Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1281
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message . com In article , Eeyore wrote: Jenn wrote: And yet you claim that the files are of real trumpets. I rather hope he'd finally stopped making such a perverse and ridiculous claim ! Graham I suspect that he won't because I pointed out the truth to him. Actually Jenn, this issue has come up before. I'm amazed that you've come this far in life without being able to understand such phrases as "it doesn't matter for the purpose", and the word agnostic. It "doesn't matter for the purpose" and yet you are unable to admit that you didn't tell the truth (or to be generous, were simply wrong about) the nature of the files on your website. I've always provided the best and most accurate information known to me. BTW why don't you tell me again why my trumpet sample can't be played on acoustic instruments. Again? |
#1282
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: JA: Putting to one side, Mr. Krueger, your mindreading about what Jenn understands or not, I fail to grasp why you are "agnostic" on this question. Not only do your "Trumpets" samples have timbral differences from the sounds of real trumpets, they include notes that Jenn and Stephen have both stated can't be played on any real-world trumpet; both have then presented evidence in support of that statement. Why do you continue to ignore that evidence? I don't ignore it, I discount it. Both of these so-called authorities have been very fallible in the past. I cited independent websites to back up my comments because I assumed you wouldn't take my word for it. What's your problem with those sites? Stephen |
#1283
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: BTW Jenn how come you never mentioned that 4 valve trumpets can play "pedal tone" frequencies as normal notes? Four valve don't play "pedal tones" as normal notes. I wonder if you misread a reference that showed the extended range of normal notes. "Pedal tone" has a specific definition that isn't affected by how many valves one has. Besides, the four valve models I know are piccolo trumpets another octave away from the pitches in question. Stephen |
#1284
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote: In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: JA: Putting to one side, Mr. Krueger, your mindreading about what Jenn understands or not, I fail to grasp why you are "agnostic" on this question. Not only do your "Trumpets" samples have timbral differences from the sounds of real trumpets, they include notes that Jenn and Stephen have both stated can't be played on any real-world trumpet; both have then presented evidence in support of that statement. Why do you continue to ignore that evidence? I don't ignore it, I discount it. Both of these so-called authorities have been very fallible in the past. Where have we been "fallible" on these matters? I cited independent websites to back up my comments because I assumed you wouldn't take my word for it. As did I. What's your problem with those sites? Stephen Arny "discounts" our statements because we don't put up with false statements about musical matters. |
#1285
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote: In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: BTW Jenn how come you never mentioned that 4 valve trumpets can play "pedal tone" frequencies as normal notes? Four valve don't play "pedal tones" as normal notes. I wonder if you misread a reference that showed the extended range of normal notes. Seems likely. "Pedal tone" has a specific definition that isn't affected by how many valves one has. Indeed. Besides, the four valve models I know are piccolo trumpets another octave away from the pitches in question. Stephen There are also the four rotary valve trumpets, the timbre of which is even further from Arny's synth files than are regular trumpets. Some orchestras use them for German literature where darker tone color is needed. The fourth valve also extends the range down a P4th; still not low enough to reach the synth notes in Arny's files. |
#1286
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message . com In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message y. com 1. In spite of the truth, you still won't admit that the files aren't of real trumpets? Why? Clearly, you are simply unwilling to concede a point to me, no matter what. This is what I find so curious about you. I simply don't know for sure. How many times do I have to say this to you Jenn? Tell me: What is the lowest frequency on your "trumpets" files? 30 Hz or less. It appears to be room noise - probably the rumble of air conditioning equipment. What is the lowest frequency played by a "trumpet" on your files? The lowest tone that contributes to the tonality of the trumpets sample is about 234 Hz. BTW Jenn how come you never mentioned that 4 valve trumpets can play "pedal tone" frequencies as normal notes? See my response to Stephen's post on the subject. |
#1287
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote: "George M. Middius" wrote: paul packer said: ==================================== C And this signifies what, Ludo? His mouse picked up a huge static charge from his overload of outrage at MiNe, simultaneously knocking Ludo off his chair and causing his newsreader to send the message with only one character. Accidents will happen. LMAO ! Graham Burning to know what LMAO means. I bet it's something complimentary. Ludovic M. |
