mc wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

At what point did I try to stop anyone from running whatever the hell
test they want to on this condition?

We are not your laboratory staff. Do your own homework if you want us to
believe you've found something. Investigate it yourself. Demonstrate it in
a properly conducted double-blind experiment. Explore its physical basis.

Excuse me? I don't think you get it. YOU and your propellor-beanied
electronic techie geek friends are the idiots that don't believe that
fuses are audible, because you didn't read it in Popular Electronics
Monthly - and all the theories you know about says it can't. Therefore,
YOU are the one obligated to do your "homework" if you want to try to
prove me wrong, you stupid twit. Otherwise, I REMAIN RIGHT about this
effect. Me, I already DID tests to my satisfaction. Simply saying I
didn't hear what I did because you can't find it in the tiny pool of
knowledge you have about electronics theory only serves to demonstrate
that you and your techie chums are ignorant, dogmatic cretins. Who
wouldn't know anything real about audio if it fell on your flat heads.

Don't think I didn't notice that you clipped out everything in my post
that successfully argued against you, and that you COULDN'T
successfully provide an arguement to defend your impoverished ideas.
All you people can do is argue in circles, never once admitting the
fallacy of your broken logic.

That's debating trick no. 1: When the other guy's argument is stronger
than yours, pretend he never said anything! So far, I haven't seen one
of you beanie heads to be anything less than a chicken****. Big talkers
yes, but chicken****s through and through.


Anyhow, I see where this is going. You have made no testable physical
claims, so if we fail to replicate it, you'll just tell us our ears aren't
golden enough.

Christ, are you people have a contest behind my back to see which one
is stupider than the other? If so, that would make a lot of sense to
me. I said fuses are audible, you ****ing imbecile. What part of that
claim is not physically testable? How do YOU think I arrived at the
conclusion that fuses are audible, if I didn't test it? By reading
about it in the bible, you retard? I even described how to go about
testing it, and I challenged every single respondent who told me I was
full of **** to test it themselves and decide for themselves. Over 200
posts now, and none of you big talking chicken****s ever had enough
scientific curiousity, or the knowledge on how to open up an amplifier,
to actually perform the test.

Hence, we can conclude that all you beanie heads do with your lives is
spew ignorant bull**** about audio on newsgroups, in attempts to
misguide and misinform as many people as you can about audio. The worst
part about it is, you're not even doing this on purpose. You people are
too stupid and mentally lazy to even be conscious about how ignorant
you are on audio matters.

But what really puzzles me in why you insult us so much. Are you trying to
get people to respect you and agree with you? Insulting us is no way to achieve
that.

There IS no way to achieve that, you stupid ****up. I've already said
in this thread many times that I could not give less of a **** if
anyone here agrees with me on anything. And I don't much care about
getting "respect" from ignorant clowns that I don't respect to begin
with. For example, anyone who knows LESS ABOUT AUDIO AND SOUND QUALITY
than I do, and then proceeds to tell me in one way or another that I'm
full of **** about something I heard, even offering false reasons for
that, without even having the intelligence or even curiousity to try
the effect for themsleves, is not giong to get any respect from me, as
they don't deserve any.

Either you admit I'm right, or you SHUT THE **** UP, if you won't prove
the effect for yourselves. Get it now, dumbo? Do anything else, and
you'll have a fight on your hands. Of which I will remind you again:
YOU are the ****ing ball lickers who had the sheer NERVE to attack and
insult me when I first asked an innocent technical query on this group.
You picked apart my query and focused on the part that I was NOT asking
you stupid queers for opinions about: the part about the fuse being
audible. And in your "focusing" on that irrelevant part of my technical
query, you spoke to me in mocking tones, and with scorn, ridicule and
derision. Over something that after 200 posts, NONE OF YOU ****WITS
ever actually tested to see if I was right. Which I am.

So you brought my insults upon yourselves. If you can't take it, then
don't dish it out. If you have a problem with MY attacks, you should
have said something about those against me. Since you didn't, you can
shut the **** up about it now.

I predict you will reply to this with an insult.

.... I predicted that you would reply to me with no intelligent
counterpoints, and nothing concrete to prove the fallacy of my claims,
except more of your bull**** theories, which only prove what a lot of
ignorant ****ups you all are. I guess we are products of our own
nature.

Go to sleep, junior. You have nothing useful to add.

Per Stromgren wrote:

He has, however, insulted almost everyone in the thread.

At least you said one true thing in your post. Dickwad.

This guy insults every poster talking to him, and he admits it. I
suppose we should just ignore him, but does anyone know of any other
method to let him know that he is not wanted, at least not using the
discussion techniques we have seen so far.

Will it ever end?

Per.

