"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:

Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey,
don't let me get in the way of your discussions with the sockpuppet.

This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious about
audio" biwaire.

And you know it.

It's such a rare event that I must praise Weil when he actually (obviously
in anger) posts a true statement.

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:33:22 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It's such a rare event that I must praise Weil when he actually (obviously
in anger) posts a true statement.

Obviously is an incorrect word, as well as the parenthetical
conclusion.

But nice try anyway.

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:33:22 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It's such a rare event that I must praise Weil when he actually
(obviously in anger) posts a true statement.

Obviously is an incorrect word, as well as the parenthetical
conclusion.

But nice try anyway.

Lame.

You should have quit while you were only that far behind, Weil.

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 10:20:14 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:33:22 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It's such a rare event that I must praise Weil when he actually
(obviously in anger) posts a true statement.

Obviously is an incorrect word, as well as the parenthetical
conclusion.

But nice try anyway.

Lame.

You should have quit while you were only that far behind, Weil.

You should have quit before you started.

You lose.

Again.

When are you going to take your own advice and leave RAO?

dave weil wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:


Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey, don't
let me get in the way of your discussions with the sockpuppet.


This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious about
audio" biwaire.

And you know it.


Weil, you humored the ****ing sockpuppet's assessment of
multi-amplification, which is highly unusual. Because of this, you have
no business speaking from a position of authority. Hell, in the weil
lexicon, bi-amplification probably makes a speaker "more neutral." This
is a train wreck.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message


George M. Middius wrote:

dave weil said:



He thought that you will use double amplification !

That's true. That's what he thought.

I don't know why he'd assume that, but, oh well...hopefully the
regular stock comes ready for use by everyone.

Maybe Gregipus is just creating an opportunity for delivering a
lecture on "finding your genitalia" or whatever he calls it. If
somebody asks for the bridge, they have to endure an harangue about
being two cheap to own a second amplifier, which as we all know is an
absolute prerequisite for being a studly audio geek like Gregipus.


Note that George, our local English Composition expert, just confused "two"
and "too". Why isn't sockpuppet Yustabe ranting about this? LOL!


George talking about audio--that alone was almost worth the price of
admission.


Singh calling George's profane posturing "talking about audio" - totally
worthless because we already know how stupid he is.


The antecedent of "he" would be whom, Arny? You can just say "Yes" if
the question confuses you.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"dave weil" wrote in message


On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:


Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey,
don't let me get in the way of your discussions with the sockpuppet.

This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious about
audio" biwaire.

And you know it.


It's such a rare event that I must praise Weil when he actually (obviously
in anger) posts a true statement.


In engineering terms this is called propagation of errors.

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 17:48:57 GMT, trotsky wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:


Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey, don't
let me get in the way of your discussions with the sockpuppet.


This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious about
audio" biwaire.

And you know it.


Weil, you humored the ****ing sockpuppet's assessment of
multi-amplification, which is highly unusual. Because of this, you have
no business speaking from a position of authority. Hell, in the weil
lexicon, bi-amplification probably makes a speaker "more neutral." This
is a train wreck.

You seem terminally confused. This doesn't bode well for running a
business, except maybe into the ground, of course.

trotsky said to ****-for-Brains:

The antecedent of "he" would be whom, Arny? You can just say "Yes" if
the question confuses you.

Gregipus hears everything. Krooger hears nothing. And yet, in the big
picture, there's so little space between them.......

"trotsky" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message


George M. Middius wrote:

dave weil said:



He thought that you will use double amplification !

That's true. That's what he thought.

I don't know why he'd assume that, but, oh well...hopefully the
regular stock comes ready for use by everyone.

Maybe Gregipus is just creating an opportunity for delivering a
lecture on "finding your genitalia" or whatever he calls it. If
somebody asks for the bridge, they have to endure an harangue about
being two cheap to own a second amplifier, which as we all know is
an absolute prerequisite for being a studly audio geek like
Gregipus.


