[Arny Krueger]

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

But it takes lots of time and money to organize and
conduct, especially if one hires (as they should) an
outside research organization to help with the
planning, logistics, and statistical evaluation.

Thus Harry proposes the use of money to cover up for
his personal lack of technical ability. Remember that
Harry has claimed to have expertise in consumer
testing.

You're over reacting. Long gone are the days when a
single person could make new discoveries. Today's
science is a cross-discipline of many professional
fields.

Non sequitor.

Perhaps if you didn't spend the better part of 13 business
weeks worth of posting a year on USEnet you'd have
time for a really fulfilling life. Is this really IT
(Christian) for you, Arny?


In one research grant study my department hired a full
time PhD in statistics for two years just to write
survey questions and analyze responses.

Meaningless unless you identify your university and
department so that we can confirm it.

Oh, I see, because you regularly malign the truth you
assume everyone does the same.

Knock yourself out. Perhaps you've heard of one or
the another.
Oakwood Hospital & Medical Center, Dearborn, Michigan.
http://www.oakwood.org/?id=697&sid=1&SiteCode=01

Major Grant Provider: W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Battle
Creek, Michigan
http://www.wkkf.org/Default.aspx?LanguageID=0

Answer so generalized as to be totally meaningless.

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my home
when possible, using unsighted conditions as are
practical, using source material with which I'm very
familiar. That's more than most people do, I dare
say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your
home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players, I'll
have a friend switch the connections to the preamp while
I'm not looking and cover the 2 players with a cloth so
that I can't see which one is playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

This is such a poor comparison that its not a test, just an exercise.

Ok.... a bit slow and, IMO, my lack of audio memory is a
bigger factor than
my sight in making subtle difference comparisons.

Realistic statement.

In long listening....days... I generally find I get
acclimated to the gear and my preference can shift. My
recent cart change took a couple weeks to get used to but
now I love the detail and dynamics.

Also realistic.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message


It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and completely double
blind in people's homes.

[ScottW]

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article . com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my home when possible,
using unsighted conditions as are practical, using source material
with
which I'm very familiar. That's more than most people do, I dare
say.
How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players, I'll have a friend
switch the connections to the preamp while I'm not looking and cover
the
2 players with a cloth so that I can't see which one is playing.

Ok.... a bit slow and, IMO, my lack of audio memory is a bigger
factor than
my sight in making subtle difference comparisons.

In long listening....days... I generally find I get acclimated to the
gear and my preference can shift. My recent cart change took a couple
weeks to get used to but now I love the detail and dynamics.

ScottW

It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

Depends on what you're trying to accomplish in your home.

Well, to some extent, "practical is practical". In other words,
regardless of what one is trying to accomplish, there are limits as to
what is practical, don't you agree?

Too nondescript for me. The only limits are the amount of effort
you're willing to put out. They are subjective.

I'm doing what I feel is practical
in order to do as objective an evaluation as is possible in practical
terms.

within the scope of effort you're willing to make.
I suggest that scope of effort you're willing to make is dependent upon
your purpose. When I'm doing personal evaluations, I never blind
myself. It isn't necessary for my purpose..but if I was trying to prove
something..it would have purpose and become a requirement.


I'm still curious why you feel the need to be blind in your own
personal evaluations.

I don't really feel a need per se. It's just interesting to me to see
if, for example, a big Krell sounds better to me than does a Sony. In
that kind of case, seeing the gear might affect a choice, I suppose.
Ordinarily, I would just listen.

I don't have a "big Sony" but my big Krell didn't sound any different
to me
than my Yamaha on my Legacys ...but those are very similar amps at
their core.

I see Classic Records has delayed release of Aqualung until Jan 10.
They were kind of advertising this as a nice stocking stuffer so
I'm bummed

ScottW

ScottW

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and completely double
blind in people's homes.

You believe that this is practical?

