John Atkinson wrote:
Sander deWaal wrote:
"John Atkinson" said:
As you are making an issue of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be
happy to email people an extract of the "Devil"
recording
so that they can compare it with the recording of the
Debate.

Just a note: the person known as "The Devil" objected to
distribution of said recording by third parties, and has
never given anyone permission to do so.

Of course, but as the one featured on the recording, Arny
Krueger can give permission if he wishes.

Wrong again. I haven't been able to get it distributed to
me. How can I reasonably authorize its distribution to
anybody else?

Again, given that the recording has only been offered for
distribution since I made the HE2005 debate recording, its
new availability means nothing.

John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
MINe 109 wrote:
Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded
over a telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for
reference.

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

It helps to get everything out in the open, don't you
agree.

What this exchange does is show Atkinson's complicity, if
not leadership of one of the better-known RAO childish
conspiracies against me.

Gosh, I am awareded two big chunks of Atkinson's figurative
hide in just one day! How good does it get?

How about proof positive that Atkinson has posted as Jamie
Benchimol? ;-)

Arny Krueger wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
As you are making an issue of this, Mr. Krueger,
I'd be happy to email people an extract of the
"Devil" recording so that they can compare it with
the recording of the Debate.

Since this extract has only been available since the
debate recording came into existence, it is highly
suspect to say the least.

No, it is the same recording of a telephone conversation
that has been discussed at length on this newsgroup. I
offered just an extract because it certainly isn't
necessary for someone to hear the entire recording to
decide if the voices sounded the same.

As I said, I would only do that with your permission,
Mr. Krueger. If you don't wish to give permission,
then that's fine by me and that'll be the end of the
subject. But again as I said, it hardly seems
appropriate for you to publicly make claims about this
recording while refusing to make it possible for others
to hear it for themselves and thus make up their own
minds.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

In , Signal wrote :

"Lionel" emitted :

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

Is it legal ?

It's not illegal.

Even if the so-called recording has been done behind Krueger's back ?
This sounds to me like an affront to private life... kind of paparazzi's
means.

Ooops, I forgot that tabloids are the only litterary institution in
England. :-)

Arny Krueger wrote:
What's unclear about:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/
"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."

I think the humor in Jason Serinus' writing is going over
your head, Mr. Krueger. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Arny Krueger wrote:
How about proof positive that Atkinson has posted
as Jamie Benchimol? ;-)

Ancient Chines proverb says that when Arny Krueger
gets rattled, out comes the accusations of
sockpuppetting on the part of those doing the
rattling. :-)

No Mr. Krueger, not only have I not posted as
"Jamie Benchimol," I haven't posted under any
name other than my own. And despite your repeated
accusations along these lines, it is fair to
point out that you have never, ever offered one
shred of proof to support those accusations.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Margaret von B. wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to
go
with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well
done,
Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging
and
boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only
count
if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you
(dung
beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far
as
I
can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change
to
prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter
gasbag
but
you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your
motto
still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That
*IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret


Life advice from RAO's cyber-transvestite! ;-)




Perhaps we can get some pearls of wisdom on life from the guy that
can't manage to make it on his own and move out form his mom and
dad's
home.


And now, gibberish from RAO's litiguous asshole. :-(




Ooooh, guess I struck a nerve. hehehehe.




Scott Wheeler

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote:
Margaret von B. wrote:
I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you
decided to go
with the proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why
am I here?
Well done, Mr. Expert.

What's your point? If I followed an outline that is so well
proven that it is well-known, how does that make me an
incompetent speaker?

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of
bragging and
boasting will *never* get you anywhere.

It got me a free trip to NYC, and award of Atkinson's
figurative tail and horns by one of his employer's own
writers.

Compliments/accomplishments
only count if they are aired by people who know you and
have worked
with you (dung beetles don't count).

What's unclear about:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."



OMG you took that seriously. That's gonna make me laugh for the rest of
the day. Thanks Arny.






Not too many of those have ever
come forth as far as I can tell (again, dung beetles
don't count).

Thanks for calling the Stereophile web site author a dung
beatle. This only discredits you, Maggie.

How come, Arny?

Because you don't seem to know what you are talking about,
Maggie.

