[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller
set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

It probably is a bid.

The thing that would make me more suspicious than the bidding pattern
is the "zero" feedback rating of the seller on an apparently high-end
item. I like dealing with people who have a proven track record when
using eBay on items that are several hundred dollars.

Yeah...but then they're likely dealers instead of original owner.

Not true. I'm not a dealer and my feedback is several hundred. You can
get feedback when you buy or sell. So if I buy something or sell
something, I can get feedback (not everybody is courteous enough to
leave it. I have several hundred more transactions than that. Also, if
I buy from someone again, only one of their feedbacks count to my
total.).

Wow...I got 4...but they're all positive .

Does paypal offer escrow service?

I think so. I've never used it. I think Paypal also offers some buyers
protections. I've only been 'had' a couple of times for pretty small
amounts, so overall it's been a good way to find things for me.

I bought my Legacy's off RAM and it was one of the most nerve wracking
deals. Everything (like shipping insurance) is geared to
protecting the shipper, not the buyer.
So I tried to setup myself as shipper and that was a real PIA.
Finally managed it through a freight company, Shannon Express.
They did a great job with packing, domestic pickup and delivery
and exactly on schedule. Said they'd be at my house between
noon and 1 PM, and they were in my drive at 12 sharp.

Freight companies tend to cost more, but for a heavy item it probably
comes out in the wash.

They were a lot cheaper than UPS heavy freight service at the time.
Less than half even with domestic pickup.

I've had multiple dealings (buy or sell items) with several people from
Germany, Australia, The Netherlands, France, Morocco, Japan, China,
Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Russia, Italy, the UK,
Canada, Switzerland, New Zealand, Hong Kong, nearly all 50 states, and
more. As I said, I've had two bad experiences. One of those was a guy
in New York. He later bid on something I was selling and it went fine.

There's a comptalk mail list at work and one guy detailed his recent
bad experience, according to him, only his CC accounts purchase
guarantee allowing him to rescind a charge within 30 days saved him
from getting ripped off. He paid through paypal. There was a lot of
discussion if you should get paypal certified or not.
He said not and felt paypal offered him little service beyond
hiding his cc#. What's your thoughts on that?

ScottW

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message
.
com

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good
to us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind
tests to see what sugar substitute tastes most like
sugar to them, most people are going to trust their
ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed
with lesser answers, sometimes to their detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

Substitute some other consumer choice that you do make.


You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

So you don't dbt those purchases.


do you have a lesser mind? ;-)

Irrelevant.

Your mind? ;-)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller
set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

It probably is a bid.

The thing that would make me more suspicious than the bidding pattern
is the "zero" feedback rating of the seller on an apparently high-end
item. I like dealing with people who have a proven track record when
using eBay on items that are several hundred dollars.

Yeah...but then they're likely dealers instead of original owner.

Not true. I'm not a dealer and my feedback is several hundred. You can
get feedback when you buy or sell. So if I buy something or sell
something, I can get feedback (not everybody is courteous enough to
leave it. I have several hundred more transactions than that. Also, if
I buy from someone again, only one of their feedbacks count to my
total.).

Wow...I got 4...but they're all positive .

I think I have three negatives. One was clearly a mistake, you know,
"This guy rocks!" but he hit the wrong feedback button. Another was a
guy who didn't like how I packed an item. It wasn't damaged, but I
offered a full refund anyway on a $20 item and told him I'd also refund
the shipping. He said he'd keep the item but then gave negative
feedback. Go figure.

If you do enough transactions, you'll likely get a negative. I figure
if people want to focus on three negatives over almost 10 years and
ignore several hundred positives, I don't want to deal with them
anyway...:-)

There's a comptalk mail list at work and one guy detailed his recent
bad experience, according to him, only his CC accounts purchase
guarantee allowing him to rescind a charge within 30 days saved him
from getting ripped off. He paid through paypal. There was a lot of
discussion if you should get paypal certified or not.
He said not and felt paypal offered him little service beyond
hiding his cc#. What's your thoughts on that?

I'm verified, if that's what you mean. That just means that paypal
knows my bank account is real. I think that means that is another way
for you to tell that I'm for real and not a scammer. I'm one of those
people that doesn't worry too much about using CCs online. That freaks
some people out though.

