can a product such as the "Shakti Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" possibly improve the sound quality
of an audio system?...Why does your magazine give
positive reviews to _such_ (my underlining) do-nothing
frauds?

When was that, Mr. Welch?

Wow, ever see an editor go backwards that fast over such
a major issue? ;-)


It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.


Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".


Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?

This is akin to confusing the Green Bottle of "medicine"
with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old traveling
"Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.


And you know that how, Mr. Welch? When did you try these
devices for yourself?

Let me ask the question again:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?


I have no idea, Mr. Welch. But that doesn't mean it can't
have an effect, of course.

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #13   Report Post  
Len Moskowitz
 
Posts: n/a
Default


George Middius wrote:

Talk like this will kill your induction into the aBxism priesthood, and it will
likely get your Hive membership revoked. Also, if you want the Krooborg to
recognize you as a sicicccncndcitits, you'll have to show the proper obeisance
to religious authority.


I'll take that as good-humored sarcasm.

I understand and respect Arny's appreciation of the ABX methodology. I
too appreciate it for objective, analytical parameter-based testing.

To my mind, it just doesn't apply to subjective perceptions. And I
don't have a beef with a very entertaining and informative magazine
publishing subjective opinion articles.

John Atkinson's tech measurements are reliable and informative. I've
learned that our opinions about sound quality are similar, and I respect
most of what he has to say.

I can't say that for many of his writers, but that's okay -- I enjoy
them as entertainment rather than as engineering or science.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
  #14   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
wrote:
How can a product such as the "Shakti Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" possibly improve the sound quality
of an audio system?...Why does your magazine give
positive reviews to _such_ (my underlining) do-nothing
frauds?

When was that, Mr. Welch?

Wow, ever see an editor go backwards that fast over such
a major issue? ;-)

It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.


Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".


Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?


If I were easily misled, Mr. Atkinson, I would be a loyal Stereophile
reader. Do you see Randi everywhere, Mr. Atkinson? If I were a huckster
and conman like yourself, an intelligent, persistent, hard-nosed
sceptic like Randi would get under my skin, too.

This is akin to confusing the Green Bottle of "medicine"
with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old traveling
"Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.


And you know that how, Mr. Welch? When did you try these
devices for yourself?


Which one? The Blue Bottle or the Green Bottle?

Let me ask the question again:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?


I have no idea, Mr. Welch. But that doesn't mean it can't
have an effect, of course.


You sound like an astrologist, Mr. Atkinson. Do you also believe in the
Akashic record? Tarot cards? Tea leaves?

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your reviewers are
either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt and cynical.


John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


  #15   Report Post  
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.

Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".


Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?


If I were easily misled, Mr. Atkinson, I would be a loyal
Stereophile reader. Do you see Randi everywhere, Mr. Atkinson?


No, I was specifically referring to a message in another current thread
to which you are posting, specifically:
--------------------------------------------
(Chevdo) wrote to joseph_welch in
message MQrVe.269840$on1.40437@clgrps13 on Tue, 13 Sep 2005 03:38:20
GMT
In article .com,
says...
The man is a repugnant malignancy:
http://snipurl.com/hmrq
...
http://www.randi.org/jr/120304youve.html#2

---------------------------------------------

The URL above takes you to an essay by Randi in which he presents
a review of the "Hallograph" as though it had appeared in
Stereophile. As the posting was in response to you, I assumed
that it was that that had triggered your outburst of bile.

If I were a huckster and conman like yourself, an intelligent,
persistent, hard-nosed sceptic like Randi would get under my
skin, too.


Oh dear, Mr. Welch, you really do appear to have got panties in
a wad. :-)

This is akin to confusing the Green Bottle of "medicine"
with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old traveling
"Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.


And you know that how, Mr. Welch? When did you try these
devices for yourself?


Which one? The Blue Bottle or the Green Bottle?


Don't be coy, Mr. Welch, You have expressed a strong opinion
on these accessories. Surely you have tried them, to be so sure
that they are ineffective? Or are you, like Randi, simply
making things up?

Perhaps oou need to try some anger-managment strategies before you
next come out from behind the safety of your PC screen. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile



  #17   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"BD" wrote in message
ups.com
So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for
something it did not do and get away with it, just by
using the 'such as' clause? I think not:

The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an
article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how
much 'slippery' wording is used.



Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording, or what have you:

http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html

"Mpingo Discs are small, ebony discs that measure about 1 (5/8" in
diameter and about 1/2" thick. They're meant to be placed face- (logo-)
side down on turn-tables and all front-end electronics; eg, CD transports,
DACs, preamps. Like all Shun Mook products, the Discs are directional.
They cost $50 each, so you can buy a few to experiment with in your system
and then buy a few more, which I know you'll do after hearing them. The
Mpingo I use on the large, flat VTA adjuster knob on the Forsell Air Force
One Mk.II gives an excellent effect; I've placed three of them in a
triangle around the turntable's platter, tangent to the direction of
platter spin.
"On some turntables, it works better to orient the Mpingos in toward the
spindle. We entertained a friend from another audio magazine the other
day, and as I lifted the four Mpingos from the Forsell and then replaced
them, he was in awe: With the Discs in place, the sound was richer and
more extended, and all aspects of the soundstage reproduction were
enhanced---you don't need gold-plated ears to hear the difference.

"I've got a Mpingo on the top of my CAT preamp; I move it to the top of
the Jadis JP 80 MC's chassis near the line-stage tubes when that sexy
French preamp is in the system. (It becomes a strange-looking beast with
its Mpingo and Ensemble Tubesox in place.) There are three Mpingos on top
of the Timbre Technology digital processor---its case is rigid and damped
by design, and it takes all three to make the difference here, although
usually one is sufficient on electronics. I've also got a Mpingo slotted
in between the twin pair of speaker binding posts on each Jadis JA 200,
and move them to the same or similar positions when switching amps.

*Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of this Atkinson-approved
article just gets stranger and stranger and stranger...

It is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing in the first place.
The only reason I get it now is because my wife re-subscribed in order to
help with a fundraiser for my son's school.

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud..


  #18   Report Post  
surf
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your reviewers are
either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt and cynical.



A possible scenario then, is that the reviewers perceived something
you don't understand. Given the possible scenario you've pointed out,
a certainty is that you're an asshole.


  #19   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
wrote:
How can a product such as the "Shakti Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" possibly improve the sound quality
of an audio system?...Why does your magazine give
positive reviews to _such_ (my underlining) do-nothing
frauds?

When was that, Mr. Welch?

Wow, ever see an editor go backwards that fast over such
a major issue? ;-)

It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.


Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".


Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?

This is akin to confusing the Green Bottle of "medicine"
with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old traveling
"Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.


And you know that how, Mr. Welch? When did you try these
devices for yourself?

Let me ask the question again:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?


I have no idea, Mr. Welch. But that doesn't mean it can't
have an effect, of course.

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?

Let's see the before and after measurements so we can decide.


The odds of them being right are roughly the same as Bush serving a 3rd term
as President.


  #20   Report Post  
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



surf said:

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your reviewers are
either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt and cynical.


A possible scenario then, is that the reviewers perceived something
you don't understand. Given the possible scenario you've pointed out,
a certainty is that you're an asshole.



Now cut that out! If you don't watch out, joseph will hire himself a bully
to lay you out.





  #21   Report Post  
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"BD" wrote in message
ups.com
The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an
article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how
much 'slippery' wording is used.


Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording, or what
have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud.


It appears you haven't read it, Mr. McKelvy. Because if you had've
done, you would see that it contains strong opinions for but also
_against_ the efficacy of the Mpingo discs.

First we see Joseph Welch dissing Stereophile in this thread for a
review that had actually appeared in TAS, then we have Arny Kreuger
up to his old debating trade tricks, presenting part of a Web article
as though it were the whole (and taking you in), and now here you are,
dissing an article you don't appear to have read.

Not a very good track record for those who claim to believe in
Science, eh.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #22   Report Post  
ScottW
 
Posts: n/a
Default


John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
wrote:
How can a product such as the "Shakti Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" possibly improve the sound quality
of an audio system?...Why does your magazine give
positive reviews to _such_ (my underlining) do-nothing
frauds?

When was that, Mr. Welch?

Wow, ever see an editor go backwards that fast over such
a major issue? ;-)

It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.


Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".


Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?

This is akin to confusing the Green Bottle of "medicine"
with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old traveling
"Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.


And you know that how, Mr. Welch? When did you try these
devices for yourself?

