In article ,
lid writes:
In article ,
(Bruce J. Richman) writes:
audioman wrote:



n article ,
(Bruce J. Richman) writes:
audioman wrote:

In article ,
(Bruce J. Richman) writes:
Audioman wrote:


In article ,
(Bruce J. Richman) writes:
Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message



Except, Krueger, that in the legal definition sense, I haven't
libeled you.

No, Richman you lied and claimed that my family tried to have me
committed.










Prove it, Krueger. Even if it were true, but it isn't, that would not
be
libel. It says nothing about your identity, your training, your
claimed
job
activities, etc. Futher, I simply raised the question or possibility
of
your
family having you committed.

You recently lied and claimed that *I* attempted to have you committed.

Obviously, that would be impossible since, as I've stated, a personal
face-to-face evaluation has to bd done before any licensed
psychologist,
psychiatrist, physician or police officer can have you committed. You
probably
don't know this, but when people are committed based on hearsay,
licensed
psychologists, at least in Florida, have the authority to rescind the
committment orders. Unfortunately, I've had to do this several times
for
people wrongly committed to psychiatric facilities based on the hearsay
of
relatives or spouses in which no actual face-to-face evaluation took
place.


Bruce J. Richman

I still can't believe that a licensed psychologist would ever stoop
to something like this in public forum. Or that they would spend so
much time on a newsgroup like this constantly declaring the state of
mental health of the others in the group. Not enough paying patients
to keep you busy?








Since you have no identity you're willing to reveal and are obviously
unqualified to evaluate the behavior of others, your presence here to
defend a
proven libeler renders your opinions worthless.

This is an opinion group and so I'm stating my opinion - I would
never allow myself to be analyzed by someone who spouts what you do
on this group.

Then you support and defend false claims of flamethrowers and liars like
Krueger. Obviously, you have a severe prejudice against people that are
qualified to evaluate the behavior of others and are not afraid to do so -
call
a spade a spade, so to speak.

Where did I mention any support for anyone on this group, especially
so in this thread? You sound like Arny now - someone says something
about you that you dislike, so they must be an Arny/Howard/McKelvy
supporter. No so, I'm just calling you on similar behavior.


That is a lie. There is no similaity between spouting off provable lies about
somebody such as the ones that Krueger, Ferstler, McKelvy, have voiced about
me, and the more mundane, hypocritical persoal insults that you like to indulge
in.

I was comparing your posts to theirs. Seems you can't help but
project.


Unlike yourself, who claims to have "perfect mental health", yet demonstrates
much behavior disproving that pompous self-description, I certainly get angry
at times and/or just feel like fighting fire with fire. That's what you've
occasionally seen and misinterpreted so often on RAO. Since you see no
difference between libel and negative personal opinions, your ability to
discriminate much of anything else is highly questionable.

You've just descibed much of your own posting behavior above quite
well.

And I am not defending anyone, just pointing out your
hypocrisy in condemning behavior in others that your exhibit
yourself, and often.


That of course, is a lie. You have quite clearly decided to engage in
personal
attacks against those that correctly point out the hostile, libelous claims
made by people like Krueger, Ferstler, & McKelvy.

I couldn't give a rat's ass about them, I just can't stand hypocrisy
like you show here.


You're in denial once again. There is no hypocrisy involved in responding to
libel with negative opinions about the people making them. You're being quite
hypocritical in obviously choosing sides, while saying nothing about those
responsible for the hostility that permeates RAO. In fact, you have chosen to
contribute to it, hypocrite.

You are the one showing the hypocrisy here since you condemn people
for posting the same thing you do, yet you are the "professional" who
flaunts their credentials and claims the high ground.

As for my behavior, and unllike yourself, I choose my words carefully, and
am
not afraid to identify myself, I don't claim that people are sockpuppets,
are
not who they claim to be, or have lied about their qualifications. You
apparently endorse this type of wholesale lying by those with whom you
agree.

Seems you're projecting again, this is not about anyone else but you.


Not at all. You're pretending to know something about psychology by using
psychological terms to insult others. You no doubt have no idea of what the
term "projection" really means or how it originated in the psychiatric
literature.

I know enugh about it to know that you keep trying to bring others
into this when it is only about you.