[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

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good
to us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind
tests to see what sugar substitute tastes most like
sugar to them, most people are going to trust their
ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed
with lesser answers, sometimes to their detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

Substitute some other consumer choice that you do make.


You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

So you don't dbt those purchases.

Of course not.

They were purchases for which DBT offers no useful insights.

Gotta use your brain, Jenn. Stop jerking your knee.

[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

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good
to us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind
tests to see what sugar substitute tastes most like
sugar to them, most people are going to trust their
ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed
with lesser answers, sometimes to their detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

Substitute some other consumer choice that you do make.


You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

So you don't dbt those purchases.

Of course not.

They were purchases for which DBT offers no useful insights.

Such as?


Gotta use your brain, Jenn. Stop jerking your knee.

Requisite snot noted.

[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:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

y.
com

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's
face it: most people just buy a boom box and set
it on the kitchen counter. For those of us who
want something better, we do the best we can to
find what sounds good to us. Just as darn few
people are going to do blind tests to see what
sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to them,
most people are going to trust their ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily
satisifed with lesser answers, sometimes to their
detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

Substitute some other consumer choice that you do make.


You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

So you don't dbt those purchases.

Of course not.

They were purchases for which DBT offers no useful
insights.

In many cases this is because representative DBTs are extant, and why
re-invent the wheel?

Such as?

Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.

Loudspeakers, which all sound very different, not that this is always or
even often a good thing.

Microphones and equalizers, for which the whole point is that they sound
different.

[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

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's
face it: most people just buy a boom box and set
it on the kitchen counter. For those of us who
want something better, we do the best we can to
find what sounds good to us. Just as darn few
people are going to do blind tests to see what
sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to them,
most people are going to trust their ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily
satisifed with lesser answers, sometimes to their
detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

Substitute some other consumer choice that you do make.


You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

So you don't dbt those purchases.

Of course not.

They were purchases for which DBT offers no useful
insights.

In many cases this is because representative DBTs are extant, and why
re-invent the wheel?

Such as?

Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.

Loudspeakers, which all sound very different, not that this is always or
even often a good thing.

Microphones and equalizers, for which the whole point is that they sound
different.

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Jenn wrote:

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

Use your brain, Jenn. Quit jerking your knee.

DBTs are useful for *everything.*

I just got back from doing a DBT between two cars. You know what? I
liked the less expensive car much better than one that was over twice
as much, until I ran it into a light pole.

[dizzy]

Jenn wrote:

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

I see you're still spouting-off about things you know nothing about,
Jenn.

DB Tests are not terribly practical and convenient for the consumer.
(Tough to figure that out, eh Jenn?)

However, it is a valuable tool for the designer/engineer, audio
researcher, and reviewer.

[Jenn]

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

I see you're still spouting-off about things you know nothing about,
Jenn.

In other words: "Jenn asked a question". lol


DB Tests are not terribly practical and convenient for the consumer.
(Tough to figure that out, eh Jenn?)

However, it is a valuable tool for the designer/engineer, audio
researcher, and reviewer.

You understand that. I understand that. Can Arny understand that?
That's what I'm trying to determine.

[dizzy]

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

I see you're still spouting-off about things you know nothing about,
Jenn.

In other words: "Jenn asked a question". lol

Well, it seemed that you were giving Arny a hard time (which he
probably deserves), and trying to simultaneously discredit the value
of DBT's in general, by drawing attentionto the fact that he buys
things without first DBT'ing them. If I misinterpreted, I'll withdraw
the "spouting off" charge.

DB Tests are not terribly practical and convenient for the consumer.
(Tough to figure that out, eh Jenn?)

However, it is a valuable tool for the designer/engineer, audio
researcher, and reviewer.

You understand that. I understand that. Can Arny understand that?
That's what I'm trying to determine.

[Jenn]

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

I see you're still spouting-off about things you know nothing about,
Jenn.

In other words: "Jenn asked a question". lol

Well, it seemed that you were giving Arny a hard time (which he
probably deserves), and trying to simultaneously discredit the value
of DBT's in general, by drawing attentionto the fact that he buys
things without first DBT'ing them.

If I was giving Arny a "hard time", it's because to this:

"And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good to
us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind tests
to see what sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to
them, most people are going to trust their ears in audio."

he replied thusly:

"It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed with lesser
answers,
sometimes to their detriment."

