| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NYOBs fascinating find
That indefatiguable lost babe in the woods NYOB fished out another
pearl to share with the world of audio and told RAHE about it. I felt it should have a wider audience "Found this JAES report that I thought some mioght find interesting, and some will not be happy about. Better to be informed than to guess. Find it he http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...sdvspcm/aes_pa... " It is an ABX comparison of SACD vs. DVD-A originally presented as a Master's thesis at a German University. You guessed it: they found no difference. Next question: who are "some" who "will not be happy about" this. Would it be their examiners objecting to the use of the never validated by basic research, never positive, ABX protocol as a proven. decisive litmus paper test ? Could "some" of them say that acceptance of an unvalidated protocol as a given without discussion puts their results in question. Or would it be Prof, S.P. Lip****z of Waterloo Univ., the heavy authority of audio research, who stood up for DVD-A (LPCM) and declared once that acceptance of SACD (!-bit sigma delta) would be "a tragedy".? * This raises a fascinating problem: Prof. Lip****z *and* his coauthor Vanderkooy *and* R. Stuart of Meridian hear the difference between SACD and DVD-A but NYOB's sources do not. Are Lip****z, Vanderkooy and Stuart misguided, closet subjectivists or ignoramuses who await RAO scientists to tell them all about ABX? Or were the two Master degree candidates led astray by the ABX protocol they used that makes it all sound the same? Only NYOB knows. Ludovic Mirabel *He said at JAES convention in Amsterdam , 2001: "The audio industry is misguided if it adopts 1-bit sigma-delta conversion as the basis for any high-quality processing, archiving, or distribution format to replace multi-bit, linear PCM." |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Calling Mikey the village idiot
wrote in message
oups.com... That indefatiguable lost babe in the woods NYOB fished out another pearl to share with the world of audio and told RAHE about it. I felt it should have a wider audience "Found this JAES report that I thought some mioght find interesting, and some will not be happy about. Better to be informed than to guess. Find it he http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...sdvspcm/aes_pa... " It is an ABX comparison of SACD vs. DVD-A originally presented as a Master's thesis at a German University. You guessed it: they found no difference. Next question: who are "some" who "will not be happy about" this. Would it be their examiners objecting to the use of the never validated by basic research, never positive, ABX protocol as a proven. decisive litmus paper test ? Could "some" of them say that acceptance of an unvalidated protocol as a given without discussion puts their results in question. Or would it be Prof, S.P. Lip****z of Waterloo Univ., the heavy authority of audio research, who stood up for DVD-A (LPCM) and declared once that acceptance of SACD (!-bit sigma delta) would be "a tragedy".? * This raises a fascinating problem: Prof. Lip****z *and* his coauthor Vanderkooy *and* R. Stuart of Meridian hear the difference between SACD and DVD-A but NYOB's sources do not. Are Lip****z, Vanderkooy and Stuart misguided, closet subjectivists or ignoramuses who await RAO scientists to tell them all about ABX? Or were the two Master degree candidates led astray by the ABX protocol they used that makes it all sound the same? Only NYOB knows. Ludovic Mirabel *He said at JAES convention in Amsterdam , 2001: "The audio industry is misguided if it adopts 1-bit sigma-delta conversion as the basis for any high-quality processing, archiving, or distribution format to replace multi-bit, linear PCM." Thank you, Ludovic. We can rely on Mikey to rise to the heights of idiocy in his reply. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
NYOBs fascinating find
wrote in message oups.com... That indefatiguable lost babe in the woods NYOB fished out another pearl to share with the world of audio and told RAHE about it. I felt it should have a wider audience "Found this JAES report that I thought some mioght find interesting, and some will not be happy about. Better to be informed than to guess. Find it he http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...sdvspcm/aes_pa... " It is an ABX comparison of SACD vs. DVD-A originally presented as a Master's thesis at a German University. You guessed it: they found no difference. Next question: who are "some" who "will not be happy about" this. The people who swear there are auidble differences because of the different formats and higher bit rates. Would it be their examiners objecting to the use of the never validated by basic research, never positive, ABX protocol as a proven. No, since that is a fantasy of yours. decisive litmus paper test ? Could "some" of them say that acceptance of an unvalidated protocol as a given without discussion puts their results in question. See above comments regarding your rich fantasy life. Or would it be Prof, S.P. Lip****z of Waterloo Univ., the heavy authority of audio research, who stood up for DVD-A (LPCM) and declared once that acceptance of SACD (!-bit sigma delta) would be "a tragedy".? * This raises a fascinating problem: Prof. Lip****z *and* his coauthor Vanderkooy *and* R. Stuart of Meridian hear the difference between SACD and DVD-A but NYOB's sources do not. They are not my sources, you stupid git, they are the people ivolved in this fairly sizeable group of listgeners. Are Lip****z, Vanderkooy and Stuart misguided, closet subjectivists or ignoramuses who await RAO scientists to tell them all about ABX? What protocl do they use Ludo? I guarantee it's not sighted comparisons. Or were the two Master degree candidates led astray by the ABX protocol they used that makes it all sound the same? There is no such protocol. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
