"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
mc wrote:

A thin wire strand may have 0.1 ohm resistance to an amplifier with
0.1 ohm output impedance (this would be a damping factor of 80 into an
8-ohm speaker, a reasonably good value - well, maybe an excellent
value for a consumer amplifier), you'll get a halving of voltage to
the speaker, or a 3 dB drop in volume, certainly noticable, but the
speaker signal will not have disappeared at lower volume. When the
volume control is turned up, the signal WILL disappear (either the
protection circuitry cuts in, or...).

I just realized that the original poster was talking about a 0.1-ohm
short
(i.e., a short through a thin strand with appreciable resistance), not a
0.1-ohm series resistance in the wire. So the mathematical analysis I
posted was not to the point.

However, the amplifier would have *other* serious problems if it were
working into a total load of 0.2 ohm! I think this, too, is what he had
in
mind (inability to deliver high volume).

It would have to be identical with both channels, if what I
read of his original post is correct. While we might get a
partial short in one channel, the chance of an identical
partial short in the other channel is limited, to say the
least.

**Your education begins he

There are a number of different protection systems in amplifiers. Some
amplifiers use more than one. If the OP's amp was shorted on one channel,
the overcurrent detection system would come into effect at modest volume
levels. This may be somewhere around a few Volts RMS output. Some (cheap)
amplifiers use a common current limit system, whereby if one channel is
attempting to deliver dangerous (to the output devices) current levels, all
output stages are shut down. I have seen such systems on surround sound and
stereo amplifiers. Better quality products tend to employ current limit
systems which operate only on the affected channel. I have seen one product
which employs a proper, fully adjustable Voltage/Current (VI) limiting
system. AFAIK, such a system is extremely rare. It was employed in the
Marantz Model 500 power amp (ca. 1973). Modern IC power amps are very
different. They employ VERY comprehensive protection mechanisms of great
sophistication.

But you have been told this before, yet you still profess to make the same
mistakes over and over again.

The really scary thing is that you write books for beginners, when you lack
some of the most fundamental understanding of what can occur in a system,
during fault conditions. I suggest that, rather than deride those who know
far more than you do, you should listen and learn.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

**It's actually far more preposterous to argue with people who ACTUALLY
know
what they're talking about,

Like you, tweako?

**Indeed. I know considerably more than you about electrical theory,
electronics and what happens to amplifiers when you connect them to low
impedance loads.

I'll bet you do, tweako.

I remember some time ago when you were going to send me a
very special "sounds better than anything else" amp to
review. That went nowhere, probably because you realized
that I would DBT the thing and say that it sounded just like
any other good amp.

**You wrote me (on RAO, I recall) back and said (to paraphrase):

"I wouldn't test your amplifier, if it was the last amplifier on the
planet." I'll try to find your exact quote.

I believe that was after a series of rather nasty (deja vu
all over again) give-and-take altercations. Prior to that,
you were eager to ship me an amp and I was kind of
interested in reviewing it. (I have since become utterly
uninterested in reviewing amps, but it has taken me time to
reach this plateau.) I think you ran into some shipment
snags, but you probably also realized that I would DBT the
unit with some cheap version I would happen to have on hand
and then say that they both sounded the same. Not a good
review for a megabuck amp, I think.

Incidentally, The Sensible Sound will soon have a review of
another upscale amp by me (designed by one of the most
notable designers in the business) that pretty much does the
same thing that I would have done with your amp.

At that point, I decided that you were a waste of time. A waste of time with
no ability to approach a product with an open mind.

For guys like you, an "open minded" attitude from a reviewer
results in a poetical writeup of an amp's performance
(dealing with superior soundstaging, imaging, depth, detail,
focus, etc., and other poppycock) that causes readers to
spend big bucks on qualities that do not exist.

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Howard Ferstler

ric wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:

A single strand of a multi-strand cable "shorting" to the opposite
polarity can either be a low impedance or a real short, depending
on its coupling to the rest of the cable. It *can* appear as a low
impedance load on the amplifier, resulting in the OP's symptoms.
Or it *can* appear as a direct short, causing problems immediately.
I have experienced both scenarios.

I got the impression from the guy's original post that the
effect was the same in both channels. It seems preposterous
to assume that identical partial shorts of the kind you
indicated would happen the same way in both channels.

Indeed, but would not an activated protection circuit cause *both*
channels to cut out, even though the "short" only occurred on one?

Beats me. It probably varies from design to design.

