[Clyde Slick]

The Krooborg has lost its mission notes.


I have only 4 cheeks to turn,


That explains his extraordinary ****ting capacity..

[Clyde Slick]

Arny Krueger a scris:

It was all a farce.

as opposed to an "insult".

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Arny Krueger wrote:

No, it was true becasue they couldn't stop insulting me.

It was all a farce.

Yes, dear. Poor dear!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Arny Krueger wrote:

Atkinson calls it "reader passion", I call it "a noisy minority". One reason
why LP bigots are so passionate is that they probably sense that its all
starting to slip away. One shoe dropping was the termination of production
of the V15.

I have two of them. What a terrible-sounding cartridge, IMO. Neither
one is mounted currently.

But I am panicked: it's all starting to slip away!

And I still call you "asshole."

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
I fail to understand why you are obsessing about this
matter.

Well, it's pretty obvious why he's obsessing about
it...you said it.

There is that, of course, which is why Mr. Krueger
trolled me by starting a new thread to discuss a casual
remark I made a while back.

I've been pretty underwhelmed by the RIAA tracking for
years. It doesn't account for specialized retailers,
such as high-end stereo stores that sell vinyl on the
side, or most mail-order retailers.

Actually it does, but not by surveying retailers. John has been embarassed
and humiliated and driven to further obfuscation by find print from the RIAA
web site in the recent past. I guess that John needs to read a bit more
fine print on the RIAA web site such as the following:

"The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is the trade group
that represents the U.S. recording industry. Its mission is to foster a
business and legal climate that supports and promotes our members' creative
and financial vitality. Its members are the record companies that comprise
the most vibrant national music industry in the world. RIAA members create,
manufacture and/or distribute approximately 90% of all legitimate sound
recordings produced and sold in the United States."

Note that the RIAA is not about membership composed of small niche dealers.

I guess it is a mystery to John how one can account for media sales without
surveying dealers. To understand this you need some experience with how
retailing works which John obviously lacks.

Retailers buy product from a distrubution chain that for all intents and
purposes is highly likely to include organizations that *are* RIAA members.
IOW record stores don't sell product that they create, they buy it from
someone else, and that someone else can track sales by analyzing payments
and shipments.

Payments and shipments are tracked in the normal course of business. IOW,
if you ship recordings to a dealer, you don't know what happens to them
until they are sold, destroyed, returned, or paid for. If they are paid for,
then and only then are they counted as being sold.

New recordings that end up in the hands of consumers without being paid for
are commonly known as "pirated" recordings. If John wants to claim that the
LP and so-called high-resolution recording market is dominated by piracy, he
can be my guest. ;-)

It also doesn't
account for all of the new vinyl sales on e-Bay, which
for years has been a hotbed of LP activity.



That's been my impression also, though if the RIAA are
trying harder to track that sales activity, as Mr.
Krueger claims, that would be commendable. Mr. Krueger,
of course, for personal reasons, needs to "prove" that
the LP sales activity you
and I are talking about doesn't actually exist.

These are intersting times for audio, in that the two
hottest product areas right now, in terms of reader
passion, are LP playback and network-distributed digital
music.

Atkinson calls it "reader passion", I call it "a noisy minority". One reason
why LP bigots are so passionate is that they probably sense that its all
starting to slip away.

I've been hearing that for the last twenty years. Still hasn't
materialized.

One shoe dropping was the termination of production
of the V15.

Word is, thanks to the backlash, they're going to reintroduce it.
Besides, the only real result of discontinuing the V15 is that now
M97xEs are flying off the shelf.

Boon

[Harry Lavo]

"Here in Ohio" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:14:31 -0500, "Harry Lavo"
wrote:

And despite it all, enough audio discussion to keep it interesting.


Yes, there is that. :-)


I just got a copy of "Suit Yourself" by Shelby Lynne yesterday. Very
enjoyable.

Last week I got a copy of "Let It Go" by Clair Marlo after having it
recommended to me. (I made sure I got the original CD from Sheffield
Labs.) I liked this one too.


I'm a predominantly a classical and jazz fan, although I also tend to like
singer/songwriters of the folk/rock persuasion.

A few weeks ago I bought the boxed set of Beethoven's nine symphonies put
out under the LSO (London Symphony Orchestra) label and featuring the LSO
under the direction of Bernard Haitink. They gave the whole series in
London in November-December of 2005 and March-April of 2006. Recorded the
live performances, selected and merged the best, cleaned up extraneous
sounds, and issues them as Hybrid multi-channel SACDs.

The performances in London got rave reviews...so when the set became
available and bought it. Was immediately bowled over...really interesting
and fresh interpretations...and the best SACD orchestral surround sound I
have heard. In my living room, I can close my eyes and hear the same sound
as I hear when listening live in a decent concert hall. Been waiting for
that all my adult life.

And then for a change of pace, I put on my Mary Chapin Carpenter
Time*Sex*Love album, which I really like and has some of the best studio
production value I have heard on SACD (again in surround sound...the stereo
mix isn't particularly good IMO).

I can recommend these to anybody interested in the genre's.

[ScottW]

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

Arny Krueger wrote:

Atkinson calls it "reader passion", I call it "a noisy minority". One reason
why LP bigots are so passionate is that they probably sense that its all
starting to slip away. One shoe dropping was the termination of production
of the V15.

I have two of them. What a terrible-sounding cartridge, IMO.

How'd you end up with 2 similar make carts you don't like?
One I can understand.

Neither
one is mounted currently.

Which version? If its a current one with available replacement
stylii I'll let you give it to me.

ScottW

[paul packer]

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:54:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

True, because people were jaundiced by past experience.

No, it was true becasue they couldn't stop insulting me.

And so the world continues to revolve around one Arnold Krueger Esq.

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" wrote in message

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

Arny Krueger wrote:

Atkinson calls it "reader passion", I call it "a noisy
minority". One reason why LP bigots are so passionate
is that they probably sense that its all starting to
slip away. One shoe dropping was the termination of
production of the V15.