NYOBs fascinating find
wrote: wrote in message oups.com... That indefatiguable lost babe in the woods NYOB fished out another pearl to share with the world of audio and told RAHE about it. I felt it should have a wider audience "Found this JAES report that I thought some mioght find interesting, and some will not be happy about. Better to be informed than to guess. Find it he http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...sdvspcm/aes_pa... " It is an ABX comparison of SACD vs. DVD-A originally presented as a Master's thesis at a German University. You guessed it: they found no difference. Next question: who are "some" who "will not be happy about" this. The people who swear there are auidble differences because of the different formats and higher bit rates. Would it be their examiners objecting to the use of the never validated by basic research, never positive, ABX protocol as a proven. No, since that is a fantasy of yours. decisive litmus paper test ? Could "some" of them say that acceptance of an unvalidated protocol as a given without discussion puts their results in question. See above comments regarding your rich fantasy life. Or would it be Prof, S.P. Lip****z of Waterloo Univ., the heavy authority of audio research, who stood up for DVD-A (LPCM) and declared once that acceptance of SACD (!-bit sigma delta) would be "a tragedy".? * This raises a fascinating problem: Prof. Lip****z *and* his coauthor Vanderkooy *and* R. Stuart of Meridian hear the difference between SACD and DVD-A but NYOB's sources do not. They are not my sources, you stupid git, they are the people ivolved in this fairly sizeable group of listgeners. Are Lip****z, Vanderkooy and Stuart misguided, closet subjectivists or ignoramuses who await RAO scientists to tell them all about ABX? What protocl do they use Ludo? I guarantee it's not sighted comparisons. Or were the two Master degree candidates led astray by the ABX protocol they used that makes it all sound the same? There is no such protocol. It is hard to believe that someone , anyone, even NYOB wouldn't get the point. A repeat for such as he: his quoted source the German master's degree candidates using ABX heard no difference between DVD-A and SACD. A much greater authority Prof.Lip****z and others in his camp claim that the difference is enormous. NYOB knows for sure that they too use ABX. So who is right? And how can his ABX article of faith and sure cure for uncertainty delude one of the two ABXing camps? Which camp is he in? What is the point he wants to make quoting this? Does he know? As happens in real life (not in the NYOB chapel), they all listen and hear differently. Some trained experts hear differences even when ABXing- I doubt if you ever will. Just don't tell people that you got the right answer and they are all deluded. I can just imagine what you listen to and through what equipment- you ain't no authority on how to listen to music (nor on the kind of music to listen to nor I'll bet on what to read, what paintings to look at, what countries to visit and even what wine to drink).Also you're no authority on whom to pick up an argument with. Regards Ludovic Mirabel BTW calling a reference a source is conventional anywhere past grade 6. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
wrote in message oups.com... wrote: wrote in message oups.com... That indefatiguable lost babe in the woods NYOB fished out another pearl to share with the world of audio and told RAHE about it. I felt it should have a wider audience "Found this JAES report that I thought some mioght find interesting, and some will not be happy about. Better to be informed than to guess. Find it he http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...sdvspcm/aes_pa... " It is an ABX comparison of SACD vs. DVD-A originally presented as a Master's thesis at a German University. You guessed it: they found no difference. Next question: who are "some" who "will not be happy about" this. The people who swear there are auidble differences because of the different formats and higher bit rates. Would it be their examiners objecting to the use of the never validated by basic research, never positive, ABX protocol as a proven. No, since that is a fantasy of yours. decisive litmus paper test ? Could "some" of them say that acceptance of an unvalidated protocol as a given without discussion puts their results in question. See above comments regarding your rich fantasy life. Or would it be Prof, S.P. Lip****z of Waterloo Univ., the heavy authority of audio research, who stood up for DVD-A (LPCM) and declared once that acceptance of SACD (!