Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1561
|
|||
|
|||
Clyde Slick said: Even in my youmger days, I wasn't fast enough to run away from a Krueger snot storm. Mikey just told us that Arnii isn't snotty, he's "supremely confident". And Mikey is RAO's acknowledged eckthpurt on all things related to boogers, so he should know. Unless, of course, his interpretation of ****borg's behavior is an "anamoly", whatever that is. John Atkinson's parable for dealing with 'borgs: the man with limited or no experience is more confident of his knowledge than the man _with_ such experience. |
#1562
|
|||
|
|||
Clyde Slick said: I was talking about Cindy Sheehan, who is trying to shame the president into acting honorably. Abandoning millions to Sadamists and violent Islamists is NOT honorable. Is that what Ms. Sheehan is lobbying for? I must have missed it. |
#1563
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:22:31 GMT, "Margaret von B."
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 09:54:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 22:40:23 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message news I'm aware of Volvo's reputation in this regard - another line that one would hardly call "cutting edge performance"). Well they do have a 4WD wagon with 2.5 liter inline 5 that produces 300 hp which incidentally amounts to more per liter than the BMW and Audi Pinkerton was blathering about. Shame you don't know much about cars. We were discussing *normally aspirated* engines, not puffers. Irrelevant. I was discussing *cutting edge performance*. Shame you're too wasted to get it. Shame then that you snipped my reference to the Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX FQ400, a stock vehicle with 200 BHP per litre. Note that *cutting edge performance* is represented almost exclusively by normally aspirated engines. Horse****! I believe the Brazilians find cow**** a more productive way of generating biodiesel...... Exhausted puffers are generally just a cheap way of plugging the gap to the proper top of the range models. Note that BMW don't have *any* puffers of any kind, while the latest generation of 'cutting edge' sports saloons from Audi and Mercedes use normally-aspirated V8s, More horse****. The SLR and the 55's and 65's are not normally aspirated. Neither is the Audi RS6. The SLR is not a saloon, the C55 and E55 *are* normally aspirated, the others are supercharged rather than turbocharged, and the RS6 is no longer made. The *new* engines are high-revving normally aspirated units, which is also true of the latest AMG engines. Note also that AMG is *not* Mercedes, it's an associated tuning company. revving to more than 8,000 rpm in the new Audi RS4. And you certainly don't see Aston Martin, Lamborghini, or Ferrari using anything but normally aspirated motors. Porsche of course have always had their Turbo available to frighten the unwary customer, but their 'cutting edge' GT3 model is normally aspirated. Yet more horse****. Carrera GT is the cutting edge, you drunken moron. And it has a normally aspirated engine, you stupid old queen. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1564
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 07:52:13 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message roups.com... Steven Sullivan wrote: In rec.audio.opinion wrote: Let us hope that the lady patiently waiting in the ditch in Crawford, TX has more success. I had no idea that anyone in Crawford, much less a whore in a ditch, cared about anything related to science. I was talking about Cindy Sheehan, who is trying to shame the president into acting honorably. Abandoning millions to Sadamists and violent Islamists is NOT honorable. Horse****, there was *zero* terorism in Iraq before the last slaughter (you couldn't call it a war), and Saddam was only there because George Senior lacked the balls to follow through in the first conflict. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1565
|
|||
|
|||
"paul packer" wrote in message ... On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 06:47:33 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: snip I confess I have a veritable hive of confusions about this whole ABX thing. Firstly, I don't understand why A/Bing never seems to show up any but the grossest differences; I only know it doesn't. How do I know that? Because I only have to play one 5 minute track off any CD through the two components in question to easily perceive the difference--the difference that was not at all apparent on A/B switching. Which brings me to my next confusion: how do the proponents of A/Bing explain this phenomenon? Do they ever move on to Step 2, and if so, and assuming they actually hear a difference, do they then say, "This must be imagined, or it would have shown up on A/Bing". Yes, that is exactly what they say. Of course, this can be true. But they go beond that...they claim any sighted difference *IS* the result of imagination. They thus leave science (and common sense) and enter the realm of propaganda for their cause. Also, how do they explain electronic design? I mean, if one amp is designed one way, fastidiously using the best components, and another uses any old components in a nevertheless competent fashion to arrive at similar distortion and noise figures, are the A/Bers saying there cannot be any audible difference given the figures, and if so, then what is the point of manufacturers making top grade components like Black Gate etc, or audio designers attempting to achieve the best sound BEYOND the noise and distortion figures? Or is that all audiophool mumbo jumbo? Good. Chung has a product for you. He (one of the EE's on RAHE) has