Arny Krueger wrote:

"Robert Morein" wrote in message



"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...


"Robert Morein" wrote in message



[snip]


...lots of technical comments.


But then, great minds do not call innocent people pedophiles.


Tell that to all the people who've called me a pedophile either
directly or by implication dozens and even 100's of times. They
rather obviously think they are really smart. They are about as
smart as you calling me deaf.


I note that in the above, Arny apparently believes that "two wrongs
make a right."


Or, I apparently believe that the wise man tolerates a little abuse in his
life.


A wiser man sees such abuse as meaningless background noise.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Robert Morein said:

The behavior Arny cites should be condemned, not imitated, by the victim
or
by anyone else.

On the contrary, it is fully justified by Mr. ****'s own behavior.

If somebody has fantasies that are both pedophiliac and necrophiliac
(as well as involving excretory functions), you might hope he keeps it
to himself. But if that individual posts vivid descriptions of the
fantasies on a public forum such as RAO, and goes on to say "One of my
enemies made me do this," that is a factual basis for accusations of
pedophilia and other abnormalities.

The accusations *against* Krooger are substantial and based on his own
behavior. The accusations *by* Krooger are frivolous and retaliatory.

This distinction has been explained to you many times before. Try to
learn it this time.

Will you be shipping me a blackboard and chalk?

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
om...
(Audio Guy) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(John Atkinson) writes:
(Audio Guy) wrote on r.a.h-e in message
...
Audio is a trivial application, they learn about power supply
design and amplification, which is pretty much all there is to
audio amplifiers, in their early years and then go on to much
more
interesting and challenging concepts.

I see statements like this from time to time, yet I am not so
sure
that audio design is "trivial." There are not many other design
fields
where an amplifier: has to provide up to 30dB of voltage gain;
act as a
voltage source into a wide and arbitrary range of load
impedances
and do so in an unconditionally stable manner; have a passband
noise
contribution at least 90dB down from 1W into 8 ohms, no matter
what
its voltage gain and ultimate power delivery; have distortion
components under all load conditions that are below the
threshold of
hearing no matter what the program material is; and do all the
above
over at least three-decade, ie, a 10-octave passband.

Thoughts, gentlemen? I would suggest that designing, say, a
typical RF
amplifier is, by comparison, "trivial" but, of course, I may
just be
missing something :-)

Sure, take my words out of context.

You left out the previous part that qualifies them:
"Audiophiles don't realize that audio is an extremely small
part of electrical engineering and that very, very few schools
even
teach courses in the subject. It isn't where the money is, nor is
it
where the interest is for EE students. EEs like to make ICs or
design
computers or work in motor control or design antennas or work in
telecom."

My apologies "audioguy" but I don't see how this paragraph changes
the
meaning of the words you wrote about audio amplifier design. It
doesn't
matter _ why_ electronic engineers feel audio is a "trivial"
application,
only that they do, and that is what I was addressing. Note that I
feel
that audio amplifier design is far from trivial. If you look at the
list of attributes I listed for an ideal audio amplifier, I can
think of
almost none, of all the designs I have tested for Stereophile, that
achieve that level of performance.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Certainly more than half of the requirements you placed on your
amplifier design detailed in your first reply to this header disappear
if the designer knows the characteristics of the source and load ahead
of time. It is for this reason that I forever wonder at how few
speakers come with their own amplifier--at least in the home hi-fi
industry.

Norm Strong

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...
I think what Audioguy meant to say is that audio amplification is
regarded as trivial not because it is, but because it is bereft of the
prestige that comes with working in a field with actively advancing
fundamentals.

If so, then I don't disagree.

I say to you, John, that nobody has come up with a reasonable set of
figures of merit. I still can't look at a set of your graphs and
predict how an amp will sound. That's a disconnect.

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his wife,
presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by looking at
how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function of a typical
amplifier can be examined using a masking model representing human
perception. Their provisional results show excellent correlation between
the metric for a given amplifier and the audibility of its spuriae.

This work is not at the stage where someone could plug measured results
into a spreadsheet and out pops a "good" "moderate" "bad" judgment, but
eventually something like that will be possible. Of course, a human
reviewer will still be needed to produce what Tom Nosuaine calls the
"audio poetry." :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

"normanstrong" wrote in message
news:lmVlb.3955$mZ5.23026@attbi_s54...
Certainly more than half of the requirements you placed on your
amplifier design detailed in your first reply to this header disappear
if the designer knows the characteristics of the source and load ahead
of time. It is for this reason that I forever wonder at how few
speakers come with their own amplifier--at least in the home hi-fi
industry.