I have two of them. What a terrible-sounding cartridge,
IMO.

How'd you end up with 2 similar make carts you don't like?
One I can understand.

Neither
one is mounted currently.

Which version? If its a current one with available
replacement stylii I'll let you give it to me.

I'd even pay shipping and a nominal handling fee if the cartridge was in
good shape.

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you match up the cartridge
to the input capacitance of your preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that
****R is capable of doing such a thing. Of course, why would I believe that
he could tell if he hadn't damaged it or pack and ship it properly?

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:54:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

True, because people were jaundiced by past experience.

No, it was true becasue they couldn't stop insulting me.

And so the world continues to revolve around one Arnold
Krueger Esq.

Well, that is something that the relevant parties do to themselves.

[Arny Krueger]

"Here in Ohio" wrote in message


On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:07:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you
match up the cartridge to the input capacitance of your
preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that ****R is
capable of doing such a thing.

What about the load resistance?

http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

Nice reference, BTW.

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be used with anything but
the standard 47K.

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Here in Ohio" wrote in message


On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:07:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you
match up the cartridge to the input capacitance of your
preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that ****R is
capable of doing such a thing.

What about the load resistance?

http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

Nice reference, BTW.

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be used with anything but
the standard 47K.

It is more capacitive sensitive than even most other MM's.

[John Atkinson]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Here in Ohio" wrote in message

What about the load resistance?
http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be used with
anything but the standard 47k.

The V15 III needed to be loaded with 68k ohms for flat response.
I believed the V15-IV and V were okay with 47k ohms.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Here in Ohio" wrote in message


On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:07:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you
match up the cartridge to the input capacitance of your
preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that ****R is
capable of doing such a thing.

What about the load resistance?

http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

Nice reference, BTW.

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be used
with anything but the standard 47K.

It is more capacitive sensitive than even most other MM's.

It is bad news for people who can't follow instructions and good news for
the people who can.

BTW Harry, I just checked google and noticed your many denouncments of the
V15.

I guessed that would be the outcome, but decided to give you the benefit of
the doubt. Thanks for running true to form.

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Here in Ohio" wrote in message


On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:07:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you
match up the cartridge to the input capacitance of your
preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that ****R is
capable of doing such a thing.

What about the load resistance?

http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

Nice reference, BTW.

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be used
with anything but the standard 47K.

It is more capacitive sensitive than even most other MM's.

It is bad news for people who can't follow instructions and good news for
the people who can.

BTW Harry, I just checked google and noticed your many denouncments of the
V15.

I guessed that would be the outcome, but decided to give you the benefit
of the doubt. Thanks for running true to form.

There is a difference between "knowing" a cartridge and "liking" it, Arny.
I did the original V15 reveiw for TAS. I inherited a V15III with the Dual
701 I bought. I had preamps that I could play with loading. I also talked
to dealers, and I subscribed to IAR who did extensive testing of the
load-effects of resistance and capitance on cartridges.

IMO the V15 series was always overhyped...in part because of its
"trackability" which was real but no better than the early top-of-line
ADC's, and the ADC's sounded much better (eg. more like music) although by
today's standards they are a bit "colored" but in a music-friendly way. I
could get it "flat" but I never could get it "real". Their was a reason
that the XLM was TAS's reference cartridge during the early days of the V15.
I had figured it out for myself earlier and used the ADC 25 (three styli)
cartridge from the late '60's until the XLM was introduced.

[Harry Lavo]

"Here in Ohio" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:39:05 -0500, "Harry Lavo"
wrote:


"Here in Ohio" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:14:31 -0500, "Harry Lavo"
wrote:

And despite it all, enough audio discussion to keep it interesting.


Yes, there is that. :-)


I just got a copy of "Suit Yourself" by Shelby Lynne yesterday. Very
enjoyable.

Last week I got a copy of "Let It Go" by Clair Marlo after having it
recommended to me. (I made sure I got the original CD from Sheffield
Labs.) I liked this one too.


I'm a predominantly a classical and jazz fan, although I also tend to like
singer/songwriters of the folk/rock persuasion.

My tastes can only be described as "eclectic." :-)

Well, then you should have SACD capability. The Sony C2000ES sold on eBay
(Canadian grey market w/three year warranty) for under $300 is an excellent
CD/SACD changer...very transparent, although its midrange smoothness can be
bettered (I use a separate DAC for critical CD listening) but superb on SACD
because it has a "direct out" that is pure DSD and bypasses any PCM
conversion, which tends to reduce ambience on this machine (and on my
Pioneer 578a).



A few weeks ago I bought the boxed set of Beethoven's nine symphonies put
out under the LSO (London Symphony Orchestra) label and featuring the LSO
under the direction of Bernard Haitink. They gave the whole series in
London in November-December of 2005 and March-April of 2006. Recorded the
live performances, selected and merged the best, cleaned up extraneous
sounds, and issues them as Hybrid multi-channel SACDs.

How do they sound as two-channel CDs? I did some exploring of this
yesterday. Obviously they use the same DSD mixdown, and the CD's sound
slightly different thatn the SACD, but still excellent. It's just that
the orchestra doesn't translate to stereo very well, once you've grown
accustom to multi-channel. I guess a truthful answer would be that I
probably no longer can make that judgement with the same frame of
reference that you might have. They are excellent performances IMO,
opinion, however.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Here in Ohio" wrote in
message

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:07:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you
match up the cartridge to the input capacitance of
your preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that ****R
is capable of doing such a thing.

What about the load resistance?

http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

Nice reference, BTW.

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be
used with anything but the standard 47K.

It is more capacitive sensitive than even most other
MM's.

It is bad news for people who can't follow instructions
and good news for the people who can.

BTW Harry, I just checked google and noticed your many
denouncments of the V15.

I guessed that would be the outcome, but decided to give
you the benefit of the doubt. Thanks for running true to
form.