Let me ask the question again:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?


I have no idea, Mr. Welch. But that doesn't mean it can't
have an effect, of course.

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


I just sped through the Willis article and I can't find anywhere where
he says they work. He spends a lot of time discussing cultures and
open mindedness and that he isn't saying they don't work... just that
they didn't work for him in the 20 minutes he spent listening to 'em at
WCES. Am I missing something?

BTW... if Barry Willis is an avowed skeptic than Arny Krueger is most
personable character on usenet.

ScottW

  #23   Report Post  
Harry Lavo
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"BD" wrote in message
ups.com
So does that mean that I could criticize the magazine for
something it did not do and get away with it, just by
using the 'such as' clause? I think not:

The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an
article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how
much 'slippery' wording is used.



Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording, or what have you:

http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html

"Mpingo Discs are small, ebony discs that measure about 1 (5/8" in
diameter and about 1/2" thick. They're meant to be placed face- (logo-)
side down on turn-tables and all front-end electronics; eg, CD transports,
DACs, preamps. Like all Shun Mook products, the Discs are directional.
They cost $50 each, so you can buy a few to experiment with in your system
and then buy a few more, which I know you'll do after hearing them. The
Mpingo I use on the large, flat VTA adjuster knob on the Forsell Air Force
One Mk.II gives an excellent effect; I've placed three of them in a
triangle around the turntable's platter, tangent to the direction of
platter spin.
"On some turntables, it works better to orient the Mpingos in toward the
spindle. We entertained a friend from another audio magazine the other
day, and as I lifted the four Mpingos from the Forsell and then replaced
them, he was in awe: With the Discs in place, the sound was richer and
more extended, and all aspects of the soundstage reproduction were
enhanced---you don't need gold-plated ears to hear the difference.

"I've got a Mpingo on the top of my CAT preamp; I move it to the top of
the Jadis JP 80 MC's chassis near the line-stage tubes when that sexy
French preamp is in the system. (It becomes a strange-looking beast with
its Mpingo and Ensemble Tubesox in place.) There are three Mpingos on top
of the Timbre Technology digital processor---its case is rigid and damped
by design, and it takes all three to make the difference here, although
usually one is sufficient on electronics. I've also got a Mpingo slotted
in between the twin pair of speaker binding posts on each Jadis JA 200,
and move them to the same or similar positions when switching amps.

*Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of this Atkinson-approved
article just gets stranger and stranger and stranger...



As usual, Arny, you are being disingenuous. You don't reveal that what you
are quoting from is a man's column, not a review. Nor do you reveal that
that man's column's are generally *NOT* viewed by the average Stereophile
reader as a review, but rather as the musings including personal
idiosyncracies, of the columnist. What self-respecting columnist, with his
own byline, would allow his columns to be edited. And what self-respecting
editor would attempt to do so.

ARNY, there is a difference between a review and a column. AND THAT GOES
FOR YOU OTHERS HERE who keep on insisting that Stereophile endorse all sorts
of audio tweaks and stuff...it has all been done in one man's column. Not
in reviews. Can't you be honest even with yourselves?


  #24   Report Post  
Mr.T
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Len Moskowitz" wrote in message
...
I don't have a problem with a writer talking about how something that
seems patently irrational to many of us affects their perception of
music played back over their audio systems.

The whole article is clearly subjective. I can't argue with what people
say that they perceive.

I don't see a single measurement there, and nothing that I would call
misleading.


Or indeed anything approaching a disclaimer that it IS only the
unsubstantiated opinion of one person.
So *everything* in that magazine should be viewed with great suspicion by
the non technical readers.

MrT.


  #25   Report Post  
Mr.T
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...
Let me ask the question again:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?


I have no idea, Mr. Welch.


Truth at last!

But that doesn't mean it can't have an effect, of course.


So why not provide some objective proof. Maybe because you can't?

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


If they were, they would have provided proof. Since they didn't, you can
assume they are just writing words for money. And those words are usually
what is asked for, or what is expected by the publisher.

MrT.




  #26   Report Post  
Mr.T
 
Posts: n/a
Default


" wrote in message
ink.net...
The odds of them being right are roughly the same as Bush serving a 3rd

term
as President.