Since he had previously stated that he has made several audio purchases
online (and therefore he did not dbt) I was seeing if he included
himself among the "lesser minds (who) are more easily satisfied with
lesser answers".

If I misinterpreted, I'll withdraw
the "spouting off" charge.

I'll sleep better now ;-)

[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

There's a comptalk mail list at work and one guy detailed his recent
bad experience, according to him, only his CC accounts purchase
guarantee allowing him to rescind a charge within 30 days saved him
from getting ripped off. He paid through paypal. There was a lot of
discussion if you should get paypal certified or not.
He said not and felt paypal offered him little service beyond
hiding his cc#. What's your thoughts on that?

I'm verified, if that's what you mean. That just means that paypal
knows my bank account is real. I think that means that is another way
for you to tell that I'm for real and not a scammer. I'm one of those
people that doesn't worry too much about using CCs online. That freaks
some people out though.

So Paypal isn't trying to cut out the CC companies
on your purchases and doing a direct debit of your account?

ScottW

[Jenn]

In article ,
"ScottW" wrote:

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

There's a comptalk mail list at work and one guy detailed his recent
bad experience, according to him, only his CC accounts purchase
guarantee allowing him to rescind a charge within 30 days saved him
from getting ripped off. He paid through paypal. There was a lot of
discussion if you should get paypal certified or not.
He said not and felt paypal offered him little service beyond
hiding his cc#. What's your thoughts on that?

I'm verified, if that's what you mean. That just means that paypal
knows my bank account is real. I think that means that is another way
for you to tell that I'm for real and not a scammer. I'm one of those
people that doesn't worry too much about using CCs online. That freaks
some people out though.

So Paypal isn't trying to cut out the CC companies
on your purchases and doing a direct debit of your account?

ScottW

It would be in their interest to do so, of course.

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

So Paypal isn't trying to cut out the CC companies
on your purchases and doing a direct debit of your account?

It would be in their interest to do so, of course.

Paypal requires sellers to pay the credit card fee. You have to have a
"premier" acct. or higher, otherwise you can't accept credit card
payments. So no, they don't make any more profit on those transactions.





--

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

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"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:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

y.
com

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's
face it: most people just buy a boom box and set
it on the kitchen counter. For those of us who
want something better, we do the best we can to
find what sounds good to us. Just as darn few
people are going to do blind tests to see what
sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to them,
most people are going to trust their ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily
satisifed with lesser answers, sometimes to their
detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

Substitute some other consumer choice that you do make.


You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

So you don't dbt those purchases.

Of course not.

They were purchases for which DBT offers no useful
insights.

In many cases this is because representative DBTs are extant, and why
re-invent the wheel?

Such as?

Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.

Loudspeakers, which all sound very different, not that this is always or
even often a good thing.

Microphones and equalizers, for which the whole point is that they sound
different.
=================================

More from the ABX quack:

In many cases this is because representative DBTs are extant, and why
re-invent the wheel?

As per ususal the Quack in an age-tested quack ruse spouts about those
"representative DBTs". of components without giving chapter and
verse.What else is he to do? : He has zero, zilch on the table but
his brass let's him believe that he can get away with a bold lie as
long as it is bold enough ("It is only RAO after all")and the ABX
quack-in-chief has to affirm something, no?.

Which "representative DBTs" is the Quack talking about? (Note how
cunningly he shuts up about ABX )
The incompetent to ridiculous PCABX site ones? The DBT/ABX reports in
the "Stereo Review" and "Audio" pop mags. 1) Not one of them would
stand up to "representative" criteria of JAES, quite a few wouldn't
make a students' wall journal 2) In addition all of them had a
negative, null outcome which proves nothing, because a next-door better
selected group could have got a positive result.

They were so representative that they were born and died in the web or
the pages of a pop mag

In contrast a respectable, representative, properlyset up DBT of
loudspeakers by S. Olive was accepted by JAES.

You're invited to give me a lie. Any references? Which means author(s),
title , year, Nr. , page(s) of an ABX audio comparing listening test
accepted by a truly professional journal?. Come on, don't be shy. We
know you can bluster. Like this:
Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.
We heard you. Now we want some evidence. Ever heard the word? EVIDENCE.
Ludovic Mirabel

[ScottW]

wrote in message
ps.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.
We heard you. Now we want some evidence. Ever heard the word? EVIDENCE.