There is a difference between "knowing" a cartridge and
"liking" it, Arny.

Depends on where you are on the accuracy ladder. Note all those audiophiles
who were caught flat-footed by Sander's little NL distortion test.

I did the original V15 reveiw for TAS.

I bet it was a review, not a reveiw. ;-)

I inherited a V15III with the Dual 701 I bought. I had
preamps that I could play with loading. I also talked to
dealers, and I subscribed to IAR who did extensive
testing of the load-effects of resistance and capitance
on cartridges.

So, what sort of bias controls did you use to clear yourself of the
influence of all of these highly biased authorities in your life, Harry?

IMO the V15 series was always overhyped...in part because
of its "trackability" which was real but no better than
the early top-of-line ADC's, and the ADC's sounded much
better (eg. more like music) although by today's
standards they are a bit "colored" but in a
music-friendly way.

The difference in warp-induced and eccentricity-induced amplitude modulation
distortion between V15 and XLM cartridges was one of those night and day
things. Problem is that the XLM's fairly gross amplitude modulation
distortion was interpreted by the naive as being a good soundstage.

I could get it "flat" but I never could get it "real".

Once I started listening to digital recordings, I never lost a lot of sleep
over such facts of life. The LP format is pretty much what it is, and that's
not all that good.

Their was a reason that the XLM was
TAS's reference cartridge during the early days of the V15.

Probably, it was the distortion, which they interpreted as being euphonic.

I had figured it out for myself earlier and used the
ADC 25 (three styli) cartridge from the late '60's until
the XLM was introduced.

You sound like Peter Pritchard true believer, Harry. There seems to be a
pattern there... ;-)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

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

Arny Krueger wrote:

Atkinson calls it "reader passion", I call it "a noisy minority". One reason
why LP bigots are so passionate is that they probably sense that its all
starting to slip away. One shoe dropping was the termination of production
of the V15.

I have two of them. What a terrible-sounding cartridge, IMO.

How'd you end up with 2 similar make carts you don't like?
One I can understand.

I got them at different times for very little investment. One is a Type
IV, one is a Type VMR.

You see, I'm open-minded. (I'm sure there's a reason you cannot
understand.)

At the time, I was willing to try a newer version.

Neither
one is mounted currently.

Which version? If its a current one with available replacement
stylii I'll let you give it to me.

So no, they're not the current version. I haven't used them in years.
Maybe I'll give them another spin one of these days.

[Sander deWaal]

"Arny Krueger" said:


Depends on where you are on the accuracy ladder. Note all those audiophiles
who were caught flat-footed by Sander's little NL distortion test.


Umm.....you're actually flattering me a little, Arns.

It was Jacco's test, I merely posted the files and the end result of
this unscientific, sighted test.

--
"Due knot trussed yore spell chequer two fined awl miss steaks."

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"ScottW" wrote in message

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

Arny Krueger wrote:

Atkinson calls it "reader passion", I call it "a noisy
minority". One reason why LP bigots are so passionate
is that they probably sense that its all starting to
slip away. One shoe dropping was the termination of
production of the V15.

I have two of them. What a terrible-sounding cartridge,
IMO.

How'd you end up with 2 similar make carts you don't like?
One I can understand.

Neither
one is mounted currently.

Which version? If its a current one with available
replacement stylii I'll let you give it to me.

I'd even pay shipping and a nominal handling fee if the cartridge was in
good shape.

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you match up the cartridge
to the input capacitance of your preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that
****R is capable of doing such a thing. Of course, why would I believe that
he could tell if he hadn't damaged it or pack and ship it properly?

Or (could it possibly be) that I preferred other cartridges? Or do you
disagree that a mechanical device (like a phono cartridge) can sound
different?

Nah. Impossible.

in·sane (in-san')
adj.
Of, exhibiting, or afflicted with insanity.
Characteristic of or associated with persons afflicted with insanity:
an insane laugh; insane babbling.

ass·hole (as'hol')
n. Vulgar Slang.
A thoroughly contemptible, detestable person.

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Here in Ohio" wrote in
message

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:07:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless you
match up the cartridge to the input capacitance of
your preamp and wiring. I seriously doubt that ****R
is capable of doing such a thing.

What about the load resistance?

http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

Nice reference, BTW.

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be
used with anything but the standard 47K.

It is more capacitive sensitive than even most other
MM's.

It is bad news for people who can't follow instructions
and good news for the people who can.

BTW Harry, I just checked google and noticed your many
denouncments of the V15.

I guessed that would be the outcome, but decided to give
you the benefit of the doubt. Thanks for running true to
form.

There is a difference between "knowing" a cartridge and
"liking" it, Arny.

Depends on where you are on the accuracy ladder. Note all those
audiophiles who were caught flat-footed by Sander's little NL distortion
test.

Between the two, I had a strong prefereence. And it had to do with which
sounded the most like real voices and real instruments in my system...which
allowed more suspension of disbelief. In other words, Arny...like most
audiophiles make judgements.

Oh, I'm sorry, preferences are totally bogus unless they match up with
yours.....


I did the original V15 reveiw for TAS.

I bet it was a review, not a reveiw. ;-)

touche'


I inherited a V15III with the Dual 701 I bought. I had
preamps that I could play with loading. I also talked to
dealers, and I subscribed to IAR who did extensive
testing of the load-effects of resistance and capitance
on cartridges.

So, what sort of bias controls did you use to clear yourself of the
influence of all of these highly biased authorities in your life, Harry?

Which are those, Arny. Did you miss the part that said I made the choice of
ADC over Shure about eight years before TAS was concieved, and based on my
own auditioning?

I still have a tape of a cartridge comparison I made a year later (having
rejected the best Shure at the time...of the ADC 10e vs. Stanton 681EE and
the Ortofon SL-15. The ADC beat them for "musicality" as well.



IMO the V15 series was always overhyped...in part because
of its "trackability" which was real but no better than
the early top-of-line ADC's, and the ADC's sounded much
better (eg. more like music) although by today's
standards they are a bit "colored" but in a
music-friendly way.