#1288
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Arny Krueger wrote: "Harry Lavo" wrote in message Of course, the fact that his ABX test looses sensitivity with musical samples doesn't bother Arny. It is well known that any kind of reliable listening test of certain effects may be more sensitive when performed with non-musical sounds. So this would be a deceptive claim on your part, Harry. In fact, he's so not bothered that he (nor anyone else) has ever verified the test as being valid to the open-ended evaluation of audio components. Please explain and provide examples of how a listening test paradigm can be validated. Please try not to overload Usenet with volumes of meaningless prose. The test is designed to pick up an identified artifact, after several hours of training. Why several hours, and why restrict it to identified artifacts? Steve Phillips at Harman Industries claims about half his potential testers are so poor at abx even after training that they have to be excluded from his panels. Is that the fault of the test or the listeners? Moreover, open-ended listening doesn't have a specific artifact to listen for; the sound must be evaluated as a "gestalt". If you want a real thrill, search for "open-ended listening test" there's only 3 hits on the entire web, and two of them don't relate to audio. IOW, this is just a catch phrase that Harry made up and applied here. Yet Arny goes on insisting (and preaching to newbies) that anything heard without using ABX or ABC/hr or some other DBT is almost certainly nonexistant - a figment of their imagination. This would be a lie, but since when has Harry been fettered by the mere truth? ====================================== The Chapel-meister speaks: " Please explain and provide examples of how a listening test paradigm can be validated. Please try not to overload Usenet with volumes of meaningless prose. Must you really demonstrate that not only you're tone deaf but that in all these years you did not pick up a glimmer of the scientific method. It can be validated by experiment and by experiment only. Till that has been done, reported, published in a peer-reviewed journal and confirmed by other experimenters IT DOES NOT EXIST. The details of design are a subject for the experimenter But I'd advise you to look up the articles of Sean Olive and Floyd Toole. Both very scrupulous researchers. If you want me to give you a lecture I'll do it for a fee. In brief and for example: Speakers can differ - right? Have a clear detailed protocol,state your statistical criteriaCollect a large statistically representative sample: age, sex , musical experience etc. Play a variety of musical fragements through invisible speakers. Ask: same, different? And now pick on some missing detail in my very foreshortened account and run with it , . . Ludovic Mirabel |
#1289
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article
om, Jenn wrote: In article , MiNe 109 wrote: In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: BTW Jenn how come you never mentioned that 4 valve trumpets can play "pedal tone" frequencies as normal notes? Four valve don't play "pedal tones" as normal notes. I wonder if you misread a reference that showed the extended range of normal notes. Seems likely. "Pedal tone" has a specific definition that isn't affected by how many valves one has. Indeed. Besides, the four valve models I know are piccolo trumpets another octave away from the pitches in question. There are also the four rotary valve trumpets, the timbre of which is even further from Arny's synth files than are regular trumpets. Some orchestras use them for German literature where darker tone color is needed. Are those what the Vienna Philharmonic use? The fourth valve also extends the range down a P4th; still not low enough to reach the synth notes in Arny's files. Lip it down! :-) Stephen |
#1290
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
" wrote: Eeyore wrote: "George M. Middius" wrote: paul packer said: ==================================== C And this signifies what, Ludo? His mouse picked up a huge static charge from his overload of outrage at MiNe, simultaneously knocking Ludo off his chair and causing his newsreader to send the message with only one character. Accidents will happen. LMAO ! Graham Burning to know what LMAO means. I bet it's something complimentary. Ludovic M. Laugh my ass(arse) off ! Graham |
#1291
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com Not only do your "Trumpets" samples have timbral differences from the sounds of real trumpets, they include notes that Jenn and Stephen have both stated can't be played on any real-world trumpet; both have then presented evidence in support of that statement. Why do you continue to ignore that evidence? I don't ignore it, I discount it. Both of these so-called authorities have been very fallible in the past. But all the references that have been given by Jenn and Stephen support their statements, as does the one website you cited, as do my music textbooks. A real trumpet can't play the lowest note in the chords you label as being played by "trumpets." And why do you claim to be "agnostic" on a subject where you yourself have full knowledge of the samples' provenance? You really need to keep up with the topic, John. It has been stipulated by me in the very recent past that the provenance of the samples is fuzzy. And this is something I still don't understand. Did the files just appear on your PC? If someone sent them to you, why didn't you just ask? Your lack of curiosity is peculiar, to say the least. And again, I don't undetstand why, if the trumpet samples are actually synthesized, as they appear to be, why you take that as any kind of reflection on your own competence? All that matters is that they be suitable for use with your ABX test. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#1292