You're also being quite dishonest and exhibiting a complete lack of insight by
claiming you have "perfect mental health".
That is the ultimate false statement that anybody can make.

I knew that one would get to you.

Thanks to delusional, hostile people like you my practice is quite
successful.

So stating that what you wrote earlier is not something a professional
therapist would say in public makes me delusional? Seems anyone
contradicting you is "delusional". Have any other diagnoses in your
pocket, or is this the only one?


There is a difference between a diagnosis and an opinion, but you're
obviously
too prejudiced and determined to engage in personal insults to know the
difference.

Delusions are defined as false beliefs not based on factual information.
Why
don't you try checking out the actual facts before you put your foot in
your
mouth and support provable lies such as the ones spouted by Krueger,
Ferstler &
McKelvy. Obvioiusly, you're committed - for whatever reasons - to ignoring
the
libelous false claims of Krueger, Ferstler & McKelvy - through deliberate
refusal to check out the validity of their statements.
Unlike these pathological liars, I'm not in the habit of making false
statements about other peoples' identities by libelous accusations of
fraud.
Perhaps the reason you are afraid to reveal yours is that you approve of
such
tactics.

Again, your pulling an Arny, this has nothing to do with others, it's
purely about your behavior, which is hypocritical and can get
downright obnoxious.


You've chosen to *try* and make it about me, while conveniently ignoring the
fact that you've chosen to engage in highly hypocritical personal attacks in
which you try and obfuscate by pretending there are no differences between
libel and negative opinions about others. You try and excuse your obnoxious
lack of objectivity by claiming you have "perfect mental health". Also, you
have not had one negative word to say about the writings of Krueger, Ferstler
or McKelvy. The reasons are pretty obvious.

You keep missing my point. You are the professional, and you brag
about it often, yet you rarely act it, so you are my target. It
wouldn't matter who you were targeting or what they were saying. You
are the hypocrite due to your actions. They may not be actionable, but
they certainly are not ethical in the strictest sense.

Why don't you tell us more about yourself? You can begin by revealing the
reasons you choose to engage in delusional speculations on an audio NG
without
revealing your identity. Then you can tell us about your failure to get
professional help for your emotional problems and how it lead to your
prejudics
against people in the mental health field.

Generalizing here a lot, I have no problem with others, just you.


I find that extremely hard to believe, and no, I'm not generalizing at all.

I'm just hypothesizing as to why a person such as yourself with an apparent
prejudice against mental health professionals, would be so eager to defend
people who can actually be PROVED to be delusional (in terms of false
belief
systems which they describe on RAO). Your willingness to ignore blatantly
false statements by those whom you support is truly remarkable. Since
you've
been exposed as a hypocrite in that respect by me, I'm not at all surprised
that you don't like to face the truth.


More projection, I have nothing again mental health professionals, and
in fact have some as friends. It's you and only you that I have a
probelm with. You're really sounding paranoid here.


Since you've lied and described yourself as having "perfect mental health",
there is no reason to believe anything else you have to say. Your attempts to
engage in amateur diagnosis of others are also quite illustrative of the fact
that you're grasping for personal insults as you go along.

And you sir are a joke of a professional.

Have you ever been advised by
family members to perhaps get professional treatment for your anger
managemenet
problems, your cowardice, or your tendencies to engage in wild
speculations
about others?

Nope, since I exhibit none of those behaviors. You?


I have not exhibited those kinds of problems on RAO. Are you sure you are
not
in denial ?

Nope, I'm a well adjusted individual myself. Unlike you, I don't feel
the need to rant about people in public as you often do here.


Unlike you, I have a realistic way of evaluating what I do and do not do. You,
on the other hand, like to condone via your silence the false claims and
libelous attacks of those you support, while engaging in personal insults for
those that have exposed your "friends" (in the sense that you share their
views) in an accurate manner.

Again, I support no one here, Arny is a clown, Howard a buffoon, and
McKelvy a joke. You are the subject here.

Or perhaps, more tellingly, have you been committed by
appropriate mental health personnel to an institution for an evaluation?

Nope, I have perfect mental health. You?