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a
change to
prove yourself to be something else besides a hateful and
bitter
gasbag but you keep constantly letting me down.

Let you down how, Maggie? By gaining favorable mention on
Stereophile's own web site?

At your advanced age
your motto still seems to be "it wasn't my fault, it was
all the
other guys". That *IS* embarrassing, Arny.

Yup, its my fault that Primedia can't follow through on
their promise of a computer and a video projector -
especially ironic in the midst of one of the largest
nationwide if not international A/V exibitions around.

Shape up!

Exactly what would shaping up be like Maggie?

Would it somehow be better if the Stereophile article read:

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that John Atkinson was God and Arnold B.
Krueger
was a pathetic girly man."

LOL!

The Little **** bones up on Kroopocrisy.

Perhaps we can get some pearls of wisdom on life from the guy that
can't manage to make it on his own and move out form his mom and dad's
home.

And now, gibberish from RAO's litiguous[sic] asshole. :-(

Will you now claim that "litiguous" is a real word in Krooglish, or just
admit that Scott's shot caused you to lose control of your bodily
functions?





This post reformatted by the Resistance,
laboring tirelessly to de-Kroogerize Usenet.

The Big **** sputtered:

Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded over a telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for reference.
So,Stephen can say anything that he wants to. As a
co-conspirator, he's hardly a reliable source of
information.

The conspiracy is afoot again. Your "enemies" are plotting to get you,
Arnii.





This post reformatted by the Resistance,
laboring tirelessly to de-Kroogerize Usenet.

Sander deWaal said:

Just a note: the person known as "The Devil" objected to distribution
of said recording by third parties, and has never given anyone
permission to do so.

More precisely, he rescinded the permission he gave previously.

The Little **** takes a page from the Book of Ferstlerianism.

You smarmy, sleazy little prick.

Goodness, such vitriol. Why are you so angry, little rodent? Oh wait, I
know -- it's because you can't support yourself and have to sponge off
your aged parents at the age of 47. How pathetic.

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to go with
the proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well done,
Mr. Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only count if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you (dung
beetles don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far as
I can tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change to prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag but you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto still
seems to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.


Arny couldn't buy a used Yugo with his public speaking income.
Show us your tax returns, Arny!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Lionel" wrote in message
...
In .com,
wrote :


Margaret von B. wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to go
with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well done,
Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and
boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only count
if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you (dung
beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far as I
can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change to
prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag but
you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto
still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret


Life advice from RAO's cyber-transvestite! ;-)

"She" hasn't had the courage to speak to Arnold directly when "she" was in
NY and now she's giving lesson of humanity...
Her hypocrisy hasn't any limits.


Maybe 'she' did speak to Arny directly, but without revelaing 'her' alter
ego.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

wrote in message
oups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:

What's unclear about:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."



OMG you took that seriously. That's gonna make me laugh for the rest of
the day. Thanks Arny.


Arny, thanks for admitting that you are a recent arrival from another
planet.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Lionel" wrote in message
...
In . com, John Atkinson
wrote :

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Does this recording answer to *THE* question ?
Nasal or not nasal ?

Whiney.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

wrote:
wrote:
And now, gibberish from RAO's litiguous asshole. :-(

Ooooh, guess I struck a nerve. hehehehe.

Yup Scotty, one of your nerves has been struck. Good you can
now laugh about it!

John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
What's unclear about:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/
"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in
the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."

I think the humor in Jason Serinus' writing is going over
your head, Mr. Krueger. :-)

Not at all. John, how many Ahrnoldt jokes do you think I've
heard in my life?

wrote in message
oups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/


The web page itself is both funny and more than a little
factual:

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."

Hyperbole, anybody?

Bad theology aside, I have to admit that posting this
article on the web puts John Atkinson in my "Good Loser"
hall of fame for all audio history, and foreseeable future
times.

I can now why RAO's self-proclaimed subjectivist clique are
whining about the debate. Their champion got his clock
cleaned, pure and simple.

Not even close.


I say it was a draw. a 0-0 tie. Neither speaker was effective.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Clyde Slick wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:

What's unclear about:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent
arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in
the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and
John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."