Oh no! The big troll is (whine, whine, bitch and moan....)!!!

Obviously, it never occurred to you to simply stay the **** out of my
thread, has it, you ignorant jagoff? NOOOOOOOO.... you just can't TEAR
yourself away from this thread, constantly updating your newspage to
see what I've written, all the while whining and moaning about how
terrible it is that I attack your RAT friends, when you've ****s
starting attacking ME in my own thread, because I had the nerve to
mention that I believe in something that didn't fit with your
flat-earth view of the world.

It will end for you when you find the courage, little newsgroup junkie,
to stop reading this thread. By the way, you stupid ****wit, I'm not
staying because I'm wanted or not wanted, I'm staying because you
stupid ****wits keep responding to me. And after that you decided to
attack me first, its a lot of fun for me to kick audio techie ass
around.

I remind you that I am still the current champ and winner of any of the
audio debates in this thread, as not a single ONE of you chicken****
whiners ever proved me wrong abotu ANYTHING, with anything even close
to solid factual evidence (and not simply faulty theories).

wrote in message
oups.com...

out does great things....). First thing you want to do is make sure
they're oriented correctly. Listen to them both ways, and I'm guessing
it will probably take a few tests in your case, before you can define
the diffrences. If you hear any, mark the side of the metal cap with an
dot or arrow indicating its pointing north. Now, cut one or two deep
notches in the metal end caps with an exacto knife (be careful not to
slip!).

That process should completely change the sound of those fuses though. The
electrons will 'eddy' around the score masrks and the optimal current
desisty distribution will be upset. Best use small amout of crayon on the
'glass' - NOT on the endcap as this will also affect the metalurgical
properties.

geoff

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...
"Per Stromgren" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" wrote...
Killfile him and get on with your life.

You're right of course, but my poor Free Agent can't do
that. I better cough up the $29 it takes to upgrade to Agent, which can.
It will be worth it.

I've tried the "top 5~6" newsreaders and keep coming back to
widely-reviled Outlook Express (free with MSwindows)
All the others seemed so clunky, non-intuitive, and lacking
in features. Many of them reminded me of the old command-
line newsreaders I used 15 years ago :-( Dunno how you can put up with
them?

Re-align you monitor to face north,a nd those newsreaders will be much
better.

geoff

PS OLX by choice, too.

Geoff@home wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

out does great things....). First thing you want to do is make sure
they're oriented correctly. Listen to them both ways, and I'm guessing
it will probably take a few tests in your case, before you can define
the diffrences. If you hear any, mark the side of the metal cap with an
dot or arrow indicating its pointing north. Now, cut one or two deep
notches in the metal end caps with an exacto knife (be careful not to
slip!).

That process should completely change the sound of those fuses though. The
electrons will 'eddy' around the score masrks and the optimal current
desisty distribution will be upset.

No, you WANT the electrons to eddy around the score marks. This
improves the sound. However, where I'd agree it could be bad is in the
manner or amount of score marks you make. Go too far, and you could end
up having too much of a good thing. Experimentation is the best way to
determine these things, and if you are really worried about the score
marks on the fuses being detrimental, well.... its real easy and real
cheap to replace a fuse, isn't it?


Best use small amout of crayon on the
'glass' - NOT on the endcap as this will also affect the metalurgical
properties.

You're right that marking the side of the cap will have an effect on
the sound. But in my experience, I don't think it will "completely
change the sound". And if it does change the sound, it might not be a
bad thing, provided you use the right ink. For example, I am currently
using blue permanent ink on the END CAPS of the fuses. It provides an
audible improvement pleasing to my ears. Different colors will produce
different results, and one may be more pleasant to you than another.
Not easy to experiment with though, unless you have many fuses of the
same rating (since once you apply it, you can't easily unapply it).

As far as I know though, the ink does not affect the metallurgical
properties, and I think you may have been misinformed about it. You can
prove this for yourself after you have determined that inking the fuse
end caps has produced a positive effect, by applying the same ink to
the inner and/or outer edge your CDs, DVDs or vinyl records (only a
small strip will do, does not have to be around the circumference of
the disc). I'm sure you'll agree the area where the ink is to be
applied on these discs are not metallic, and yet I'm sure you'll find
the ink has the same type of effect (depending on the type and color
chosen).

Crayon will not show up clearly, especially on glass, so if you're
concerned about the marker on the side of the fuse cap affecting the
sound negatively, well the crayon is not such a good alternative.
Besides, I can't mark the glass of my fuses with anything, because the
glass is covered by strips of self-adhesive laser-etched silver foil
(which again, makes a tremendous difference to the sonics).

mc wrote:
Summing up this thread:

The original poster said that he observed a sound quality improvement by
removing the fuse from his amplifier, and he asked whether it was safe to
run the amplifier that way.