Note that George, our local English Composition expert, just
confused "two" and "too". Why isn't sockpuppet Yustabe ranting about
this? LOL!


George talking about audio--that alone was almost worth the price of
admission.


Singh calling George's profane posturing "talking about audio" -
totally worthless because we already know how stupid he is.


The antecedent of "he" would be whom, Arny? You can just say "Yes" if
the question confuses you.


Works either way. Pick the one that makes you feel good!

trotsky wrote:


dave weil wrote:

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:


Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey,
don't let me get in the way of your discussions with the sockpuppet.



This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious about
audio" biwaire.

And you know it.



Weil, you humored the ****ing sockpuppet's assessment of
multi-amplification, which is highly unusual. Because of this, you have
no business speaking from a position of authority. Hell, in the weil
lexicon, bi-amplification probably makes a speaker "more neutral." This
is a train wreck.


I love to be a "****ing sockpuppet", coming from you it's really a pleasure.
Can you repeat please ?

trotsky wrote:

In engineering terms this is called propagation of errors.


If you knew that why did you vainly attempt again and again ?

LOL !

"Errare humanum est . Perseverare diabolicum"

Langis wrote:

Lionel wrote:


Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey,
don't let me get in the way of your discussions with the sockpuppet.



This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious about
audio" biwaire.

And you know it.



Weil, you humored the ****ing sockpuppet's assessment of
multi-amplification, which is highly unusual. Because of this, you have
no business speaking from a position of authority. Hell, in the weil
lexicon, bi-amplification probably makes a speaker "more neutral." This
is a train wreck.


I love to be a "****ing sockpuppet", coming from you it's really a pleasure.
Can you repeat please ?


Why don't you just re-read it.


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

I've tested that but after a while it loses its power. ;o)

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 20:52:03 +0100, Langis wrote:

dave weil wrote:

BTW, I love the way you are promoting your speakers on the internet.
I'm sure that your input on RAO is going to really pay off in real
sales.

When I consider buying something relatively expensive, Usenet is one
of the resources I use to check it out. I know many other people who
do the same. "Jupiter Audio" is going to provide a lot of hits for
potential customers direct to this forum, will they be able to make
sense of what they find?

Yes, that's my point exactly.

There's also the PR aspect as well. I'm sure that some people probably
admire a scorched earth policy and might actually make their
purchasing decisions on that, but I think most people are probably put
off by such skirmishing (to tag it with a milder name).

Langis wrote:

dave weil wrote:


BTW, I love the way you are promoting your speakers on the internet.
I'm sure that your input on RAO is going to really pay off in real
sales.


When I consider buying something relatively expensive, Usenet is one
of the resources I use to check it out. I know many other people who
do the same. "Jupiter Audio" is going to provide a lot of hits for
potential customers direct to this forum, will they be able to make
sense of what they find?


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

Jupiter Audio ?
Jupiter Audio is a subsidiary of Madisound's "Do it yourself" branch.
Mr. Gregory Singh is "THE" President, foreman, worker, caretaker of
Jupiter Audio.
In fact Mr. Gregory Singh is a grotesque swindler, Jupiter Audio is a
façade.

Langis wrote:

Joseph Oberlander wrote:


Joe, you own JBL. Sound quality is something you have yet to prove you
understand.


And after all these years, you still can't tell the difference between
JLB's consumer crap and their studio monitors.


It's "JBL", Joseph.

Yeah, so what? My postings frequently have typos in them. I'm not
the type to even look twice at such petty things, but instead read
for content.

The studio monitors a pretty fair speakers. On the plus side are they
are heavily built to withstand abuse, "translate" well in mixes (like
Yamaha NS10's), reach high SPLs without much difficulty and can fill a
room. On the other hand they are heavy handed top and bottom, lack
detail, refinement etc.

