Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Arny Krueger wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message Oily Tartlet wrote: On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 03:30:40 +0200, Lionel Chapuis wrote: Dogs eat dogs I'm sorry, but I can't stand to see your lever of pulvarity to Englash the lauginage. A French Krueger--how unclean can you get? You know I try to be nice with you Singh, and your basic nature always screws things up. But what should one expect from a second-rate midwest clone of Middius? Come on, Arny, you have to expect me to get a few licks in for old times' sake. I haven't even misspelled your name once, for example. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Bob Morein wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "trotsky" wrote in message Bob Morein wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message . earthlink.net... While the speakers were still breaking in, I thought about trying felt around the tweeter. After enough time had passed, though, I was shocked at how sweet sounding the tweeter became. If it's not broke, don't fix it. You don't understand the issue. The felt ring has nothing to do with coloration. It causes the tweeter to act more like the ideal point radiator. No, cabinet diffraction causes frequency response aberrations. Since each guy is about half right and half wrong, this could prove to be the start of a lasting hatred. ;-) There already is . You are correct, and so is Trotsky in his correction. Diffraction causes comb filtering, which is one way of looking at the disorganized mess produced by Trotsky's hard baffle. So I amend my claim to simply state that felt, or an attractive material, makes things better. Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. Felt could have made a distinction but it doesn't fit into his marketing scheme. As ever, Bob, the best test you can give a speaker is listening. And unless you have a pretty good concept of what musicality in a loudspeaker means, all the quasi-anechoic methods in the world aren't going to help. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Arny Krueger wrote: "Bob Morein" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "trotsky" wrote in message Bob Morein wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message .earthlink.net... While the speakers were still breaking in, I thought about trying felt around the tweeter. After enough time had passed, though, I was shocked at how sweet sounding the tweeter became. If it's not broke, don't fix it. You don't understand the issue. The felt ring has nothing to do with coloration. It causes the tweeter to act more like the ideal point radiator. No, cabinet diffraction causes frequency response aberrations. Since each guy is about half right and half wrong, this could prove to be the start of a lasting hatred. ;-) There already is . Oh dear, my registry of RAO feuds had become out-fo-date. You are correct, and so is Trotsky in his correction. Diffraction causes comb filtering, which is one way of looking at the disorganized mess produced by Trotsky's hard baffle. Oh here we go again. Sooner or later the discussion had to move from Singh's web site to the actual performance of Singh's loudspeaker products. So I amend my claim to simply state that felt, or an attractive material, makes things better. ..at least some of the time. Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, True. It does help to have a superior product to back up the brave-sounding prose. and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. But are these drivers really any better? Two key parameters for low frequency drivers for small speakers are Xmax and smoothness of response near the crossover frequency. http://www.madisound.com/silverflute.html gives me no comfort in either area. As far as the tweeters go, here's a pretty credible-looking comparative look: http://ldsg.snippets.org/sect-4.php3 Like the reviewer, I see the YAG-20 as being underspecified. A lot of the success of Jupiter audio's full-range product rests in the design of its crossover, at which point the supporting website text gets really well, underspecified. There's that word again! Krueger, at the risk of overstating the obvious, you and Bob Morion are hardly the target audience for my speakers. Now don't make me take the kid gloves off. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Girth wrote: Girth wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. Ellis Audio! Worth a look, Greg. http://www.ellisaudio.com/ Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, the speaker looks like every DIY speaker I see being touted on various audio forums. I will read up on his marketing concepts, though. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Girth wrote:
"Bob Morein" wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. I think they guys running Ellis Audio and the one running Shamrock Audio (both use simmilar designs and ship the speaker set around techniques) both have a lot of experience. They also have insane amounts of testing and math and experience in building custom cabinets and crossovers. They definately are the exception to the rule. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Girth wrote:
Girth wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. Ellis Audio! Worth a look, Greg. http://www.ellisaudio.com/ Note the incredible detail on the tech side on his pages. That's how he goes a long ways towards getting rid of the guy in the garage picture in most people's minds. And - as far as I can tell - all his technical talk and tweaks he's tried make sense on paper. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
trotsky wrote:
Girth wrote: Girth wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. Ellis Audio! Worth a look, Greg. http://www.ellisaudio.com/ Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, the speaker looks like every DIY speaker I see being touted on various audio forums. I will read up on his marketing concepts, though. Go to: http://www.shamrockaudio.com/eire.htm Note the $2995 price. This speaker is virutally identical in sound to the Ellis Audio offering. Why the pric difference? One is a company and one is a guy who isn't interested in making a profit. Many people agree they sound very close to each other. You can't possibly beat his marketing concepts, because he isn't playing that game or trying to make a living off of his work. (much like say, the guy who builds telescopes in his free time - some fine examples are out there that would cost thousands more on the open market) Is the Shamrock Audio worth $2995? IMO, no. There are better speakers out there for much less money from Tannoy, Ke5f, Jeseph Audio, and others. Is the Ellis Audio good for its price? Absolutely. He's making a $1300 speaker that sounds great. He's making no profit on it, though, because he lacks the economics of scale and discounts that the big manufacturers would have. They could probably build it for $500 their cost.(minus the gorgeous laquer finish he does as an option) They'd sell it for $1500 MSRP and on sale for $1300 or so. Hence, it's not a bad speaker for the price compared to the big boys. Note - his claims that it sounds better than $2500 speakers are marketing, honestly. Compared to DIY type offerings like the Eire, sure. Compared to a pair of Tannoys(real ones - not Saturns) or Joseph Audio or some B&W towers? Um... No. To Trotsky: I'd see if you could get a listen to his speakers in person. Bring yours for a side-by-side comparison. Works out bugs - or maybe if yours is better, help him do the same. Everyone wins and gets a better speakers. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Joseph Oberlander wrote: Girth wrote: Girth wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. Ellis Audio! Worth a look, Greg. http://www.ellisaudio.com/ Note the incredible detail on the tech side on his pages. That's how he goes a long ways towards getting rid of the guy in the garage picture in most people's minds. AYOC? A generic website with generic pictures and a note saying, "Sorry, guys, all my stuff is in boxes right now" is okay because he spent some quality time with some meters? |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Joseph Oberlander wrote: trotsky wrote: Girth wrote: Girth wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. Ellis Audio! Worth a look, Greg. http://www.ellisaudio.com/ Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, the speaker looks like every DIY speaker I see being touted on various audio forums. I will read up on his marketing concepts, though. Go to: http://www.shamrockaudio.com/eire.htm Note the $2995 price. This speaker is virutally identical in sound to the Ellis Audio offering. You've heard this difference, or did the meters and measurements do the listening for you? Why the pric difference? One is a company and one is a guy who isn't interested in making a profit. Many people agree they sound very close to each other. Can I have their names? And do you really expect a guy that isn't interested in making money to be around to service his product down the line? You can't possibly beat his marketing concepts, because he isn't playing that game or trying to make a living off of his work. (much like say, the guy who builds telescopes in his free time - some fine examples are out there that would cost thousands more on the open market) Telescopes. Got it. And if you get a good one I'll bet you can see Jupiter! Is the Shamrock Audio worth $2995? IMO, no. If it's got a solid wood baffle that's pretty rare. I'm sure you've got a point, though. There are better speakers out there for much less money from Tannoy, Ke5f, Jeseph Audio, and others. Is the Ellis Audio good for its price? Absolutely. He's making a $1300 speaker that sounds great. He's making no profit on it, though, because he lacks the economics of scale and discounts that the big manufacturers would have. They could probably build it for $500 their cost.