Hi Norm, I believe that the apparent restriction of customer choice that
this represents is a major impediment to successful marketing of an active
speaker. Even if the customer buys exactly the amplifier that the speaker
designer feels works best with his loudspeaker, and would therefore be
the one that could be supplied in an integrated package, it appears to be
important to customers to have the widest amplifier choice available.

Probably only Meridian has made much headway in the audiophile market
selling integrated loudspeaker/amplifier packages.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

PS: Your letter on the purported advantages of hi-rez audio media
appears in the ne (November) issue of Stereophile.

On 23 Oct 2003 14:13:21 -0700, (John
Atkinson) wrote:

I say to you, John, that nobody has come up with a reasonable set of
figures of merit. I still can't look at a set of your graphs and
predict how an amp will sound. That's a disconnect.

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his wife,
presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by looking at
how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function of a typical
amplifier can be examined using a masking model representing human
perception. Their provisional results show excellent correlation between
the metric for a given amplifier and the audibility of its spuriae.

Damn...you're making my head hurt.

In article ,
dave weil wrote:

On 23 Oct 2003 14:13:21 -0700, (John
Atkinson) wrote:

I say to you, John, that nobody has come up with a reasonable set of
figures of merit. I still can't look at a set of your graphs and
predict how an amp will sound. That's a disconnect.

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his wife,
presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by looking at
how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function of a typical
amplifier can be examined using a masking model representing human
perception. Their provisional results show excellent correlation between
the metric for a given amplifier and the audibility of its spuriae.

Damn...you're making my head hurt.

I'm still reeling from trying to picture the orbit of Cruithne...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


[snip]

But then, great minds do not call innocent people pedophiles.

Tell that to all the people who've called me a pedophile either directly
or
by implication dozens and even 100's of times. They rather obviously
think
they are really smart. They are about as smart as you calling me deaf.

I note that in the above, Arny apparently believes that "two wrongs make a
right."
Thisis utterly childish.
While his personality could hardly be called childish, it has peculiar
chinks, of which this is one example.

The behavior Arny cites should be condemned, not imitated, by the victim
or
by anyone else.


The behavior Arny exhibits should be condemned.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

dave weil wrote:
On 23 Oct 2003 14:13:21 -0700, (John
Atkinson) wrote:


I say to you, John, that nobody has come up with a reasonable set of
figures of merit. I still can't look at a set of your graphs and
predict how an amp will sound. That's a disconnect.

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his wife,
presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by looking at
how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function of a typical
amplifier can be examined using a masking model representing human
perception. Their provisional results show excellent correlation between
the metric for a given amplifier and the audibility of its spuriae.


Damn...you're making my head hurt.



Ran out of Demerol?

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

I make note of this, in case Mr. Wheeler wishes to depose me for the
trial.


We all wish to depose you.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...

Krooger inhabits a peculiar universe in which his own behavior has
nothing to do with how much other people like or dislike him. Instead,
people detest him because he, Krooger, believes he is smarter than
they are. Or because he holds certain opinions in a small area that is
nearly inconsequential to most people. Or because -- and this is my
favorite -- they succumb to my telepathic commands and begin hating
Krooger simply because I willed it.

It's all a great big plot. Only "God" has this kind of power.


I thought that Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell and Pat
Robertson had it too.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 22:30:36 GMT, trotsky wrote:

dave weil wrote:
On 23 Oct 2003 14:13:21 -0700, (John
Atkinson) wrote:


I say to you, John, that nobody has come up with a reasonable set of
figures of merit. I still can't look at a set of your graphs and
predict how an amp will sound. That's a disconnect.

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his wife,
presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by looking at
how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function of a typical
amplifier can be examined using a masking model representing human
perception. Their provisional results show excellent correlation between
the metric for a given amplifier and the audibility of its spuriae.


Damn...you're making my head hurt.



Ran out of Demerol?

Why? Are you running a special?

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

Krooger inhabits a peculiar universe in which his own behavior has
nothing to do with how much other people like or dislike him. Instead,
people detest him because he, Krooger, believes he is smarter than
they are. Or because he holds certain opinions in a small area that is
nearly inconsequential to most people. Or because -- and this is my
favorite -- they succumb to my telepathic commands and begin hating
Krooger simply because I willed it.