Mine are quite "refined" - of course, they are not your typical "monitor"
design like the NS10s are, but good old fashioned large speakers from
20 years ago made to be heavier and more accurate. Of course, they still
make them because they are a good speaker for applications besides monitoring,
if a big on the large and ugly side(why they got rid of the wood veneer, I'll
never know)

dave weil wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 17:48:57 GMT, trotsky wrote:



dave weil wrote:

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:



Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey, don't
let me get in the way of your discussions with the sockpuppet.


This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious about
audio" biwaire.

And you know it.


Weil, you humored the ****ing sockpuppet's assessment of
multi-amplification, which is highly unusual. Because of this, you have
no business speaking from a position of authority. Hell, in the weil
lexicon, bi-amplification probably makes a speaker "more neutral." This
is a train wreck.


You seem terminally confused. This doesn't bode well for running a
business, except maybe into the ground, of course.



I'm confused? Do you or don't you realize that biwire terminals on
speakers are used about 99.99% for biwiring, and not biamping? If you
do realize this, why did you respond to the sockpuppet?

George M. Middius wrote:

trotsky said to ****-for-Brains:


The antecedent of "he" would be whom, Arny? You can just say "Yes" if
the question confuses you.


Gregipus hears everything. Krooger hears nothing. And yet, in the big
picture, there's so little space between them.......



In stark contrast to your ears, of course.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message



George M. Middius wrote:


dave weil said:




He thought that you will use double amplification !

That's true. That's what he thought.

I don't know why he'd assume that, but, oh well...hopefully the
regular stock comes ready for use by everyone.

Maybe Gregipus is just creating an opportunity for delivering a
lecture on "finding your genitalia" or whatever he calls it. If
somebody asks for the bridge, they have to endure an harangue about
being two cheap to own a second amplifier, which as we all know is
an absolute prerequisite for being a studly audio geek like
Gregipus.

Note that George, our local English Composition expert, just
confused "two" and "too". Why isn't sockpuppet Yustabe ranting about
this? LOL!



George talking about audio--that alone was almost worth the price of
admission.


Singh calling George's profane posturing "talking about audio" -
totally worthless because we already know how stupid he is.


The antecedent of "he" would be whom, Arny? You can just say "Yes" if
the question confuses you.



Works either way. Pick the one that makes you feel good!


You make a mockery of Christianity!

"Lionel" wrote in message


trotsky wrote:

dave weil wrote:

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:

Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey,
don't let me get in the way of your discussions with the
sockpuppet.

This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious
about audio" biwaire.

And you know it.

Weil, you humored the ****ing sockpuppet's assessment of
multi-amplification, which is highly unusual. Because of this, you
have no business speaking from a position of authority. Hell, in
the weil lexicon, bi-amplification probably makes a speaker "more
neutral." This is a train wreck.

I love to be a "****ing sockpuppet", coming from you it's really a
pleasure. Can you repeat please ?

Consider the alternative Singh seems to be favoring, being a sockpuppet who
is celibate.

LOL!

trotsky said:

Gregipus hears everything. Krooger hears nothing. And yet, in the big
picture, there's so little space between them.......

In stark contrast to your ears, of course.

Feeble attempt at wordplay noted, Mommy****er.

"Langis" wrote in message

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

Joe, you own JBL. Sound quality is something you have yet to prove
you understand.


And after all these years, you still can't tell the difference
between JLB's consumer crap and their studio monitors.

It's "JBL", Joseph.

The studio monitors a pretty fair speakers. On the plus side are they
are heavily built to withstand abuse, "translate" well in mixes (like
Yamaha NS10's), reach high SPLs without much difficulty and can fill a
room. On the other hand they are heavy handed top and bottom, lack
detail, refinement etc.

Yup, according to Dormer all studio monitors sound like NS10s.

LOL!

Langis wrote:
dave weil wrote:


BTW, I love the way you are promoting your speakers on the internet.
I'm sure that your input on RAO is going to really pay off in real
sales.