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Eeyore" wrote in message Jenn wrote: And yet you claim that the files are of real trumpets. More evidence that Jenn has no understanding of the word agnostic. I rather hope he'd finally stopped making such a perverse and ridiculous claim ! Of course Jenn is lying. I claim that I don't know whether the trumpets sample is acoustic or synthed. I don't know which. You clearly stated that the files were recordings of real trumpets. For the zillionth time: I don't know whether the trumpets1 sample is acoustic or synthed. I know. And yet you are willing to say that *I* am lying. Remind me of the last time you admitted you were wrong. Was it even in this century? Here? Last week. The whole week? Wow. ScottW |
#1293
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com Not only do your "Trumpets" samples have timbral differences from the sounds of real trumpets, they include notes that Jenn and Stephen have both stated can't be played on any real-world trumpet; both have then presented evidence in support of that statement. Why do you continue to ignore that evidence? I don't ignore it, I discount it. Both of these so-called authorities have been very fallible in the past. But all the references that have been given by Jenn and Stephen support their statements, as does the one website you cited, as do my music textbooks. A real trumpet can't play the lowest note in the chords you label as being played by "trumpets." And why do you claim to be "agnostic" on a subject where you yourself have full knowledge of the samples' provenance? You really need to keep up with the topic, John. It has been stipulated by me in the very recent past that the provenance of the samples is fuzzy. And this is something I still don't understand. Did the files just appear on your PC? If someone sent them to you, why didn't you just ask? Your lack of curiosity is peculiar, to say the least. And again, I don't undetstand why, if the trumpet samples are actually synthesized, as they appear to be, why you take that as any kind of reflection on your own competence? All that matters is that they be suitable for use with your ABX test. A little late to the jean creaming party over having caught Arny in a mistake....aren't you John? ScottW |
#1294
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: " wrote: Eeyore wrote: "George M. Middius" wrote: paul packer said: ==================================== C And this signifies what, Ludo? His mouse picked up a huge static charge from his overload of outrage at MiNe, simultaneously knocking Ludo off his chair and causing his newsreader to send the message with only one character. Accidents will happen. LMAO ! Graham Burning to know what LMAO means. I bet it's something complimentary. Ludovic M. Laugh my ass(arse) off ! Graham netkkkkopin gfjukkwit Bertie |
#1295
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: Harry Lavo wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message "Powell" wrote in message If you spent the time to read the post you would have noted that Krivis believes that "high-end" home audio gear is in no way comparable to quality pro equipment." Usually, its low on required function and vastly overpriced for what it does and how it does it. This is simply not true. A list of manufacturers with high quality construction standards was provided. Construction methods are only a tiny part of the picture. However, if I recall correctly, this answer was given in response to a claim that most home audio gear, even high end, was vastly inferior in construction quality to pro gear. Was it about construction quality originally ? I'm sure high-end audio would be no worse in that respect. Graham netkkkkopin gfjukkktard Bertie |
#1296
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: Arny Krueger wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Arny Krueger wrote: "Eeyore" wrote You're totally absurd. The following is an absurd question: How many amps can you tell apart by *listening* to their square wave response ? I don't know - never tried. Now tell us how synthesisers make sounds please. FM or wavetable? Both ? Graham netkkkkopin gfjukkwit Bertie |
#1297
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote: In article om, Jenn wrote: In article , MiNe 109 wrote: In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: BTW Jenn how come you never mentioned that 4 valve trumpets can play "pedal tone" frequencies as normal notes? Four valve don't play "pedal tones" as normal notes. I wonder if you misread a reference that showed the extended range of normal notes. Seems likely. "Pedal tone" has a specific definition that isn't affected by how many valves one has. Indeed. Besides, the four valve models I know are piccolo trumpets another octave away from the pitches in question. There are also the four rotary valve trumpets, the timbre of which is even further from Arny's synth files than are regular trumpets. Some orchestras use them for German literature where darker tone color is needed. Are those what the Vienna Philharmonic use? Yep. Lots of British orchestras too. Several U.S. orchestras have now purchased a set. I was at the L.A. Phil last weekend and they used them for the Mozart cm Mass. The fourth valve also extends the range down a P4th; still not low enough to reach the synth notes in Arny's files. Lip it down! :-) WAAAAAAYYYY down! lol |