The difference in warp-induced and eccentricity-induced amplitude
modulation distortion between V15 and XLM cartridges was one of those
night and day things. Problem is that the XLM's fairly gross amplitude
modulation distortion was interpreted by the naive as being a good
soundstage.

Soundstage had nothing to do with my preference.

I could get it "flat" but I never could get it "real".

Once I started listening to digital recordings, I never lost a lot of
sleep over such facts of life. The LP format is pretty much what it is,
and that's not all that good.

Complete non-sequitor noted, apparently just to fill up space.


Their was a reason that the XLM was
TAS's reference cartridge during the early days of the V15.

Probably, it was the distortion, which they interpreted as being euphonic.

Your profound ignorance of the reality of how and why that choice was made
is evident.



I had figured it out for myself earlier and used the
ADC 25 (three styli) cartridge from the late '60's until
the XLM was introduced.

You sound like Peter Pritchard true believer, Harry. There seems to be a
pattern there... ;-)

At the time he made the best sounding cartridges, that's all. His wooden
tonearm, however, while a nice concept, sucked. Such was its flimsy
construction.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Here in Ohio" wrote in
message

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:07:59 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It is well known that V15s sound like crap unless
you match up the cartridge to the input
capacitance of your preamp and wiring. I seriously
doubt that ****R is capable of doing such a thing.

What about the load resistance?

http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

Nice reference, BTW.

I've never seen any recommendations that the V15 be
used with anything but the standard 47K.

It is more capacitive sensitive than even most other
MM's.

It is bad news for people who can't follow instructions
and good news for the people who can.

BTW Harry, I just checked google and noticed your many
denouncments of the V15.

I guessed that would be the outcome, but decided to
give you the benefit of the doubt. Thanks for running
true to form.

There is a difference between "knowing" a cartridge and
"liking" it, Arny.

Depends on where you are on the accuracy ladder. Note
all those audiophiles who were caught flat-footed by
Sander's little NL distortion test.

Between the two, I had a strong preference.

As did I. I owned an XLM and a V15. After a lot of listening, the XLM went
into a drawer.

And it had
to do with which sounded the most like real voices and
real instruments in my system...which allowed more
suspension of disbelief. In other words, Arny...like
most audiophiles make judgements.

We came up with different conclusions. I picked the cartrdige that was, in
the large scheme of things, more accurate.

Oh, I'm sorry, preferences are totally bogus unless they
match up with yours.....

Never said that. I just said that the XLM had these pretty strong technical
flaws.

I did the original V15 reveiw for TAS.

I bet it was a review, not a reveiw. ;-)

touche'

I inherited a V15III with the Dual 701 I bought. I had
preamps that I could play with loading. I also talked
to dealers, and I subscribed to IAR who did extensive
testing of the load-effects of resistance and capitance
on cartridges.

So, what sort of bias controls did you use to clear
yourself of the influence of all of these highly biased
authorities in your life, Harry?

Which are those, Arny. Did you miss the part that said I
made the choice of ADC over Shure about eight years
before TAS was concieved, and based on my own auditioning?

OK Harry, so you're a true believer in a certain brand. In the 8 years
before TAS was conceived of, I tried lots of brands. For example, my first
magnetic cartridge was an Empire 108. Now I don't know exactly how many
years that was before TAS was conceived of, but whatever.

I still have a tape of a cartridge comparison I made a
year later (having rejected the best Shure at the
time...of the ADC 10e vs. Stanton 681EE and the Ortofon
SL-15. The ADC beat them for "musicality" as well.

Hmm, I had a 681EE or EEE at some point in my life. That was a short
experience.

IMO the V15 series was always overhyped...in part
because of its "trackability" which was real but no
better than the early top-of-line ADC's, and the ADC's sounded much
better (eg. more like music) although by today's
standards they are a bit "colored" but in a
music-friendly way.

The difference in warp-induced and eccentricity-induced
amplitude modulation distortion between V15 and XLM
cartridges was one of those night and day things.
Problem is that the XLM's fairly gross amplitude
modulation distortion was interpreted by the naive as
being a good soundstage.

Soundstage had nothing to do with my preference.

I find that a little surprising given how many times you've ranted and raved
about superior soundstaging, Harry.

Maybe you didn't know the word then.

I could get it "flat" but I never could get it "real".

Once I started listening to digital recordings, I never
lost a lot of sleep over such facts of life. The LP
format is pretty much what it is, and that's not all
that good.

Complete non-sequitor noted, apparently just to fill up
space.

Just the facts.

Their was a reason that the XLM was
TAS's reference cartridge during the early days of the V15.

Probably, it was the distortion, which they interpreted
as being euphonic.

Your profound ignorance of the reality of how and why
that choice was made is evident.

Let's put it this way Harry. I was a charter subscriber to TAS, just like I
was a charter subscriber to Stereophile. Both were defining moments, but in
different ways. SP was a strong influence in my life for a much longer
period of time. I grew out of TAS pretty quick. TAS was rather thoroughly
debunked in my life by a number of experiences, the XLM being one, and ABX
being another.

I had figured it out for myself earlier and used the
ADC 25 (three styli) cartridge from the late '60's until
the XLM was introduced.

You sound like Peter Pritchard true believer, Harry.
There seems to be a pattern there... ;-)

At the time he made the best sounding cartridges, that's
all. His wooden tonearm, however, while a nice concept,
sucked. Such was its flimsy construction.

The XLM was flimsy, too.

[Arny Krueger]

"Here in Ohio" wrote in message

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:13:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Let's put it this way Harry. I was a charter subscriber
to TAS, just like I was a charter subscriber to
Stereophile. Both were defining moments, but in
different ways. SP was a strong influence in my life for
a much longer period of time. I grew out of TAS pretty
quick. TAS was rather thoroughly debunked in my life by
a number of experiences, the XLM being one, and ABX
being another.