People who claim they have "perfect mental health" are usually in denial,
and/or are reluctant to discuss their psychological problems, Given that
you
hide behind your screen name, I'm a little surprised at your lack of
candor. I

It's worth noting that "audioman" seems at a loss for words here. Apparently,
when hit with the hard reality that *nobody* has perfect mental health, he has
no snide, hypocritical, psychobabble-tinged response. Q.E.D.

Again, that was only said to get a rise out of you, and it certainly
worked.

wouldn't expect anybody to discuss their psychological problems on an open
NG,
and only asked you the question since you obviously are concealing your
identity.

So anyone here who uses a pseudonym or an anonymous handle has
psycological problems and needs help. Says a lot about your buddies
here.


Now, who's projecting?. LOL !!! Those who don't provide credible names, or
readily identify themselves on RAO or elsewhere (sometimes via private email)
would appear to be less confident about their own words, reputations, and of
course, truthfulness. Perhaps you would care to list "my buddies here". This
is a good chance for you to demonstrate your "perfect mental health".

Lack of posting with real names is still anonomous whether or not hte
send private emai or snail mail. Wheeler has found that out the hard
way.

ROFLMAO !!!

My, you know some USENT acronyms, what a man!

Unlike yourself, I don't hold any false fantasies about my mental health
and
don't foolishly claim to have no problems. Like most people with a
reasonable
amount of introspection - either by training or nature - I'm pretty well
aware
of my personal strengths and weaknesses.

Try a lot more introspection, you've missed something quite important,
such as why do you feel the need to analyze posters to this group.

I have no such needs, and don't engage in psychoanalysis either in my
professional work or on RAO. Since you have no ability or desire to engage in
self-evaluation (introspection), your advice to anybody else to do so indicates
that you are (a) in denial, (b) extremely afraid to have an honest
self-evaluation of your own personality strengths and weaknessesm, (c) are
extremely egocentric and arrogant, and (4) are a flaming hypocrite.

A wonderful diagnoses of yourself, again proof of your projection.

BTW, none of these opinions of mine represent analysis. I'm just working with
the evidence you've repeatedly provided with your claims of perfect mental
health.
Coupled of course with your staggering chutzpah (it's a technical term - look
it up) in suggesting that others have problems.

I'm not the one bragging about being a psychologist and analyzing
everyone who speaks against me as you do. Hypocrite!

It
seems you've mentioned how one must talk with someone in person
before making a diagnoses, but that doesn't seem to get in the way
here.


It doesn't get in YOUR way. It definitely gets in my way. You obviously don't
know what a formal diagnosis entails. There are significant differences
between giving professional opinions, and making formal diagnoses. I've never
made a format diagnosis in my life without evaluating a patient face-to-face.
If you believe otherwise, I'll be glad to furnish you with the name of the
appropriate professional Board in my home state to which you can file a
complaint. However, I'd suggest you not sign it "audioman". guffaw

This is only about your very unprofessional behaviour and nothing
else.

Since you pretend to have "perfect mental health", then you obviously very
little insight and its questionable whether you could ever benefit from any
counseling for even relatively minor problems.

I'm not the one who feels the need to make sure everyone here knows
that they are a licensed psychologist and then goes on to analyze
virtually everyone with whom you disagree with.


You're now embellishing your lies. See comments above about anlysis of others.
I could care less who or who doesn't know what my credentials are. Granted, I
haven't the cowardice to hide behind a screen name like you have done. And
granted, I've engaged in a little self-disclosure (an alien concept to you) on
RAO -something you're obviously afraid to do. That said, when I sign my name
with my title, it's generally in response to the type of libel you condone with
your obvious choice to avoid criticize those doing it. Instead you have chosen
to focus on the legitimate retaliation I've posted only in response to the
pathological liars you so conveniently neglect to say one negative word about.
It sounds like you think that they have "perfect mental health" also, and
therefore you have no need to criticize them. guffaw

Then why do you often either mention that you are a psychologist,
include your license number, or analyze someone in almost every post
you make? Those are not the actions of someone who "could care less
who or who doesn't know what my credentials are". Who the hell cares
whether or not you are a psychologist on an AUDIO group? All it does is
call attention to your very unprofessional behavior.

Personal factors like these in your background would help to eplain your
current prejudices and need to enter NGs for the sole purpose of
insulting
others.