What is the name of this group?

ScottW

[Jenn]

In article ,
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
wrote:

Jenn said:

So Paypal isn't trying to cut out the CC companies
on your purchases and doing a direct debit of your account?

It would be in their interest to do so, of course.

Paypal requires sellers to pay the credit card fee. You have to have a
"premier" acct. or higher, otherwise you can't accept credit card
payments. So no, they don't make any more profit on those transactions.

Can't the buyer replenish their accounts with ATM cards, for example?
Is the bank charge passed on to the seller?

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

Paypal requires sellers to pay the credit card fee. You have to have a
"premier" acct. or higher, otherwise you can't accept credit card
payments. So no, they don't make any more profit on those transactions.

Can't the buyer replenish their accounts with ATM cards, for example?
Is the bank charge passed on to the seller?

I don't know about a card that's ATM only. When I signed up for Paypal, it
treated my card as a credit card and didn't ask whether it a debit one.

Are you planning on selling on ebay?




--

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

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

There's a comptalk mail list at work and one guy detailed his recent
bad experience, according to him, only his CC accounts purchase
guarantee allowing him to rescind a charge within 30 days saved him
from getting ripped off. He paid through paypal. There was a lot of
discussion if you should get paypal certified or not.
He said not and felt paypal offered him little service beyond
hiding his cc#. What's your thoughts on that?

I'm verified, if that's what you mean. That just means that paypal
knows my bank account is real. I think that means that is another way
for you to tell that I'm for real and not a scammer. I'm one of those
people that doesn't worry too much about using CCs online. That freaks
some people out though.

So Paypal isn't trying to cut out the CC companies
on your purchases and doing a direct debit of your account?

AFAIK, you can:

Have money in your account with Paypal and use that (like debit card),
or

Use a credit card which Paypal charges for the transactions, or

Have Paypal directly debit your bank account, or

Paypal offers their own credit cards which you can use.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...
ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton: a Krell, and several other analogue
stuff.

Why is it snake oil?

Why would you buy a Krell for several thousands more than a
Parasound
or a QSC?

Or does the Krell sound better? If no, then why wouldn't they be
considered "snake oil"?

If this is about Krell's ability to handle very low impedances, and
if
the QSC and Parasound cannot operate with similar low impedances,
then
aren't the QSC and Parasound not very well designed?

I'd say not as well designed. But how many amps "need" to be able to
drive a
1
ohm load?

My point was to show old Arns his insanity and his inherent hypocrisy,
not to criticize Krell or anybody who owns one.

I have no problem with people buying Krell, or even Boulder for that
matter, if that's what suits them.:-)

Anyway, thats why I bought my KSA-150. I bought it used..unheard..on
solid
recommendation that there isn't a finer SS amp to be had and it will
drive
any
speaker. I knew I was going to be looking for new speakers and I
wanted an
amp
that had no limitations. If it sounded better driving a benign load
speaker
well, I guess that would have been a plus, but driving the Legacy's
....I
can't
say it does. But while some hi-end gear might get credit it isn't
due, I
also
know some stuff that isn't in favor gets disrespect it doesn't
deserve. I
think
people often lump Yamaha gear in one big pile of crappy mass market
stuff
which
is grossly unfair. When I say I have a Mitsu linear TT, most think
of the
POS
LT-5 and assume all Mitsu tables are likewise bad. People don't give
my C-60
preamp any credit but I haven't heard a better SS preamp. It simply
performs
IMO. So it all works both ways AFAIAC. At the end of the day, how
much I
paid
for it...too little or too much, isn't what I'm thinking about when I
turn it
on.

I agree with you. Further, I would add how much or how little that you
paid for your gear is none of my (or anybody else's) business. Nor is
it my business what brands you chose. If it helps you enjoy listening
to music, then it's perfect. Music is, after all, what it's all about
IMO.

I agree...but we all know that everyone on occasion likes to brag.
Some people like to brag about how much they spent and others
like to brag about how little they spent. I'm inclined toward the
latter.

As am I. I actually choose not to discuss my system here, as some will
think that I'm bragging, others will turn up their noses, and still
others may not agree with the choices that I've made. It makes me
happy, which is all that really matters, so screw 'em.

I'm going to take the risk of joining in to this conversation between you
two, as the topics interest me.