I had read Audio, Stereo Review, and High Fidelity for a
number of years, beginning somewhere in the mid-'70s. I
liked Audio and found the other 2 to be rather boring.

I started out in the late 50s, reading the general-technican audience
ragazines like Popular Electronics, Radio & TV News and Wireless World.

In the early '80s, I was exposed to TAS, Stereophile, and
The $ensible Sound.

In the early 60s I got tuned into High Fideilty, High Fidelity Review, and
Audio. My recollection is that an ad in Audio led me to SP. My 12 issue
subscription to SP ended up being the longest-running single magazine
subscription of my life - I think it took Holt more than 6 years to get out
his first 12 issues. But what issues they were!

I found TAS to be rather snotty.

Consider the sources.

Stereophile was
interesting (mostly because of JGH I think), but I
preferred T$S because of the emphasis on best bang for
the buck. (I have always preferred products that give you
good value for money. They tickle my fancy just for that
reason alone.)

When SP started out there was no high end as such. One could even buy a good
Marantz or Mac power amp or preamp and get change from $300.

I found that, in some of the magazines, there was a
certain style of review where they spent a bunch of time
mentioning recordings and how the equipment sounded with
those recordings. I quickly made it my practice to skip
over that part of the reviews. (I still can't tolerate
that stuff.)

I read it, and for a while I ate it up.

An example might be:

"Though the 9007 was a somewhat cool customer, less
"ripe" than some other amplifiers I've encountered, it
managed to effectively capture the harmonic structures of
instruments on familiar recordings, reproducing with
great clarity the texture and tonality of pianos, for
instance. I pulled out Nat "King" Cole's 1956 trio
recording After Midnight (LP, Capitol W782) one evening,
and this mono recording's three-dimensionality and
instrumental palpability were impressively revealed
thanks to the 9007's musical grip. Rhythmically, the
record had never sounded more assured, though it had less
of its familiar tubey warmth and "golden glow" than I'm
used to."

We didn't mention IAR, did we? Well now we have, let's move on. ;-)

Sort of trying to eff the ineffable. I don't effing need
that crap. :-)

Consider the source.

In the end, I concluded that most of the reviews weren't
really worth reading. (On the other hand, people like
Richard Heyser and D.B. Keele wrote really good reviews.
Hi Fi News and RR had some good stuff in it, although it
was hard to obtain in my area. Later on HFN & RR seemed
to go all mystical, just like some of the US audio mags.
I had a subscription to Studio Sound for quite a while
and they had some extremely good articles too.)

I agree that the reviews in Audio and HFN often made more sense than the
rest.

I've looked at a number of online reviews at various
sites, and they just don't hold my attention. It's more
of the "I listened to this recording and the violins
sounded really ripe on this amplifier... I speculate that
the blue LEDs the amplifier uses made the sound of the
violins ripe because my reference amplifier uses red LEDs
and the violins don't sound ripe on it.)

Does one even need to see much but a picture of the equipment to write a
review like that? I'm sure I've seen one audio product reviewed when there
weren't even finished first prototypes of it. ;-)

Of the current crop of magazines, only AudioXpress is
interesting because at least it tells you how to do
things instead of just telling you to buy things.

AudioXpress appeals to people who have intersts like that. However, I'm
about 45 years on the sunny side of building my first power amp from
scratch. There aren't a lot of people who have built as much custom
electronics as I have. So AudioXpress slid off my radar, even though I wrote
and co-wrote a few articles for them in what are now their early days.

I like the tests that JA does for Stereophile too,
although I think more weight should be given to the results.

There are problems with some of JAs tests, especially in the digital domain.
However, IMO & IME the means by which they do equipment listening tests are
unbelievably crude and inherently highly insensitive, issues of bias control
notwithstanding. In essence their equipment reviews are as good as fiction
or poetry. Well-written pap.

[John Atkinson]

Arny Krueger wrote:
AudioXpress slid off my radar, even though I wrote and
co-wrote a few articles for them in what are now their early days.

One article.

There are problems with some of JA's tests, especially in the
digital domain.

Another nasty little troll from Arny Krueger. You have not yet
substantiated this criticism in any meaningful way, Mr. Krueger.
And the one time you did try to, it turned out that your criticism
stemmed from your own misunderstanding, as was demonstrated
on r.ah-e by Glenn Zelniker. (Those morbidly interested should
search the Newsgroups using the keywords "dither failure" -- see,
for example, message .)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[Arny Krueger]

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
AudioXpress slid off my radar, even though I wrote and
co-wrote a few articles for them in what are now their
early days.

One article.

There are problems with some of JA's tests, especially
in the digital domain.

Another nasty little troll from Arny Krueger. You have
not yet substantiated this criticism in any meaningful
way, Mr. Krueger.

As usual, I did. You just didn't like what I did.

And the one time you did try to, it
turned out that your criticism stemmed from your own
misunderstanding, as was demonstrated
on r.ah-e by Glenn Zelniker.

At that stage of life, I had learned to let Glenn blow hard, as was his
preference.

(Those morbidly interested
should search the Newsgroups using the keywords "dither
failure" -- see, for example, message
.)

I agree that appealling to the terminally morbid is a worthwhile use of your
talents, John.

[Harry Lavo]

"Here in Ohio" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 16:50:05 -0500, "Harry Lavo"
wrote:


At the time he made the best sounding cartridges, that's all. His wooden
tonearm, however, while a nice concept, sucked. Such was its flimsy
construction.


That somehow reminds me of that NAD turntable with the arm made of a
flat sheet of circuit board material or something. :-)

Well, Pritchards was made of afromosa wood, looked nice, and had decent
bearings. But it had a plastic headshell that was pressure fitted to the
arm, and which worked itself loose in no time. It may have done more to
spread the myth that replacable headshells always muck up the sound than any
other arm.