(minus the gorgeous laquer finish he does as an option) Did you buy a pair, then? If not, why not? They'd sell it for $1500 MSRP and on sale for $1300 or so. Hence, it's not a bad speaker for the price compared to the big boys. Note - his claims that it sounds better than $2500 speakers are marketing, honestly. Compared to DIY type offerings like the Eire, sure. Compared to a pair of Tannoys(real ones - not Saturns) or Joseph Audio or some B&W towers? Um... No. I really don't see your point, even a little bit. To Trotsky: I'd see if you could get a listen to his speakers in person. Bring yours for a side-by-side comparison. Bring them where? Are you translating your post from another language? Works out bugs - or maybe if yours is better, help him do the same. Everyone wins and gets a better speakers. Yes. I can see why you'd need those telescopes. |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Girth wrote: Joseph Oberlander wrote: You can't possibly beat his marketing concepts, because he isn't playing that game or trying to make a living off of his work. I've just been having a closer look at the website, Greg I didn't realise he was doing this for free. Still, I rate the idea of having a demo pair 'doing the rounds'. I like this idea too. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
"trotsky" wrote http://www.jupiter-audio.com And be brutally honest. I see the site was built with Adobe GoLive 6... nice program. Where are your META NAME: Keywords, description and revisit-after? You'll need these tags for best search engine placement. What is your geographic service area for your products? |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
"trotsky" wrote in message
Arny Krueger wrote: "Bob Morein" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "trotsky" wrote in message Bob Morein wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message hlink.net... While the speakers were still breaking in, I thought about trying felt around the tweeter. After enough time had passed, though, I was shocked at how sweet sounding the tweeter became. If it's not broke, don't fix it. You don't understand the issue. The felt ring has nothing to do with coloration. It causes the tweeter to act more like the ideal point radiator. No, cabinet diffraction causes frequency response aberrations. Since each guy is about half right and half wrong, this could prove to be the start of a lasting hatred. ;-) There already is . Oh dear, my registry of RAO feuds had become out-fo-date. You are correct, and so is Trotsky in his correction. Diffraction causes comb filtering, which is one way of looking at the disorganized mess produced by Trotsky's hard baffle. Oh here we go again. Sooner or later the discussion had to move from Singh's web site to the actual performance of Singh's loudspeaker products. So I amend my claim to simply state that felt, or an attractive material, makes things better. ..at least some of the time. Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, True. It does help to have a superior product to back up the brave-sounding prose. and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. But are these drivers really any better? Two key parameters for low frequency drivers for small speakers are Xmax and smoothness of response near the crossover frequency. http://www.madisound.com/silverflute.html gives me no comfort in either area. As far as the tweeters go, here's a pretty credible-looking comparative look: http://ldsg.snippets.org/sect-4.php3 Like the reviewer, I see the YAG-20 as being underspecified. A lot of the success of Jupiter audio's full-range product rests in the design of its crossover, at which point the supporting website text gets really well, underspecified. There's that word again! Krueger, at the risk of overstating the obvious, you and Bob Morion are hardly the target audience for my speakers. Right, our IQs are in the triple-digits. Now don't make me take the kid gloves off. Singh, quit putting on airs. You don't own any figurative "kid gloves". Probably don't own any real ones, either. |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
trotsky said: I haven't even misspelled your name once, for example. Rarely does anybody actually misspell it. I, for one, have never "misspelled" it. Oh, right, I forgot the etymology of the name "Krooger". I believe I coined that spelling. Do you need some quality time with a dictionary, maybe? |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Arny Krueger wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message Krueger, at the risk of overstating the obvious, you and Bob Morion are hardly the target audience for my speakers. Right, our IQs are in the triple-digits. Dude, you're not supposed to count the decimal points. Now don't make me take the kid gloves off. Singh, quit putting on airs. You don't own any figurative "kid gloves". Probably don't own any real ones, either. But of course you do--and we won't go into what kid was used, either. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