[Jenn]

In article . com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article . com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my home when
possible,
using unsighted conditions as are practical, using source
material
with
which I'm very familiar. That's more than most people do, I
dare
say.
How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own personal
selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players, I'll have a
friend
switch the connections to the preamp while I'm not looking and
cover
the
2 players with a cloth so that I can't see which one is playing.

Ok.... a bit slow and, IMO, my lack of audio memory is a bigger
factor than
my sight in making subtle difference comparisons.

In long listening....days... I generally find I get acclimated to
the
gear and my preference can shift. My recent cart change took a
couple
weeks to get used to but now I love the detail and dynamics.

ScottW

It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

Depends on what you're trying to accomplish in your home.

Well, to some extent, "practical is practical". In other words,
regardless of what one is trying to accomplish, there are limits as to
what is practical, don't you agree?

Too nondescript for me. The only limits are the amount of effort
you're willing to put out. They are subjective.

Of course they are subjective, but surely some common ground can be
found here. To compare 2 CD players in my home, I think what I do is
practical. I think that doing more is FOR ME impractical.


I'm doing what I feel is practical
in order to do as objective an evaluation as is possible in practical
terms.

within the scope of effort you're willing to make.
I suggest that scope of effort you're willing to make is dependent upon
your purpose.

Of course.

When I'm doing personal evaluations, I never blind
myself. It isn't necessary for my purpose..but if I was trying to prove
something..it would have purpose and become a requirement.


I'm still curious why you feel the need to be blind in your own
personal evaluations.

I don't really feel a need per se. It's just interesting to me to see
if, for example, a big Krell sounds better to me than does a Sony. In
that kind of case, seeing the gear might affect a choice, I suppose.
Ordinarily, I would just listen.

I don't have a "big Sony" but my big Krell didn't sound any different
to me
than my Yamaha on my Legacys ...but those are very similar amps at
their core.

I see Classic Records has delayed release of Aqualung until Jan 10.
They were kind of advertising this as a nice stocking stuffer so
I'm bummed

Sorry for you.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my home
when possible, using unsighted conditions as are
practical, using source material with which I'm very
familiar. That's more than most people do, I dare
say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your
home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players, I'll
have a friend switch the connections to the preamp while
I'm not looking and cover the 2 players with a cloth so
that I can't see which one is playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

No kidding.


This is such a poor comparison that its not a test, just an exercise.

You're right. I'll just use my ears in the future.

[Jenn]

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
In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

ig
y.
com

In fact PCABX could be a useful means for comparing
high end turntables. Of course no way can we get
high end turntable buyers to relax their hysterical
death's-gip

lol What I have a "hysterical death's-gip" on is
that which sounds most like live acoustic music to
me.

Which in the past has inexplicably had audible
distortion which other recordings lack.

Who cares? One should listen to what, on balance,
sounds best to them.

Which is one reason why a lot of people don't listen to
classical, jazz and other so-called serious music.

Of course. Same with R&R or church music. But we're
speaking of audio quality.

In your case Jenn, we're talking about religious beliefs
about audio. But thanks for bringing religion up.

Try to stay on task: we're speaking about the quality of
audio.

Right, and we're talking about your religious beliefs with respect to sound
quality.

No we're not, as I don't hold religious beliefs about sound. You seem
to, however.

You have this irrational belief that music doesn't sound realistic
without added noise and distortion.

Your statement isn't logical, but explaining that to you is pointless.


Resolved then, no efforts should ever be made to change
what sounds good to people.

LOL Who said that?

That's a possible implication of what you said, Jenn.

I quite agree that it's stupid to try to change what
sounds good to people vis-a-vis audio. It's called
"preference".

Resolved, I'll never point out audible flaws in music reproduction to
anybody, because if they prefer crappy SQ, that's their preference.

Your response has nothing to do with my statement, but you probably
can't see that.


You are the most illogical person I've ever read.

Trying to make sense out of what you say may do that to
some people, Jenn.