[Harry Lavo]

"Here in Ohio" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:13:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Let's put it this way Harry. I was a charter subscriber to TAS, just like
I
was a charter subscriber to Stereophile. Both were defining moments, but
in
different ways. SP was a strong influence in my life for a much longer
period of time. I grew out of TAS pretty quick. TAS was rather thoroughly
debunked in my life by a number of experiences, the XLM being one, and ABX
being another.

I had read Audio, Stereo Review, and High Fidelity for a number of
years, beginning somewhere in the mid-'70s. I liked Audio and found
the other 2 to be rather boring.

In the early '80s, I was exposed to TAS, Stereophile, and The $ensible
Sound.

I found TAS to be rather snotty. Stereophile was interesting (mostly
because of JGH I think), but I preferred T$S because of the emphasis
on best bang for the buck. (I have always preferred products that give
you good value for money. They tickle my fancy just for that reason
alone.)

I found that, in some of the magazines, there was a certain style of
review where they spent a bunch of time mentioning recordings and how
the equipment sounded with those recordings. I quickly made it my
practice to skip over that part of the reviews. (I still can't
tolerate that stuff.)

An example might be:

"Though the 9007 was a somewhat cool customer, less "ripe" than some
other amplifiers I've encountered, it managed to effectively capture
the harmonic structures of instruments on familiar recordings,
reproducing with great clarity the texture and tonality of pianos, for
instance. I pulled out Nat "King" Cole's 1956 trio recording After
Midnight (LP, Capitol W782) one evening, and this mono recording's
three-dimensionality and instrumental palpability were impressively
revealed thanks to the 9007's musical grip. Rhythmically, the record
had never sounded more assured, though it had less of its familiar
tubey warmth and "golden glow" than I'm used to."

It may surprise you find I don't much like them either. For that very
reason, the reviews in Sound and Music are completely worthless, since this
is *all* they do vis-a-vis audio evaluation.


Sort of trying to eff the ineffable. I don't effing need that crap.
:-)

In the end, I concluded that most of the reviews weren't really worth
reading. (On the other hand, people like Richard Heyser and D.B. Keele
wrote really good reviews. Hi Fi News and RR had some good stuff in
it, although it was hard to obtain in my area. Later on HFN & RR
seemed to go all mystical, just like some of the US audio mags. I had
a subscription to Studio Sound for quite a while and they had some
extremely good articles too.)

Audio and Hi Fi News and RR were my favorites...but so was I(nternational)
A(udio) R(eview) back in its heyday in the late '70's / early '80's. Audio
goes all the way back to my dad...somewhere he had (I've lost) some of the
very earliest copies from the early '50's. But I've been a subscriber to
the subjective mags as well since Stereophile was a baby, and TAS just a
gleam in HP's eye. I never trust any single review in any of them, but in
each there are reviewers that I give more credence to than others.


I've looked at a number of online reviews at various sites, and they
just don't hold my attention. It's more of the "I listened to this
recording and the violins sounded really ripe on this amplifier... I
speculate that the blue LEDs the amplifier uses made the sound of the
violins ripe because my reference amplifier uses red LEDs and the
violins don't sound ripe on it.)

Most are pretty amateurish. When I read them, or often when I read a new
reviewer in a subjective mag, I get a sense of deja vu. They tend to make
the same errors we did in the first few issues of TAS.


Of the current crop of magazines, only AudioXpress is interesting
because at least it tells you how to do things instead of just telling
you to buy things.

I like the tests that JA does for Stereophile too, although I think
more weight should be given to the results.

The mag provides the info...subjective and objective. You provide the
"weights". How hard is that?

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Here in Ohio" wrote in message

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:13:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Let's put it this way Harry. I was a charter subscriber
to TAS, just like I was a charter subscriber to
Stereophile. Both were defining moments, but in
different ways. SP was a strong influence in my life for
a much longer period of time. I grew out of TAS pretty
quick. TAS was rather thoroughly debunked in my life by
a number of experiences, the XLM being one, and ABX
being another.

I had read Audio, Stereo Review, and High Fidelity for a
number of years, beginning somewhere in the mid-'70s. I
liked Audio and found the other 2 to be rather boring.

I started out in the late 50s, reading the general-technican audience
ragazines like Popular Electronics, Radio & TV News and Wireless World.

In the early '80s, I was exposed to TAS, Stereophile, and
The $ensible Sound.

In the early 60s I got tuned into High Fideilty, High Fidelity Review, and
Audio. My recollection is that an ad in Audio led me to SP. My 12 issue
subscription to SP ended up being the longest-running single magazine
subscription of my life - I think it took Holt more than 6 years to get
out his first 12 issues. But what issues they were!

I found TAS to be rather snotty.

HP wasn't snotty in those days...he basically did the same as
Stereophile...look for the best, and evaluate the equipment based primarily
on sound and synergy.

If JGH *had* published more on time, there probably wouldn't have been a
TAS. There was much audiophile unhappiness with Stereophiles erratic
operation, and Harry was a newspaperman and thought he could launch a
magazine that did the same kind of reveiwing but got out on time.
Unfortunately, then there were two. Not out on time, I mean.


Consider the sources.

Stereophile was
interesting (mostly because of JGH I think), but I
preferred T$S because of the emphasis on best bang for
the buck. (I have always preferred products that give you
good value for money. They tickle my fancy just for that
reason alone.)

When SP started out there was no high end as such. One could even buy a
good Marantz or Mac power amp or preamp and get change from $300.

This is factually wrong. In 1964, a pair of Marantz power amps cost $768
($4800 in todays $). The MAC 275 cost $444 ($2800 in todays $). The only
ones that gave you change from $300 were the Eico, Dynaco, and Citation
kits. Source: 1964 Audio and Stereo Review equipment directories.



I found that, in some of the magazines, there was a
certain style of review where they spent a bunch of time
mentioning recordings and how the equipment sounded with
those recordings. I quickly made it my practice to skip
over that part of the reviews. (I still can't tolerate
that stuff.)

I read it, and for a while I ate it up.