So when I do it to you, it's "delusional", when you do it to someone
it isn't?



Perhaps someday you will learn the difference between statements made about
others that are provably false to the extent that any objective observer
would
question the sanity of the person making them - and negative opinions about
others.

I'd suggest you begin by asking yourself the following question: What
nondelusional person makes statements such as the following:

I'm not the one who made those statements, so why in the hell did you
quote it?



Why did you deliberately delete (see below) evidence of the kind of behavior
that you criticize me for attacking?

Because that is not my point, the point is you do it at all while
claiming to be a professional.

Your desperate need to maintain your facade of objectivity is ludicrous. You
can't even allow documented evidence presented to explain the behavior you
criticize to see the light of day.

It's your behaviour that I'm critizing, not others.

You should change your screen name from audioman to deletionman. chuckle

Every experienced USENET user knows that one should snip unrelated
text when replying to a post.

unrelated crap snipped


Similar to the methods of the people that audioman has chosen to ignore, while
condoning their behavior through his silence.

Can't keep on topic, can you? It's all about you.

You can sure sound like a psychologist, but you certainly do not act
at all like a professional. I've met MANY, MANY professionals, and
sir, you are not one.



And you, sir, are full of ****. And that's my RAO opinion. No, it's not very
professional, but then again, this is not my office, and thank God, you are NOT
my patient.

Not good enough to handle me huh? What a maroon!

I'd suggest you walk up to your nearest mental health facility and
tell them about your "perfect mental health". They'll either roll on the floor
laughing or committ you.

Boy, that one really got to you, didn't it?

I must be very close to the truth here to get such a rise out of you.
Let's see how long I can keep you going....

I guess the professional psychologist has no more comments. Must mean
he agrees with me.

"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 4:59 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Art "wetface" Sackman croaked:

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

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


Jim is a very bright guy who had the good sense and objectivity
to
very quickly figure out and become disgusted by Krueger and
Ferstler's obvious agendas.

I think that without any verifiable confirmation from Jim, this is
just another one of Richman's lies.

While Richman brags about the possibility of sharing a beer (etc.)
with Jim in person, Nousaine and I actually did so.

Did you snowball it?

What does that mean?



it is either A, B ,C, or D

A) http://snowball.tartarus.org/

B)
http://www-eps.harvard.edu/people/fa...all_paper.html

C) http://tinyurl.com/2zp99

D) http://snowball.cs.columbia.edu/


I can't make up my mind Art, you want to give me another hint?


Do you spit or swallow?

"George" says you prefer to "take a facial". He also says he has pictures
to
prove it.

Hey, you can draw any picture you want.
Here are some crayons for you.

http://www.crayola.com/kids/

Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 7:43 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 4:59 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Art "wetface" Sackman croaked:

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

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


Jim is a very bright guy who had the good sense and objectivity
to
very quickly figure out and become disgusted by Krueger and
Ferstler's obvious agendas.

I think that without any verifiable confirmation from Jim, this is
just another one of Richman's lies.

While Richman brags about the possibility of sharing a beer (etc.)
with Jim in person, Nousaine and I actually did so.

Did you snowball it?

What does that mean?



it is either A, B ,C, or D

A) http://snowball.tartarus.org/

B)
http://www-eps.harvard.edu/people/fa...all_paper.html

C) http://tinyurl.com/2zp99

D) http://snowball.cs.columbia.edu/


I can't make up my mind Art, you want to give me another hint?


Do you spit or swallow?

"George" says you prefer to "take a facial". He also says he has pictures
to
prove it.

Hey, you can draw any picture you want.
Here are some crayons for you.

http://www.crayola.com/kids/

Just squirt some "Elmer's Glue-all" on your face. That'll look pretty realistic
'til it dries.

"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 7:43 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 4:59 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Art "wetface" Sackman croaked:

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

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


Jim is a very bright guy who had the good sense and
objectivity
to
very quickly figure out and become disgusted by Krueger and
Ferstler's obvious agendas.

I think that without any verifiable confirmation from Jim, this
is
just another one of Richman's lies.

While Richman brags about the possibility of sharing a beer
(etc.)
with Jim in person, Nousaine and I actually did so.