-bit sigma delta) would be "a tragedy".? * This raises a fascinating problem: Prof. Lip****z *and* his coauthor Vanderkooy *and* R. Stuart of Meridian hear the difference between SACD and DVD-A but NYOB's sources do not. They are not my sources, you stupid git, they are the people ivolved in this fairly sizeable group of listgeners. Are Lip****z, Vanderkooy and Stuart misguided, closet subjectivists or ignoramuses who await RAO scientists to tell them all about ABX? What protocl do they use Ludo? I guarantee it's not sighted comparisons. Or were the two Master degree candidates led astray by the ABX protocol they used that makes it all sound the same? There is no such protocol. It is hard to believe that someone , anyone, even NYOB wouldn't get the point. A repeat for such as he: his quoted source the German master's degree candidates using ABX heard no difference between DVD-A and SACD. A much greater authority Prof.Lip****z and others in his camp claim that the difference is enormous. NYOB knows for sure that they too use ABX. So who is right? And how can his ABX article of faith and sure cure for uncertainty delude one of the two ABXing camps? Which camp is he in? What is the point he wants to make quoting this? Does he know? This is why it's obvious that Mikey has a weak mind. Mikey simply isn't aware of many things, such as the quality of his mind, the quality of his perceptions, or more generally, his own limitations. You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. Would you ask a frog for an opinion about audio? Of course not, yet the frog functions quite well as a frog, eating bugs, copulating, and even making frog "music." Like other lower creatures, Mikey has a limited repertoire of vocalizations, and a tendency for imitative behavior. We can expect a reply of the form "Thank you for admitting...", when no such admission has been made, or "No, since that is a fantasy of yours", or "See above comments regarding your rich fantasy life", etc. Mikey copies Arny Krueger's walk and talk. I am sure it is an embarassment to Arny, since, whatever else he may be, he is an independently thinking person. Mikey, it is time for you to realize that you are a limited person. You are a mouthpiece, not a mind. If Arny Krueger used sockpuppets, they would have much more depth than you, a real person. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:04:27 -0400, "RAO WHITEPAPER TEAM"
wrote: You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. That must be painful, Robert. I thought his world view was merely circumscribed. :-) |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
"paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:04:27 -0400, "RAO WHITEPAPER TEAM" wrote: You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. That must be painful, Robert. I thought his world view was merely circumscribed. :-) Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
NYOBs fascinating find
wrote in message
oups.com That indefatiguable lost babe in the woods NYOB fished out another pearl to share with the world of audio and told RAHE about it. I felt it should have a wider audience "Found this JAES report that I thought some mioght find interesting, and some will not be happy about. Better to be informed than to guess. Find it he http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...sdvspcm/aes_pa... " It is an ABX comparison of SACD vs. DVD-A originally presented as a Master's thesis at a German University. You guessed it: they found no difference. Who is surprised? Next question: who are "some" who "will not be happy about" this. Radical subjectivists who are resistant to *any* evidence that goes against their prejudices. Would it be their examiners objecting to the use of the never validated by basic research, never positive, ABX protocol as a proven. decisive litmus paper test ? BTW here we have an academic paper based on the often-dissed ABX test. Could "some" of them say that acceptance of an unvalidated protocol as a given without discussion puts their results in question. Who besides a number of disgruntled Golden Ears diss the ABX test for the purpose of determining whether small, subtle differences exist? Or would it be Prof, S.P. Lip****z of Waterloo Univ., the heavy authority of audio research, who stood up for DVD-A (LPCM) and declared once that acceptance of SACD (!-bit sigma delta) would be "a tragedy".? * SACD was and is an economic tragedy for its commercial supporters. This raises a fascinating problem: Prof. Lip****z *and* his coauthor Vanderkooy *and* R. Stuart of Meridian hear the difference between SACD and DVD-A but NYOB's sources do not. No way! I asked Lip****z and Vanderkooy about this the last time I had a face-to-face meeting with them. Their papers are about technical differences, not real-world audible differnces. Are Lip****z, Vanderkooy and Stuart misguided, closet subjectivists or ignoramuses who await RAO scientists to tell them all about ABX? Nahh, this is about Mirabel misrepresenting facts, which is can be counted on to do. Or were the two Master degree candidates led astray by the ABX protocol they used that makes it all sound the same? Ironically, the paper being discussed here found some listeners who heard differences a statistically significant number of times. Only NYOB knows. Ludovic Mirabel *He said at JAES convention in Amsterdam , 2001: "The audio industry is misguided if it adopts 1-bit sigma-delta conversion as the basis for any high-quality processing, archiving, or distribution format to replace multi-bit, linear PCM." History has supported this conclusion. SACD is yet another dead format. It's the 21st century Elcassette. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
NYOBs fascinating find
wrote in message
