Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#401
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 22:18:44 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "paul packer" wrote in message ... On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 14:14:11 +0200, Sander deWaal wrote: (paul packer) said: Actually Sander, you've already said it all, with your overbearing tone, childish name-calling and dismissive attitude. Why don't you just post: "I'm smarter than you are, naaa-naaa-nah-naaa-nah." Oh Arnie, you always miss the bullseye, but this time you've missed the whole dart board. Of all the people you could have accused of those sins, you had to pick Sander! What bothers Arny most, is that this low-IQ, childish name-calling prick with his dismissive attitude and overbearing tone, actually has a (paid) job in the field that Arny so desperately wants to belong to. If you were any kind of decent person you'd hand that job over to Arnie immediately. You know he can do it better anyway. That, combined with my ability to mock and mimic his "Krooglish" to a T (and beyond), places me firmly in the "Middius Camp", as far as Arny is concerned of course. Mimicking "Krooglish" doesn't bother Arnie. He hasn't yet officially recognised that such a thing exists. Dear God........ A mirror for Arnie, quick..... Don't bother, Paul. When someone grows up to over 50 years old and still doesn't know himself, he never will. I think Arnie's over 60, isn't he? Dear God..... He is 58 or 59 Is that all? But he's been on RAO for 53 years. That means he was 5 or 6 when he started. Gee, and his early posts are so mature.... |
#402
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"paul packer" wrote in message ... On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:04:15 -0700, "ScottW" wrote: "paul packer" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 19:58:29 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: Jenn said to the Krooborg: By the way, listen to any Monte Verdi lately? eh eh Do I detect a lack of pity in your gibe at Mr. ****? Maybe you're trying to make him cry again. Jenn is actually tracing the path of degeneration Arnie imposes on all new posters. You start off nice and reasonable. Then Arnie replies to one of your posts in his inimitable way. You make allowances, decide he's just eccentric and ignore him. Then he answers another of your posts with a half-snide remark. Still you ignore him. Then he makes an out-and-out attack. This time you decide to hit back. Suddenly you find yourself in a fully-fledged "debating trade" war--a war you only half understand because Arnie's replies never quite seem to make sense. Eventually you pull out to save your sanity, but soon you find Arnie attacking you in every thread, using your name as if it's going out of style. You decide enough is enough and go after him. Flame wars break out everywhere. It goes on and on until you begin to tire, though Arnie never tires. Finally you decide it just isn't worth trying to decipher Arnie's cryptic thought processes and fall back on mockery. Thus the words "eh eh" (alternatively, "he he") start to creep into your posts. You feel a little guilty, because up to now you've always been a nice person who never mocked anyone, even the biggest dag in the schoolyard, but underneath you know Arnie's brought it all on himself several times over. In any case, whenever your guilt becomes too much and you decide to desist, Arnie mounts another unprovoked attack, as if he misses your punishment. So you decide to give him what he wants on a full-time basis, like everyone else. Thus your inevitable degeneration is complete, from innocent, sunny poster to malevolent, snarling Arnie basher. You hate yourself every morning, but every night you get back on line and bash Arnie again, because it's one of Usenet's great activities, and because he deserves it so much. and you bitch about my offtopic ****. ..... ScottW You think this is off-topic? I thought it was dead-on. Do you realize what a sad testament to the state of this group you just made? BTW, I never "bitch". It's just not something I do. :-) You can't argue with perception. ScottW |
#403
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
|
#404
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 13:45:41 -0400, "Harry Lavo"
wrote: There are also those who are brass-tacks oriented as hell with their everyday life, and they need an outlet that lets them speculate and ignore hard data. Audio fills the bill for some of them, and high-end audio fills the bill best of all. Howard has once again assumed the mantle of all-knowing psychoanalyst. It is absolutely amazing how he get's inside all our heads, while we in the real world find it very difficult to accurately guess where other people are at in their internal views and motivations. Well, Howard's retired now, so I guess any time trying to guess the internal motivations of others gets you down you could send him a quick email. He's usually out the back whittling until the sun gets too hot---or something. |
#405
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 10:15:16 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote: You think this is off-topic? I thought it was dead-on. Do you realize what a sad testament to the state of this group you just made? Indeed. That's why I made it. BTW, I never "bitch". It's just not something I do. :-) You can't argue with perception. No, but you can alter it. |
#406
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
Signal said:
You *know* I wouldn't stand a chance if my employer knew someone like Arny was out looking for a job like mine. Why would Arny demote himself to doing what you do? He's already got the worlds best job, most satisfying career, the most admiration and respect that any living person has ever had, in the world, ever. Of course you're right, how could I forget. He once developed the technology used in Neve consoles as well, so he doesn't have to "prove it!" anymore ;-) To quote The Great Man himself: "Been there, done that! ;-) " -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#407
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
Sander deWaal wrote: Put a single 24 dB/oct. Butterworth low pass filter with a corner frequency of 20 kHz between your source and your amp. You think you'll notice? Right. Now put 10 of them in series between source and amp. Do you think you'll notice? I hope this ain't too scientific for ya. But we aren't discussing differences between a series of 10 audio components are we? And the point is that if two amps sound identical and you put those 10 filters on each of them, the resulting sound from each would still be identical since they both would be changed in the same way. If A=B, then (A * 10x)=(B * 10x) I know that's complicated for ya, so I'll simplify the formula: WIRE = WIRE !!! |
#408
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"Annika1980" said:
Put a single 24 dB/oct. Butterworth low pass filter with a corner frequency of 20 kHz between your source and your amp. You think you'll notice? Right. Now put 10 of them in series between source and amp. Do you think you'll notice? I hope this ain't too scientific for ya. But we aren't discussing differences between a series of 10 audio components are we? I thought we were. If not, accept my apologies. And the point is that if two amps sound identical and you put those 10 filters on each of them, the resulting sound from each would still be identical since they both would be changed in the same way. If A=B, then (A * 10x)=(B * 10x) The answer to that is 42, as you damn well know! I know that's complicated for ya, so I'll simplify the formula: WIRE = WIRE !!! "Uh,..... it's like, THIS I can understand, dude!" ;-) -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#409
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
Put a single 24 dB/oct. Butterworth low pass filter with a corner frequency of 20 kHz between your source and your amp. 24 dB/oct isn't all that steep. You think you'll notice? Possibly, due to residual effects at lower frequencies. It's on the edge. Offhand, a 20 KHz 24 dB/oct is something like 0.5 dB down at 15 KHz. There's a reason why I used far steeper filters in my similar experiments that people can try for themselves at http://www.pcabx.com/technical/low_pass/index.htm and http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm Now put 10 of them in series between source and amp. Thus stacking up 10 possibly audible, small differences. Do you think you'll notice? Probably, and you might not have to work all that hard at hearing it. I hope this ain't too scientific for ya. The PCABX site has thousand's of happy users. |
#410
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"Arny Krueger" said:
The PCABX site has thousand's of happy users. So does crack heroin. Sorry, I'm not in love with (PC)ABX. BTW it's "thousands", no apostrophe. -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#411
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
Sander deWaal said to PunctuationAbuseBorg: The PCABX site has thousand's of happy users. BTW it's "thousands", no apostrophe. Thank's Mr. Dwewal for, admitting Mr. Deewell that you have nothing, better to do with your time than nit-picking on trivially-inconsequential typo's Mr. dEwall. -- A day without Krooger is like a day without radiation poisoning. |
#412
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
said: Sander deWaal said to PunctuationAbuseBorg: The PCABX site has thousand's of happy users. BTW it's "thousands", no apostrophe. Thank's Mr. Dwewal for, admitting Mr. Deewell that you have nothing, better to do with your time than nit-picking on trivially-inconsequential typo's Mr. dEwall. Well, it's nothing, really. If a million monkeys typing away on a million typewriters for a million years should be able to create a Shakespear masterpiece, shouldn't pointing out spelling errors to Arny by a million RAO users for a million years have a positive influence on Arny's (ab)use of the language? I'm an optimistic person. We Dutch have too much free time on our hands, however. -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#413
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
Sander deWaal said: Thank's Mr. Dwewal for, admitting Mr. Deewell that you have nothing, better to do with your time than nit-picking on trivially-inconsequential typo's Mr. dEwall. Well, it's nothing, really. Thanks for admitting you're Usenet oeuvre amounts to nothing Sander's. If a million monkeys typing away on a million typewriters for a million years should be able to create a Shakespear masterpiece, shouldn't pointing out spelling errors to Arny by a million RAO users for a million years have a positive influence on Arny's (ab)use of the language? I beg you to consider the flip side of the million-monkeys scenario: How much Krooglish would the ignorant primates generate while striving to replicate a single gem of literature? We Dutch have too much free time on our hands, however. Come back when, you have a real job in the audio business. LOt"S! ;-) -- A day without Krooger is like a day without radiation poisoning. |