When I consider buying something relatively expensive, Usenet is one
of the resources I use to check it out. I know many other people who
do the same. "Jupiter Audio" is going to provide a lot of hits for
potential customers direct to this forum, will they be able to make
sense of what they find?


Excuse me?

trotsky wrote:

I'm confused? Do you or don't you realize that biwire terminals on
speakers are used about 99.99% for biwiring, and not biamping? If you
do realize this, why did you respond to the sockpuppet?

Are your speaker common or discrete biwiring ?
LOL!

Learn your "job" with the following, Mr. Gregory Singh president of a
phantom company !

http://www.pcavtech.com/techtalk/biwire/

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 22:59:38 GMT, trotsky wrote:



Langis wrote:
dave weil wrote:


BTW, I love the way you are promoting your speakers on the internet.
I'm sure that your input on RAO is going to really pay off in real
sales.


When I consider buying something relatively expensive, Usenet is one
of the resources I use to check it out. I know many other people who
do the same. "Jupiter Audio" is going to provide a lot of hits for
potential customers direct to this forum, will they be able to make
sense of what they find?


Excuse me?

Shall we take bets, my faithful faggish cabal?

--
td

Langis wrote:
trotsky wrote:



I think "I could've demanded that the logo from the speaker be used on
the site" had us both confused. It's the direct opposite of what I
said.


As I told dave, I think there's only one way to interpret "I already had
the logos done before the website..."


I am no longer sure whether you are referring to the nameplates, or
the logos on your site when you say "the logos". If it's the former, I
have to take issue with that.


I'm not sure what your game plan is here, PD. I've had to deal with a
****storm of about 2000 messages, most of them ridiculous in nature. I
realize you're criticism *is* perhaps the only constructive criticism on
this newsgroup, but I find your timing questionable. It's as if you
waited for the floodgates to be opened first, and then you just piled on
yourself. And I really, really don't appreciate you're humoring dave
weil, as *my* criticisms of what he had to say were spot on.


OK, you disagree. I maintain that the logo from your website could
look far more professional on the speakers than the nameplates, to the
degree that it could influence potential customers perception of the
product.



I think you're putting too much stock in the look.


Looks are important, to a lot of people.

How about some market research.


Okay, you made me laugh. If you know somebody that knows more about the
consumer audio market please let me know who that is. What you don't
realize is that you are really criticizing dave's inability to
communicate just how good the look, fit, and finish of the speakers is.
Here's the deal: there's nothing wrong with the product, the product
is excellent. There's also nothing wrong with me--anybody that has
dealt with me on the phone or in person will tell you that. Hell,
you've talked to me on the phone, you probably have an opinion. There's
also nothing wrong with the price point, despite what the morons in the
peanut gallery are saying. The only hard part is to get people to
listen to them. I don't have the money to exhibit at shows, because I'm
doing this on a shoestring. I'm also not in a position to secure a
business loan or venture capital. So I have to come up with clever ways
to get people to recognize the speakers for how good they really are.
And gee, I thought the rao was a sure thing, too.

But please, if you have more insight in the matter then elighten me.


Weird answer. If the photographer *insists* on photographing the
speakers like a bowl of fruit, it's a false economy not to find
another. You ask for what you want and they do it.. right?


Perhaps you can provide a link to a photo or photos that you think are
better.


Here's an example. The pictures on this site are neutral, giving you
just enough information to visualize what they might look like in your
own home, but without adding personal bias. Personal bias gives the
viewer an opportunity to find themselves not fitting the profile and
walking away.

http://www.castle.uk.com/pages/classic.htm


What's your point, PD? Castle is a long established name, and they
still have zero market penetration in the U.S. In fact, in my
experience, British audio companies are the bottom of the barrel when it
comes to marketing. I don't know why, I guess it has something to do
with the British mindset, but it makes their products nigh on impossible
to sell on this side of the pond.