insisted that if a component is spec'd properly for it's place in the circuit, then all components meeting that spec will sound the same, and anybody who feels differently is either misguided or a charlatan. Moreover, he says that "listening in" a piece of equipment is a high-end charade, and that good circuit design plus a "confirming listen" to make sure all is well is what real engineers do. Of course, he can't explain why my Onkyo preamp, with actually superior "specs" for the most part, sounds far less "real" in my system thtn does my Audio Research preamp. I haven't done an ABX, so of course my "claim" can't be taken seriously. Sometimes this argument gets so laughable on its face that one just needs to walk away for awhile. For myself I'm a cheapskate. I'd prefer to believe that the cheapest items are as good as the other sort given similar specs; unfortunately my ears too often, though not always, tell me otherwise. I know all this has been thrashed out ad nauseam here and elsewhere, but I'm still confused as to what the A/Bers actually hear when they play a favourite track first on a $200 amp and then on a $2000 one. I don't understand, above all, how this debate ever arose in the first place, or what currently sustains it when the evidence is clear. Frankly, many of the people making the argument don't seem to own really high-end gear, so one wonders about their real world experience with comparisons. Pinkerton does, but of course (wink, wink) he only bought it because he liked its looks and functionality, not because it sounded better. |
#1566
|
|||
|
|||
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:22:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 09:54:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message m... On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 22:40:23 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message newsj7sf1l5p5qtu4nmj0uj78u3berho3gaal@4ax. com... I'm aware of Volvo's reputation in this regard - another line that one would hardly call "cutting edge performance"). Well they do have a 4WD wagon with 2.5 liter inline 5 that produces 300 hp which incidentally amounts to more per liter than the BMW and Audi Pinkerton was blathering about. Shame you don't know much about cars. We were discussing *normally aspirated* engines, not puffers. Irrelevant. I was discussing *cutting edge performance*. Shame you're too wasted to get it. Shame then that you snipped my reference to the Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX FQ400, a stock vehicle with 200 BHP per litre. Note that *cutting edge performance* is represented almost exclusively by normally aspirated engines. Horse****! I believe the Brazilians find cow**** a more productive way of generating biodiesel...... Exhausted puffers are generally just a cheap way of plugging the gap to the proper top of the range models. Note that BMW don't have *any* puffers of any kind, while the latest generation of 'cutting edge' sports saloons from Audi and Mercedes use normally-aspirated V8s, More horse****. The SLR and the 55's and 65's are not normally aspirated. Neither is the Audi RS6. The SLR is not a saloon, the C55 and E55 *are* normally aspirated, the CLS55, S55 and S65 are saloons. others are supercharged rather than turbocharged, Irrelevant. Neither is normally aspirated. and the RS6 is no longer made. The replacement due in 2006 will not be normally aspirated either. The *new* engines are high-revving normally aspirated units, which is also true of the latest AMG engines. Note also that AMG is *not* Mercedes, it's an associated tuning company. Horse**** again you moron. AMG is part of Mercedes. Has been for years. Sober up and keep up with the news. revving to more than 8,000 rpm in the new Audi RS4. And you certainly don't see Aston Martin, Lamborghini, or Ferrari using anything but normally aspirated motors. Porsche of course have always had their Turbo available to frighten the unwary customer, but their 'cutting edge' GT3 model is normally aspirated. Yet more horse****. Carrera GT is the cutting edge, you drunken moron. And it has a normally aspirated engine, you stupid old queen. -- Of course my point was that the GT3 is not their cutting edge, you impotent old drunk. Cheers, Margaret |
#1567
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 08:12:09 -0400, "Harry Lavo"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 06:51:14 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:57:30 +0200, "Ruud Broens" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "John Atkinson" wrote in message But also, from my experience of having taken part in some of those tests as a listener, it is because the proctor wanted to introduce an element of confusion into the scoring, thus increasing the possibility of a null result. Yet another example of Atkinson's paranoia. hmm. clearly, in the case of establishing the CD format, there were definite incentives to get the sample size and rate as low as possible: to get an adequate duration with the limitations of the technically & economically viable solution available in 1980. that's not an opinion, but a fact :-) Rudy nb Philips originally wanted to settle on a 14 bit linear coded format. Sony upped that to 16....come on, 14 bits ?? who are ya kiddin? Listening tests ??? Vinyl, on the best day of its life, is around 12 bits equivalent. The widest dynamic range known on a music master tape is around 80dB, 14 bits will allow a properly dithered dynamic range of 81dB. What's the problem? The problem is that too many newbies have been mis-educated by high end ragazines with the lie that analog has infinite resolution. I wonder how many times that lie has been published in say Stereophile or TAS? Harry tell lies? Say it ain't so! :-) Gratuitous insult / slander duly noted. Not *you*, you insignificant self-important cretin, the *real* Harry! Didn't you see the TAS reference? Beasides, anything I've ever said about you has been a compliment - couldn't fail to be, since I never use the kind of language I'd need for an insult............... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1568