It's all a great big plot. Only "God" has this kind of power.


I thought that Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell and Pat
Robertson had it too.


You forgot the smiley. Check with Lionella -- she has loads of extras.

And of course you're distorting what I said. It's their utterly verbal
preaching and perorating, not their beaming of thoughts, that
influences the ovine oafs in their flocks. Do you see the difference,
or do you prefer to be offended anew by something that never happened?

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

Krooger inhabits a peculiar universe in which his own behavior has
nothing to do with how much other people like or dislike him. Instead,
people detest him because he, Krooger, believes he is smarter than
they are. Or because he holds certain opinions in a small area that is
nearly inconsequential to most people. Or because -- and this is my
favorite -- they succumb to my telepathic commands and begin hating
Krooger simply because I willed it.

It's all a great big plot. Only "God" has this kind of power.


I thought that Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell and Pat
Robertson had it too.


You forgot the smiley. Check with Lionella -- she has loads of extras.

And of course you're distorting what I said. It's their utterly verbal
preaching and perorating, not their beaming of thoughts, that
influences the ovine oafs in their flocks. Do you see the difference,
or do you prefer to be offended anew by something that never happened?


I REFUSE to type smiley's.
Sometime's I'll use an old fashioned exclamation point once in a while.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
om...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...
I think what Audioguy meant to say is that audio amplification is
regarded as trivial not because it is, but because it is bereft of the
prestige that comes with working in a field with actively advancing
fundamentals.

If so, then I don't disagree.

I say to you, John, that nobody has come up with a reasonable set of
figures of merit. I still can't look at a set of your graphs and
predict how an amp will sound. That's a disconnect.

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his wife,
presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by looking at
how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function of a typical
amplifier can be examined using a masking model representing human
perception. Their provisional results show excellent correlation between
the metric for a given amplifier and the audibility of its spuriae.

That sounds very promising.
There may yet be room for audio poetry, however.
If I may liken audio to a data stream with "features", the mere audibility
of a feature "discrepancy" may not correlate with the emotional importance
to the listener. The frequency of the "feature", and thus the "discrepancy",
also depends upon the musical material. Treble grain may be barely audible,
and comprise an insignificant portion of the power spectrum, yet be as
irritating as chalk on a blackboard. And loose, tubby bass may be considered
a benefit to some.

The most consistent thing about amplifiers I have noticed is my personal
need to match the amplifier to the speaker. Bright amps work well with soft
domes, while softer, ie., MOSFET amps, work better for me with hard domes.
The right wine for the meal.

But I have had in the back of my mind using a Hafler type bridge to get the
difference signal and look at the spectra.
I was largely dissuaded by the thought that this was a solution that nobody
wanted. as many members of this group might state.

This work is not at the stage where someone could plug measured results
into a spreadsheet and out pops a "good" "moderate" "bad" judgment, but
eventually something like that will be possible. Of course, a human
reviewer will still be needed to produce what Tom Nosuaine calls the
"audio poetry." :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

Krooger inhabits a peculiar universe in which his own behavior has
nothing to do with how much other people like or dislike him.
Instead,
people detest him because he, Krooger, believes he is smarter than
they are. Or because he holds certain opinions in a small area that
is
nearly inconsequential to most people. Or because -- and this is my
favorite -- they succumb to my telepathic commands and begin hating
Krooger simply because I willed it.

It's all a great big plot. Only "God" has this kind of power.


I thought that Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell and Pat
Robertson had it too.


You forgot the smiley. Check with Lionella -- she has loads of extras.

And of course you're distorting what I said. It's their utterly verbal
preaching and perorating, not their beaming of thoughts, that
influences the ovine oafs in their flocks. Do you see the difference,
or do you prefer to be offended anew by something that never happened?


I REFUSE to type smiley's.
Sometime's I'll use an old fashioned exclamation point once in a while.

You're mean.
:0):0):0): ):0)::
)0):0):0)

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...



You're mean.

:0):0):0): ):0)::
)0):0):0)



...l..




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

(John Atkinson) wrote:


"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...
I think what Audioguy meant to say is that audio amplification is
regarded as trivial not because it is, but because it is bereft of the
prestige that comes with working in a field with actively advancing
fundamentals.