#1298
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article EltYg.6274$fl.1786@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote: A little late to the jean creaming party over having caught Arny in a mistake....aren't you John? Try to keep up. Stephen |
#1299
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article EltYg.6274$fl.1786@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com Not only do your "Trumpets" samples have timbral differences from the sounds of real trumpets, they include notes that Jenn and Stephen have both stated can't be played on any real-world trumpet; both have then presented evidence in support of that statement. Why do you continue to ignore that evidence? I don't ignore it, I discount it. Both of these so-called authorities have been very fallible in the past. But all the references that have been given by Jenn and Stephen support their statements, as does the one website you cited, as do my music textbooks. A real trumpet can't play the lowest note in the chords you label as being played by "trumpets." And why do you claim to be "agnostic" on a subject where you yourself have full knowledge of the samples' provenance? You really need to keep up with the topic, John. It has been stipulated by me in the very recent past that the provenance of the samples is fuzzy. And this is something I still don't understand. Did the files just appear on your PC? If someone sent them to you, why didn't you just ask? Your lack of curiosity is peculiar, to say the least. And again, I don't undetstand why, if the trumpet samples are actually synthesized, as they appear to be, why you take that as any kind of reflection on your own competence? All that matters is that they be suitable for use with your ABX test. A little late to the jean creaming party ?? over having caught Arny in a mistake....aren't you John? Speaking only for myself, it's not about catching him in a mistake. Anyone can make a mistake; it's no big deal. What I find interesting is: 1. His evident inability to admit a mistake in the face of overwhelming evidence 2. The fact that as a person who accepts money for recording acoustic music, he can't can't hear when something is so blatantly not acoustic. |
#1300
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote: " wrote: Eeyore wrote: "George M. Middius" wrote: paul packer said: ==================================== C And this signifies what, Ludo? His mouse picked up a huge static charge from his overload of outrage at MiNe, simultaneously knocking Ludo off his chair and causing his newsreader to send the message with only one character. Accidents will happen. LMAO ! Graham Burning to know what LMAO means. I bet it's something complimentary. Ludovic M. Laugh my ass(arse) off ! Graham I was right. You were grateful. Ludovic M. |
#1301
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Arny Krueger" said:
If I want to know technical information about music and musical instruments, I would prefer to check that out with my good friend who has a PhD in music, or use some standard appropriate reference. I didn't know that mr. Google (or Goggle) had a PhD in music ;-) -- "Due knot trussed yore spell chequer two fined awl miss steaks." |
#1302
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article EltYg.6274$fl.1786@dukeread08, "ScottW" wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com Not only do your "Trumpets" samples have timbral differences from the sounds of real trumpets, they include notes that Jenn and Stephen have both stated can't be played on any real-world trumpet; both have then presented evidence in support of that statement. Why do you continue to ignore that evidence? I don't ignore it, I discount it. Both of these so-called authorities have been very fallible in the past. But all the references that have been given by Jenn and Stephen support their statements, as does the one website you cited, as do my music textbooks. A real trumpet can't play the lowest note in the chords you label as being played by "trumpets." And why do you claim to be "agnostic" on a subject where you yourself have full knowledge of the samples' provenance? You really need to keep up with the topic, John. It has been stipulated by me in the very recent past that the provenance of the samples is fuzzy. And this is something I still don't understand. Did the files just appear on your PC? If someone sent them to you, why didn't you just ask? Your lack of curiosity is peculiar, to say the least. And again, I don't undetstand why, if the trumpet samples are actually synthesized, as they appear to be, why you take that as any kind of reflection on your own competence? All that matters is that they be suitable for use with your ABX test. A little late to the jean creaming party ?? over having caught Arny in a mistake....aren't you John? Speaking only for myself, it's not about catching him in a mistake. Anyone can make a mistake; it's no big deal. What I find interesting is: 1. His evident inability to admit a mistake in the face of overwhelming evidence Was it interesting the first time, the 40th time or the 400th time? 2. The fact that as a person who accepts money for recording acoustic music, he can't can't hear when something is so blatantly not acoustic. Perhaps he hasn't put himself into the acoustic instruments only box. ScottW |