Which is certainly valid, but as far as audio is concerned, I'm already
well ahead of the curve. Granted there's always room for improvement.
All it takes is cash.


In the early stages of business it's worth being resourcesful. For
example - find a photography graduate who has an impressive portfolio,
bit of artistic flair, skills to match - offer them a credit on your
site. It's a win-win situation.


Thanks for the advice, but Castle was about as bad an example as you
could possibly come up with. I'll bet even in the UK their market
penetration needs work. Very good speakers, though. Mine are quite a
bit better.


The only beef I have with you, PD, is that you didn't apply the same
scrutiny to weil's attempt at a review as you did with my efforts.


You invited scrutiny, Dave did not.


Oh geez, more rules of engagement? I'm going to need a scorecard.


Having said that...


In
fact, I think you totally gave him a free pass, which is unfair.


False. I openly questioned Dave about his use of the words "lean" and
"neutral", you are witness to that.


That's not good enough, as far as I'm concerned. If you found those
words wrongly used, then "the Devil's" post should've severely outraged
you. He couldn't have been more out of bounds.


Having not heard the speakers I'm
unable to comment on pretty much anything else besides the use of
language. TBH if you gave me the same rhetoric you gave dave after
giving up a chunk of time you would likewise be receiving your
speakers back in record time.


That might explain why the general public is so stupidly complacent
whilst reading the garbage typical audio reviewers spew. I guess
nobody's got the ******** to call a spade a spade anymore. The ironic
thing is that they claim they're all gentlemen, until the decide to dump
on a guy for 2000 posts are so, in which case they become the total
assholes they claim they're decrying. People are funny that way, don't
you think?

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Lionel" wrote in message



trotsky wrote:


dave weil wrote:


On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:53:35 GMT, trotsky wrote:


Most people serious about audio biwire their speakers. But hey,
don't let me get in the way of your discussions with the
sockpuppet.


This of course is a lie. A *small* proportion of people "serious
about audio" biwaire.

And you know it.


Weil, you humored the ****ing sockpuppet's assessment of
multi-amplification, which is highly unusual. Because of this, you
have no business speaking from a position of authority. Hell, in
the weil lexicon, bi-amplification probably makes a speaker "more
neutral." This is a train wreck.


I love to be a "****ing sockpuppet", coming from you it's really a
pleasure. Can you repeat please ?


Consider the alternative Singh seems to be favoring, being a sockpuppet who
is celibate.

LOL!


I'm laughing too, but at the mental image of you reading the Bible!
"Dr. Wick, I do my best Bible reading in the can. Nobody reads
Leviticus anyway, and those pages are just thin enough to wipe your ass
with."

Arny, you still remain the biggest joke on this group. Thanks for the
laugh.

George M. Middius wrote:

trotsky said:


Gregipus hears everything. Krooger hears nothing. And yet, in the big
picture, there's so little space between them.......



In stark contrast to your ears, of course.


Feeble attempt at wordplay noted, Mommy****er.


Who on this newsgroup thinks it's permissible for Middius to talk to me
in this way?

trotsky wrote:

I'm not sure what your game plan is here, PD. I've had to deal with a
****storm of about 2000 messages, most of them ridiculous in nature. I
realize you're criticism *is* perhaps the only constructive criticism on
this newsgroup, but I find your timing questionable. It's as if you
waited for the floodgates to be opened first, and then you just piled on
yourself. And I really, really don't appreciate you're humoring dave
weil, as *my* criticisms of what he had to say were spot on.


Is PD "brutally honest" ?
LOL

The Devil wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 22:59:38 GMT, trotsky wrote:



Langis wrote:

dave weil wrote:



BTW, I love the way you are promoting your speakers on the internet.
I'm sure that your input on RAO is going to really pay off in real
sales.