Howard Ferstler

wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
However, the amplifier would have *other* serious problems if it were
working into a total load of 0.2 ohm! I think this, too, is what he had in
mind (inability to deliver high volume).

It would have to be identical with both channels, if what I
read of his original post is correct. While we might get a
partial short in one channel, the chance of an identical
partial short in the other channel is limited, to say the
least.

No it is not. Consider if the short results in the power supply
going into current limiting, for example. Both channels would be
heavily affected. Or consider a protection circuit that yanks the
supply rail down to a level that prevent damage.

Any number of mechanisms that, quite apparently, you haven't
even thought of could easily cause the effects observed.

Please, Howard, stick to what you know and stay out of trouble.

Looks like you have me at a disadvantage. Actually, without
a hands-on analysis we are all (well, all but you)
speculating.

As for that suggestion about staying "out of trouble," you
sound like my wife.

Howard Ferstler

Arny Krueger wrote:

George M. Middius wrote:

Richard Pierce said:

Please, Howard, stick to what you know and stay out of
trouble.

So you're telling him to shut up and sit in the corner?

Middius, telling you to shut up and sit in the corner never
works, so why would you expect it to work with Howard? Oh, I
get it, this is consistent with your policy of unending
hypocrisy.

We are in a war, Arny. In a war there are going to be some
misfires - even from me.

Howard Ferstler

ric wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:

It would have to be identical with both channels, if what I
read of his original post is correct. While we might get a
partial short in one channel, the chance of an identical
partial short in the other channel is limited, to say the
least.

Again, would not a fault on one channel cause the protection circuit
to cut in on both channels?

Apparently, it could. As I noted in another part of the
thread, without a hands-on analysis we are all pretty much
speculating.

Howard Ferstler

Arny Krueger wrote:

ric wrote:
Howard Ferstler wrote:

It would have to be identical with both channels, if what
I
read of his original post is correct. While we might get
a
partial short in one channel, the chance of an identical
partial short in the other channel is limited, to say the
least.

Again, would not a fault on one channel cause the
protection circuit
to cut in on both channels?

It may or may not, depending on the design of the protection
circuit.

I've seen amps were a fault in one channel only affected
that channel, and others where a fault in either channel
would shut the whole amp down.

But this guy was getting odd noises out of both channels.
Would a short in one channel cause that kind of artifact in
both channels but only at moderate and high levels, with no
audible problems at all at lower levels?

The situation is so odd that I think that we are all kind of
just speculating about what is going on with this guy's set
up.

Howard Ferstler

Arny Krueger wrote:

ric wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:

ric wrote:
Howard Ferstler wrote:

It would have to be identical with both channels, if
what I
read of his original post is correct. While we might
get a
partial short in one channel, the chance of an
identical
partial short in the other channel is limited, to say
the
least.

Again, would not a fault on one channel cause the
protection circuit
to cut in on both channels?

It may or may not, depending on the design of the
protection
circuit.

So, it is a possible solution to Mr. Ferstler's objection.
He didn't
allow for such a scenario, allowing only that an identical
short
"would have to" appear in both channels. One possible
explanation
was my above protection circuit question.

Nobody knows as much as Howard Ferstler, not even Howard
Ferstler. ;-)

Good point. My wife would agree.

Howard Ferstler

Trevor Wilson wrote:

The really scary thing is that you write books for beginners, when you lack
some of the most fundamental understanding of what can occur in a system,
during fault conditions. I suggest that, rather than deride those who know
far more than you do, you should listen and learn.

Beginners do not require information about amp design, and a
book on basic audio would not ordinarily deal with topics
such as what we have been dealing with in this thread.
Actually, the number of posts and the variety of answers
shows that we have a rather esoteric situation.

Regarding those books of mine, what newcomers (and even some
old timers who have a tendency to be easily suckered) do
require is information that will protect them from con
artists who want them to purchase overpriced wires and
electronics.

Howard Ferstler

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.


Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
was my above protection circuit question.

Nobody knows as much as Howard Ferstler, not even Howard
Ferstler. ;-)

Good point. My wife would agree.


"At least" there is one person in the world stupider than you.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

We are in a war, Arny. In a war there are going to be some
misfires - even from me.



I know a good plastic surgeon. He specializes in toes.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Howard Ferstler

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.


Name names, chicken****.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Howard Ferstler

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:44:55 -0400, Clyde Slick wrote
(in article ):


"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.


Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

I'd sure want to know!

Ty Ford




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:13:50 -0400, Howard Ferstler wrote
(in article ):

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Howard Ferstler

Hey Howard. I consider myself a reviewer of high end pro audio gear.