If so, then I don't disagree.

I say to you, John, that nobody has come up with a reasonable set of
figures of merit. I still can't look at a set of your graphs and
predict how an amp will sound. That's a disconnect.

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his wife,
presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by looking at
how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function of a typical
amplifier can be examined using a masking model representing human
perception. Their provisional results show excellent correlation between
the metric for a given amplifier and the audibility of its spuriae.

OK I heard that paper. So how does that show that any ampliifer on the market
currently available or on your RCL (congratulations on learning how to count)
is "better sounding" than any other with regard to the GedLee Metric?


This work is not at the stage where someone could plug measured results
into a spreadsheet and out pops a "good" "moderate" "bad" judgment, but
eventually something like that will be possible. Of course, a human
reviewer will still be needed to produce what Tom Nosuaine calls the
"audio poetry." :-)

So how are your bais-controlled validation listening tests going? I'm comforted
that you'll be there for the "poetry" part. Wouldn't it be horrible for
enthusiasts to learn from a spec-sheet "number" that their Yamaha integrated
amplifier sounds exactly like a 12K high-end set of mono-blocks ?

"normanstrong" wrote:

....snips.....


"John Atkinson" wrote in message

I see statements like this from time to time, yet I am not so
sure
that audio design is "trivial." There are not many other design
fields
where an amplifier: has to provide up to 30dB of voltage gain;
act as a
voltage source into a wide and arbitrary range of load
impedances
and do so in an unconditionally stable manner; have a passband
noise
contribution at least 90dB down from 1W into 8 ohms, no matter
what
its voltage gain and ultimate power delivery; have distortion
components under all load conditions that are below the
threshold of
hearing no matter what the program material is; and do all the
above
over at least three-decade, ie, a 10-octave passband.

Thoughts, gentlemen? I would suggest that designing, say, a
typical RF
amplifier is, by comparison, "trivial" but, of course, I may
just be
missing something :-)

I don't know if Mr Atkinson is missing anything. But I wonder exactly how it is
that with the exception of high-ouput impedance amplifiers that exactly NO ONE
hasd ever shown in a reasonably well bias-controlled experiment (including Mr
Atkinson's; indeed his personally conducted large trial experiments showed that
even with high-output impedance amplifiers there was no sonic difference) that
modern amplfiers have any sound of their own.



Sure, take my words out of context.

You left out the previous part that qualifies them:
"Audiophiles don't realize that audio is an extremely small
part of electrical engineering and that very, very few schools
even
teach courses in the subject. It isn't where the money is, nor is
it
where the interest is for EE students. EEs like to make ICs or
design
computers or work in motor control or design antennas or work in
telecom."

My apologies "audioguy" but I don't see how this paragraph changes
the
meaning of the words you wrote about audio amplifier design. It
doesn't
matter _ why_ electronic engineers feel audio is a "trivial"
application,
only that they do, and that is what I was addressing. Note that I
feel
that audio amplifier design is far from trivial. If you look at the
list of attributes I listed for an ideal audio amplifier, I can
think of
almost none, of all the designs I have tested for Stereophile, that
achieve that level of performance.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


OK; which ones that you recommend have been shown to sound different with a
bias controlled listening test?


Certainly more than half of the requirements you placed on your
amplifier design detailed in your first reply to this header disappear
if the designer knows the characteristics of the source and load ahead
of time. It is for this reason that I forever wonder at how few
speakers come with their own amplifier--at least in the home hi-fi
industry.

Norm Strong

Actually the best-performing speaker I've tested DO come with their own
amplifiers and application specific EQ.

I wonder what Mr Atkinson's experience may be in this regard.

(John Atkinson) wrote:

"normanstrong" wrote in message
news:lmVlb.3955$mZ5.23026@attbi_s54...
Certainly more than half of the requirements you placed on your
amplifier design detailed in your first reply to this header disappear
if the designer knows the characteristics of the source and load ahead
of time. It is for this reason that I forever wonder at how few
speakers come with their own amplifier--at least in the home hi-fi
industry.

Hi Norm, I believe that the apparent restriction of customer choice that
this represents is a major impediment to successful marketing of an active
speaker. Even if the customer buys exactly the amplifier that the speaker
designer feels works best with his loudspeaker, and would therefore be
the one that could be supplied in an integrated package, it appears to be
important to customers to have the widest amplifier choice available.