An example might be:

"Though the 9007 was a somewhat cool customer, less
"ripe" than some other amplifiers I've encountered, it
managed to effectively capture the harmonic structures of
instruments on familiar recordings, reproducing with
great clarity the texture and tonality of pianos, for
instance. I pulled out Nat "King" Cole's 1956 trio
recording After Midnight (LP, Capitol W782) one evening,
and this mono recording's three-dimensionality and
instrumental palpability were impressively revealed
thanks to the 9007's musical grip. Rhythmically, the
record had never sounded more assured, though it had less
of its familiar tubey warmth and "golden glow" than I'm
used to."

We didn't mention IAR, did we? Well now we have, let's move on. ;-)

Sort of trying to eff the ineffable. I don't effing need
that crap. :-)

Consider the source.

A meaningless comment, if ever there was one.



In the end, I concluded that most of the reviews weren't
really worth reading. (On the other hand, people like
Richard Heyser and D.B. Keele wrote really good reviews.
Hi Fi News and RR had some good stuff in it, although it
was hard to obtain in my area. Later on HFN & RR seemed
to go all mystical, just like some of the US audio mags.
I had a subscription to Studio Sound for quite a while
and they had some extremely good articles too.)

I agree that the reviews in Audio and HFN often made more sense than the
rest.

Hey, we have a trifecta.


I've looked at a number of online reviews at various
sites, and they just don't hold my attention. It's more
of the "I listened to this recording and the violins
sounded really ripe on this amplifier... I speculate that
the blue LEDs the amplifier uses made the sound of the
violins ripe because my reference amplifier uses red LEDs
and the violins don't sound ripe on it.)

Does one even need to see much but a picture of the equipment to write a
review like that? I'm sure I've seen one audio product reviewed when
there weren't even finished first prototypes of it. ;-)

If you have, it wasn't in Stereophile or TAS (at least since the late
seventies...Harry got burned once...he was not stupid...and put a policy in
place.)


Of the current crop of magazines, only AudioXpress is
interesting because at least it tells you how to do
things instead of just telling you to buy things.

AudioXpress appeals to people who have intersts like that. However, I'm
about 45 years on the sunny side of building my first power amp from
scratch. There aren't a lot of people who have built as much custom
electronics as I have. So AudioXpress slid off my radar, even though I
wrote and co-wrote a few articles for them in what are now their early
days.

I like the tests that JA does for Stereophile too,
although I think more weight should be given to the results.

There are problems with some of JAs tests, especially in the digital
domain. However, IMO & IME the means by which they do equipment listening
tests are unbelievably crude and inherently highly insensitive, issues of
bias control notwithstanding. In essence their equipment reviews are as
good as fiction or poetry. Well-written pap.

We never would have guessed you held such views, Arny. :-)

[Sander deWaal]

"Harry Lavo" said:


Audio and Hi Fi News and RR were my favorites...but so was I(nternational)
A(udio) R(eview) back in its heyday in the late '70's / early '80's. Audio
goes all the way back to my dad...somewhere he had (I've lost) some of the
very earliest copies from the early '50's.


Look at this:
http://www.audioxpress.com/bksprods/BKSGENHIS.htm

The Audio Anthology series, 6 volumes with reprints from Audio
Engineering starting from 1947.

The Audiocraft Reissue Collection is interesting as well.

--
"Due knot trussed yore spell chequer two fined awl miss steaks."

[Harry Lavo]

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" said:


Audio and Hi Fi News and RR were my favorites...but so was I(nternational)
A(udio) R(eview) back in its heyday in the late '70's / early '80's.
Audio
goes all the way back to my dad...somewhere he had (I've lost) some of the
very earliest copies from the early '50's.


Look at this:
http://www.audioxpress.com/bksprods/BKSGENHIS.htm

The Audio Anthology series, 6 volumes with reprints from Audio
Engineering starting from 1947.

The Audiocraft Reissue Collection is interesting as well.

Thanks for the references....AudioXpress is one of the few audio sites I
didn't have bookmarked, and I was aware of the reprints. Looking at some of
the reprints from McProud's first volume brought back memories....I think
Dad's first issue was in 1948. He was an electrical engineer by training, a
vibration engineer by occupation before he started his own string of
Radio/Television/Audio stores in 1949, and (somehow) a local officer in the
Society of Automotive Engineers. I didn't follow his footsteps, but my
interests didn't diverge much. He built his first homebuilt speaker in
1939....I built mine in 1956.

[Clyde Slick]

John Atkinson a scris:
Arny Krueger wrote:
AudioXpress slid off my radar, even though I wrote and
co-wrote a few articles for them in what are now their early days.

One article.

There are problems with some of JA's tests, especially in the
digital domain.

Another nasty little troll from Arny Krueger. You have not yet
substantiated this criticism in any meaningful way, Mr. Krueger.
And the one time you did try to, it turned out that your criticism
stemmed from your own misunderstanding, as was demonstrated
on r.ah-e by Glenn Zelniker. (Those morbidly interested should
search the Newsgroups using the keywords "dither failure" -- see,
for example, message .)



Ahhh!
My all-time favorite Krueger meltdown.

[Arny Krueger]

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
oups.com
John Atkinson a scris:
Arny Krueger wrote:
AudioXpress slid off my radar, even though I wrote and
co-wrote a few articles for them in what are now their
early days.

One article.

There are problems with some of JA's tests, especially
in the digital domain.

Another nasty little troll from Arny Krueger. You have
not yet substantiated this criticism in any meaningful
way, Mr. Krueger. And the one time you did try to, it
turned out that your criticism stemmed from your own
misunderstanding, as was demonstrated
on r.ah-e by Glenn Zelniker. (Those morbidly interested
should search the Newsgroups using the keywords "dither
failure" -- see, for example, message
.)

Ahhh!

My all-time favorite Krueger meltdown.

It's not a meltdown at all.

In contrast we have a great collection of Art's meltdowns - they are simply
full quotes of other people's posts with no additional comments.