|
|||
|
|||
Margaret von B. said: I think it is time you get some new meds, Arny. Or is all of your rambling just a series of "typos"? Arnii's toilet may be backed up again. Time for a flush! |
#1569
|
|||
|
|||
Arny Krueger wrote EddieM wrote Arny Krueger wrote EddieM wrote Arny Krueger wrote snip ?? ?? back at you! So if the listener fail to detect, the ABX box is there to justify that it will have no impact on the listener's ability to discern sound differences, right? No. If the listener fails to detect it could well be that there is nothing to detect. WHO, then, is given the power to make a final decision whether there is something or nothing to detect during the experiment ? For me, Science. Answer the question ! Stop hiding in the facade of "Science". ABX box is there to help ensure that the listener isn't just reporting his prejudices and biases. And guess who gets penalize when the listeners failed to abandon their biases --as required-- ? The listeners. Bad decisions and undisciplined behavior have consequences. But you just said above that: " ABX box is there to help ensure that the listener isn't just reporting his prejudices and biases. " See the word "help" and "ensure" in your comment ? Did you mean to say ...to help and ensure they don't pass the test because of their friabilities ? Assuming of course that the equip. does not again add 'additional' variables of its own. That can be determined. Can you clarify ? Sure, which equipment are you talking about? The transparent ABX equipment. The box. It's known to be transparent, both by listening tests and measurements. That's right! And it could never be blame when stress and confusion occurs........ Correct? What is the objective that the proctor wish to achieve by incorporating such ABX equipment with regards to the validity of the test ? A more valid test for a given level of effort. Therefore the listener must meet the same level of performance and precision set forth by the ABX equipment,. No, the listener must meet his own standard for his personal best. 'cause if he fail to detect, the resulting data at the end of the experiment will be corroborated by the ABX equip. as legitimate, no? Its the corroboration of the listener's responses by the ABX equipment that tells us whether the listener's responses are legitimate or just random guessing. WHO, then, decides in setting the level of standard for the listener to ensure that when confusion occurs... and he/she made an honest guess, they should be penalized ? [Answer the question!] It's the listener's responsibility to ensure that the listening environment meets their needs. Are you joking ? What if that person is Fertsler who wanted to deliberately falsify the data to meet his needs? If they don't like the game then they shouldn't play. Tell me who wants to play your game if you penalize those making an honest guess ? The listener must be absolutely precise in his decision. No guessing, right ? If the listener is just guessing, then the ABX equipment will help identify that. No, what you mean to say is that the ABX equip. will help to ensure that, at the end of the test, the listener is identified and thoroughly lambasted from then on. What are you saying? The listener is identified as being who he is at the beginning of the test. LoL! Of course you'd say that. How does abx equip. 'validly justify' itself with regards to its capability to expose whether or not, the listener is able to detect and differentiate subtle sound differences ? Certainly tests done without ABX equipment, that duplicate the results of tests done with ABX equipment, supports the idea that the equipment isn't masking differences that could otherwise be heard. I'm not asking whether the ABX box is masking the differences that otherwise could be heard, I'm asking how does the box validly justify itself in exposing the listener ability to detect subtle differences. The box is a simple mechanism with a simple function. If it executes that simple function properly, then it will expose whether or not the listener is detecting subtle differences. Whether or not the box is executing its simple function can be determined by doing a test whose outcome is obvious, such as when one of the two pieces of equipment being compared is turned off and not responding at all. Again, I'm not asking you what the box is, or how to use it. I'm asking how does it validly decide that the listener is not making an honest guess. The box doesn't decide squat. People are required to make decisions. Oh yeah ? WHO, then, is given the power to make a final decision whether there is something or nothing to detect during the experiment ? ( The embarrassing truth is that you refused to respond to this question above. Would you redeem yourself this time ? ) snip We're not talking about sighted test, we're talkin about long term, extended listening comparison under blind test condition. Then the listener's personal preferences and biases are removed as influenced in the test by the proper use of the ABX box to do a blind test. ?? ?? back at you! I don't think you have a good enough command of the English language to pursue this topic more deeply. Evasiveness duly noted. |
#1570
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:30:20 GMT, "Margaret von B."