I have a different take on this. An average "high-end" enthusiast may already
have a stack of amplifiers or at least a single expensive 2-channel amplifier
at his/her disposal. Anybody else has purchased a modrn receiver with 5
amplifier channels already built into the chassis.

People just don't see the reason to buy power again. The neo-phytes don't get
it. The high-enders never WILL get it; it's too apparent. So the best way to
better sounding loudspeakers will remain foreign to the market UNTIL the
current generation of computer users (who expect their speakers to be powered)
are in the loop.


Probably only Meridian has made much headway in the audiophile market
selling integrated loudspeaker/amplifier packages.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

PS: Your letter on the purported advantages of hi-rez audio media
appears in the ne (November) issue of Stereophile.

That take is likely a fair statement of the current market. Paradigm stopped
offering their Active series which was one of the better performing speaker
systems ever to reach the market. Yet few would buy them.

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...



You're mean.


:0):0):0): ):0)::
)0):0):0)



..l..

Me 2.

"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"normanstrong" wrote:

...snips.....


"John Atkinson" wrote in message

I see statements like this from time to time, yet I am not so
sure
that audio design is "trivial." There are not many other design
fields
where an amplifier: has to provide up to 30dB of voltage gain;
act as a
voltage source into a wide and arbitrary range of load
impedances
and do so in an unconditionally stable manner; have a passband
noise
contribution at least 90dB down from 1W into 8 ohms, no matter
what
its voltage gain and ultimate power delivery; have distortion
components under all load conditions that are below the
threshold of
hearing no matter what the program material is; and do all the
above
over at least three-decade, ie, a 10-octave passband.

Thoughts, gentlemen? I would suggest that designing, say, a
typical RF
amplifier is, by comparison, "trivial" but, of course, I may
just be
missing something :-)

I don't know if Mr Atkinson is missing anything. But I wonder exactly how
it is
that with the exception of high-ouput impedance amplifiers that exactly NO
ONE
hasd ever shown in a reasonably well bias-controlled experiment (including
Mr
Atkinson's; indeed his personally conducted large trial experiments showed
that
even with high-output impedance amplifiers there was no sonic difference)
that
modern amplfiers have any sound of their own.



Sure, take my words out of context.

You left out the previous part that qualifies them:
"Audiophiles don't realize that audio is an extremely small
part of electrical engineering and that very, very few schools
even
teach courses in the subject. It isn't where the money is, nor is
it
where the interest is for EE students. EEs like to make ICs or
design
computers or work in motor control or design antennas or work in
telecom."

My apologies "audioguy" but I don't see how this paragraph changes
the
meaning of the words you wrote about audio amplifier design. It
doesn't
matter _ why_ electronic engineers feel audio is a "trivial"
application,
only that they do, and that is what I was addressing. Note that I
feel
that audio amplifier design is far from trivial. If you look at the
list of attributes I listed for an ideal audio amplifier, I can
think of
almost none, of all the designs I have tested for Stereophile, that
achieve that level of performance.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


OK; which ones that you recommend have been shown to sound different with
a
bias controlled listening test?


Certainly more than half of the requirements you placed on your
amplifier design detailed in your first reply to this header disappear
if the designer knows the characteristics of the source and load ahead
of time. It is for this reason that I forever wonder at how few
speakers come with their own amplifier--at least in the home hi-fi
industry.

Norm Strong

Actually the best-performing speaker I've tested DO come with their own
amplifiers and application specific EQ.

I wonder what Mr Atkinson's experience may be in this regard.

What speaker do you refer to?

George M. Middius wrote:


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:


Krooger inhabits a peculiar universe in which his own behavior has
nothing to do with how much other people like or dislike him. Instead,
people detest him because he, Krooger, believes he is smarter than
they are. Or because he holds certain opinions in a small area that is
nearly inconsequential to most people. Or because -- and this is my
favorite -- they succumb to my telepathic commands and begin hating
Krooger simply because I willed it.

It's all a great big plot. Only "God" has this kind of power.


I thought that Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell and Pat
Robertson had it too.



You forgot the smiley. Check with Lionella -- she has loads of extras.


Lionella use what she can in order to be better understood... You don't.