Did you snowball it?

What does that mean?



it is either A, B ,C, or D

A) http://snowball.tartarus.org/

B)

http://www-eps.harvard.edu/people/fa...all_paper.html

C) http://tinyurl.com/2zp99

D) http://snowball.cs.columbia.edu/


I can't make up my mind Art, you want to give me another hint?


Do you spit or swallow?

"George" says you prefer to "take a facial". He also says he has
pictures
to
prove it.

Hey, you can draw any picture you want.
Here are some crayons for you.

http://www.crayola.com/kids/

Just squirt some "Elmer's Glue-all" on your face. That'll look pretty
realistic
'til it dries.

Yours might look good with superglue:

http://www.the-squid.com/issue1/braceface.htm

Clyde Slick wrote:



"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 7:43 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 4:59 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Art "wetface" Sackman croaked:

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

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


Jim is a very bright guy who had the good sense and
objectivity
to
very quickly figure out and become disgusted by Krueger and
Ferstler's obvious agendas.

I think that without any verifiable confirmation from Jim, this
is
just another one of Richman's lies.

While Richman brags about the possibility of sharing a beer
(etc.)
with Jim in person, Nousaine and I actually did so.

Did you snowball it?

What does that mean?



it is either A, B ,C, or D

A) http://snowball.tartarus.org/

B)

http://www-eps.harvard.edu/people/fa...all_paper.html

C) http://tinyurl.com/2zp99

D) http://snowball.cs.columbia.edu/


I can't make up my mind Art, you want to give me another hint?


Do you spit or swallow?

"George" says you prefer to "take a facial". He also says he has
pictures
to
prove it.

Hey, you can draw any picture you want.
Here are some crayons for you.

http://www.crayola.com/kids/

Just squirt some "Elmer's Glue-all" on your face. That'll look pretty
realistic
'til it dries.

Yours might look good with superglue:

http://www.the-squid.com/issue1/braceface.htm










Ir sounds like Krueger,
the noted history revisionist and liar about what others have actually said
(see above) thinks that having a beer with Jim Johnston and Tom Nousaine is one
of his most memorable accomplishments. It was nice of them to visit him
during his institutionalization and bring along a sixpack. I understand that
Michael McStupid will be dropping by next week with some duck sauce and yet
another plea to Krueger to let him have the pictures. He just doesn't want to
pay the blackmail money any longer and he's tired of being called a
pathological liar. When last seen, he was waddling around with a rather dazed,
demented look on his face babbling about Standing Up For The Truth,
EMails from mysterious strangers, and Getting Revenge via the Last Word.


Bruce J. Richman

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
Lionel said:

I still think this duality is an artificial one, and not necessary at
all. In the end, we're all people with the same basic needs, emotions
and reactions.

I agree and disagree. I think it is also a good way to explain certain
social behaviour. I wrote *social*, not individual. I believe that you
have had friendly relations with RAO regulars. I am sure that most of
them are charming guys in the normal relationship.
For me the interest of RAO is obviously the *duality*. This artificial
duality which exacerbate the reactions, the behaviours, the emotions and
recreate in a microcosm all the misuderstandings, hatred... relationship
of a real large society.
I know that this deprives the *real* audio-enthusiats from their NG. But
I am also sure that this present a *real* interest.

I think so. But like Devil wrote, most posts are deleted unread.
My default settings are thusly that posts longer than 200 lines are
automatically ourged as well.
I mostly focus on audio posts lately.

You have already said that RAO is part of your daily (guilty) pleasure
because of the fun it provides you. You are sage Sander you can have
some fun with a minimum of (bad) interaction. I am a gluttonous and I
cannot stay stoïc at the border between fun and "tasteless". ;-(
Sometime I am jealous of you !

Don't be, we all have out own qualities and excellences.
I don't really know what you mean by "sage" and "gluttonous", but I
suspect I know what you mean.
We're all different, and that's what makes RAO, and this world, such
an interesting place.