My all time-favorite Zelniker meltdown:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...4238316ba088bb

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg is stuck behind its own personal language barrier again.

In contrast we have a great collection of Art's meltdowns - they are simply
full quotes of other people's posts with no additional comments.

Arnii, could you please tell us what "meltdown" means in Krooglish? All
we know from your outburst quoted above is that the meaning is vastly
different from the human meaning.

Still waiting for the secret instructions on how to purchase an aBxism
switchbox. TIA.





--

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

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Arny Krueger wrote:

My all time-favorite Zelniker meltdown:

So who is this Zelniker? I've been here for about a year and I don't
recall seeing any posts from this person.

This wouldn't be like you hypocritically whining about how people talk
about you when you're not here, would it?

But, as we all know, you're an insane asshole, so you wouldn't be able
to see that.

_______________________________

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

[George M. Middius]

Shhhh! said:

My all time-favorite Zelniker meltdown:

So who is this Zelniker? I've been here for about a year and I don't
recall seeing any posts from this person.

He's a Real Audio Guy who used to post on Usenet. He owns his own company
that makes professional studio gear (www.z-sys.com). Naturally, Krooger is
much smarter than some PhD who earns a fine living supplying equipment to
top sound engineers around the world. Or so Arnii tells us. ;-)

This wouldn't be like you hypocritically whining about how people talk
about you when you're not here, would it?

Stop doing that! You can't expect the Krooborg to play fair when everybody
is conspiring against him.

The bottom line about Glenn is that a few times, he tried to teach Arnii a
thing or two about digital electronics. The effort was unsuccessful. My
fave exchange between Dr. Z and Mr. **** involved a test Glenn gives to
job applicants. He posted it on RAO and invited Krooger to submit his
answers. That drove Turdy into a major Kroodown.




--

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

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said:

My all time-favorite Zelniker meltdown:

So who is this Zelniker? I've been here for about a year and I don't
recall seeing any posts from this person.

He's a Real Audio Guy who used to post on Usenet. He owns his own company
that makes professional studio gear (www.z-sys.com). Naturally, Krooger is
much smarter than some PhD who earns a fine living supplying equipment to
top sound engineers around the world. Or so Arnii tells us. ;-)

This wouldn't be like you hypocritically whining about how people talk
about you when you're not here, would it?

Stop doing that! You can't expect the Krooborg to play fair when everybody
is conspiring against him.

The bottom line about Glenn is that a few times, he tried to teach Arnii a
thing or two about digital electronics. The effort was unsuccessful. My
fave exchange between Dr. Z and Mr. **** involved a test Glenn gives to
job applicants. He posted it on RAO and invited Krooger to submit his
answers. That drove Turdy into a major Kroodown.

I'll go search that exchange. My guess is that it's pretty funny.

I just read the 'meltdown' post that Arns referred to.

It appears that it's simply another case of somebody trying to have a
discussion with Arns, then Arns frustrates them with lies, distortions,
illogic and so forth, then the person realizes that Arns is an insane
asshole and tells him to **** off, then Arns declares 'victory' due to
a 'meltdown.'

While I haven't been here all that long, it does seem to be a recurring
pattern.

The funny thing is that Arns is so insane he can't see when his ass has
been handed to him.

This comment seemed spot-on:

"How's this? **** YOU, you loathsome, psychotic, subhuman imbecile!
You
deserve every ounce of vitriole and hatred directed your way."
____________________________________

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

[Jenn]

In article om,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said:

My all time-favorite Zelniker meltdown:

So who is this Zelniker? I've been here for about a year and I don't
recall seeing any posts from this person.

He's a Real Audio Guy who used to post on Usenet. He owns his own company
that makes professional studio gear (www.z-sys.com). Naturally, Krooger is
much smarter than some PhD who earns a fine living supplying equipment to
top sound engineers around the world. Or so Arnii tells us. ;-)

This wouldn't be like you hypocritically whining about how people talk
about you when you're not here, would it?

Stop doing that! You can't expect the Krooborg to play fair when everybody
is conspiring against him.

The bottom line about Glenn is that a few times, he tried to teach Arnii a
thing or two about digital electronics. The effort was unsuccessful. My
fave exchange between Dr. Z and Mr. **** involved a test Glenn gives to
job applicants. He posted it on RAO and invited Krooger to submit his
answers. That drove Turdy into a major Kroodown.

I'll go search that exchange. My guess is that it's pretty funny.

I just read the 'meltdown' post that Arns referred to.

It appears that it's simply another case of somebody trying to have a
discussion with Arns, then Arns frustrates them with lies, distortions,
illogic and so forth, then the person realizes that Arns is an insane
asshole and tells him to **** off, then Arns declares 'victory' due to
a 'meltdown.'

While I haven't been here all that long, it does seem to be a recurring
pattern.

That plus often declaring himself the smartest person in the room.

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

While I haven't been here all that long, it does seem to be a recurring
pattern.

That plus often declaring himself the smartest person in the room.

Jenn that's something we expect a Lilliputian like you Jenn to say Jenn.
LOt"S.


Seriously though (harumph)... It's my belief that in Krooger's warped and
delusion-rocked world, he sees himself sitting at a Console Of Ultimate
Power, firing off missives of concentrated "knowledge", thereby
demolishing the puny intellects who dare to challenge him. He's so far
gone, though, that what Arnii thinks is a devastating "deconstruction"
usually amounts to incoherent whining. Krooger fires his missiles and
hears satisfying explosions, but sane people hear the plop-plop-plop of
turds falling on Krooger's front yard.




--

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

[Clyde Slick]

Arny Krueger a scris:




In contrast we have a great collection of Art's meltdowns - they are simply
full quotes of other people's posts with no additional comments.


The only thing melting down in my house is my mouse.

[Clyde Slick]

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! a scris:


So who is this Zelniker?


A "REAL PROFESSIONAL AUDO ENGINEER" who totally
eviscerated Arny.