oups.com It is hard to believe that someone , anyone, even NYOB wouldn't get the point. A repeat for such as he: his quoted source the German master's degree candidates using ABX heard no difference between DVD-A and SACD. Proving that Mirabel never read page 8 of the paper he cites: Perceptual Discrimination of Digital Coding Formats http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...paper_6086.pdf A much greater authority Prof.Lip****z and others in his camp claim that the difference is enormous. Yet another false claim based on what? |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:36:20 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote: "paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:04:27 -0400, "RAO WHITEPAPER TEAM" wrote: You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. That must be painful, Robert. I thought his world view was merely circumscribed. :-) Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Should I be offended or proud? :-) |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
"paul packer" wrote in message
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:36:20 -0400, "Robert Morein" wrote: "paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:04:27 -0400, "RAO WHITEPAPER TEAM" wrote: You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. That must be painful, Robert. I thought his world view was merely circumscribed. :-) Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Figment of your imagination, Paul. Should I be offended or proud? :-) Instead of being so defensive, first try begging, borrowing, or stealing a clue about audio, Paul. Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "paul packer" wrote in message On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:36:20 -0400, "Robert Morein" wrote: "paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:04:27 -0400, "RAO WHITEPAPER TEAM" wrote: You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. That must be painful, Robert. I thought his world view was merely circumscribed. :-) Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Figment of your imagination, Paul. Should I be offended or proud? :-) Instead of being so defensive, first try begging, borrowing, or stealing a clue about audio, Paul. Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. Nor is the suggestion that Paul should grovel complimentary to you. |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
"Robert Morein" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "paul packer" wrote in message On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:36:20 -0400, "Robert Morein" wrote: "paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:04:27 -0400, "RAO WHITEPAPER TEAM" wrote: You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. That must be painful, Robert. I thought his world view was merely circumscribed. :-) Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Figment of your imagination, Paul. Should I be offended or proud? :-) Instead of being so defensive, first try begging, borrowing, or stealing a clue about audio, Paul. Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. Nor is the suggestion that Paul should grovel complimentary to you. Huh? I said that where? Oh Robert I get it, I didn't ever say that, you just made it up on your own! Robert, just because you made that up, is no reason that it is a proper reflecton on me. |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
NYOBs fascinating find
wrote in message oups.com... wrote: wrote in message oups.com... That indefatiguable lost babe in the woods NYOB fished out another pearl to share with the world of audio and told RAHE about it. I felt it should have a wider audience "Found this JAES report that I thought some mioght find interesting, and some will not be happy about. Better to be informed than to guess. Find it he http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projek...sdvspcm/aes_pa... " It is an ABX comparison of SACD vs. DVD-A originally presented as a Master's thesis at a German University. You guessed it: they found no difference. Next question: who are "some" who "will not be happy about" this. The people who swear there are auidble differences because of the different formats and higher bit rates. Would it be their examiners objecting to the use of the never validated by basic research, never positive, ABX protocol as a proven. No, since that is a fantasy of yours. decisive litmus paper test ? Could "some" of them say that acceptance of an unvalidated protocol as a given without discussion puts their results in question. See above comments regarding your rich fantasy life. Or would it be Prof, S.P. Lip****z of Waterloo Univ., the heavy authority of audio research, who stood up for DVD-A (LPCM) and declared once that acceptance of SACD (!