It's real easy to pock a keyboard with bull**** with no one around. You want
to call me a pimp to my face and back it up with facts?

Screw the parole violation, let's get together real soon!

Ty Ford

-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Howard Ferstler wrote:

Indeed, but would not an activated protection circuit cause *both*
channels to cut out, even though the "short" only occurred on one?

Beats me. It probably varies from design to design.

I'm sure it does. But it sure shoots holes in your "theory" that
an amp would need identical shorts on both channels to have the
symptoms that the OP observed. Agreed?

Clyde Slick wrote:
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.


Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?




Although he is now openly working as a PR flak, I would nominate the
notorious Jonatahn Scull as a prototypical pimp (or is it, more
properly, "whore") from his time as a "reviewer" for $tereopile.

Howard Ferstler wrote:

It would have to be identical with both channels, if what I
read of his original post is correct. While we might get a
partial short in one channel, the chance of an identical
partial short in the other channel is limited, to say the
least.

Again, would not a fault on one channel cause the protection circuit
to cut in on both channels?

Apparently, it could. As I noted in another part of the
thread, without a hands-on analysis we are all pretty much
speculating.

Then I would suggest you refrain from using words like "It would
have to be..." as you did above.

Clyde Slick wrote:

Nobody knows as much as Howard Ferstler, not even Howard
Ferstler. ;-)

Good point. My wife would agree.


"At least" there is one person in the world stupider than you.

Oh, I'm sure there are more. Just not with Usenet access. g

Howard Ferstler wrote:

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Hmmm...he's gutless, as well.

Ty Ford wrote:

Screw the parole violation, let's get together real soon!


Wow. You DO have a sense of humor.

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Who are all of them? Name names, stop
being a chicken**** asshole. Elevate yourself to being
"at least" a regular asshole.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:44:55 -0400, Clyde Slick wrote
(in article ):


"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.


Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

I'd sure want to know!

Ty Ford


Howard continues to duck the issue. No surpise, he
doesn't want to get sued.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Clyde Slick wrote:
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Who are all of them? Name names, stop
being a chicken**** asshole. Elevate yourself to being
"at least" a regular asshole.


Wow! You are just so +formidable+, Art. How could anyone stand up and
spit in your eye?

wrote in message
oups.com...


Clyde Slick wrote:
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Who are all of them? Name names, stop
being a chicken**** asshole. Elevate yourself to being
"at least" a regular asshole.


Wow! You are just so +formidable+, Art. How could anyone stand up and
spit in your eye?


How is Mommy's cooking these days?
Are you eating well?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

During my Friday night Usenet reading I came across this sarcastic
reply in an increasingly incendiary cascade involving
rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech and rec.audio.opinion, in
which on 17 Jun 2005 20:12:57 -0700, asked:



Clyde Slick wrote:
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Who are all of them? Name names, stop
being a chicken**** asshole. Elevate yourself to being
"at least" a regular asshole.


Wow! You are just so +formidable+, Art. How could anyone stand up and
spit in your eye?

By riding a high horse?

-----
http://www.mindspring.com/~benbradley

Clyde Slick wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


Clyde Slick wrote:
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Who are all of them? Name names, stop
being a chicken**** asshole. Elevate yourself to being
"at least" a regular asshole.


Wow! You are just so +formidable+, Art. How could anyone stand up and
spit in your eye?


How is Mommy's cooking these days?

She passed some years ago. How's yours?

Are you eating well?

Yes! Tonight, my GF and I made grilled wild salmon with a
lemon/honey/soy sauce, grilled asparagus and a roasted tomato couscous.
Along with a nice Syrah. Strawberries, brown sugar, and creme fraiche
for dessert.....with Brut Imperial.


I'll start by licking the honeypot tonight, Art. You?

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

The really scary thing is that you write books for beginners, when you
lack
some of the most fundamental understanding of what can occur in a system,
during fault conditions. I suggest that, rather than deride those who
know
far more than you do, you should listen and learn.

Beginners do not require information about amp design,

**I never said they did. They need good, solid advice, based on actual
facts. You have, in this thread, made several fundamental errors, both in
comprehending the nature of the fault and what has caused it. Worse, I (and
others) have corrected you (several times) and you STILL maintain that you
have not made any errors. Worse still, you engage in personal attacks to
those who have corrected you. This is just sheer bloody minded stupidity of
the worst kind. I will continue to engage you until you retract your idiotic
slander and admit your mistakes.

and a
book on basic audio would not ordinarily deal with topics
such as what we have been dealing with in this thread.