What I write is quite clear in its meaning, Arny. If YOU have problems
with it it is YOUR problem. (corrected)

Resolved, nobody should ever point out audible flaws in music reproduction
to anybody, or demonstrate superior tonal balance or clarity because if they
prefer poor SQ, that's their preference.

Your response has nothing to do with my statement, but you probably
can't see that.


You now agree with the wholesale abandoment of music
education, Jenn?

LOL For you, yes. An expression about teaching a pig
to sing comes to mind.

As much the same principle comes to mind when trying to
get you to think logically about audio, Jenn.

How would "thinking logically" about audio help?

I've discovered that I should ever point out audible flaws in music
reproduction to anybody, or demonstrate superior tonal balance or clarity
because if they prefer poor SQ, that's their preference. Preference for
noise and distortion is sacrosanct.

Your response has nothing to do with my statement, but you probably
can't see that.


I listen to what sounds best to me. It has nothing to do with logic.

I know Jenn that I've done terrible things when I provided people with a
higher quality recording of a musical event to people who thought that what
they had previouisly heard sounded best to them. It was their preference and
I trashed their preference by demonstrating a better sound to them.
Obviously, I was trashing their former preferences.

Sometimes that's analogue, sometimes it's digital.

So, you're reversing your position about LPs sounding
superior to CDs?

That's not what I've stated, and you know it.

I know no such thing, Jenn.

Are you getting enough sleep? What I've CLEARLY stated,
over and over, is that to me the best LPs sound better
than CDs. Understand?

The question about sleep may be autobiographical for you
Jenn, as you seem to be very excitable. If you were
thinking calmly, you'd see that "your position about LPs
sounding superior to CDs" is that you say "that to me
the best LPs sound better than CDs.'. The connection is
very logical, no matter what you say.

Incorrect. Your asking if I've changed my position shows
that clearly.

Heaven forbid that you'd ever change your thinking, Jenn.

Another off-topic response. Follow the conversation above.

[Clyde Slick]

Powell a scris:
"Arny Krueger" wrote

..

Thus Harry proposes the use of money to cover up for his personal lack of
technical ability. Remember that Harry has claimed to have expertise in
consumer testing.



You have one of the finest research universities in the
world (U M) right in your back yard. Perhaps you might
consider submitting a proposal for a PhD thesis.


or, "at least" to Oakland U

[Sander deWaal]

"Arny Krueger" said:


It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?


We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and completely double
blind in people's homes.



Very practical, indeed.
Stumbling over furniture, amplifiers etc.


Q.: How does one recognize blind test attendants?
A.: By the bruises on their ankles.


--
- Ever seen someone with 5.1 ears? So, what does that tell you? -

[Clyde Slick]

Arny Krueger a scris:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message
ps.com...
Now you seem to be OK with people preferring iPods
and MP3 players, for example, but if somebody prefers
something that you consider "less accurate" as a matter
of choice for other reasons, you short-circuit.

This time you're making it up as you go along again,
Robert.

Who's "Robert"?

Good question. From the tone I somehow got the idea that ****R was Morien.

is your ****ter on the fritz again?
maybe there is some borg, who also happens to own
a thriving plumbing consultation business, posting on
rec.plumbing.opinion.
his name is Arny

[Clyde Slick]

Arny Krueger a scris:

Meaningless unless you identify your university and department so that we
can confirm it.

we're still waiting for you to identify
your staff of PCABX professionals!

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

Hey, well, listen Arny....both "handles" begin with the letter "S". It's a
natural mistake. We can't expect you to be perfect now, can we? Not when
you have 500,000 more messages to type, and so little time to do it because
of the time demands of your 250 annual recording sessions. You are
forgiven.

Wow. Arns is that busy?
We should be thankful for the time he spends here then, I suppose.:-)

Let's not sell him short. Krooger has also told us he atones for his
****fulness on Usenet by "racking up 100's and 100's of hour's of good
work's" at his church.




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and completely double
blind in people's homes.

You believe that this is practical?

True faith often transcends the practical.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[George M. Middius]

Sander deWaal said:

Q.: How does one recognize blind test attendants?
A.: By the bruises on their ankles.