Georgetta one more question please :
Don't you think that we are more and more looking to 2 old lesbians
after a noisy rupture ? ;O)

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
om

Unfortunately yes. But two excellent papers by Earl Geddes and his
wife, presented at the recent AES Convention, show a way forward, by
looking at how the spuriae produced by the "bent" transfer function
of a typical amplifier can be examined using a masking model
representing human perception. Their provisional results show
excellent correlation between the metric for a given amplifier and
the audibility of its spuriae.

Geddes' specialty is loudspeaker design and evaluation. Therefore he's
concerned with relatively high levels of distortion by the standards of
modern audio power amplifiers.

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:48:18 GMT, MiNE 109
wrote:

I'm still reeling from trying to picture the orbit of Cruithne...

LOL! I told you it was a better name than Jupiter!

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...on_991029.html

--
td

In article z,
The Stainless Steel Boob Orchestra wrote:

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:48:18 GMT, MiNE 109
wrote:

I'm still reeling from trying to picture the orbit of Cruithne...

LOL! I told you it was a better name than Jupiter!

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...on_991029.html

Just remember the 'th' is silent!

Here's the site with animations of the orbit:

http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...

Krooger recently blamed me for the waves of disdain and torrents of
loathing that envelop him on RAO. No doubt he has a similar bugbear
for the other Usenet groups. And somebody else for the other sites
where they have his number.

As usual, you're lying Middius. Or maybe you're so stupid you actually
believe this. You've tried to dominate RAO for years and force me off by
various means. The good news is that you are violently hated on most of the
Usenet audio groups, and you don't bother them very much. So life there is
relatively gentle and sweet for me. I mostly just come here to futiley check
for intelligent life, lead newbies away to the promised lands, and feed the
animals.

It's ironic Middius that the groups where you don't go are mostly relatively
healthy places were on-topic discussions dominate. In contrast RAO, which
is your own personal turf. is widely despised and hated. Almost as widely
despised and hated as you! Newbies frequently run away screaming.
Experienced hands warn people away. You've done a great job with RAO,
Middius. Your mother should be proud.

On other, equally deluded days, he has fatuously claimed that he is
despised for his "audio opinions".

Again Middius you're lying. In most audio groups my opinions get a fair
hearing, free of your inane comments and the insipid off-topic trolling of
your acolytes. Works for me. Works for me even with the gratuitous
interference.

And on still others, he ludicrously
boasts of having "won" debates with his betters, or "shown up" various
other posters, or "deconstructed" the statements of normal people with
that peculiarity of his illness we know as Kroo-logic.

Middius as if you should talk about logic. You and your saprophytes are some
of the biggest, easiest targets for deconstruction that I find in all of the
audio groups in Usenet. Face it, you knew you hated me the first time I
deconstructed your false claims about tubes, and it's been downhill ever
since.

In real life, he can't hold a job.

It's interesting Middius that there's a common thread through you and all of
your brainless parasites. None of you will say anything specific about their
jobs. The most forthcoming of you is Weil, and he still won't say where he
works. Yet you yammer and whine about the fact that I'm self-employed. I say
put up or shut up. If jobs are an issue, why haven't the whole rotten lot of
you come clean about YOUR jobs? Let's start with your job Middius. Who is
your employer and what is your job title? Really.

And there are a ton of reports from
other audio enthusiasts in his neck of the woods that he is a total
prick in real life, very much like the online version and the recorded
version.

Yet another lie Middius, given that none of your current informants know me
in real life. Back in the days before you chased JJ off, I believe he
mentioned that he had actually met me in person and found that I was at
least average to deal with.

Maybe Mr. **** will tell us who's to blame for all those
other people not being able to stand him.

Yet another figment of the overheated Middius imagination.

Krooger inhabits a peculiar universe in which his own behavior has
nothing to do with how much other people like or dislike him.

Wrong again Middius. I think that the fact that I enjoy deconstructing
fallacious claims way too much and do it way too often has a lot to do with
why a lot of people dislike me. But you know what Middius, I'm not going to
cut back on my enjoyment of other people's foolishness just to please a
bunch of losers like you and your clique.

This is a marketplace of ideas Middius, and if your ideas about audio (which
mostly don't seem to exist) don't sell, don't blame me.

Instead,
people detest him because he, Krooger, believes he is smarter than
they are.