**Well it bloody well should. I've lost count of the number of service jobs
I've done, due to bad cabling. including splices. In fact, I serviced one
amp three times in three weeks, due to EXACTLY the kind of thing we are
discussing. I naturally informed that customer that he probably had a fault
with his speaker cables after the first repair (standard comments from me,
when delaing with a blown output stage), only to find that he ignored me (at
his cost). I ended up doing a service call (at huge cost) to point out his
mistake. A book dealing with such things would have saved him a lot of
money.

Actually, the number of posts and the variety of answers
shows that we have a rather esoteric situation.

**No, we do not. As a librarian you are ill-qualified to speak about what
causes problems with audio systems. I, OTOH, with more than 30 years of
audio service experience, am VERY well qualified to discuss problems in the
real world of audio. To back up those 30 years, I have engaged in 4 years of
full time, formal education in electronics. IOW: I have the theoretical and
mathematical skills to solve those issues as well. You can belittle my
experience all you wish, but I have the 'runs on the board'. You are a
librarian and possess the skills necessary to be a librarian. Based on what
you have written in this thread (and a host of others), your skills in the
audio (problem solving) area are pitifully limited.


Regarding those books of mine, what newcomers (and even some
old timers who have a tendency to be easily suckered) do
require is information that will protect them from con
artists who want them to purchase overpriced wires and
electronics.

**I would wonder about those poor beginners who are purchasing those
over-priced and utterly useless books. You clearly have no idea about
amplifiers and cables and their potential effects on a system.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

**It's actually far more preposterous to argue with people who
ACTUALLY
know
what they're talking about,

Like you, tweako?

**Indeed. I know considerably more than you about electrical theory,
electronics and what happens to amplifiers when you connect them to low
impedance loads.

I'll bet you do, tweako.

**Of course I do.



I remember some time ago when you were going to send me a
very special "sounds better than anything else" amp to
review. That went nowhere, probably because you realized
that I would DBT the thing and say that it sounded just like
any other good amp.

**You wrote me (on RAO, I recall) back and said (to paraphrase):

"I wouldn't test your amplifier, if it was the last amplifier on the
planet." I'll try to find your exact quote.

I believe that was after a series of rather nasty (deja vu
all over again) give-and-take altercations.

**So what? I've had lots of discussions with lots of people. Some are polite
and friendly and some are not. You seem incapable of separating equipment
and personalities. I've had similar heated discussions with Mr Krueger, but
I would still be happy to ship an amp to him, because I am confident he
would report facts about products, not mix facts with personalities. You
have shown that you cannot do so.

BTW: I have not shipped an amp to Mr Kueger for the simple reason that his
testing is quite rigorous and would reveal exactly WHY the amp sounds
different (better) than other designs. You do not appear to have those
skills. You would likely hear a difference, but you have not engendered any
trust from me that you would actually report those differences honestly.

Prior to that,
you were eager to ship me an amp and I was kind of
interested in reviewing it. (I have since become utterly
uninterested in reviewing amps, but it has taken me time to
reach this plateau.) I think you ran into some shipment
snags, but you probably also realized that I would DBT the
unit with some cheap version I would happen to have on hand
and then say that they both sounded the same. Not a good
review for a megabuck amp, I think.

**Trust me when I say this: They would not sound the same.


Incidentally, The Sensible Sound will soon have a review of
another upscale amp by me (designed by one of the most
notable designers in the business) that pretty much does the
same thing that I would have done with your amp.

**I don't read the Sensible Sound, so I will take your word for it.


At that point, I decided that you were a waste of time. A waste of time
with
no ability to approach a product with an open mind.

For guys like you, an "open minded" attitude from a reviewer
results in a poetical writeup of an amp's performance
(dealing with superior soundstaging, imaging, depth, detail,
focus, etc., and other poppycock) that causes readers to
spend big bucks on qualities that do not exist.

**See what I mean? You're not even approaching the review with any kind of
open-minded honesty.


Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products.

**Indeed, they seem to be just that. BTW: Which high end writers would they
be (names)?

Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

**Wrong. I value honesty above all else.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Ty Ford wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:44:55 -0400, Clyde Slick wrote
(in article ):

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in
message
...

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not
want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

I'd sure want to know!

Let's cut to the chase. Ferstler knows next to nothing about
pro audio, pro audio products, or pro audio reviewers.
Therefore, his opinons of audio reviewers has nothing to do
with people who review pro audio gear.