#414
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
said: Thank's Mr. Dwewal for, admitting Mr. Deewell that you have nothing, better to do with your time than nit-picking on trivially-inconsequential typo's Mr. dEwall. Well, it's nothing, really. Thanks for admitting you're Usenet oeuvre amounts to nothing Sander's. My "usenet career" is indeed negligible compared to some other audio geniuses I know. So be it, we can't all be Kruegers or even Ferstlers. If a million monkeys typing away on a million typewriters for a million years should be able to create a Shakespear masterpiece, shouldn't pointing out spelling errors to Arny by a million RAO users for a million years have a positive influence on Arny's (ab)use of the language? I beg you to consider the flip side of the million-monkeys scenario: How much Krooglish would the ignorant primates generate while striving to replicate a single gem of literature? Ouch! We Dutch have too much free time on our hands, however. Come back when, you have a real job in the audio business. LOt"S! You mean like recording church choirs and boasting about it on usenet? ;-) Oh well. -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#415
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
Sander deWaal said: We Dutch have too much free time on our hands, however. Come back when, you have a real job in the audio business. LOt"S! You mean like recording church choirs and boasting about it on usenet? You wish Mr. Dwlale. ;-) Oh well. Are you back already? -- A day without Krooger is like a day without radiation poisoning. |
#416
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. The PCABX site has thousand's of happy users. Crackeads, all!! -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#417
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
Stuart Krivis said:
"teached" The past tense of teach is taught. (Please don't take my correction as an insult.) You're right, of course. What have I been thonking? ;-) -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#418
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
Sander deWaal said: You're right, of course. What have I been thonking? ;-) Look's like Mr.BeWare has, at least some day's to learn his business. ;-) Its like a dictionary can, lead you to a DAw but can it teach learn how you to think, mucH? Just for grin's lets, talk about you're favorite rock band Sander. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - any attemp to describe the band's music should include the rockmusical basis of the songs, the thrilling arrangements and the absence of common rock- guitars and vocals. covering an enormous emotional range, the songs with their futuristic atmosphere cannot be compared to anything else. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thank's Mr. Devill for, thonking about your airudishion, LOt"s. ;-) ;-( -- A day without Krooger is like a day without radiation poisoning. |
#419
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message ... Stuart Krivis said: "teached" The past tense of teach is taught. (Please don't take my correction as an insult.) You're right, of course. What have I been thonking? ;-) The past tense of tight is taut -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDem |
#420
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
said: You're right, of course. What have I been thonking? ;-) Look's like Mr.BeWare has, at least some day's to learn his business. ;-) Its like a dictionary can, lead you to a DAw but can it teach learn how you to think, mucH? Just for grin's lets, talk about you're favorite rock band Sander. The RoHS Orchestra featuring WEEE-zer playing: "Lead it Free!" Me, frustrated? ;-) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - That's a LIE!!! any attemp to describe the band's music should include the rockmusical basis of the songs, the thrilling arrangements and the absence of common rock- guitars and vocals. Which leaves us with bassoons, only. Well done! covering an enormous emotional range, the songs with their futuristic atmosphere cannot be compared to anything else. I prefer a cappuccino, myself. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Again, a lie. What a surprise! ;-) Thank's Mr. Devill for, thonking about your airudishion, LOt"s. Erudition means nothing these days, people don't get educated anymore, they get Googled. King Of The Newsgroup, anyone? ;-) ;-) Uh. ;-( Ah. -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#421
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"Clyde Slick" said:
"teached" The past tense of teach is taught. (Please don't take my correction as an insult.) You're right, of course. What have I been thonking? ;-) The past tense of tight is taut Thaunk yau. -- "All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others". |
#422
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message ... "Clyde Slick" said: "teached" The past tense of teach is taught. (Please don't take my correction as an insult.) You're right, of course. What have I been thonking? ;-) The past tense of tight is taut Thaunk yau. The past tense of think is thunk The past tense of thank is I'm sorry. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDem |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Just for Ludovic | Audio Opinions | |||
Any blind listening tests on Class A vs Class B amps? | Tech | |||
Richman's ethical lapses | Audio Opinions | |||
science vs. pseudo-science | High End Audio |