When I consider buying something relatively expensive, Usenet is one
of the resources I use to check it out. I know many other people who
do the same. "Jupiter Audio" is going to provide a lot of hits for
potential customers direct to this forum, will they be able to make
sense of what they find?


Excuse me?


Shall we take bets, my faithful faggish cabal?


Before or after we discuss who's ****ing which family members?

Enjoy the woodwork!

Langis wrote:
trotsky wrote:


BTW, I love the way you are promoting your speakers on the internet.
I'm sure that your input on RAO is going to really pay off in real
sales.


When I consider buying something relatively expensive, Usenet is one
of the resources I use to check it out. I know many other people who
do the same. "Jupiter Audio" is going to provide a lot of hits for
potential customers direct to this forum, will they be able to make
sense of what they find?


Excuse me?


You'll have to be more specific than that.


Okay, what did you mean by that last question?

trotsky wrote:



George M. Middius wrote:


trotsky said:


Gregipus hears everything. Krooger hears nothing. And yet, in the big
picture, there's so little space between them.......




In stark contrast to your ears, of course.



Feeble attempt at wordplay noted, Mommy****er.



Who on this newsgroup thinks it's permissible for Middius to talk to me
in this way?


Me, because you are a *Mommy****er* !

trotsky said:

you're criticism
don't appreciate you're humoring
somebody that knows

zzzzzzzzzz

There's also nothing wrong with me

oopsy!

trotsky wrote:



Langis wrote:

trotsky wrote:


BTW, I love the way you are promoting your speakers on the internet.
I'm sure that your input on RAO is going to really pay off in real
sales.



When I consider buying something relatively expensive, Usenet is one
of the resources I use to check it out. I know many other people who
do the same. "Jupiter Audio" is going to provide a lot of hits for
potential customers direct to this forum, will they be able to make
sense of what they find?



Excuse me?



You'll have to be more specific than that.



Okay, what did you mean by that last question?

You seems to be confused it was not a question.
You have put the question "Excuse me ?"

trotsky whined:

Feeble attempt at wordplay noted, Mommy****er.

Who on this newsgroup thinks it's permissible for Middius to talk to me
in this way?

Who doesn't think it's permissible?

Of course, the underlying issue is your dismally low self-awareness.
The Mommy****er sobriquet is a direct descendant of your own
(unintentional) self-mockery on this very newsgroup.

Lionella said:

Feeble attempt at wordplay noted, Mommy****er.

Who on this newsgroup thinks it's permissible for Middius to talk to me
in this way?

Me, because you are a *Mommy****er* !

I'll side with Gregipus on this one -- votes from morons don't count.

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 23:41:45 GMT, trotsky wrote:

Before or after we discuss who's ****ing which family members?

Well, if we *must* bring your mother back into this. You will note
that I *had* remained silent.

Well done on furthering the discussion about your speakers, BTW. I'm
glad you're the only mother****er who can stay on the topic of audio
for so long.

--
td

George M. Middius wrote:


Lionella said:


Feeble attempt at wordplay noted, Mommy****er.


Who on this newsgroup thinks it's permissible for Middius to talk to me
in this way?


Me, because you are a *Mommy****er* !


I'll side with Gregipus on this one -- votes from morons don't count.


Have you finished with Joseph ?

George M. Middius wrote:

trotsky whined:


Feeble attempt at wordplay noted, Mommy****er.



Who on this newsgroup thinks it's permissible for Middius to talk to me
in this way?


Who doesn't think it's permissible?

Of course, the underlying issue is your dismally low self-awareness.
The Mommy****er sobriquet is a direct descendant of your own
(unintentional) self-mockery on this very newsgroup.


George, your understanding of the English language is a lot worse than I
thought.

The Devil wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 23:41:45 GMT, trotsky wrote:


Before or after we discuss who's ****ing which family members?


Well, if we *must* bring your mother back into this. You will note
that I *had* remained silent.

Well done on furthering the discussion about your speakers, BTW.


Agreed. The message count must be near 2500 by now.