OMG you took that seriously. That's gonna make me laugh
for the rest
of the day. Thanks Arny.


Arny, thanks for admitting that you are a recent arrival
from another
planet.

Guilty as charged. This explains why I'm so many years
advanced ahead of the rest of you zombies, Art.

Clyde Slick wrote:
"Margaret von B."
wrote in
message ...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned
essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is
not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you
decided to go
with the proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why
am I here?
Well done, Mr. Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of
bragging and
boasting will *never* get you anywhere.
Compliments/accomplishments
only count if they are aired by people who know you and
have worked
with you (dung beetles don't count). Not too many of
those have ever
come forth as far as I can tell (again, dung beetles
don't count).
How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a
change to
prove yourself to be something else besides a hateful and
bitter
gasbag but you keep constantly letting me down. At your
advanced age
your motto still seems to be "it wasn't my fault, it was
all the
other guys". That *IS* embarrassing, Arny.


Arny couldn't buy a used Yugo with his public speaking
income.

Actually, it was a new Pontiac.

John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
How about proof positive that Atkinson has posted
as Jamie Benchimol? ;-)

Ancient Chines proverb says that when Arny Krueger
gets rattled, out comes the accusations of
sockpuppetting on the part of those doing the
rattling. :-)

No Mr. Krueger, not only have I not posted as
"Jamie Benchimol," I haven't posted under any
name other than my own. And despite your repeated
accusations along these lines, it is fair to
point out that you have never, ever offered one
shred of proof to support those accusations.

Proof positive - Jamie Benchemol was doing British humor
schtick.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Looks like a Red Herring to me.


"at least" it doesn't smell like one of your Brown Turds.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
MINe 109 wrote:
Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded
over a telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for
reference.

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

It helps to get everything out in the open, don't you
agree.

What this exchange does is show Atkinson's complicity, if
not leadership of one of the better-known RAO childish
conspiracies against me.


See a shrink. Please.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:

What's unclear about:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent
arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in
the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and
John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."



OMG you took that seriously. That's gonna make me laugh
for the rest
of the day. Thanks Arny.


Arny, thanks for admitting that you are a recent arrival
from another
planet.

Guilty as charged. This explains why I'm so many years
advanced ahead of the rest of you zombies, Art.



Well, it does explain why you can't speak English.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:
"Margaret von B."
wrote in
message ...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned
essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is
not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you
decided to go
with the proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why
am I here?
Well done, Mr. Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of
bragging and
boasting will *never* get you anywhere.
Compliments/accomplishments
only count if they are aired by people who know you and
have worked
with you (dung beetles don't count). Not too many of
those have ever
come forth as far as I can tell (again, dung beetles
don't count).
How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a
change to
prove yourself to be something else besides a hateful and
bitter
gasbag but you keep constantly letting me down. At your
advanced age
your motto still seems to be "it wasn't my fault, it was
all the
other guys". That *IS* embarrassing, Arny.


Arny couldn't buy a used Yugo with his public speaking
income.

Actually, it was a new Pontiac.



Prove it!!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
How about proof positive that Atkinson has posted
as Jamie Benchimol? ;-)

Ancient Chines proverb says that when Arny Krueger
gets rattled, out comes the accusations of
sockpuppetting on the part of those doing the
rattling. :-)

No Mr. Krueger, not only have I not posted as
"Jamie Benchimol," I haven't posted under any
name other than my own. And despite your repeated
accusations along these lines, it is fair to
point out that you have never, ever offered one
shred of proof to support those accusations.

Proof positive - Jamie Benchemol was doing British humor
schtick.


Very good work. That one puts you on better logical ground than all of your
pcabx testing.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Arny Krueger wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/


The web page itself is both funny and more than a little
factual:

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."

Hyperbole, anybody?

Bad theology aside, I have to admit that posting this
article on the web puts John Atkinson in my "Good Loser"
hall of fame for all audio history, and foreseeable future
times.

Mr. Serinus seems to be still smarting from the effects of
that cable ABX. Reality checks can do that.




--

-S
It's not my business to do intelligent work. -- D. Rumsfeld, testifying
before the House Armed Services Committee

whosbest54 wrote:
In article . com,
says...


The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, thank you for hosting the debate and posting the audio recording.