If it were an idle claim, then you guys would just laugh it off. But I prove
day in and day out that your thinking is flawed and your facts are bogus. It
hurts. You feel pain. It makes you mad. You could improve your thinking and
polish up your facts if you wanted to. But, you're too stupid or too lazy.

Or because he holds certain opinions in a small area that is
nearly inconsequential to most people.

So inconsequential that one of your parasites is suing me! LOL!

Or because -- and this is my
favorite -- they succumb to my telepathic commands and begin hating
Krooger simply because I willed it.

Telepathy is based on brain power and you've got none to spare, Middius.
Stop giving yourself undeserved compliments.

It's all a great big plot.

Just a small one based on a few small minds.

Only "God" has this kind of power.

That might be meaningful Middius, if you believed in God. But you don't.
You're just making meaningless statements. Again.

Maybe Turdy should ponder that for a while.

Maybe you should wake up and smell the coffee, Middius.

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The good news is that you are violently hated on most of the
Usenet audio groups, and you don't bother them very much. So life there is
relatively gentle and sweet for me.

Except for RAHE apparently.

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The most forthcoming of you is Weil, and he still won't say where he
works.

And we know why *that* is, don't we?

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The most forthcoming of you is Weil, and he still won't say where he
works.

And we know why *that* is, don't we?

Weil, I believe your answer has always indicated absolute, paralyzing,
unthinking fear.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The good news is that you are violently hated on most of the
Usenet audio groups, and you don't bother them very much. So life there
is
relatively gentle and sweet for me.

Except for RAHE apparently.

The RAHE moderators apparently decided to get rid of me to solve their
problems with anti-DBT trollers. Didn't work.

dave weil said:

The good news is that you are violently hated on most of the
Usenet audio groups, and you don't bother them very much. So life there is
relatively gentle and sweet for me.

Except for RAHE apparently.

Looks like Krooger was really stung by my concise and accurate recap
of his paranoid fantasies.

George M. Middius wrote:




Looks like Krooger was really stung by my concise and accurate recap
of his paranoid fantasies.


Did I already tell you that you sound like Trotsky ?
Same unashmed modesty. ;o)

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


dave weil said:

The good news is that you are violently hated on most of the
Usenet audio groups, and you don't bother them very much. So life there
is
relatively gentle and sweet for me.

Except for RAHE apparently.

Looks like Krooger was really stung by my concise and accurate recap
of his paranoid fantasies.

No, I got bored and started working down my list of posts from lesser forms
of life.

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:12:56 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The most forthcoming of you is Weil, and he still won't say where he
works.

And we know why *that* is, don't we?

Weil, I believe your answer has always indicated absolute, paralyzing,
unthinking fear.

Actually, I think that my answer has included respect for my
co-workers.

But thank you for playing.

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:14:12 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The good news is that you are violently hated on most of the
Usenet audio groups, and you don't bother them very much. So life there
is
relatively gentle and sweet for me.

Except for RAHE apparently.

The RAHE moderators apparently decided to get rid of me to solve their
problems with anti-DBT trollers. Didn't work.

Sorry, but they didn't "get rid of you". *You* got rid of you.

"dave weil" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:14:12 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The good news is that you are violently hated on most of the
Usenet audio groups, and you don't bother them very much. So life
there
is
relatively gentle and sweet for me.

Except for RAHE apparently.

The RAHE moderators apparently decided to get rid of me to solve their
problems with anti-DBT trollers. Didn't work.

Sorry, but they didn't "get rid of you". *You* got rid of you.

Let me put it this way, I shed no tears. The place has been ruined by the
brain-dead anti-DBTers and even the moderators know it.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...

Yep, this is the very thing I'm talking about. The quicker you get the
chip off of your shoulder, the better you will be.

Show us all how to do it, David "Gratuitous Attack" Weil.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:12:56 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:47:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The most forthcoming of you is Weil, and he still won't say where he
works.

And we know why *that* is, don't we?

Weil, I believe your answer has always indicated absolute, paralyzing,
unthinking fear.

Actually, I think that my answer has included respect for my
co-workers.

Oh, you don't want them to become jealous when you get flowers?

LOL!

The Stainless Steel Boob Orchestra wrote:

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:48:18 GMT, MiNE 109
wrote:


I'm still reeling from trying to picture the orbit of Cruithne...


LOL! I told you it was a better name than Jupiter!

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...on_991029.html

I'm not sure I like the name, but that orbit is craaaazeeeee...

Nexus 6