George M. Middius wrote: trotsky said: I haven't even misspelled your name once, for example. Rarely does anybody actually misspell it. I, for one, have never "misspelled" it. Oh, right, I forgot the etymology of the name "Krooger". I believe I coined that spelling. Do you need some quality time with a dictionary, maybe? No, but perhaps you could recount the story of how Krueger two different spellings of his name on two different websites. Did the weasel even have an explanation for this? |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
trotsky wrote:
Girth wrote: trotsky wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. Ellis Audio! Worth a look, Greg. http://www.ellisaudio.com/ Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, the speaker looks like every DIY speaker I see being touted on various audio forums. I will read up on his marketing concepts, though. How important is the look? Having said that, the finish on Ellis's speakers are by all accounts excellent. No, I'm sure it is. In fact, I'm sure the speakers themselves are quite good. But there's umpteen DIY posts where people have photos that are just as generic looking, such that you really can't get a handle on how the speakers are going to look in the flesh. http://www.ellisaudio.com/FinishingWood.htm Based upon his methods, I'd say he's doing it exactly right. Note how he states elsewhere that he couldn't even get woodshops in his area to even DO it as it was too labor intensive. 5-6 coats with the 0000 steel wool as a top finish is exactly right. Yes, it takes HOURS per cabinet. The guy must have an obsession or arms of a bodybuilder to do all that work. $200 more is a steal for that finish. http://www.ellisaudio.com/finishcomments.htm $700-$1000 for a cabinet at woodworking shop prices seems about right. This is where he eats his profit. M0st companties would slap together the cabinet for $200-$300 and be done with it. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
trotsky wrote:
AYOC? A generic website with generic pictures and a note saying, "Sorry, guys, all my stuff is in boxes right now" is okay because he spent some quality time with some meters? He recently moved from Colorado Springs(IIRC) to another state. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
"George M. Middius" wrote in message trotsky said: I haven't even misspelled your name once, for example. Rarely does anybody actually misspell it. I, for one, have never "misspelled" it. Oh, right, I forgot the etymology of the name "Krooger". I believe I coined that spelling. Do you need some quality time with a dictionary, maybe? A dictionary, an English teacher, a volume of Wren and Martin and perhaps an IQ test. |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
Girth wrote: Joseph Oberlander wrote: http://www.ellisaudio.com/ Note the incredible detail on the tech side on his pages. That's how he goes a long ways towards getting rid of the guy in the garage picture in most people's minds. And - as far as I can tell - all his technical talk and tweaks he's tried make sense on paper. The cynicism page made me laugh!! Ellis certainly cuts through the BS. Yes, he cuts the BS up into slices and tries to sell it to the hapless reader. Yeah. Note how he obsesses about screws and types of glue and... Well there's the brass screws he uses in his crossovers and the screw job he gives anybody who actually believes his crap. Exactly the sort of fine-tweaking that the big firms do and 95% of the independants don't bother with. That's because they have at least the foggiest notion of what science and engineering is all about. Small changes are important and the big boys(tm) know that. It makes great advertising copy, if you have the stomach for that sort of thing. |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
trotsky said: I haven't even misspelled your name once, for example. Rarely does anybody actually misspell it. I, for one, have never "misspelled" it. Oh, right, I forgot the etymology of the name "Krooger". I believe I coined that spelling. Do you need some quality time with a dictionary, maybe? No, Wrong answer. but perhaps you could recount the story of how Krueger two different spellings of his name on two different websites. Did the weasel even have an explanation for this? You sound like Mickey McBugEater. Who is "the weasel"? |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Joseph Oberlander wrote: trotsky wrote: No, I'm sure it is. In fact, I'm sure the speakers themselves are quite good. But there's umpteen DIY posts where people have photos that are just as generic looking, such that you really can't get a handle on how the speakers are going to look in the flesh. http://www.ellisaudio.com/FinishingWood.htm Based upon his methods, I'd say he's doing it exactly right. Note how he states elsewhere that he couldn't even get woodshops in his area to even DO it as it was too labor intensive. 