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:22:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 09:54:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message om... On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 22:40:23 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message newsj7sf1l5p5qtu4nmj0uj78u3berho3gaal@4ax .com... I'm aware of Volvo's reputation in this regard - another line that one would hardly call "cutting edge performance"). Well they do have a 4WD wagon with 2.5 liter inline 5 that produces 300 hp which incidentally amounts to more per liter than the BMW and Audi Pinkerton was blathering about. Shame you don't know much about cars. We were discussing *normally aspirated* engines, not puffers. Irrelevant. I was discussing *cutting edge performance*. Shame you're too wasted to get it. Shame then that you snipped my reference to the Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX FQ400, a stock vehicle with 200 BHP per litre. Note that *cutting edge performance* is represented almost exclusively by normally aspirated engines. Horse****! I believe the Brazilians find cow**** a more productive way of generating biodiesel...... Exhausted puffers are generally just a cheap way of plugging the gap to the proper top of the range models. Note that BMW don't have *any* puffers of any kind, while the latest generation of 'cutting edge' sports saloons from Audi and Mercedes use normally-aspirated V8s, More horse****. The SLR and the 55's and 65's are not normally aspirated. Neither is the Audi RS6. The SLR is not a saloon, the C55 and E55 *are* normally aspirated, the CLS55, S55 and S65 are saloons. But they are not *sports* saloons - even for fat Texans........ And strictly speaking, they are AMGs, not Mercs. A fine distinction, to be sure. others are supercharged rather than turbocharged, Irrelevant. Neither is normally aspirated. But as noted, they're not *sports* saloons by any reasonable standard. and the RS6 is no longer made. The replacement due in 2006 will not be normally aspirated either. Perhaps, but it will be using an old engine. The *new* 'cutting edge' angines are normally aspirated. Good luck in your desperate flailing to defend a lost position. But there always something fundamentally pathetic about dolls with balls.......... The *new* engines are high-revving normally aspirated units, which is also true of the latest AMG engines. Note also that AMG is *not* Mercedes, it's an associated tuning company. Horse**** again you moron. AMG is part of Mercedes. Has been for years. Sober up and keep up with the news. Wholly owned, but independent, as with Aston Martin and Jaguar. revving to more than 8,000 rpm in the new Audi RS4. And you certainly don't see Aston Martin, Lamborghini, or Ferrari using anything but normally aspirated motors. Porsche of course have always had their Turbo available to frighten the unwary customer, but their 'cutting edge' GT3 model is normally aspirated. Yet more horse****. Carrera GT is the cutting edge, you drunken moron. And it has a normally aspirated engine, you stupid old queen. -- Of course my point was that the GT3 is not their cutting edge, you impotent old drunk. Noted that you're once again trying to cover your mistake. I guess you've had lots of practice......................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1571
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 08:06:39 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message .. . Typical dishonest strawman from Harry. The whole point is that the 'objectivists' are well aware that *everyone* has expectation bias. That's why it needs to be disabled by the test protocol - DBT. DBT does 'NOT' disable the expectation that things will sound the same. Sure it does - why wouldn't it? Besides, why would anyone *not* expecting difference even bother to take such a test? You really are a braindead clown. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1572
|
|||
|
|||
"MINe 109" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: I have little doubt you could successfully tell the difference between two Brendel performances of the same work, in a DBT, even if you lacked knowledge of the 'arcana'. Am I overestimating you? But can you understand the meaning of the differences? Straw man, since the knowing the meaning of the differences is outside the scope of the discussion. You agreed that chord balance was inside the scope of the discussion when you claimed you could more precisely balance a chord using eq than a musician could do in performing on an instrument. More of Krueger's slimy debating trade. ----== 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 =---- |
#1573
|
|||
|
|||
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message news "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: I have little doubt you could successfully tell the difference between two Brendel performances of the same work, in a DBT, even if you lacked knowledge of the 'arcana'. Am I overestimating you? But can you understand the meaning of the differences? Straw man, since the knowing the meaning of the differences is outside the scope of the discussion. You agreed that chord balance was inside the scope of the discussion when you claimed you could more precisely balance a chord using eq than a musician could do in performing on an instrument. Wrong, because I was talking about changing chord balance as a technical exercise, which can be done without knowing what chord balance is musically speaking. Commas are cheap these days. Try buying some. ----== 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 =---- |
#1574
|
|||
|
|||