Contrary to what Arny has said, I don't think either you or he 'won' or
'lost'. Both of you made your points clearly. It was easy to understand
how your views differ.

My views on the announced topic of the debate have been posted to my
web page for years and are generally in line with Arny's. Those views
aren't modified in any way by what I've heard nor by Arny's behavior in
this newsgroup.

John, again, your story about what you did with your amps in your 20's was
interesting, but your decision making wasn't based on any scientific
method, but on your opinion/feelings.


Good, someone else noticed! ;



And yes, there _may_ have been
problems with the test you did that originally led you to purchase the SS
amp. Arny did point out that methods have improved and there are practical
methods for doing the tests. Not that there's anything wrong with the
straight listening you did for your amp decision, if that's what you want
to do and it makes you happy.

But to use is as a basis for discounting DBTs is simply...questionable.

I choose to rely on more scientific methods
to decern _real_ differences in equipment. And, as I say on my web page,
often those differences aren't important, even if they exist.

It's interesting that simply changing the volume level of rig by a few dB, or
moving the speakers by an inch or two, can swamp whatever relatively
small differences exist between amps or CD players.



--

-S
It's not my business to do intelligent work. -- D. Rumsfeld, testifying
before the House Armed Services Committee

Steven Sullivan wrote:
whosbest54 wrote:
In article . com,
says...


The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, thank you for hosting the debate and posting the audio
recording.

Contrary to what Arny has said, I don't think either you or he
'won' or
'lost'. Both of you made your points clearly. It was easy to
understand
how your views differ.

My views on the announced topic of the debate have been posted to
my
web page for years and are generally in line with Arny's. Those
views
aren't modified in any way by what I've heard nor by Arny's
behavior in
this newsgroup.

John, again, your story about what you did with your amps in your
20's was
interesting, but your decision making wasn't based on any
scientific
method, but on your opinion/feelings.


Good, someone else noticed! ;


The horror! Decision making based on one's own opinion. That has to be
stopped!!!! But please do tell us what is your idea of a good
alternative in this particular situation to buying something based on
one's opinions?









And yes, there _may_ have been
problems with the test you did that originally led you to purchase
the SS
amp. Arny did point out that methods have improved and there are
practical
methods for doing the tests.



One thing that has not changed since then is the objectivist mantra.




Not that there's anything wrong with the
straight listening you did for your amp decision, if that's what
you want
to do and it makes you happy.

But to use is as a basis for discounting DBTs is
simply...questionable.


I agree with that. But it is a completely valid reason for his choice
to buy the tube amp. But alas, this is the very thing you guys decry
when push comes to shove. You loathe reviews that draw the same
conclusions.





I choose to rely on more scientific methods
to decern _real_ differences in equipment. And, as I say on my web
page,
often those differences aren't important, even if they exist.

It's interesting that simply changing the volume level of rig by a
few dB, or
moving the speakers by an inch or two, can swamp whatever relatively
small differences exist between amps or CD players.


No one has ever suggested that one not optimise listening levels or
speaker position. No one has said don't do this but buy an expensive
amp instead.



Scott Wheeler

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/


The web page itself is both funny and more than a little
factual:

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."

Hyperbole, anybody?

Bad theology aside, I have to admit that posting this
article on the web puts John Atkinson in my "Good Loser"
hall of fame for all audio history, and foreseeable future
times.

I can now why RAO's self-proclaimed subjectivist clique are
whining about the debate. Their champion got his clock
cleaned, pure and simple.

Not even close.


I say it was a draw. a 0-0 tie. Neither speaker was effective.

Agreed, but if you consider comparing Arny's argument to his schtick on
RAO.... he clearly failed to support his position. In fact he apparently
left John quite perplexed by agreeing that differences are a matter of
degree. His argument became a semantic one.

ScottW

wrote

I was wondering just where that "squeaky", "whiny", "high-pitched",
etc., voice of Arny's all the "Normals" claimed to have heard on "The
Tape" went.


It didn't go anywhere. Same voice. He doesn't sound like
a teenaged nerd to you? Do you have voice issues as well?

wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
whosbest54 wrote:
Not that there's anything wrong with the straight listening
you did for your amp decision, if that's what you want to do
and it makes you happy.