I naively guess that this false debate found his origin in the word HiFI.
No I'm joking...
Concerning audio I am *listening* all point of views. To be honest your
audio equally makes me dream as Arnold's one reassures me. (Is it
understandable ?)

i understand perfectly well what you mean, but I don't think the 2
views are necessarily opposed to eachother
One can use whatever information one wants and base his own
conclusions upon that.
Arny's method isn't all that strange, it happens in most scientifical
areas.
My approach can be found among crackpots and audio designers :-)
Still, a merge between the 2 worlds should be possible.
Measure whatever possible when initially designing, and tweak
afterwards by intuition.

Don't repeat that but I am too ignorant on the subject to be the guy of
a dogma. :-)

that makes me ignorant too, I don't like dogmas as well.

I realize that statements like these are dangerous, because
essentially, I'm throwing the HiFi ideal out of the window.
Here, it has become MyFi.

Your thinking process isn't dangerous since you have given yourself the
maximum possibilities to make as far as possible rational technic
choices.
From my point of view if you are still doubting and taking a lot of
pleasure in the same time it means that you are in the right way. ;-)

Yep, but as you say, it's *my* way.
Another person may need other processes to reach his conclusions and
realize his wishes.
Fine by me.
As I said before, perhaps a certain lack of knowledge somewhere urges
me to work the way i do, and could it be done a lot faster and with
more predictable results via another method.
But I'm just having fun with my soldering iron, and that's the most
important part for me.
I'm not a real designer, I'm not a manufacturer, just a hobbyist and a
tinkerer. I can *allow* myself to work this way.

I think that DBT are tools among thousand of others tools. They results
are not oracles.
I like them when they allow to unmask a notorious crook, or a snobbish
disdainfully attitude, my proletarian origin I guess. :-)

But who's to decide what snake-oil is?

Reality.

As Bruce Richman said , the power of imagination is a very strong one.
If one thinks that putting Shakti Stones on his amplifier makes it
sound better, who am I to disagree?
If one thinks that works, it works for him. Period.

You seem to imply the same in your next paragraph:

I am not one to critic a "ceremonial" in the largest sens of this word.
Ceremonials found their origin in the origin of the human being. Perhaps
they are *needed* to prepare your neurons and to establish the
connections which will provide you a pleasure that you wouldn't have
without the "ceremonial".
In my POV a ceremonial is a kind of yoga which allows you to be more
receiptive. Avoiding the gluttony the ceremonial provide you a *sane*
pleasure which make you grow.

Can you now understand that I have *no need* for DBTs?

Can you understand that I never doubt of that. ;-)

I said that in general, sometimes I get carried away and forget who I
am responding to.

Did you ever have a friend which has leave your salon because he didn't
like to listen music on your HiFI ?

It has happened, yes.
But that was more becaue of the loudness, which we only noticed when
we wanted to talk to eachother :-)

Agreed, it might take some more effort to get the tweaks right, but
then again, that's my *hobby*, not my profession (any more).

If you need my opinion, it sounds like an encouragement.
Tweak, tweak, tweak again, never stop tweaking. :-)

I won't, it's in my nature.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

"Michael McKelvy" said:

But who's to decide what snake-oil is?

Reality.

In a literal context, you're of course right.
In a broader sense, they could work because of imagination.
I'm not going into spiritual things here, though I won't dismiss
spiritual power at first hand either.

IMO, it's all a matter of rituals.
Putting LPs on, and manipulating with the arm etc. requires a certain
involvement with your gear.
Not the same at all as pushing a "play" button.

Flipping the switch of your tube amp and watching the heaters glow up
slowly, I'm talking that kind of thing.
Dimming the lights and see the mighty glow of a 211 or 845 :-)

For some of us, these "rituals"enhance the pleasure we get from our
audio gear. That would include me.

What to think about the story that Russian cosmonauts actually ****
against the rear left wheel of the bus that takes them to the launch
platform for good luck?
Footballers that wear crucifixes and kiss them before each match?
People who drive around with pictures of their wife and kids in a
little frame that says underneath: "think of me" ?

Hardly scientific, ain't it? :-)

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

Sander deWaal wrote:

"Michael McKelvy" said:

But who's to decide what snake-oil is?

Reality.

In a literal context, you're of course right.
In a broader sense, they could work because of imagination.
I'm not going into spiritual things here, though I won't dismiss
spiritual power at first hand either.