5-6 coats with the 0000 steel wool as a top finish is exactly right. Yes, it takes HOURS per cabinet. The guy must have an obsession or arms of a bodybuilder to do all that work. $200 more is a steal for that finish. http://www.ellisaudio.com/finishcomments.htm $700-$1000 for a cabinet at woodworking shop prices seems about right. This is where he eats his profit. M0st companties would slap together the cabinet for $200-$300 and be done with it. Again, I fail to see your point. Do you really think in depth descriptions of wood finishing is a strong selling point? And do you think selling speakers for less than they're worth is a good business model? |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Joseph Oberlander wrote: trotsky wrote: AYOC? A generic website with generic pictures and a note saying, "Sorry, guys, all my stuff is in boxes right now" is okay because he spent some quality time with some meters? He recently moved from Colorado Springs(IIRC) to another state. Colorado Springs isn't a state, but I think I know what you're trying to say. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Arny Krueger wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message Arny Krueger wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message Krueger, at the risk of overstating the obvious, you and Bob Morion are hardly the target audience for my speakers. Right, our IQs are in the triple-digits. Dude, you're not supposed to count the decimal points. An IQ with decimal places? It would take a real obsessive-compulsive to imagine that! Now don't make me take the kid gloves off. Singh, quit putting on airs. You don't own any figurative "kid gloves". Probably don't own any real ones, either. But of course you do As in goat skin gloves, yes. and we won't go into what kid was used, either. The goat they came from was yours, Singh. That one just whizzed right past you, didn't it. I guess I've still got it! |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
trotsky said: Rarely does anybody actually misspell it. I, for one, have never "misspelled" it. Oh, right, I forgot the etymology of the name "Krooger". I believe I coined that spelling. Do you need some quality time with a dictionary, maybe? No, Wrong answer. I take it you're conceding that on this point, the entire exchange flew straight over your slopey little head. but perhaps you could recount the story of how Krueger two different spellings of his name on two different websites. Did the weasel even have an explanation for this? You sound like Mickey McBugEater. Who is "the weasel"? Krueger, who else? Sorry, does not compute. Weasels are cunning, crafty, and intuitive. Krooger is none of the above. Try to get your anthropomorphism more in tune with reality, please. You anally follow his every exploit, A bizarre accusation. What planet are you inhabiting now? And speaking of "anally", what have you done with Jocasta? surely you remember how he used a different spelling of his name when he posted to rahe. Surely I don't. But since you do, is the point you're making that Krooger is a hypocrite? What shocking news. That's the etymology of the spelling "Krooger", right? You have exited the remotest neighborhood of what sane people would recognize as making sense. Turn off the "Queer as Folk" tape and pay attention. ?? First you accuse me of being obsessed with Mr. ****, then you swing around and accuse me of watching TV at the same time as I play on Usenet. Oh wait -- that was your grindingly desperate last call for the "I'm better 'cause I fantasize about women" shot, right? You should get to know StynchBlob. Aside from his inane hangups with "objectivity", his cave-man politics, and the whole JEE-zus routine, you two should have a merry dance to celebrate your alleged sexual "orientations". Oh, one last thing -- it's reported that the biggest segment of QaF's audience is straight women. If you knew any of those, you could demonstrate your great sensitivity by watching the show with them and screaming "dirty faggot!" every time the guys' clothes came off. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Oily Tartlet a écrit :
On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 03:12:56 +0200, Lionel Chapuis lionel{dot}chapuis{at}free{dot}fr wrote: Are you a sockpuppet? What do you mean ? Which type there's here at least 5 to 10 different categories. You're the tardiloquous teknonymy type. -- Oily Tartlet I hope in a first time that your name was an anagram of "dirty toilet"... which could be funny on RAO. I'm little bit disappointed but not srprised. Lionel Chapuis PS : time to play for you... |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:03:18 +0200, Lionel Chapuis