-bit sigma delta) would be "a tragedy".? * This raises a fascinating problem: Prof. Lip****z *and* his coauthor Vanderkooy *and* R. Stuart of Meridian hear the difference between SACD and DVD-A but NYOB's sources do not. They are not my sources, you stupid git, they are the people ivolved in this fairly sizeable group of listgeners. Are Lip****z, Vanderkooy and Stuart misguided, closet subjectivists or ignoramuses who await RAO scientists to tell them all about ABX? What protocl do they use Ludo? I guarantee it's not sighted comparisons. Or were the two Master degree candidates led astray by the ABX protocol they used that makes it all sound the same? There is no such protocol. It is hard to believe that someone , anyone, even NYOB wouldn't get the point. I get the point, you are full of ****, so you constantly lie and/or misrepresent the facts. A repeat for such as he: his quoted source the German master's degree candidates using ABX heard no difference between DVD-A and SACD. A much greater authority Prof.Lip****z and others in his camp claim that the difference is enormous. They claim audible differences? Or is it something else, be honest for a change. NYOB knows for sure that they too use ABX. So who is right? And how can his ABX article of faith and sure cure for uncertainty delude one of the two ABXing camps? Which camp is he in? The one that relies on facts, not whim. What is the point he wants to make quoting this? Does he know? As happens in real life (not in the NYOB chapel), they all listen and hear differently. They do? How is that? Where is the documentation? Some trained experts hear differences even when ABXing- I doubt if you ever will. Maybe, maybe not, how many ABX tests have you participated in? Just don't tell people that you got the right answer and they are all deluded. Stop with the delusions already. Quit pretendting the data is saying something it's not and stop trying to convince people that Lip****z and Vanderkooy are on your side. I can just imagine what you listen to and through what equipment- you ain't no authority on how to listen to music Blissfully? That's how I do it, knowing I have equipment that sounds transparent and delivers the signal to a very good set of speakers. Not the best possible speakers, but very good ones for sure. (nor on the kind of music to listen to I listen to a wide range of music, from the Beatles to Bach, to Glen Miller, to MJQ, to Bella Fleck and probably other stuff you've never heard of. Not that any of that matters since it's all about personal preference, right? nor I'll bet on what to read, what paintings to look at, what countries to visit and even what wine to drink).Also you're no authority on whom to pick up an argument with. I try not to argue with people who are intent on distorting the fact and who are not dishonorable pieces of **** like you, but every once in a while, I just can't resist, poking at teh bee hive, as it were. Watching you disemble is sometimes very funny, and sometimes very sad. Regards Ludovic Mirabel BTW calling a reference a source is conventional anywhere past grade 6. Tryning to infer that Lip****z and Vanderkooy said that there is audible superiority of SACD over CD is so much more sophisticated right? Picking on the phrasing over the data is the kind of bull**** that people like you love to do when you know you have no facts to back you up and you know you've lost the argument. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Big Lie is alive and well and living in Minnesota
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Robert Morein" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "paul packer" wrote in message On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:36:20 -0400, "Robert Morein" wrote: "paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:04:27 -0400, "RAO WHITEPAPER TEAM" wrote: You have presented a conundrum that is too complex for Mikey to comprehend. Like other small brained creatures, his worldview is circumcised. That must be painful, Robert. I thought his world view was merely circumscribed. :-) Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Figment of your imagination, Paul. Should I be offended or proud? :-) Instead of being so defensive, first try begging, borrowing, or stealing a clue about audio, Paul. Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. Nor is the suggestion that Paul should grovel complimentary to you. Huh? I said that where? Oh Robert I get it, I didn't ever say that, you just made it up on your own! Robert, just because you made that up, is no reason that it is a proper reflecton on me. I'm sorry, Arny. I didn't follow proper form. The correct form of expression is, "Thanks for admitting that you want Paul to grovel." See? You can put anything you want after the phrase "Thanks for admitting..." |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Big Lie is alive and well and living in Minnesota
Robert Morein said to the Big ****: I'm sorry, Arny. I didn't follow proper form. The correct form of expression is, "Thanks for admitting that you want Paul to grovel." See? You can put anything you want after the phrase "Thanks for admitting..." For proper intensity of Kroofulness, you have to imagine you're being clever when you say that. Please check your wetware for conformity to this precept. |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:12:20 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Figment of your imagination, Paul. Should I be offended or proud? :-) Instead of being so defensive Defensive? I thought I was being flippant. first try begging, borrowing, or stealing a clue about audio, Paul. What you actually mean is electronics, Arnie. I've been in "audio" since about 1965 and followed its progress keenly, whilst taking virtually no interest in electronics . Of course if you go back to 1956 there probably wasn't much difference, but audio is now a wholly consumer product with nary a soldering iron in sight. It's been that way for some time. Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. If you check back on that thread, Arnie, you'll see that I was not advancing theories of my own but repeating what I had read. If I "know nothing" about the subject of ATRAC, it appears I have plenty of company. But then of course I forgot, your mission is to enlighten the world. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:05:20 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote: Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. Nor is the suggestion that Paul should grovel complimentary to you. Should I be burrowing my forehead into the ground at this point? |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
"paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:05:20 -0400, "Robert Morein" wrote: Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. Nor is the suggestion that Paul should grovel complimentary to you. Should I be burrowing my forehead into the ground at this point? On this newsgroup, CYA is recommended. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
"paul packer" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:12:20 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Figment of your imagination, Paul. Should I be offended or proud? :-) Instead of being so defensive Defensive? I thought I was being flippant. first try begging, borrowing, or stealing a clue about audio, Paul. What you actually mean is electronics, Arnie. I've been in "audio" since about 1965 and followed its progress keenly, whilst taking virtually no interest in electronics . Of course if you go back to 1956 there probably wasn't much difference, but audio is now a wholly consumer product with nary a soldering iron in sight. It's been that way for some time. Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complementary to you. If you check back on that thread, Arnie, you'll see that I was not advancing theories of my own but repeating what I had read. If I "know nothing" about the subject of ATRAC, it appears I have plenty of company. But then of course I forgot, your mission is to enlighten the world. More like "punish the innocent". |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not
exactly complementary to you. One of the problems with a spellchecker is that it will accept any word that's in its dictionary as being spelled correctly. Thus, desert and dessert are both acceptable to the spellchecker, as are discrete and discreet. Then there's complimentary and complementary, both good words, but entirely different in meaning. Norm Strong |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
"paul packer" wrote in message
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:12:20 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Paul, the term is appropriate for dickbrains. Well, that's what Arnie's calling me at the moment. Figment of your imagination, Paul. Should I be offended or proud? :-) Instead of being so defensive Defensive? I thought I was being flippant. That too. first try begging, borrowing, or stealing a clue about audio, Paul. What you actually mean is electronics, Arnie. I've been in "audio" since about 1965 and followed its progress keenly, whilst taking virtually no interest in electronics . Half right. In fact Paul you have almost no interest in audio as demonstrated by the vast amount of urban legend you accept as being truth. If you were really interested in audio you'd understand it better. Of course if you go back to 1956 there probably wasn't much difference, but audio is now a wholly consumer product with nary a soldering iron in sight. It's been that way for some time. Paul, part of your problem is that you only have a passing awareness of consumer audio, which is only a part of audio pie. Your "know nothing" approach to the ATRAC issue is not exactly complimentary to you. If you check back on that thread, Arnie, you'll see that I was not advancing theories of my own but repeating what I had read. What was it that I was saying about you accepting urban legend as if it was truth? If I "know nothing" about the subject of ATRAC, it appears I have plenty of company. Ignorance is pretty rampant amount audiophiles, true. But then of course I forgot, your mission is to enlighten the world. ....such as it can be enlightened. Much of the world, particularly the audiophool world, is highly resistant to the light. Imagine Paul jumping up and wagging his tail every time I say audiophool |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:53:06 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: But then of course I forgot, your mission is to enlighten the world. ...such as it can be enlightened. Much of the world, particularly the audiophool world, is highly resistant to the light. Thanks for admitting you're the source of the light, Arnie. I suspected you had delusions of omniscience, but didn't really expect you to admit it. Well, that's game, set and match. |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
A man's got to know his limitations
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:19:11 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote: Should I be burrowing my forehead into the ground at this point? On this newsgroup, CYA is recommended. Maybe if I just let it hang out, Arnie will take pity. :-) |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Where to find sound analysis software | Audio Opinions | |||
| What are they Teaching | Audio Opinions | |||
| Powerful Argument in Favor of Agnosticism and Athetism | Audio Opinions | |||
| Want an audio system but dont have the cash? get the cash find out how | General | |||
Linear Mode