And the bloodstains around their eye sockets.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[paul packer]

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:38:32 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



Jenn said:

lol What I have a "hysterical death's-gip" on is that
which sounds most like live acoustic music to me.

Which in the past has inexplicably had audible distortion which other
recordings lack.

Who cares? One should listen to what, on balance, sounds best to them.

Jenn, I've tried in the past to explain the horrific effect comments like
this have on Mr. Krooger and his fellow nitwits. First off, phrases like
"sounds best" or "sounds better" are terribly disorienting to Them. etc..etc

All of which may be true, George. But of far more importance is the
fact that you neglected to point out to Jenn that she made a dreadful
grammatical error. :-)

[paul packer]

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:04:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Jenn won't accept any compromises, This allows here to justify not changing
her thinking.

Don't you mean "here" thinking?

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and
completely double blind in people's homes.

You believe that this is practical?

It is for people with reasonable skills with audio.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my home
when possible, using unsighted conditions as are
practical, using source material with which I'm very
familiar. That's more than most people do, I dare
say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your
home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players, I'll
have a friend switch the connections to the preamp
while I'm not looking and cover the 2 players with a
cloth so that I can't see which one is playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

No kidding.


This is such a poor comparison that its not a test, just
an exercise.

You're right. I'll just use my ears in the future.

Delusional (or is it religious?) belief that level matching somehow disables
the use of ears noted.

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:04:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Jenn won't accept any compromises, This allows here to
justify not changing her thinking.

Don't you mean "here" thinking?

No way.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my home
when possible, using unsighted conditions as are
practical, using source material with which I'm very
familiar. That's more than most people do, I dare
say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your
home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players, I'll
have a friend switch the connections to the preamp
while I'm not looking and cover the 2 players with a
cloth so that I can't see which one is playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

No kidding.


This is such a poor comparison that its not a test, just
an exercise.

You're right. I'll just use my ears in the future.

Delusional (or is it religious?) belief that level matching somehow disables
the use of ears noted.

Do you know the meaning of the word "just"?

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my
home when possible, using unsighted conditions as
are practical, using source material with which
I'm very familiar. That's more than most people
do, I dare say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your
home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players,
I'll have a friend switch the connections to the
preamp while I'm not looking and cover the 2 players
with a cloth so that I can't see which one is
playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

No kidding.


This is such a poor comparison that its not a test,
just an exercise.

You're right. I'll just use my ears in the future.

Delusional (or is it religious?) belief that level
matching somehow disables the use of ears noted.

Do you know the meaning of the word "just"?

Snot attack noted.

Heck, I'm way ahead of you Jenn, I know several of them.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message
.
com

It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and
completely double blind in people's homes.

You believe that this is practical?

It is for people with reasonable skills with audio.

And using just your ears is practical for people with reasonable musical
skills.

Anyway, I would ask you how to do this in my home without undue monetary
investment, but you've shown time and again that you're not interested
in teaching me anything without also imparting a smartass comment.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message
.
com
In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my
home when possible, using unsighted conditions as
are practical, using source material with which
I'm very familiar. That's more than most people
do, I dare say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in your
home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players,
I'll have a friend switch the connections to the
preamp while I'm not looking and cover the 2 players
with a cloth so that I can't see which one is
playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

No kidding.


This is such a poor comparison that its not a test,
just an exercise.

You're right. I'll just use my ears in the future.

Delusional (or is it religious?) belief that level
matching somehow disables the use of ears noted.

Do you know the meaning of the word "just"?

Snot attack noted.

I'll take that as a "yes". In that case, you should understand, "I'll
just use my ears".

[George M. Middius]

There's something on your shoe, Arnii.

Jenn won't accept any compromises, This allows here to
justify not changing her thinking.

Don't you mean "here" thinking?

No way.

That response has two syllables, which proves you're smarter than
"duh"-Mikey.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message
.
com

It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and
completely double blind in people's homes.