IMO, it's all a matter of rituals.
Putting LPs on, and manipulating with the arm etc. requires a certain
involvement with your gear.
Not the same at all as pushing a "play" button.

Flipping the switch of your tube amp and watching the heaters glow up
slowly, I'm talking that kind of thing.
Dimming the lights and see the mighty glow of a 211 or 845 :-)

For some of us, these "rituals"enhance the pleasure we get from our
audio gear. That would include me.

What to think about the story that Russian cosmonauts actually ****
against the rear left wheel of the bus that takes them to the launch
platform for good luck?
Footballers that wear crucifixes and kiss them before each match?
People who drive around with pictures of their wife and kids in a
little frame that says underneath: "think of me" ?

Hardly scientific, ain't it? :-)

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."








Those that routinely ignore psychology and pretend that it doesn't influence
behavior, also tend to ignore the role that *perceptions* play in the enjoyment
of music and the audio equipment that produces it. What people *perceive* at a
given moment in time, *is* their reality at that point in time.


Bruce J. Richman

Sander deWaal wrote:


(Bruce J. Richman) said:

In a literal context, you're of course right.
In a broader sense, they could work because of imagination.
I'm not going into spiritual things here, though I won't dismiss
spiritual power at first hand either.

IMO, it's all a matter of rituals.
Putting LPs on, and manipulating with the arm etc. requires a certain
involvement with your gear.
Not the same at all as pushing a "play" button.

Flipping the switch of your tube amp and watching the heaters glow up
slowly, I'm talking that kind of thing.
Dimming the lights and see the mighty glow of a 211 or 845 :-)

For some of us, these "rituals"enhance the pleasure we get from our
audio gear. That would include me.

What to think about the story that Russian cosmonauts actually ****
against the rear left wheel of the bus that takes them to the launch
platform for good luck?
Footballers that wear crucifixes and kiss them before each match?
People who drive around with pictures of their wife and kids in a
little frame that says underneath: "think of me" ?

Hardly scientific, ain't it? :-)

Those that routinely ignore psychology and pretend that it doesn't influence
behavior, also tend to ignore the role that *perceptions* play in the
enjoyment
of music and the audio equipment that produces it. What people *perceive*
at a
given moment in time, *is* their reality at that point in time.

Thanks for your conclusive summary.
Confucius say: "Fool need 1000 words, wise man only 2 ". :-)

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."







Well, a few more than 2 words,. sometimes. Thank you very much for your very
kind words. You are definitely a man possessing both good taste and wisdom.

LOT's !!! I'll "buy off on" that.




Bruce J. Richman

(Bruce J. Richman) said:

You are definitely a man possessing both good taste and wisdom.

Over on RATubes and AGA, they seem to think different about me.
The ever so charming Lord Valve and his acolytes are shooting blanks
at me right now :-)

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

Sander deWaal wrote:


(Bruce J. Richman) said:

You are definitely a man possessing both good taste and wisdom.

Over on RATubes and AGA, they seem to think different about me.
The ever so charming Lord Valve and his acolytes are shooting blanks
at me right now :-)

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."








So.........what do they know? They're probably a bunch of NOS tube and
transformer bigots. They just don't appreciate good old retro-technology.
They probably think Stradivarius was a hack violin maker too.



Bruce J. Richman

(Bruce J. Richman) said:

Over on RATubes and AGA, they seem to think different about me.
The ever so charming Lord Valve and his acolytes are shooting blanks
at me right now :-)

So.........what do they know? They're probably a bunch of NOS tube and
transformer bigots. They just don't appreciate good old retro-technology.
They probably think Stradivarius was a hack violin maker too.

It's even worse......they're *real*, tough 'Murricans, teaching that
Eurotrash a lesson on how to rule the world.
It's hilarious, actually :-)

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

George M. Middius wrote:


Bruce J. Richman said:

Those that routinely ignore psychology and pretend that it doesn't
influence
behavior, also tend to ignore the role that *perceptions* play in the
enjoyment
of music and the audio equipment that produces it.

Those individuals also say things like "Been there done that" and
"existence exists". Not to mention being bet-welchers and huge cowards
who are afraid to take IQ tests.