I'd rate that a Billion times more likely. He already has a record of fixing
elections and bypassing the constitution.
The others have no record of proof, other than by assertion. (just like GWB
come to think of it :-)

MrT.


  #27   Report Post  
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Mr.T said:

Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


If they were, they would have provided proof.


I can see why you hide behind an anonym. Nobody as dumb as you wants his
real identity known.




  #28   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:17:36 GMT, "
wrote:

It is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing in the first place.
The only reason I get it now is because my wife re-subscribed in order to
help with a fundraiser for my son's school.

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud..


The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.

Mr. Atkinson is laughing all the way to the bank.
  #29   Report Post  
Mr.T
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...
I can see why you hide behind an anonym. Nobody as dumb as you wants his
real identity known.


Actually it is far more stupid to expose your ignorance openly to the world
as you do.

MrT.


  #30   Report Post  
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


ScottW wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?


I have no idea, Mr. Welch. But that doesn't mean it can't
have an effect, of course.

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


I just sped through the Willis article and I can't find anywhere
where he says they work. He spends a lot of time discussing
cultures and open mindedness and that he isn't saying they don't
work... just that they didn't work for him in the 20 minutes he
spent listening to 'em at WCES. Am I missing something?


I believe you are talking about Barry's report on Mpingo discs, ScottW,
whereas Mr. Welch was asking about the Shakti Stones.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile



  #31   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com

then we have Arny Kreuger up to his old debating trade
tricks, presenting part of a Web article as though it
were the whole (and taking you in),


Here we have John Atkinson being as deceptive as ever. I
cited the entire article and provided the following advice
which Atkinson cheerfully and deceptively removed prior when
quoting, so he could appear to be justified while whining
about its absence:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html

"*Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of this
Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and stranger
and stranger..."

Apparently when I ask readers to read "the rest of the
article", in Atkinson's mind this means telling people to
ignore most of the article.

Talk about truth being stranger than fiction, we have here
another example of "Atkinson truth".


  #32   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...


Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording,
or what have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html

"Mpingo Discs are small, ebony discs that measure about
1 (5/8" in diameter and about 1/2" thick. They're meant
to be placed face- (logo-) side down on turn-tables and
all front-end electronics; eg, CD transports, DACs,
preamps. Like all Shun Mook products, the Discs are
directional. They cost $50 each, so you can buy a few to
experiment with in your system and then buy a few more,
which I know you'll do after hearing them. The Mpingo I
use on the large, flat VTA adjuster knob on the Forsell
Air Force One Mk.II gives an excellent effect; I've
placed three of them in a triangle around the
turntable's platter, tangent to the direction of platter
spin. "On some turntables, it works better to orient the
Mpingos in toward the spindle. We entertained a friend
from another audio magazine the other day, and as I
lifted the four Mpingos from the Forsell and then
replaced them, he was in awe: With the Discs in place,
the sound was richer and more extended, and all aspects
of the soundstage reproduction were enhanced---you don't
need gold-plated ears to hear the difference. "I've
got a Mpingo on the top of my CAT preamp; I move
it to the top of the Jadis JP 80 MC's chassis near the
line-stage tubes when that sexy French preamp is in the
system. (It becomes a strange-looking beast with its
Mpingo and Ensemble Tubesox in place.) There are three
Mpingos on top of the Timbre Technology digital
processor---its case is rigid and damped by design, and
it takes all three to make the difference here, although
usually one is sufficient on electronics. I've also got
a Mpingo slotted in between the twin pair of speaker
binding posts on each Jadis JA 200, and move them to the
same or similar positions when switching amps. *Please
follow up on the URL above - the rest of this
Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and
stranger and stranger...


As usual, Arny, you are being disingenuous. You don't
reveal that what you are quoting from is a man's column,
not a review.


I provided a link to the *entire article*. Pardon me for
presuming that your attention span is still long enough to
read all of it, Harry.

Nor do you reveal that that man's column's
are generally *NOT* viewed by the average Stereophile
reader as a review, but rather as the musings including
personal idiosyncracies, of the columnist.


Anybody who can follow a link and read the entire article
now knows that. Why in the 21st century do I need to fully
quote an entire article on Usenet?

What self-respecting columnist, with his own byline, would
allow his columns to be edited. And what self-respecting
editor would attempt to do so.