You believe that this is practical?

It is for people with reasonable skills with audio.

And using just your ears is practical for people with
reasonable musical skills.

Apparently Jenn you think that people who don't have what you think are
reasonble musical skills can't use their ears.

Anyway, I would ask you how to do this in my home without
undue monetary investment, but you've shown time and
again that you're not interested in teaching me anything
without also imparting a smartass comment.

I take this for yet another one of your snotty, smartass comments, Jenn.
Too bad that you're such a bitter old woman.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message
.
com
In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my
home when possible, using unsighted conditions as
are practical, using source material with which
I'm very familiar. That's more than most people
do, I dare say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in
your home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players,
I'll have a friend switch the connections to the
preamp while I'm not looking and cover the 2
players with a cloth so that I can't see which one
is
playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

No kidding.


This is such a poor comparison that its not a test,
just an exercise.

You're right. I'll just use my ears in the future.

Delusional (or is it religious?) belief that level
matching somehow disables the use of ears noted.

Do you know the meaning of the word "just"?

Snot attack noted.

I'll take that as a "yes". In that case, you should
understand, "I'll just use my ears".

What you don't seem to understand Jenn, is that things like level matching,
time synching, and bias controls actually enhance the use of the ears.

[Jenn]

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

It's what is practical in the home, wouldn't you say?

We've gone the full route - level match, time synch and
completely double blind in people's homes.

You believe that this is practical?

It is for people with reasonable skills with audio.

And using just your ears is practical for people with
reasonable musical skills.

Apparently Jenn you think that people who don't have what you think are
reasonble musical skills can't use their ears.

Untrue, but you are entitled to read anything into my statements that
you wish to. It's not unexpected.


Anyway, I would ask you how to do this in my home without
undue monetary investment, but you've shown time and
again that you're not interested in teaching me anything
without also imparting a smartass comment.

I take this for yet another one of your snotty, smartass comments, Jenn.

It's simply my experience with you, Arny.

Too bad that you're such a bitter old woman.

LOL Oh how "fun"! Too bad you're such an impotent old man.

[Jenn]

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
In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com
Jenn wrote:
In article
. com,
"ScottW" wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Let's see: I listen to proposed purchases in my
home when possible, using unsighted conditions as
are practical, using source material with which
I'm very familiar. That's more than most people
do, I dare say. How do you do it?

How do you accomplish unsighted conditions in
your home?

Why do you feel that is necessary for your own
personal selections?

ScottW

If I'm listening to, for example, two CD players,
I'll have a friend switch the connections to the
preamp while I'm not looking and cover the 2
players with a cloth so that I can't see which one
is
playing.

Absence of level-matching and time-synching noted.

No kidding.


This is such a poor comparison that its not a test,
just an exercise.

You're right. I'll just use my ears in the future.

Delusional (or is it religious?) belief that level
matching somehow disables the use of ears noted.

Do you know the meaning of the word "just"?

Snot attack noted.

I'll take that as a "yes". In that case, you should
understand, "I'll just use my ears".

What you don't seem to understand Jenn, is that things like level matching,
time synching, and bias controls actually enhance the use of the ears.

Time synching: I disagree. The purpose of that seems to eliminate the
subject of a test knowing when the switch happens. Am I wrong here?
Level matching: I agree. Bias controls: I'm about to write a bit
about that. Coming soon.

But again: at the end of the day, simple listening with discernment for
what sounds best to you is most important.

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

at the end of the day, simple listening with discernment for
what sounds best to you is most important.

This is only true if you have some internal appreciation for the quality
of the sound you're hearing. You have to be able to discern some aspect of
the sound that makes it more enjoyable. Lacking such discernment, one must
perforce rely on abstracted measurements of "accuracy" in order to find a
reason for "preferring" one system over another.