IME pro audio is a much more pragmatic market than high end
consumer audio, as a rule.

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**So what? I've had lots of discussions with lots of
people. Some are
polite and friendly and some are not. You seem incapable
of
separating equipment and personalities. I've had similar
heated
discussions with Mr Krueger, but I would still be happy to
ship an
amp to him, because I am confident he would report facts
about
products, not mix facts with personalities. You have shown
that you
cannot do so.

BTW: I have not shipped an amp to Mr Kueger for the simple
reason
that his testing is quite rigorous and would reveal
exactly WHY the
amp sounds different (better) than other designs. You do
not appear
to have those skills. You would likely hear a difference,
but you
have not engendered any trust from me that you would
actually report
those differences honestly.

Thank you, Trevor.

wrote:

Yes! Tonight, my GF and I made grilled wild salmon with a
lemon/honey/soy sauce, grilled asparagus and a roasted tomato couscous.
Along with a nice Syrah. Strawberries, brown sugar, and creme fraiche
for dessert.....with Brut Imperial.

Yes - we know you like to eat. Was it wild Arkansas salmon?
I bet that's good!


I'll start by licking the honeypot tonight...

It's 2AM and you're taking a little RAO break?
right... Is the whale reading over your shoulder?

wrote:

Yes! Tonight, my GF and I made grilled wild salmon with a
lemon/honey/soy sauce, grilled asparagus and a roasted tomato couscous.
Along with a nice Syrah. Strawberries, brown sugar, and creme fraiche
for dessert.....with Brut Imperial.

Yes - we know you like to eat. Was it wild Arkansas salmon?
I bet that's good!


I'll start by licking the honeypot tonight...

It's 2AM and you're taking a little RAO break?
right... Is the whale reading over your shoulder?

Ty Ford wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:13:50 -0400, Howard Ferstler wrote
(in article ):

Clyde Slick wrote:

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.


Hey Howard. I consider myself a reviewer of high end pro audio gear.

It's real easy to pock a keyboard with bull**** with no one around. You want
to call me a pimp to my face and back it up with facts?

Screw the parole violation, let's get together real soon!

Ty Ford

-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Note that I originally said "many" high-end writers and not
all of them. My comment about "all of them" was misstated.
Heck, I review some high-end gear myself.

The problem occurs when so-called reviewers review stuff
like wires (interconnect or speaker, it does not matter) and
then use poetic license to spout baloney about what they
claim to hear. Amp reviews are often almost as bad, although
admittedly it is possible for a poorly designed amp to sound
different (meaning worse, even though euphonically the
result may be pleasant) from mainstream units. And of course
an underpowered amp may clip a bit when compared to a more
powerful unit. There is some leeway with amps, but certainly
not with wires, and probably not with CD and DVD players, if
we are talking about the audio performance with the latter.

Howard Ferstler

ric wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:

Many high-end writers are pimps for companies who market
overpriced and overkill products. Guys like you do not want
a reviewer; you want a pimp.

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Hmmm...he's gutless, as well.

Is it that important for you to know exactly who is feeding
you a bill of goods? If you cannot spot the con artists on
your own you deserve all the screwing over they can supply
to you.

As for being gutless, try to imagine what happens to someone
who directly slights a tweako journalist. Most of those guys
have their lawyer's phone numbers on their speed dialers.
Nobody insults people in the fool's paradise and gets away
with it.

Howard Ferstler

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

All of those who review wires and amps and then say that
various upscale (meaning expensive) versions are vastly
superior to lesser designs.

Name names, chicken****.

All of them. I leave it to you to pick and choose.

Who are all of them? Name names, stop
being a chicken**** asshole. Elevate yourself to being
"at least" a regular asshole.

I do believe you are upset, tweako. Good.

Howard Ferstler

Ty Ford wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:44:55 -0400, Clyde Slick wrote
(in article ):

Which particular high end reviewers would you
publicly proclaim as pimps?

I'd sure want to know!

Let's face it. For tweako readers some of those guys border
on being the voice of God. On the other hand, those readers
with a more rational approach to reality can spot the con
artists and true believers almost instantly.

If somebody here needs help in spotting those con artists
they are probably beyond help to begin with. Posting names
would result in a hoard of tweakos rising up out of the
slime to defend their ministers.

By the way, I have never read any of your stuff.

Howard Ferstler

Clyde Slick wrote:

Howard continues to duck the issue. No surpise, he
doesn't want to get sued.

Right. I realize just how insane some of those people are.
It would be expensive, even when those nitwits lost the
case.

Howard Ferstler