SNIP

The original poster has been hostile to any attempt to investigate his
claims scientifically. He has, however, insulted
almost everyone in the thread.

That's because he is a troll. He never cared to have the question
answered in any meaningful way, because he never somodified his
amplifier, therefore he never actually *heard* any difference, had no
real investment in whether what he was allegedly doing was safe...and
was just itching for someone to answer so that he could insult him...

....because he is a troll. It seems, a very good one.

jak

mc wrote:
Killfiles.

I predict he will respond to this message with an insult. He's very
predictable.



....and I predict that at least two or three people will comment on that,
and he'll, in turn insult them, because...

....that's what trolls do.

Let it go.

jak

wrote in message
oups.com...

You're right that marking the side of the cap will have an effect on
the sound. But in my experience, I don't think it will "completely
change the sound". And if it does change the sound, it might not be a
bad thing, provided you use the right ink. For example, I am currently
using blue permanent ink on the END CAPS of the fuses. It provides an
audible improvement pleasing to my ears. Different colors will produce
different results, and one may be more pleasant to you than another.
Not easy to experiment with though, unless you have many fuses of the
same rating (since once you apply it, you can't easily unapply it).

So green markers are on the 'out' now ? I think they were proved inferior
with CD-edges too.

Besides, I can't mark the glass of my fuses with anything, because the
glass is covered by strips of self-adhesive laser-etched silver foil
(which again, makes a tremendous difference to the sonics).


I find enveloping the fuse in aluminium foil sounds better than the silver,
though the 'laser etch' may well go better with CD players. The other
advantage of this process (as well as the sound improvement) it that the
fuses seldom blow.


geoff

jakdedert wrote:

That's because he is a troll. He never cared to have the question
answered in any meaningful way, because he never somodified his
amplifier, therefore he never actually *heard* any difference, had no
real investment in whether what he was allegedly doing was safe...and
was just itching for someone to answer so that he could insult him...

Oh great. Another zealot of the religious audio techie order who makes
a false and groundless claim that he states as FACT, a claim of being
able to read someone's mind no less, without feeling the need to
provide solid facts to back up his claims.
Unfortunately, jakyourselfoff, this is exactly what we've seen from ALL
of you audio techs on this newsgroup, when making audio claims. You
freaks have never backed up a SINGLE solitary assertion against me with
facts. Let's see who can guess why that is, hmmm?


...because he is a troll. It seems, a very good one.

I must you people keep saying that, and I've never tried to be a
"troll", and I'm not sure I know what that is. So since you mentioned
it, what the **** IS a "troll", according to you freaks? Is it someone
who isn't sincere in his arguments and intellectually dishonest, like
say.... Arnie Krueger? The same Arnie Krueger that you pat on the back
and trade jokes with when ridiculing someone who doesn't conform to
your audio religion? Is it someone who spends their entire LIVES on
newsgroups, with about 6 billion posts to their name? Like say....
Arnie Krueger? Could someone who describes themselves as a "master
baiter", when talking about their posting to newsgroups, be accurately
assessed as a "troll"? Like, for example, your precious precious Arny
Krueger did, in his lifelong trolling of audio newsgroups? How about
someone who spammed newsgroups with the same message over and over and
over again... would THAT person be called a "troll"? Like, say, your
leader Arnie Krueger did? How about a guy who changes his name more
often than he changes his underwear... like say Arnie/Arny/Arnold
Kruger/Krueger did? Would THAT be what you people call a "troll"?

Or is your defintion of "troll" what I've come to understand: someone
who discusses something YOU don't believe in, and that you CAN'T refute
with factual evidence, and CAN'T successfully fight on ANY level, in
ANY degree? So does making up lies about the person and calling them a
"troll" in another pathetic effort to invalidate their claims (claims
which you've NEVER been able to disprove or even tried...) make you and
your little techie chummies feel better?

I think I understand now: A "TROLL", according to RATs, can be merely
anyone who is not welcome, for whatever reasons, on their newsgroup.
Unfortunately, although you've made a little techie geek boys club of
this group, it ain't YOUR newsgroup. I don't care how many years you
RAT junkies have been eating pellets on this newsgroup, and that this
is the first time I post to it. According to me, its as much MY group
as it is anyone of you dumb ignorant audio techs. The fact that you
call me names like "troll", which is akin to what 6-year olds do,
doesn't bother me in the slightest.