#1303
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
In article lqvYg.6284$fl.1541@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article EltYg.6274$fl.1786@dukeread08, "ScottW" wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message ups.com Not only do your "Trumpets" samples have timbral differences from the sounds of real trumpets, they include notes that Jenn and Stephen have both stated can't be played on any real-world trumpet; both have then presented evidence in support of that statement. Why do you continue to ignore that evidence? I don't ignore it, I discount it. Both of these so-called authorities have been very fallible in the past. But all the references that have been given by Jenn and Stephen support their statements, as does the one website you cited, as do my music textbooks. A real trumpet can't play the lowest note in the chords you label as being played by "trumpets." And why do you claim to be "agnostic" on a subject where you yourself have full knowledge of the samples' provenance? You really need to keep up with the topic, John. It has been stipulated by me in the very recent past that the provenance of the samples is fuzzy. And this is something I still don't understand. Did the files just appear on your PC? If someone sent them to you, why didn't you just ask? Your lack of curiosity is peculiar, to say the least. And again, I don't undetstand why, if the trumpet samples are actually synthesized, as they appear to be, why you take that as any kind of reflection on your own competence? All that matters is that they be suitable for use with your ABX test. A little late to the jean creaming party ?? over having caught Arny in a mistake....aren't you John? Speaking only for myself, it's not about catching him in a mistake. Anyone can make a mistake; it's no big deal. What I find interesting is: 1. His evident inability to admit a mistake in the face of overwhelming evidence Was it interesting the first time, the 40th time or the 400th time? People are a never ending source of interest. 2. The fact that as a person who accepts money for recording acoustic music, he can't can't hear when something is so blatantly not acoustic. Perhaps he hasn't put himself into the acoustic instruments only box. Sorry, I don't understand your statement. |
#1304
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Eeyore" wrote in
message Arny Krueger wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Arny Krueger wrote: "Eeyore" wrote You're totally absurd. The following is an absurd question: How many amps can you tell apart by *listening* to their square wave response ? I don't know - never tried. Now tell us how synthesisers make sounds please. FM or wavetable? Both ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesizer |
#1305
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 03:45:53 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: Harry Lavo wrote: "Eeyore" wrote in message "George M. Middius" wrote: Poopie is receiving on a very strange frequency. Leave it be and chat with the (almost) normals. This from the loon who just posted "accuracy sounds lovely". It does ! It does however need to be really accurate. It has to be really accurate of a really lovely performance. This would be ideal. Graham Is this conversation for real? |
#1306
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:48:43 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote: George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net said: Arnii had the plot ripped out along with that bedraggled collection of weeds and scrub he calls a "lawn". "And stop throwing garbage on my lawn!" You're a very unkind person, Sander. :-) |
#1307
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
paul packer said: This from the loon who just posted "accuracy sounds lovely". It does ! It does however need to be really accurate. It has to be really accurate of a really lovely performance. This would be ideal. Is this conversation for real? Keep in mind that Poopie has one foot in BorgWorld. -- "Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible." A. Krooger, Aug. 2006 |
#1308
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
paul packer said: Arnii had the plot ripped out along with that bedraggled collection of weeds and scrub he calls a "lawn". "And stop throwing garbage on my lawn!" You're a very unkind person, Sander. :-) Bull****! Bull****! Bull****! -- "Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible." A. Krooger, Aug. 2006 |
#1309
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Arny Krueger wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Arny Krueger wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Arny Krueger wrote: "Eeyore" wrote You're totally absurd. The following is an absurd question: How many amps can you tell apart by *listening* to their square wave response ? I don't know - never tried. Now tell us how synthesisers make sounds please. FM or wavetable? Both ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesizer Evasion. Graham |
#1310