Sorry Harry, editing rags like Stereophile is something
that's not my job. I have edited technical works, and my
readers have allowed me to have a free hand, probably
because they know that:

(1) They aren't perfect
(2) There is no such thing as something that one man can do
that another man can't in some sense improve on.

ARNY, there is a difference between a review and a
column. AND THAT GOES FOR YOU OTHERS HERE who keep on
insisting that Stereophile endorse all sorts of audio
tweaks and stuff...it has all been done in one man's
column. Not in reviews. Can't you be honest even with
yourselves?


Harry, you're whining again. Grow up! ;-(


  #33   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com

Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers,
one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a
subjectivist, the other of whom, Barry Willis, is an
avowed skeptic. Imagine my surprise, therefore, when
_both_ subjectivist and skeptic found that the Shakti
devices had a positive audible effect on the sounds of
their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and Willis
are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


John, it just goes to show that your idea of a skeptic
corresponds to most people's idea of a born sucker.

The mind boggles at the idea of Stereophile publishing a
review of Shatki devices written by say, David Clark or for
that part, Richard Clark.



  #34   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
oups.com

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your
reviewers are either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt
and cynical.


I've learned the merit of the old saw about "Why presume
malice when simple incompetence will suffice?".


  #35   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"surf" wrote in message
news
wrote

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your
reviewers are either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt
and cynical.



A possible scenario then, is that the reviewers perceived
something you don't understand.


Actually, they perceive audio illusions that are very
well-understood.





  #36   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message

" wrote in
message
ink.net...


The odds of them being right are roughly the same as
Bush serving a 3rd term as President.


I'd rate that a Billion times more likely. He already has
a record of fixing elections and bypassing the
constitution.


Hmm, you do have a point there! ;-)


  #37   Report Post  
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Mr.T said:

I can see why you hide behind an anonym. Nobody as dumb as you wants his
real identity known.


Actually it is far more stupid to expose your ignorance openly to the world
as you do.


I guess in your circles, grinding out lame IKYABWAIs passes for smarts.




  #38   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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


Mr.T said:

I can see why you hide behind an anonym. Nobody as dumb
as you wants his real identity known.


Actually it is far more stupid to expose your ignorance
openly to the world as you do.


I guess in your circles, grinding out lame IKYABWAIs
passes for smarts.


Grinding out lame IKYABWAIs clearly passes for smarts in
your group, George. As usual, you can't see it, or are too
big of a hypocrite to admit it. Right now you've got some of
the biggest boobs in the history of Usenet on your team.
Quite a slide from the days of Bamborough licking your
chops, eh?


  #39   Report Post  
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Arny Krueger wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording,
or what have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html
...Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of
this Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and
stranger and stranger...


As usual, Arny, you are being disingenuous. You
don't reveal that what you are quoting from is a
man's column, not a review.


I provided a link to the *entire article*.


No, Mr. Krueger, your link takes the reader to _page 3_
of the Web reprint, _not_ the entire article. This is
what I was referring to in the posting to which to you
seem to have taken exception. The correct URL, which takes readers to
the beginning of the full reprint, which
includes an introductory comment by myself, is
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69 .

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #40   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording,
or what have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html
...Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of
this Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and
stranger and stranger...


As usual, Arny, you are being disingenuous. You
don't reveal that what you are quoting from is a
man's column, not a review.


I provided a link to the *entire article*.


No, Mr. Krueger, your link takes the reader to _page 3_
of the Web reprint, _not_ the entire article.


Hair splitting, anyone?

I guess Atkinson wants people to believe that his site is so
badly designed that there's no way to link the rest of the
article from the page which I pointed to, being that it
contains the text I quoted.

Even though I keep tripping Atkinson up in childish
deceptions, someone at least semi-competent did the site
design for his ragazine.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
John Atkinson: audio ignoramus or sleazebag? Rich.Andrews Audio Opinions 22 December 28th 04 03:02 AM
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk [email protected] Pro Audio 3 May 28th 04 02:32 PM
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk [email protected] Pro Audio 0 May 28th 04 01:48 AM
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk [email protected] Pro Audio 0 May 28th 04 01:48 AM
RCA out and Speaker Question in 2004 Ranger Edge Question magicianstalk Car Audio 0 March 10th 04 03:32 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:54 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"