"John Atkinson" wrote in message oups.com... Not in any message retrievable by Google, Mr. Krueger. For the record, I played in touring bands 1966 through 1972 first while I was at university then while working a day job in scientific research. From 1972 through 1976, I played bass guitar professionally: touring, doing broadcasts, and working sessions. I still play the occasional live gig, the most recent of which was 10 days ago. I have engineered, produced, and played as a musician on around 50 commercially released recordings, the most recent of which, which I engineered, edited, mixed, mastered, and also contributed a bass guitar part to one track, is released next week. I am also a full voting member of NARAS (the Grammys) Engineers & Producers Wing. So just why you regard this experience of mine in audio engineering and music production as "a muth that is way too easy to bust", Mr. Krueger, escapes me. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else, just as you presumably did with your comments on my attitude to religion. But thank you for playing "Let's COmpare Resumes." :-) hah!, but you don't have a general engineering degree from Oakland University and you never designed an ashtray for an Omni. ----== 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 =---- |
#1575
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 09:25:46 +0000 (UTC), in rec.audio.opinion you
wrote: What you also fail to take into account is the more benign usage and environmental conditions that European cars are subject to (in an overall sense) as opposed to American cars. American cars in general aren't as "edgy" as their European counterparts, partly because America (ironically, I think) has taken the lead in being strict on emissions standards, which robs an engine of its maximum performance (as well as mandating sometimes ridiculous "safety standards" which adds weight and bulk to the car. I'm referring mostly to those over-the-top body prodection requirements of the 70s - 90s). They also have to be designed to extreme usage in a wide variety of environmental conditions and long-term mileage requirements (and yes, I'm aware of Volvo's reputation in this regard - another line that one would hardly call "cutting edge performance"). Shame you don't know much about cars. Virtually all European cars now conform to the same safety and emissions standards as their American counterparts. I believe California is a little tougher, but then that's a different planet, really..................... Shame you ignore the history of emissions control. I guess you don't know too much about the subject - cars. But that's not surprising coming from an area of the world where 100,000 km is considered high mileage. |
#1576
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 09:28:59 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote: They also have to be designed to extreme usage in a wide variety of environmental conditions and long-term mileage requirements (and yes, I'm aware of Volvo's reputation in this regard - another line that one would hardly call "cutting edge performance"). Well they do have a 4WD wagon with 2.5 liter inline 5 that produces 300 hp which incidentally amounts to more per liter than the BMW and Audi Pinkerton was blathering about. Shame you don't know much about cars. We were discussing *normally aspirated* engines, not puffers. Bull****. Volvo was the sub subject. Perhaps you should put down the bottle for a change, you old drunk. |
#1577
|
|||
|
|||
Stewart Pinkerton said: And strictly speaking, they are AMGs, not Mercs. A fine distinction, to be sure. I've never heard Mercedes cars referred to as "Mercs". Weren't you going on about Ford a little while ago? |
#1578
|
|||
|
|||
Stewart Pinkerton said: DBT does 'NOT' disable the expectation that things will sound the same. Sure it does - why wouldn't it? Because Krooger is a liar, Nousiane is an ideologue, and Ferstler is a propagandist. |
#1579
|
|||
|
|||
Stewart Pinkerton said: Besides, why would anyone *not* expecting difference even bother to take such a test? Surely you jest. Have you met Tommi, Harold, and Arnii? You probably don't realize how much schmutz your precious beliefs in sameness and aBxism attract from the company they keep. |
#1580
|
|||
|
|||
dave weil said: But that's not surprising coming from an area of the world where 100,000 km is considered high mileage. Speaking of which, do you know the average mileage of trade-ins in Japan? |
#1581
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... ego....... In article , Stewart Pinkerton wrote: Yeah, someone called 'Jenn', claiming to be a conductor, already tried that on r.a.h-e - it wasn't convincing then, either, except as yet another demonstration of musos Gee, Stewart, I'm very fond of you...no need to...ah never mind. You do stand out from among the herd. That's the nicest thing anyone has said to me all day. Thanks! |
#1582
|
|||
|
|||
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 07:52:13 -0400, "Clyde Slick" wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message groups.com... Steven Sullivan wrote: In rec.audio.opinion wrote: Let us hope that the lady patiently waiting in the ditch in Crawford, TX has more success. I had no idea that anyone in Crawford, much less a whore in a ditch, cared about anything related to science. I was talking about Cindy Sheehan, who is trying to shame the president into acting honorably. Abandoning millions to Sadamists and violent Islamists is NOT honorable. Horse****, there was *zero* terorism in Iraq before I guess when the dictator is doing he killing it isn't called terrorism. the last slaughter (you couldn't call it a war), Poor Stu's queens rules of war... tell it to your dead from the Falkland Islands War. and Saddam was only there because George Senior lacked the balls to follow through in the first conflict. Or stuck to the UN mandate, depending on your point of view. The media was going a little bonkers on that Highway of Death scene. We couldn't have anymore "slaughter". ScottW |
#1583
|
|||
|
|||
Scottie does his version of the "debating trade" dance. Horse****, there was *zero* terorism in Iraq before I guess when the dictator is doing he killing it isn't called terrorism. That is correct. It's called repression. Are you now going to pull a Krooger and declare that if you'd said what you meant to say, you would have said the right thing, and so you should get full points anyway? ;-) |
#1584