wrote: I hope in a first time that your name was an anagram of "dirty toilet"... which could be funny on RAO. I'm little bit disappointed but not srprised. Wasn't it Sartre who said 'Hell is other people'? Lionel Chapuis PS : time to play for you... Don't break the spoon. -- Oily Tartlet |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:58:10 +0200, Lionel Chapuis
wrote: "L'enfer c'est les autres" Yes you're right ! You read it ? Is it just a well-known sentence ? Be careful to out of context misunderstanding. It shØuld æ ì a çommonesqÜe sãyethpedìmentré. -- Oily Tartlet |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
"trotsky" wrote in message ... Arny Krueger wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message Krueger, at the risk of overstating the obvious, you and Bob Morion are hardly the target audience for my speakers. Right, our IQs are in the triple-digits. Greg, the felt is supposed to go on the front of the speakers, not in your ears. |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
"trotsky" wrote in message ... Girth wrote: Girth wrote: Greg will learn soon enough that a cute website and nice subcontracted parts provide little differentiation, and unless the design has been thoroughly tuned using quasi-anechoic methods, a turntable, and lots of experience, holds little chance of technical equality with products from larger companies, even if their drivers are not quite as good. I'm trying to recall the name of the speaker builder who has become very successful in recent times for the kits (and builds?) he produces, many listeners claiming they beat commercial designs many times the price. This guy had some noval marketing ideas, such as circulating a set of the demo speakers between people shipping point to point. Ellis Audio! Worth a look, Greg. http://www.ellisaudio.com/ I'll take a demo set, providing they come with high quality binding posts that are easily removable. |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
"trotsky" wrote in message ... Joseph Oberlander wrote: trotsky wrote: No, I'm sure it is. In fact, I'm sure the speakers themselves are quite good. But there's umpteen DIY posts where people have photos that are just as generic looking, such that you really can't get a handle on how the speakers are going to look in the flesh. http://www.ellisaudio.com/FinishingWood.htm Based upon his methods, I'd say he's doing it exactly right. Note how he states elsewhere that he couldn't even get woodshops in his area to even DO it as it was too labor intensive. 5-6 coats with the 0000 steel wool as a top finish is exactly right. Yes, it takes HOURS per cabinet. The guy must have an obsession or arms of a bodybuilder to do all that work. $200 more is a steal for that finish. http://www.ellisaudio.com/finishcomments.htm $700-$1000 for a cabinet at woodworking shop prices seems about right. This is where he eats his profit. M0st companties would slap together the cabinet for $200-$300 and be done with it. Again, I fail to see your point. Do you really think in depth descriptions of wood finishing is a strong selling point? And do you think selling speakers for less than they're worth is a good business model? Be sure to advertise how many cans of Krylon you use on each. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Oily Tartlet a écrit :
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:58:10 +0200, Lionel Chapuis wrote: "L'enfer c'est les autres" Yes you're right ! You read it ? Is it just a well-known sentence ? Be careful to out of context misunderstanding. It shØuld æ ì a çommonesqÜe sãyethpedìmentré. -- Oily Tartlet I was sure of that ! Read it again... |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Girth wrote: trotsky wrote: No, I'm sure it is. In fact, I'm sure the speakers themselves are quite good. But there's umpteen DIY posts where people have photos that are just as generic looking, such that you really can't get a handle on how the speakers are going to look in the flesh. http://www.ellisaudio.com/FinishingWood.htm Based upon his methods, I'd say he's doing it exactly right. Note how he states elsewhere that he couldn't even get woodshops in his area to even DO it as it was too labor intensive. 5-6 coats with the 0000 steel wool as a top finish is exactly right. Yes, it takes HOURS per cabinet. The guy must have an obsession or arms of a bodybuilder to do all that work. $200 more is a steal for that finish. http://www.ellisaudio.com/finishcomments.htm $700-$1000 for a cabinet at woodworking shop prices seems about right. This is where he eats his profit. M0st companties would slap together the cabinet for $200-$300 and be done with it. Again, I fail to see your point. Do you really think in depth descriptions of wood finishing is a strong selling point? For some people, probably. Castle put a lot of emphasis on the wood finishing in their brochures. That's not the reason I bought Harlech's, nor why you bought Howard's, but certainly *some* customers appreciate it. The teak finish did prompt me to buy a teak cabinet. Regardless, the guy that does my cabinets does an excellent job with the finishes, so I think I have that base covered. Boon's question about exotic finishes I'm sure will come up eventually, though. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