I don't recall that I gave you permission...:-)

The only reason for describing a system (and the reason I occasionally do
it) is so other people can judge the basis of the discussion...mostly I do
so when describing the multichannel setup, or some aspect of imaging...where
people who have had experience (even if in a dealer showroom) can judge for
themselves the liklihood of it applying to their own setup. Or regarding
source material, especially SACDs or LP's, where there are questions about
the quality/neutrality of the source. Another reason is to identify
components that have proved especially troublesome, or exceptionally
reliable. And yet another reason is to illustrate where trade offs can be
made...such as my pushing the Sony C2000ES SACD player because of its
outstanding value for SACD purposes vs many other players. But bragging as
a status symbol has no place. And bragging about how little you paid (if
the equipment is worth only the same) opens you to redicule, so why would
anybody do it. IMO a quality system within the range of components
delivering quality sound and put together by second-hand purchases where
appropriate and first-hand purchases where appropriate is the "golden mean".
And from what I can judge, the way many, many audiophiles do it (at least
those of us with some years under our belts and especially those of us who
frequent these newsgroups).

I pretty much agree with you here. The only reason for me to discuss
"how little I paid" is because that's half the fun for me. I think
anybody could spend $150,000 and get good sound. You know, fly in the
factory people to set your speakers up in the room, and so on.

I'm actually on the "borg" side cables and wire, for example.

Me too. Unfortunately many people who are on the other side think
they're
duty bound to convince you they're right....you know...like liberals and
politics .

It's amazing how stereotypes are pushed on usenet. For example, to Arny, I
am the quintessential "audiophool". Yet even without usenet help, my system
was populated with a combination of used Monster 1000ii interconnects
(purchased way back when my main source was the trading rag Audiomart) and
Radio Shack Gold interconnects. They are all good cables...but the average
cost is probably $40-50 a pair, and they make me happy. I have never bought
a green pen, or cd clarifier, or cable lifts, or cones. I have bought solid
things that make a difference, such as a Target wall rack for my turntable
and sorbothane feet for my mechanical equipment.

What's more amazing to me is the intolerance for opposing audio views.
For example, I've said several times that IMO DBTs have a place in
research and manufacturing, but that I do not believe them to be
practical for the average consumer. You've seen the response. It must
be because I don't "get something" or that I don't have the "chops" to
operate a VOM. Or look at the **** that Jenn gets because she like some
vinyl recordings. Jesus.

The shop where I got my Quads started pushing cables
on me...and I flat told 'em, "I'm not a cable guy". The owners reply,
"We'll
change that." He's a nice guy, but now its really hard to talk to him.

If he continues to push them on you after you've said, "No, thanks."
I'd find a different dealer.

The dealers know that is where a lot of extra profit lies. For some, it may
make the difference to staying in business. So buyer beware. But also,
buyers can make up there own minds, and certainly they should demand return
privelege (especially on cables, which are not easily damaged and have the
margin to support a "used" mark-down) .

If interconnects or other cables are what determines if you stay in
business, I think that you're in the wrong line of work...:-)

But
if you want to buy Tara Zero (and if it doesn't mean that you aren't
feeding your kids as a result), that's fine with me.

What are the odds that old Arns will ever agree with you, do you
figure?

Ignore the usenet shtick and he's probably a lot closer to this
position than you realize.

Some days I think so. I usually give him the benefit of the doubt. But
there are times when he does seem envy-driven.

Your "envy-driven" is my "insane."

So he's a dick on the Usenet about preference, but he really doesn't
believe what he says? While that's irrational, which would fit with his
insanity nicely, I disagree: I'd guess that he's just generally a
dick.:-)

Actually, he is much more reasonable on other newsgroups, especially when
among others who can technically challenge him. But his personal hang-ups
and abrasiveness generally show through eventually, so his reputation kind
of grows slowly as a "difficult" poster, albeit one with a fair degree of
technical savvy.

I'd add to that that there is absolutely *no* evidence from I've seen
that old Arns even enjoys listening to music.

[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:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

y.
com
In article
,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote
in message

ig
y.
com

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's
face it: most people just buy a boom box and set
it on the kitchen counter. For those of us who
want something better, we do the best we can to
find what sounds good to us. Just as darn few
people are going to do blind tests to see what
sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to them,
most people are going to trust their ears in
audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily
satisifed with lesser answers, sometimes to their
detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

Substitute some other consumer choice that you do
make.