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:40:08 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: Stewart Pinkerton said: And strictly speaking, they are AMGs, not Mercs. A fine distinction, to be sure. I've never heard Mercedes cars referred to as "Mercs". Weren't you going on about Ford a little while ago? I am not responsible for your ignorance of standard abbreviations. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1585
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:40:43 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: Stewart Pinkerton said: DBT does 'NOT' disable the expectation that things will sound the same. Sure it does - why wouldn't it? Because Krooger is a liar, Nousiane is an ideologue, and Ferstler is a propagandist. And you are an ignorant asshole without a life or a clue, which seems to even things up somewhat. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1586
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:41:56 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: Stewart Pinkerton said: Besides, why would anyone *not* expecting difference even bother to take such a test? Surely you jest. Have you met Tommi, Harold, and Arnii? No, but when they *took* tests, as opposed to proctoring, it was because they expected a difference, When such expectations are dashed on many occasions, one usually begins to see the light............ You probably don't realize how much schmutz your precious beliefs in sameness and aBxism attract from the company they keep. You probably don't realise how deluded you are. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1587
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:46:11 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: dave weil said: But that's not surprising coming from an area of the world where 100,000 km is considered high mileage. Speaking of which, do you know the average mileage of trade-ins in Japan? It's about 10,000 km, isn't it? It's a mark of honour to have a *new* car in Japan. Perhaps that's a factor in how rapidly they evolve - there's a hungry market out there for newer and better? It's definitely a mark of American 'sophistication' that the biggest selling vehicle is a fatass pickup truck with leaf-spring suspension and a live rear axle. I'm betting that the most popular accessory is a rifle rack................... Dammit, even America's 'flagship' sports car has leaf spring rear suspension! :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1588
|
|||
|
|||
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:30:20 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:22:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 09:54:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news:fj3uf15t1lprgngjr6qtuddqhpc8o24792@4ax. com... On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 22:40:23 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message newsj7sf1l5p5qtu4nmj0uj78u3berho3gaal@4a x.com... I'm aware of Volvo's reputation in this regard - another line that one would hardly call "cutting edge performance"). Well they do have a 4WD wagon with 2.5 liter inline 5 that produces 300 hp which incidentally amounts to more per liter than the BMW and Audi Pinkerton was blathering about. Shame you don't know much about cars. We were discussing *normally aspirated* engines, not puffers. Irrelevant. I was discussing *cutting edge performance*. Shame you're too wasted to get it. Shame then that you snipped my reference to the Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX FQ400, a stock vehicle with 200 BHP per litre. Note that *cutting edge performance* is represented almost exclusively by normally aspirated engines. Horse****! I believe the Brazilians find cow**** a more productive way of generating biodiesel...... Exhausted puffers are generally just a cheap way of plugging the gap to the proper top of the range models. Note that BMW don't have *any* puffers of any kind, while the latest generation of 'cutting edge' sports saloons from Audi and Mercedes use normally-aspirated V8s, More horse****. The SLR and the 55's and 65's are not normally aspirated. Neither is the Audi RS6. The SLR is not a saloon, the C55 and E55 *are* normally aspirated, the CLS55, S55 and S65 are saloons. But they are not *sports* saloons - even for fat Texans........ CLS55 is the most sporting of them all. Even for drunken british twits. The fact that *you* cannot afford it, does not disqualify it. And strictly speaking, they are AMGs, not Mercs. A fine distinction, to be sure. Horse****. They come with Mercedes VIN's. It is that simple. others are supercharged rather than turbocharged, Irrelevant. Neither is normally aspirated. But as noted, they're not *sports* saloons by any reasonable standard. What would that make your moped then? Oh, I said it... and the RS6 is no longer made. The replacement due in 2006 will not be normally aspirated either. Perhaps, but it will be using an old engine. The *new* 'cutting edge' angines are normally aspirated. Good luck in your desperate flailing to defend a lost position. But there always something fundamentally pathetic about dolls with balls.......... "Cutting edge" is a figment of your imagination. Definitions by a nobody like you don't count. The *new* engines are high-revving normally aspirated units, which is also true of the latest AMG engines. Note also that AMG is *not* Mercedes, it's an associated tuning company. Horse**** again you moron. AMG is part of Mercedes. Has been for years. Sober up and keep up with the news. Wholly owned, but independent, as with Aston Martin and Jaguar. Horse****. AM is AM. Jag is a Jag. AMG is a Mercedes. Or do they badge them AM Fords and Jaguar Fords for you dorks over there? AM and Jag have their own VIN's. revving to more than 8,000 rpm in the new Audi RS4. And you certainly don't see Aston Martin, Lamborghini, or Ferrari using anything but normally aspirated motors. Porsche of course have always had their Turbo available to frighten the unwary customer, but their 'cutting edge' GT3 model is normally aspirated. Yet more horse****. Carrera GT is the cutting edge, you drunken moron. And it has a normally aspirated engine, you stupid old queen. -- Of course my point was that the GT3 is not their cutting edge, you impotent old drunk. Noted that you're once again trying to cover your mistake. I guess you've had lots of practice......................... You can try to bake a cake out of your horse**** but it is still horse****. Cheers, Margaret -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1589