George M. Middius wrote: trotsky said: Rarely does anybody actually misspell it. I, for one, have never "misspelled" it. Oh, right, I forgot the etymology of the name "Krooger". I believe I coined that spelling. Do you need some quality time with a dictionary, maybe? No, Wrong answer. I take it you're conceding that on this point, the entire exchange flew straight over your slopey little head. but perhaps you could recount the story of how Krueger two different spellings of his name on two different websites. Did the weasel even have an explanation for this? You sound like Mickey McBugEater. Who is "the weasel"? Krueger, who else? Sorry, does not compute. Weasels are cunning, crafty, and intuitive. Krooger is none of the above. Try to get your anthropomorphism more in tune with reality, please. Et tu, Brute? Are we really going to have to have another discussion about the vernacular? You anally follow his every exploit, A bizarre accusation. What planet are you inhabiting now? And speaking of "anally", what have you done with Jocasta? I knew that was coming. Sorry, but not every household shares your wont for sexual dysfunction. surely you remember how he used a different spelling of his name when he posted to rahe. Surely I don't. But since you do, is the point you're making that Krooger is a hypocrite? What shocking news. No, the point I'm making is that you used to have a cute story at the ready on how the permutation "Krooger" came up, and now you don't have jack cheese. That's the etymology of the spelling "Krooger", right? You have exited the remotest neighborhood of what sane people would recognize as making sense. Right. So you just glossed over Oberlander's contributions. Turn off the "Queer as Folk" tape and pay attention. ?? First you accuse me of being obsessed with Mr. ****, then you swing around and accuse me of watching TV at the same time as I play on Usenet. I'm not accusing you of anything. I came back here after a four month hiatus with all kinds of olive branches coming out of my ass, and you appeared to be in a hurry to see if I've still got game. You tell me what I'm supposed to think. Oh wait -- that was your grindingly desperate last call for the "I'm better 'cause I fantasize about women" shot, right? You should get to know StynchBlob. Aside from his inane hangups with "objectivity", his cave-man politics, and the whole JEE-zus routine, you two should have a merry dance to celebrate your alleged sexual "orientations". You're being too sensitive. (What new?) The only gay issue I'm ****ed off about is the fact that Madonna got to stick her tongue in Britney's mouth and not me. Oh, one last thing -- it's reported that the biggest segment of QaF's audience is straight women. If you knew any of those, you could demonstrate your great sensitivity by watching the show with them and screaming "dirty faggot!" every time the guys' clothes came off. Or not. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Oily Tartlet wrote: On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:58:10 +0200, Lionel Chapuis wrote: "L'enfer c'est les autres" Yes you're right ! You read it ? Is it just a well-known sentence ? Be careful to out of context misunderstanding. It shØuld æ ì a çommonesqÜe sãyethpedìmentré. Flase calim. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Bob Morein wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message ... Arny Krueger wrote: "trotsky" wrote in message Krueger, at the risk of overstating the obvious, you and Bob Morion are hardly the target audience for my speakers. Right, our IQs are in the triple-digits. Greg, the felt is supposed to go on the front of the speakers, not in your ears. You attributed a quote from Krueger as a quote from me. Where did you put your felt? |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Oily Tartlet wrote: On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 01:16:18 GMT, trotsky wrote: It shØuld æ ì a çommonesqÜe sãyethpedìmentré. Flase calim. From a pley, then. But mostly it shØuld æ ì a çommonesqÜe sãyethpedìmentré. Jrazu! |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Oily Tartlet a écrit :
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 01:16:18 GMT, trotsky wrote: It shØuld æ ì a çommonesqÜe sãyethpedìmentré. Flase calim. From a pley, then. But mostly it shØuld æ ì a çommonesqÜe sãyethpedìmentré. -- Oily Tartlet Is this strange noise coming from your mouth, Stinky Toilet ? |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, here it is.
Lionel Chapuis ventured:
You're the tardiloquous teknonymy type. -- Oily Tartlet I hope in a first time that your name was an anagram of "dirty toilet"... which could be funny on RAO. I'm little bit disappointed but not srprised. Try "Artly Toilet" GeoSynch |