You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

So you don't dbt those purchases.

Of course not.

They were purchases for which DBT offers no useful
insights.

In many cases this is because representative DBTs are
extant, and why re-invent the wheel?

Such as?

Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players
and recorders and similar items that sound essentially
the same.

Loudspeakers, which all sound very different, not that
this is always or even often a good thing.

Microphones and equalizers, for which the whole point is
that they sound different.

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

You keep asking irrelevent questions, Jenn.

The proper follow-on question would seem to be:

"So for which purchases are DBT relevant"?

The answer is: Any product for which exceptional claims are made, which you
wish to confirm or deny.

For example, you've been showing some interest in high end turntables. I've
suggested that some of the claims of improved SQ for some of them may be
exceptional claims. It would be therefore potentially useful to do a DBT of
relevant high end turntables.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

So for what devices are dbt relevant?

I see you're still spouting-off about things you know
nothing about, Jenn.

In other words: "Jenn asked a question". lol


DB Tests are not terribly practical and convenient for
the consumer. (Tough to figure that out, eh Jenn?)

I would agree that not a lot of consumers can or should run right out and do
one, the next time they want to buy an optical player.

However, it is a valuable tool for the
designer/engineer, audio researcher, and reviewer.

....and consumers. ABX was developed mostly by people who were functioning as
consumers.

You understand that. I understand that. Can Arny
understand that? That's what I'm trying to determine.

Snot noted.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message


Since he had previously stated that he has made several
audio purchases online (and therefore he did not dbt) I
was seeing if he included himself among the "lesser minds
(who) are more easily satisfied with lesser answers".

As usual, a flawed test.

The erronious presumptions are is that Jenn presumes she knows which answers
I already know, and that she is qualified to judge which are lesser and
larger.

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message
ps.com

You're invited to give me a lie.

Why should I? I see you already have plenty of your own.

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg continues trying to outrun reality.

However, it is a valuable tool for the
designer/engineer, audio researcher, and reviewer.

...and consumers.

Arnii, this is reality. Please save your far-out fantasies for your
dreamworld and your therapy sessions.




--

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

[[email protected]]

ScottW wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.
We heard you. Now we want some evidence. Ever heard the word? EVIDENCE.

What is the name of this group?

ScottW

Good point ScottW. Who on earth wants evidence. One wants more and more
opinions. Original, clear and instructive like yours usually are.
Keep on trucking
Ludovic Mirabel

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
The Krooborg continues trying to outrun reality.

However, it is a valuable tool for the
designer/engineer, audio researcher, and reviewer.

...and consumers.

Arnii, this is reality. Please save your far-out fantasies for your
dreamworld and your therapy sessions.

I'm not sure what a therapist could do for poor old Arns.

Therapy might help with certain behaviors or complexes. But can it have
a positive affect on the truly insane?;-)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.
We heard you. Now we want some evidence. Ever heard the word? EVIDENCE.

What is the name of this group?

It seems to me that if it is fair for Arns to trash preference and
demand proof of "exceptional" or "technical" claims, then when Arns
makes an exceptional or technical claim (as he did above), asking that
he back it up with evidence is also fair game.

[ScottW]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
ScottW wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.
We heard you. Now we want some evidence. Ever heard the word? EVIDENCE.

What is the name of this group?

It seems to me that if it is fair for Arns to trash preference and
demand proof of "exceptional" or "technical" claims, then when Arns
makes an exceptional or technical claim (as he did above), asking that
he back it up with evidence is also fair game.

Do you think letting Arny turn you into a hypocrite is a good move.
I'd prefer to maintain my integrity regardless of what Arny does.

ScottW

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

...and consumers.

Arnii, this is reality. Please save your far-out fantasies for your
dreamworld and your therapy sessions.

I'm not sure what a therapist could do for poor old Arns.

I don't know either, but he did tell us he regular consults with several
of them.

Therapy might help with certain behaviors or complexes. But can it have
a positive affect on the truly insane?;-)

Yes to the first part -- a competent therapist should be on alert for
warning signs and be able to intervene before the inevitable mass murder
incident at a shopping mall or church.





--

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

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


Since he had previously stated that he has made several
audio purchases online (and therefore he did not dbt) I
was seeing if he included himself among the "lesser minds
(who) are more easily satisfied with lesser answers".