|
|||
|
|||
Pinkerton says: (message 1594, August 14)
"You are a liar and a crook. I referred *specifically* to KEF, who ran with B&O in Denmark a large-scale Eureka project called Archimedes, on speaker/room interactions, using DBT methods extensively. This led directly to the development of the Uni-Q drivers and to the 'pod' cabinet designs pioneered by B&W. Interesting that your version of Google seems quite different from everone else's. http://www.beoworld.co.uk/archimedes.htm Tells the story - took all of five seconds on Google to make the link. You are a liar and a crook. " Using all these resources B&O achieved mediocre loudspeakers in pretty boxes. Pray Milaird what has it all to do with A POSITIVE REPORT OF COMPARING COMPONENTS BY ABX? You ARE desperate aren't you? Ludovic Mirabel Any more about Appalachians? (see my message 1581, Aug.13) |
#1590
|
|||
|
|||
"dave weil" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 09:28:59 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton wrote: They also have to be designed to extreme usage in a wide variety of environmental conditions and long-term mileage requirements (and yes, I'm aware of Volvo's reputation in this regard - another line that one would hardly call "cutting edge performance"). Well they do have a 4WD wagon with 2.5 liter inline 5 that produces 300 hp which incidentally amounts to more per liter than the BMW and Audi Pinkerton was blathering about. Shame you don't know much about cars. We were discussing *normally aspirated* engines, not puffers. Bull****. Volvo was the sub subject. Perhaps you should put down the bottle for a change, you old drunk. Stoopi seems to have the same problem that Arny frequently has. With numerous fights in progress with everyone imaginable, he forgets what he is fighting about. And being an alcoholic doesn't probably help. |
#1591
|
|||
|
|||
Pukey Drunkerton whined: Sure it does - why wouldn't it? Because Krooger is a liar, Nousiane is an ideologue, and Ferstler is a propagandist. And you are an ignorant asshole without a life or a clue, which seems to even things up somewhat. On the contrary, I was one of the first RAO regulars to recognize you for the bigoted, unschooled, rabid, drunken religionist that you are. You will note, if you're capable of half a second's objectivity regarding yourself, that my opinion is now shared by most of the regular contributors on all of the audio newsgroups. Now I might really deserve that low opinion you have of me, and it might be coincidence that I came to the same conclusion as everybody else. Or it could be that the problem is not in me but in someone else. ;-) |
#1592
|
|||
|
|||
Drunkie Pukerton squawked: Surely you jest. Have you met Tommi, Harold, and Arnii? No, but when they *took* tests, as opposed to proctoring, it was because they expected a difference, ring ring ring Stewbie, it's the reality phone. This must be your annual update call. Do you want to take it there, or are you too drunk to hold the handset? |
#1593
|
|||
|
|||
In article tgKLe.4066$Ji.968@lakeread02,
"ScottW" wrote: Horse****, there was *zero* terorism in Iraq before I guess when the dictator is doing he killing it isn't called terrorism. That's correct. Stephen |
#1594
|
|||
|
|||
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:46:11 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: dave weil said: But that's not surprising coming from an area of the world where 100,000 km is considered high mileage. Speaking of which, do you know the average mileage of trade-ins in Japan? It's about 10,000 km, isn't it? It's a mark of honour to have a *new* car in Japan. Perhaps that's a factor in how rapidly they evolve - there's a hungry market out there for newer and better? It's definitely a mark of American 'sophistication' that the biggest selling vehicle is a fatass pickup truck with leaf-spring suspension and a live rear axle. I'm betting that the most popular accessory is a rifle rack................... Old school. This is the ticket. http://www.ibistek.com/cobra_gallery.asp?title=main ScottW |
#1595
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:54:46 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote: On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:40:08 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: Stewart Pinkerton said: And strictly speaking, they are AMGs, not Mercs. A fine distinction, to be sure. I've never heard Mercedes cars referred to as "Mercs". Weren't you going on about Ford a little while ago? I am not responsible for your ignorance of standard abbreviations. Why are you talking about Mercurys? |
#1596
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 17:01:37 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote: On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:46:11 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: dave weil said: But that's not surprising coming from an area of the world where 100,000 km is considered high mileage. Speaking of which, do you know the average mileage of trade-ins in Japan? It's about 10,000 km, isn't it? It's a mark of honour to have a *new* car in Japan. Perhaps that's a factor in how rapidly they evolve - there's a hungry market out there for newer and better? It's definitely a mark of American 'sophistication' that the biggest selling vehicle is a fatass pickup truck with leaf-spring suspension and a live rear axle. I don't disagree that America's preoccupation with SUVs and big trucks (something that you upper crust Brits were first on point with) is laughable (that was part of my previous point about the US market). I'm betting that the most popular accessory is a rifle rack................... You'd be wrong. It's a trailer package. chuckle BTW, that "gun rack" stereotype is pretty much long gone. I live in the heart of "gun rack" country and I can't remember the last one that I've seen. Now, Harley Davidson stickers, THAT'S a different story. Dammit, even America's 'flagship' sports car has leaf spring rear suspension! :-) Really? Since when does the Viper have such a suspension? |