But to use is as a basis for discounting DBTs is simply...
questionable.

I agree with that. But it is a completely valid reason for his choice
to buy the tube amp.

Hi Scott, what everyone seems to be ignoring is my point for
mentioning this anecdote. Which was that all the non-sighted
factors worked _against_ my becoming dissatisfied with the Quad.
The solid-state amp was cheaper, smaller, more powerful, ran
cooler, and offered, in my opinion, better industrial design.
So, if these factors were going to have any influence on my
listening, as the "objectivists" repeatedly claim, they would all
have persuaded me that the amplifier was fine. However, as my
increasing disatisfaction was real and I was having to work harder
to appreciate the music through the amplifier, it was this
cognitive dissonance that proved to be the tipping point at which
I changed from a hard-line objectivist -- see an editorial I wrote
in a 1978 issue of HFN for an example -- into someone who realized
the value of listening.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

ScottW wrote:

Agreed, but if you consider comparing Arny's argument to
his schtick
on RAO.... he clearly failed to support his position.

Thanks for showing that you can't read very well, Scott. You
got it when you heard me say it on the recording, despite
all the times you failted to get it when I posted it on RAO.

In fact he
apparently left John quite perplexed by agreeing that
differences are
a matter of degree.

No, I asserted that unlike what Stereopile and the rest say,
some things sound different, some things don't.

His argument became a semantic one.

That's what it has always been, once the HE press posturing
is cut away.

wrote:
Lionel wrote:
In
. com, John
Atkinson wrote :

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Does this recording answer to *THE* question ?
Nasal or not nasal ?


I was wondering just where that "squeaky", "whiny",
"high-pitched",
etc., voice of Arny's all the "Normals" claimed to have
heard on "The
Tape" went.

Among the possibilities:

a)"The Tape" never existed at all

b)The "Normals" lied about the sound of Arny's voice on
"The Tape"

c)The psychotic posting as "the Devil" altered Arny's
voice on "The
Tape"

d)"The Tape" existed but was a complete fabrication by
"the Davil"
that had absolutely no basis in reality, but was merely
"the Devil"
playing both parts and, perhaps, using a digital pitch
change device
to alter the "Arny" parts


I'm going with "d". ;-)

Given that Atkinson has stepped forward as worldwide
distributor of the tape...

Signal wrote:
"Lionel" emitted :

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an
issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can
compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

Is it legal ?

It's not illegal.

Even if the so-called recording has been done behind
Krueger's back ?

Correct.

More like the recording came out of someone's back-side.

John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
whosbest54 wrote:
Not that there's anything wrong with the straight listening
you did for your amp decision, if that's what you want to do
and it makes you happy.

But to use is as a basis for discounting DBTs is simply...
questionable.

I agree with that. But it is a completely valid reason for his
choice
to buy the tube amp.

Hi Scott, what everyone seems to be ignoring is my point for
mentioning this anecdote. Which was that all the non-sighted
factors worked _against_ my becoming dissatisfied with the Quad.
The solid-state amp was cheaper, smaller, more powerful, ran
cooler, and offered, in my opinion, better industrial design.
So, if these factors were going to have any influence on my
listening, as the "objectivists" repeatedly claim, they would all
have persuaded me that the amplifier was fine. However, as my
increasing disatisfaction was real and I was having to work harder
to appreciate the music through the amplifier, it was this
cognitive dissonance that proved to be the tipping point at which
I changed from a hard-line objectivist -- see an editorial I wrote
in a 1978 issue of HFN for an example -- into someone who realized
the value of listening.


I think the fair point to make is that you chose one of two
possibilities. You didn't *prove* that you heard a real audible
difference. I think the problem objectivists face in your case is that
your decision was a reasonable one even if it wasn't scientifically
supported. You picked what you saw as the most likely of the two
possibilities. The *real* problem I see for objectivists is that your
solution solved your problem regardless of which possibility was the
true underlying reality. I have yet to see any objectivist offer you a
better alternative than the one you took when you bought the tube amp
and started enjoying your stereo again. Regardless of what they believe
was the real cause and effect.