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
paul packer wrote: Eeyore wrote: Harry Lavo wrote: "Eeyore" wrote in message "George M. Middius" wrote: Poopie is receiving on a very strange frequency. Leave it be and chat with the (almost) normals. This from the loon who just posted "accuracy sounds lovely". It does ! It does however need to be really accurate. It has to be really accurate of a really lovely performance. This would be ideal. Graham Is this conversation for real? Why wouldn't it be ? Graham |
#1311
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"George M. Middius" wrote: paul packer said: This from the loon who just posted "accuracy sounds lovely". It does ! It does however need to be really accurate. It has to be really accurate of a really lovely performance. This would be ideal. Is this conversation for real? Keep in mind that Poopie has one foot in BorgWorld. Whilst Arny is mad would you mind laying off the idiot talk ? Graham |
#1312
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 06:00:30 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: paul packer wrote: Eeyore wrote: Harry Lavo wrote: "Eeyore" wrote in message "George M. Middius" wrote: Poopie is receiving on a very strange frequency. Leave it be and chat with the (almost) normals. This from the loon who just posted "accuracy sounds lovely". It does ! It does however need to be really accurate. It has to be really accurate of a really lovely performance. This would be ideal. Graham Is this conversation for real? Why wouldn't it be ? Graham You don't know? Read it again. |
#1313
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Jenn" wrote in
message If you're "agnostic" about it, why did you claim that they are recordings of acoustic trumpet? What are my most recent statements on the matter, Jenn? |
#1314
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Jenn" wrote in
message Arny "discounts" our statements because we don't put up with false statements about musical matters. This is obviously an insult. Since Jenn never insults anybody, it is obviously a forged post. |
#1315
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Jenn" wrote in
message Speaking only for myself, it's not about catching him in a mistake. Anyone can make a mistake; it's no big deal. What I find interesting is: 1. His evident inability to admit a mistake in the face of overwhelming evidence 2. The fact that as a person who accepts money for recording acoustic music, he can't can't hear when something is so blatantly not acoustic. This is obviously an insult, actually a collection of them. Since Jenn never insults anybody, its obviously a forgery. |
#1316
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Jenn" wrote in
message In article lqvYg.6284$fl.1541@dukeread08, "ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article EltYg.6274$fl.1786@dukeread08, "ScottW" wrote: A little late to the jean creaming party over having caught Arny in a mistake....aren't you John? Speaking only for myself, it's not about catching him in a mistake. Anyone can make a mistake; it's no big deal. What I find interesting is: 1. His evident inability to admit a mistake in the face of overwhelming evidence Was it interesting the first time, the 40th time or the 400th time? People are a never ending source of interest. Thanks Jenn for admitting that you are intersted in repeating the same insults 400 or more times. |
#1317
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message oups.com ohn? Actually, ScottW, I was trying to be conciliatory. I actually agree with Arny that whether these are real or fake trumpets doesn't matter if they prove useful in listening tests. But I am saddened by AK's continuing to dispute matters that seem to be well-established fact.. Hey, we got another loser who can't understand the meaning of the word "agnostic". |
#1318
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Arny Krueger wrote: "Jenn" wrote If you're "agnostic" about it, why did you claim that they are recordings of acoustic trumpet? What are my most recent statements on the matter, Jenn? Why do you reply to questions with questions Arny ? Graham |
#1319
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Arny Krueger wrote: "Jenn" wrote Speaking only for myself, it's not about catching him in a mistake. Anyone can make a mistake; it's no big deal. What I find interesting is: 1. His evident inability to admit a mistake in the face of overwhelming evidence 2. The fact that as a person who accepts money for recording acoustic music, he can't can't hear when something is so blatantly not acoustic. This is obviously an insult, actually a collection of them. Since Jenn never insults anybody, its obviously a forgery. Like your samples. Graham |
#1320
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
The Krooborg still won't shut up. If you're "agnostic" about it, why did you claim that they are recordings of acoustic trumpet? What are my most recent statements on the matter, Jenn? The same mincing, quibbling, prevaricative, Krooglish-drenched "debating trade" garbage you always dump on Usenet. Arnii, do you think it's just a coincidence that everybody in the world says you're a sick ****? -- "Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible." A. Krooger, Aug. 2006 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Why tubes are the paradigm | Audio Opinions | |||
A Question for Arny about the lawsuit | Audio Opinions |