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[dizzy]

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

We simply must come up with a name for the syndrome that so often shows
up: question someone's intelligence and make an error like "your"
making here. lol

No, what we REALLY must come up with is a name for the syndrome that
YOU exhibit, Jenn: Attack a typo after making an error like you did.
lol

In

Jenn wrote:

If you can't deal with it and simply want to
hurl "insults" you're no long worth a response.

I'm "no long worth" a response, Jenn? Do you have any idea how
assinine it is to attack typos, Jenn, especially when you're guilty of
the same "crime"?

What was I "attacking" Dizzy? Hint: it wasn't typos.

Stop lying, Jenn. You attacked the typo in my "You're question was
stupid" statement.

[Jenn]

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

We simply must come up with a name for the syndrome that so often shows
up: question someone's intelligence and make an error like "your"
making here. lol

No, what we REALLY must come up with is a name for the syndrome that
YOU exhibit, Jenn: Attack a typo after making an error like you did.
lol

In

Jenn wrote:

If you can't deal with it and simply want to
hurl "insults" you're no long worth a response.

I'm "no long worth" a response, Jenn? Do you have any idea how
assinine it is to attack typos, Jenn, especially when you're guilty of
the same "crime"?

What was I "attacking" Dizzy? Hint: it wasn't typos.

Stop lying, Jenn. You attacked the typo in my "You're question was
stupid" statement.

You just made my point, thanks.

[dizzy]

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

No bias in your "childish statement" attack? LOL

Correct.

Wrong, obviously.

Most people would agree that answering a simple question how
you did is childish.

Most would agree that your question was stupid.

They would? I'll remember that if you ever have the curiosity to ask a
question about music.

It would only be fair turn-about, Jenn, if I were to, say, first
spout-off extensively regarding music, and then show that I didn't
even know what a scale was.

Arny simply gave a straightforward answer. I
appreciated that.

Great. You and Arny are real tight now, eh?

Many people judge each situation individually. Evidently, you don't.
You're entitled, I guess.

I recognize a fair-weather friend what I see one, Jenn.

Most would agree that your statement is childish,

Most would agree you're an idiot.

Well, that ends this "discussion",

Looks like you can dish it out but cannot take it, Jenn.

I don't "dish out" things such as calling people on this board idiots.

So "childish" is okay, while "idiot" is not, eh Jenn?

If you wish to do that, fine, but I have no desire to continue such a
discussion.

So you say, Jenn.

except for this observation:

You're going to "observe" a typo, Jenn? How childish.

"Think harder" Dizzy. That's not what I'm observing.

The fact is you did observe my typo, Jenn. If your real point was to
whine about something else, your observation of the typo, not
surprisingly, distracted from it. In short, it appears that your
communications skills need work Jenn.

You're question was stupid.

We simply must come up with a name for the syndrome that so often shows
up: question someone's intelligence and make an error like "your"
making here. lol

I guess you told me, Jenn. I guess you're a deeper thinker than what
I gave you credit for. (Rolling eyes)

What do you think I was observing, Dizzy?

Suffering from reading comprehension problems, Jenn?

[dizzy]

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

We simply must come up with a name for the syndrome that so often shows
up: question someone's intelligence and make an error like "your"
making here. lol

No, what we REALLY must come up with is a name for the syndrome that
YOU exhibit, Jenn: Attack a typo after making an error like you did.
lol

In

Jenn wrote:

If you can't deal with it and simply want to
hurl "insults" you're no long worth a response.

I'm "no long worth" a response, Jenn? Do you have any idea how
assinine it is to attack typos, Jenn, especially when you're guilty of
the same "crime"?

What was I "attacking" Dizzy? Hint: it wasn't typos.

Stop lying, Jenn. You attacked the typo in my "You're question was
stupid" statement.

You just made my point, thanks.

That you're an idiot? Why thank me for that?

[Jenn]

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

We simply must come up with a name for the syndrome that so often
shows
up: question someone's intelligence and make an error like "your"
making here. lol

No, what we REALLY must come up with is a name for the syndrome that
YOU exhibit, Jenn: Attack a typo after making an error like you did.
lol

In

om
Jenn wrote:

If you can't deal with it and simply want to
hurl "insults" you're no long worth a response.