Scott Wheeler

John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
whosbest54 wrote:
Not that there's anything wrong with the straight
listening
you did for your amp decision, if that's what you want
to do
and it makes you happy.

But to use is as a basis for discounting DBTs is
simply...
questionable.

I agree with that. But it is a completely valid reason
for his choice
to buy the tube amp.

Hi Scott, what everyone seems to be ignoring is my point
for
mentioning this anecdote. Which was that all the
non-sighted
factors worked _against_ my becoming dissatisfied with the
Quad.

Horsefeathers.

The solid-state amp was cheaper, smaller, more powerful,
ran
cooler, and offered, in my opinion, better industrial
design.

Failure to note the endemic high end predjudice against of
all of these factors noted.

So, if these factors were going to have any influence on
my
listening, as the "objectivists" repeatedly claim, they
would all
have persuaded me that the amplifier was fine.

If you believe this then you think that the SET amp darlings
of the high end are cheaper, smaller, more powerful, and run
cooler. We can haggle about the industrial design element,
because that means different things to different people.


However, as my
increasing disatisfaction was real and I was having to
work harder
to appreciate the music through the amplifier,

So, if I do a PCABX test showing that the Quad 405 is in
fact a colored amplifer, what does that mean?

it was this
cognitive dissonance that proved to be the tipping point
at which
I changed from a hard-line objectivist -- see an editorial
I wrote
in a 1978 issue of HFN for an example -- into someone who
realized
the value of listening.

The false claim here is that objectivists don't care about
listening. This totally ignores the well-knkown role that
listening tests play in the realm of objectivist equipment
evaluations, such as those promoted by Stan Lip****z, Floyd
Toole, David Clark, Tom Nousaine, etc.

John Atkinson wrote:
The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Will there be a video version of this or not? Would be nice to see as
well as hear these proceedings.

Arny Krueger wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
whosbest54 wrote:
Not that there's anything wrong with the straight
listening
you did for your amp decision, if that's what you want
to do
and it makes you happy.

But to use is as a basis for discounting DBTs is
simply...
questionable.

I agree with that. But it is a completely valid reason
for his choice
to buy the tube amp.

Hi Scott, what everyone seems to be ignoring is my point
for
mentioning this anecdote. Which was that all the
non-sighted
factors worked _against_ my becoming dissatisfied with the
Quad.

Horsefeathers.


How sad, another objectivist is forced to deny circumstances.
Horsefeathers is a very compelling argument Arny. Use it on
allsubjectivists when they relate their experiences to you. The
converts will just pile up.




The solid-state amp was cheaper, smaller, more powerful,
ran
cooler, and offered, in my opinion, better industrial
design.

Failure to note the endemic high end predjudice against of
all of these factors noted.


Failure to acknowledge JA's position on those factors at the time. you
are now forced to call him a liar or claim you know what was in his
head better than he did. All in light of the fact that JA's actions
spoke loudly about his biases at that time.




So, if these factors were going to have any influence on
my
listening, as the "objectivists" repeatedly claim, they
would all
have persuaded me that the amplifier was fine.

If you believe this then you think that the SET amp darlings
of the high end are cheaper, smaller, more powerful, and run
cooler. We can haggle about the industrial design element,
because that means different things to different people.


You are just chasing your tail now. you can'tr deal wih the facts as
they were presented. You have to now invent facts. That is the problem
objectivists face with this anecdote.






However, as my
increasing disatisfaction was real and I was having to
work harder
to appreciate the music through the amplifier,

So, if I do a PCABX test showing that the Quad 405 is in
fact a colored amplifer, what does that mean?


Means he was right all along on all acounts of this anecdote. It would
also mean that the objectivists of the time had their collective headfs
up their db asses. If that is the case then what has changed in the
objectivist camp since then?




it was this
cognitive dissonance that proved to be the tipping point
at which
I changed from a hard-line objectivist -- see an editorial
I wrote
in a 1978 issue of HFN for an example -- into someone who
realized
the value of listening.

The false claim here is that objectivists don't care about
listening. This totally ignores the well-knkown role that
listening tests play in the realm of objectivist equipment
evaluations, such as those promoted by Stan Lip****z, Floyd
Toole, David Clark, Tom Nousaine, etc.






Scott Wheeler