Agreed. They also run around accusing people with verifiable identities of
being "sockpuppts", and yelling "prove it" whenever their despicable behavior
is pointed out to them. I have heard recently from an unimpeachable
Californian poster and regular on RAO that one of these people actually works
as a warehouse clerk at a well known California speaker manufacturing plant.
Ironically, as it turns out, he used to work for one of the better known
mail-order LP dealers in California as a stock clerk until his views towards
vinyl as posted on RAO were pointed out to his employer. The rest is history.




Bruce J. Richman

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Michael McKelvy" said:

But who's to decide what snake-oil is?

Reality.

In a literal context, you're of course right.
In a broader sense, they could work because of imagination.

Nope, you'd just be imagining they work.

I'm not going into spiritual things here, though I won't dismiss
spiritual power at first hand either.

IMO, it's all a matter of rituals.
Putting LPs on, and manipulating with the arm etc. requires a certain
involvement with your gear.
Not the same at all as pushing a "play" button.

Nope, more tedium. I like to get right to it. Foreplay is for sex, then I
take my time.

Flipping the switch of your tube amp and watching the heaters glow up
slowly, I'm talking that kind of thing.
Dimming the lights and see the mighty glow of a 211 or 845 :-)

Go for it.

For some of us, these "rituals"enhance the pleasure we get from our
audio gear. That would include me.

But in your ritual, you actually get to a point where something happens.

What to think about the story that Russian cosmonauts actually ****
against the rear left wheel of the bus that takes them to the launch
platform for good luck?

I think Russians are wierd. They have a different attitude abolut many
things.
I heard an explanation once that seems to be true. Here or in most Western
cultures, your neighbor has a cow and you don't, so you work hard so you can
also have a cow. For Russians if your neighbor has a cow and you don't, you
pray for his cow to die.

Footballers that wear crucifixes and kiss them before each match?

And then go out and kick the **** out of each other. Again, wierd.

People who drive around with pictures of their wife and kids in a
little frame that says underneath: "think of me" ?

Love is a great force.

Hardly scientific, ain't it? :-)

No, but they are mostly cheaper than your typical snake oil gizmo.


--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:



"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 7:43 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Torresists" wrote in message
...
Subject: Equalizers
From: "Clyde Slick"
Date: 8/19/2004 4:59 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Art "wetface" Sackman croaked:

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

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


Jim is a very bright guy who had the good sense and
objectivity
to
very quickly figure out and become disgusted by Krueger and
Ferstler's obvious agendas.

I think that without any verifiable confirmation from Jim,
this
is
just another one of Richman's lies.

While Richman brags about the possibility of sharing a beer
(etc.)
with Jim in person, Nousaine and I actually did so.

Did you snowball it?

What does that mean?



it is either A, B ,C, or D

A) http://snowball.tartarus.org/

B)

http://www-eps.harvard.edu/people/fa...all_paper.html

C) http://tinyurl.com/2zp99

D) http://snowball.cs.columbia.edu/


I can't make up my mind Art, you want to give me another hint?


Do you spit or swallow?

"George" says you prefer to "take a facial". He also says he has
pictures
to
prove it.

Hey, you can draw any picture you want.
Here are some crayons for you.

http://www.crayola.com/kids/

Just squirt some "Elmer's Glue-all" on your face. That'll look pretty
realistic
'til it dries.

Yours might look good with superglue:

http://www.the-squid.com/issue1/braceface.htm










Ir sounds like Krueger,
the noted history revisionist and liar about what others have actually
said
(see above) thinks that having a beer with Jim Johnston and Tom Nousaine
is one
of his most memorable accomplishments. It was nice of them to visit him
during his institutionalization and bring along a sixpack.

How come nobody visited you during your instituionalization?

I understand that
Michael McStupid will be dropping by next week with some duck sauce and
yet
another plea to Krueger to let him have the pictures. He just doesn't
want to
pay the blackmail money any longer and he's tired of being called a
pathological liar.

I understand that being a pthological liar is the only way you can get any
attention. Bean counting isn't really much of a life, is it?

When last seen, he was waddling around with a rather dazed,
demented look on his face babbling about Standing Up For The Truth,
EMails from mysterious strangers, and Getting Revenge via the Last Word.


I like to get revenge by being right, you should try it.