I'm "no long worth" a response, Jenn? Do you have any idea how
assinine it is to attack typos, Jenn, especially when you're guilty of
the same "crime"?

What was I "attacking" Dizzy? Hint: it wasn't typos.

Stop lying, Jenn. You attacked the typo in my "You're question was
stupid" statement.

You just made my point, thanks.

That you're an idiot? Why thank me for that?

ZZZzzzz You still don't get it.

[Jenn]

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

No bias in your "childish statement" attack? LOL

Correct.

Wrong, obviously.

Most people would agree that answering a simple question how
you did is childish.

Most would agree that your question was stupid.

They would? I'll remember that if you ever have the curiosity to ask a
question about music.

It would only be fair turn-about, Jenn, if I were to, say, first
spout-off extensively regarding music, and then show that I didn't
even know what a scale was.

When did I "spout-off extensively" regarding the technical aspects of
audio?


Arny simply gave a straightforward answer. I
appreciated that.

Great. You and Arny are real tight now, eh?

Many people judge each situation individually. Evidently, you don't.
You're entitled, I guess.

I recognize a fair-weather friend what I see one, Jenn.

Again, you're not making sense. Arny gave me a straight forward answer,
as opposed to you.


Most would agree that your statement is childish,

Most would agree you're an idiot.

Well, that ends this "discussion",

Looks like you can dish it out but cannot take it, Jenn.

I don't "dish out" things such as calling people on this board idiots.

So "childish" is okay, while "idiot" is not, eh Jenn?

You really don't understand the difference, do you?


If you wish to do that, fine, but I have no desire to continue such a
discussion.

So you say, Jenn.

except for this observation:

You're going to "observe" a typo, Jenn? How childish.

"Think harder" Dizzy. That's not what I'm observing.

The fact is you did observe my typo, Jenn. If your real point was to
whine about something else, your observation of the typo, not
surprisingly, distracted from it. In short, it appears that your
communications skills need work Jenn.

LOL I'll do you a favor and explain this to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further. You commented on someone else's
intelligence, then misspelled a word. I was commenting on the fact that
this happens so often on the boards that it ought to be given a name,
not on your misspelling.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message


LOL Oh how "fun"! Too bad you're such an impotent old
man.

Yet another silly fantasy of yours Jenn.

Remember what Mark Twain said about older women, and think about Tony
Randall.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message


In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


What you don't seem to understand Jenn, is that things
like level matching, time synching, and bias controls
actually enhance the use of the ears.

Time synching: I disagree. The purpose of that seems to
eliminate the subject of a test knowing when the switch
happens. Am I wrong here?

Yes Jenn, you are as usual, completely and totally wrong.

The purpose of time synching is to make it as easy as possible to compare,
and to avoid false positives due to hearing the lack of synchronization.

If the two pieces of music being compared aren't synchonized well enough,
small differences will be masked by the larger differences due to time
displacement.

If the two pieces of music being compared aren't synchonized well enough, I
can always identify them in a DBT, even if they are otherwise identical.

Level matching: I agree.

Congratulations Jenn, you actually got something right! Remember that
level-matching extends naturally to matching frequency response.

Bias controls: I'm about to write a bit about that.

I'm sure that you'll get that all wrong, too. But, give it a shot!

But again: at the end of the day, simple listening with
discernment for what sounds best to you is most important.

An important issue that many golden ears want to ignore - if you can't tell
the difference by means of just sound quality, then any differences in your
preferences are irrelevant to the issue of sound quality.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


LOL Oh how "fun"! Too bad you're such an impotent old
man.

Yet another silly fantasy of yours Jenn.

As is yours about me being a "bitter old woman".

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

LOL Oh how "fun"! Too bad you're such an impotent old
man.

Yet another silly fantasy of yours Jenn.

As is yours about me being a "bitter old woman".

Arnii has dragged you down into the mud with him.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.