As usual, a flawed test.

The erronious presumptions are is that Jenn presumes she knows which answers
I already know, and that she is qualified to judge which are lesser and
larger.

lol I'm simply replying to what you stated "lesser minds".

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message


I'm simply replying to what you stated "lesser minds".

Prove it.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

The methane Arns is breathing because his head is so far up his ass is
affecting him:

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in
message


I'm simply replying to what you stated "lesser minds".

Prove it.

How about the part that you snipped, Arns, where Jenn says,

"Since he had previously stated that he has made several audio
purchases online (and therefore he did not dbt) I was seeing if he
included himself among the "lesser minds (who) are more easily
satisfied with lesser answers". "

That seems proof enough for sane people, Arns. Why do you ask for more?

Oh, i guess that I already know: because you're nuts.

________________________________________

Arns Krueger (n. Vulgar): an insane asshole who is addicted to
harassing Normal people's preferences on the Usenet

[[email protected]]

ScottW wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
ScottW wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.
We heard you. Now we want some evidence. Ever heard the word? EVIDENCE.

What is the name of this group?

It seems to me that if it is fair for Arns to trash preference and
demand proof of "exceptional" or "technical" claims, then when Arns
makes an exceptional or technical claim (as he did above), asking that
he back it up with evidence is also fair game.

Do you think letting Arny turn you into a hypocrite is a good move.
I'd prefer to maintain my integrity regardless of what Arny does.

ScottW
=================================

Ssssh said It seems to me that if it is fair for Arns to trash
preference and
demand proof of "exceptional" or "technical" claims, then when Arns
makes an exceptional or technical claim (as he did above), asking that
he back it up with evidence is also fair game.

ScottW produces one of his "Please notice me . I'm ME SCOTT"
interjections
Do you think letting Arny turn you into a hypocrite is a good move.
I'd prefer to maintain my integrity regardless of what Arny does.

Did you turn a few pages in your Webster (after you managed to lip read
"h y p o c r i t e") and got another big word "i n t e g r i t y"?

You proved you can read. Close the book.
Now a test for text comprehension.: Define those two big words and
explain how they apply.
Ludovic Mirabel

[paul packer]

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 15:20:04 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


The erronious presumptions are is

Hmmm?

that Jenn presumes she knows which answers
I already know, and that she is qualified to judge which are lesser and
larger.

Come again?

[paul packer]

On 19 Dec 2006 12:47:18 -0800, "
wrote:

Keep on trucking
Ludovic Mirabel

Very hip, Ludo. But I think it should be "truckin'". :-)

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


I'm simply replying to what you stated "lesser minds".

Prove it.

Not again, Arny. I already have done so.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
ScottW wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
Good cables, good amplifiers, good optical disc players and recorders and
similar items that sound essentially the same.
We heard you. Now we want some evidence. Ever heard the word? EVIDENCE.

What is the name of this group?

It seems to me that if it is fair for Arns to trash preference and
demand proof of "exceptional" or "technical" claims, then when Arns
makes an exceptional or technical claim (as he did above), asking that
he back it up with evidence is also fair game.

Do you think letting Arny turn you into a hypocrite is a good move.
I'd prefer to maintain my integrity regardless of what Arny does.

So it would be better, IYO, to just sagely nod and say, "I guess that
is old Arns' opinion, which he gets to have. Nobody dare question it,
since this is an opinion group."

I do not see how questioning Arns on his own terms is being
hypocritical or lacks integrity. More to the point (since I did not
actually question the insane old asshole), I do not see why pointing
out that when someone else here questions the insane old asshole on his
own terms seems fair game to me, that my integrity is being compromised
or that I am being hypocritical.

If the insane old asshole showed even a shred of understanding personal
preference, I might feel differently. As it is, the insane old asshole
should provide the evidence requested, or, if he cannot, he should
offer the retraction and apology he recently demanded from Jenn.

Or else the insane old asshole will prove (yet again) that he is a
hypocrite with no integrity.;-)

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said to ConcreteBorg:

that Jenn presumes she knows which answers
I already know, and that she is qualified to judge which are lesser and
larger.

Come again?

No, Arnii, not again. You've bashed your head into that stone wall
thousands of times, always to no avail. I say quit while you're still able
to do your "debating trade", at least to your own satisfaction.





--

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