#1597
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:47:32 -0500, dave weil
wrote: On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:54:46 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton wrote: On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:40:08 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: Stewart Pinkerton said: And strictly speaking, they are AMGs, not Mercs. A fine distinction, to be sure. I've never heard Mercedes cars referred to as "Mercs". Weren't you going on about Ford a little while ago? I am not responsible for your ignorance of standard abbreviations. Why are you talking about Mercurys? I'm not, I'm talking about soldiers of fortune. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1598
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:31:15 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: Pukey Drunkerton whined: Sure it does - why wouldn't it? Because Krooger is a liar, Nousiane is an ideologue, and Ferstler is a propagandist. And you are an ignorant asshole without a life or a clue, which seems to even things up somewhat. On the contrary, I was one of the first RAO regulars to recognize you for the bigoted, unschooled, rabid, drunken religionist that you are. SCORE! QED.................. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1599
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:55:32 -0500, dave weil
wrote: On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 17:01:37 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton wrote: On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:46:11 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote: dave weil said: But that's not surprising coming from an area of the world where 100,000 km is considered high mileage. Speaking of which, do you know the average mileage of trade-ins in Japan? It's about 10,000 km, isn't it? It's a mark of honour to have a *new* car in Japan. Perhaps that's a factor in how rapidly they evolve - there's a hungry market out there for newer and better? It's definitely a mark of American 'sophistication' that the biggest selling vehicle is a fatass pickup truck with leaf-spring suspension and a live rear axle. I don't disagree that America's preoccupation with SUVs and big trucks (something that you upper crust Brits were first on point with) is laughable (that was part of my previous point about the US market). Actually, we called them shooting brakes or estate cars, because they were useful for loading up all the clutter you need for a good day out blasting birds out of the sky, or lumping bits and bobs to the far corners of one's estate. :-) I'm betting that the most popular accessory is a rifle rack................... You'd be wrong. It's a trailer package. chuckle Ah yes, good ol' UHaul.............. BTW, that "gun rack" stereotype is pretty much long gone. I live in the heart of "gun rack" country and I can't remember the last one that I've seen. Now, Harley Davidson stickers, THAT'S a different story. However, you can still buy those T-shirts with a list of things that indicate why you might be a redneck - and there's always a rifle rack on that list! :-) OTOH, who the heck buys those that say 'you might consider thanking your lucky stars that you're in Texas'? :-) OTGH, the *really* cool accessory is the one that's legal in South Africa - side-mounted flamethrowers for dislodging unwanted nig... er, I mean persons of doubtful reputation............... Dammit, even America's 'flagship' sports car has leaf spring rear suspension! :-) Really? Since when does the Viper have such a suspension? Sorry, that's a truck engine in a plastic body................ -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#1600
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 17:06:24 GMT, "Margaret von B."
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:30:20 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message news On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:22:31 GMT, "Margaret von B." wrote: CLS55, S55 and S65 are saloons. But they are not *sports* saloons - even for fat Texans........ CLS55 is the most sporting of them all. Even for drunken british twits. The fact that *you* cannot afford it, does not disqualify it. Are you *nuts*? The CLS55 is just a quirky styling exercise to make an S-class saloon *look* sporty. OTOH, I do have a few shares left in the most fabulous bridge - even nicer than the one your idiot cousin in Arizona bought by mistake. And strictly speaking, they are AMGs, not Mercs. A fine distinction, to be sure. Horse****. They come with Mercedes VIN's. It is that simple. others are supercharged rather than turbocharged, Irrelevant. Neither is normally aspirated. But as noted, they're not *sports* saloons by any reasonable standard. What would that make your moped then? Oh, I said it... Faster than most Mercs on real roads, in point of fact....... and the RS6 is no longer made. The replacement due in 2006 will not be normally aspirated either. Perhaps, but it will be using an old engine. The *new* 'cutting edge' angines are normally aspirated. Good luck in your desperate flailing to defend a lost position. But there always something fundamentally pathetic about dolls with balls.......... "Cutting edge" is a figment of your imagination. Definitions by a nobody like you don't count. Back at ya, ladyboy! Bottom line - *all* the desirable new 'cutting edge' motors by *anyone's* definition are naturally aspirated and have specific outputs of 100BHP per litre or more. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Arny vs. Atkinson debat - Could someone post a blow by blow? | Audio Opinions | |||
The Bill May Report on Single-Ended Output Transformers for 300B etc | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Sub Amps - a Follow up Question | Tech | |||
Yet another DBT post | High End Audio | |||
Run Rabbit Run | Vacuum Tubes |