YOU are the ones who trolled ME, by piling on derisive attacks on me
when I asked what by the ****ing RAT charter, is a legitimate post for
this newsgroup. YOU are the ones who were clearly "itching to insult
ME". So if me fighting back against you ignorant goofs is "trolling",
then you saying Im a "very good troll" is a compliment to me - since I
took ALL of you ignorant mother****ers on single-handedly, and am still
winning the debate (due to preponderence of evidence on my part). And
lastly, if I'm the troll you say I am, considering that there are over
210 posts in my thread and you have been saying this from the beginning
of it, what the **** does that say about YOU!?! LOL!

wrote:

crap snipped

Yawn.

//Walt

Geoff@home wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

You're right that marking the side of the cap will have an effect on
the sound. But in my experience, I don't think it will "completely
change the sound". And if it does change the sound, it might not be a
bad thing, provided you use the right ink. For example, I am currently
using blue permanent ink on the END CAPS of the fuses. It provides an
audible improvement pleasing to my ears. Different colors will produce
different results, and one may be more pleasant to you than another.
Not easy to experiment with though, unless you have many fuses of the
same rating (since once you apply it, you can't easily unapply it).

So green markers are on the 'out' now ?

I don't know, I've been out of the audio scene for some time now, and
never followed the "politics of audio" to begin with. Maybe the pens
are, but if so, that's just another aspect of our disposable society
with its fickle population (witness the major major decline of home
hifi sound quality coinciding with the moment that the movie companies
started brainwashing people that having a freaking home theatre in
their house with "5.1" speakers is a GREAT thing for music
reproduction, and so much better than merely two speakers and nasty
old-fashioned "stereo"). Point being, if it worked to begin with (and
it did to many who tried it, but of course didn't work so well to those
who didn't try it, and only flapped their stupid gums about it a
lot....), then the Stoplight marker will work as well now, or 20 years
from now. What many Stoplight owners don't know, is that it works as
well on vinyl records, audio tapes and videocassettes as it does on
CDs.

HOW it works is more of an interesting question, I think. According to
others, its very possible the manufacters are wrong about the
underlying principle, and that it works on a completely different field
of science (I will only say here that it is a little understood
field...). What we don't know about "audio", presently, is probably a
whole lot more than what we do know.

I think they were proved inferior
with CD-edges too.

That's not been my experience. And I remember speaking with many people
who used the pen, and "proved" that it did work. Not everyone can hear
differences, but you can say that over just about ANYTHING in audio.
That's usually because of the simple fact that some people have more
adept listening skills than others (which doesn't mean those with
lesser skills can't hear a given effect). I had a CD-Stoplight pen a
number of years ago, and found that it acheived good results, better to
my (highly trained) ears than other colors I tested at the time (it
uses a "paint" ink, which is quite different from that of a felt
marker). But I have not used the pen recently or compared it with
anything else in years.


Besides, I can't mark the glass of my fuses with anything, because the
glass is covered by strips of self-adhesive laser-etched silver foil
(which again, makes a tremendous difference to the sonics).


I find enveloping the fuse in aluminium foil sounds better than the silver,
though the 'laser etch' may well go better with CD players. The other
advantage of this process (as well as the sound improvement) it that the
fuses seldom blow.

We were talking about "foiling" the fuses of an audio amplifier. I
don't see how you could have come to a logical conclusion that one foil
or other on the glass of the amp fuse is better for cd sound or
anything else. I think you need to revisit basic principles of how an
amplifier works. An improvement in the sound of the amp should yield
the same order of improvement with anything connected to it. Ive never
had an experience that ran contrary to that principle in all my years
of audio experimentation. Perhaps the difference you heard with CD
corrected some of your players sonic flaws that you found displeasing,
which led you to conclude the foil on the amp fuse somehow works better
on one input than another.

Aluminum foil is a completely different material than the laminated
foil Ive been using, notwithstanding the fact that it isn't normally
adhesive. I would expect to either have a completely different sound,
or make no difference at all. But Im willing to try it on something, if
you've compared it to the same type of foil Ive been using, and claim
it sounds better to you. If your CD player does not perform to
satisfaction, or you simply want something better, you can simply foil
the fuse of the CD player.

I do not beleive the foiling process has any effect on whether the
fuses blow or don't blow. I don't see the connection and that's not
been my experience in foiling fuses. If you did what I did yesterday,
which was to smear oil on the plug blades of my amplifier, then I can
understand if you find this tweak is more likely to cause fuses to
blow! ;-)

wrote:
jakdedert wrote:

That's because he is a troll. He never cared to have the question
answered in any meaningful way, because he never somodified his
amplifier, therefore he never actually *heard* any difference, had no
real investment in whether what he was allegedly doing was safe...and
was just itching for someone to answer so that he could insult him...

Oh great. Another zealot of the religious audio techie order who makes
a false and groundless claim that he states as FACT, a claim of being
able to read someone's mind no less, without feeling the need to
provide solid facts to back up his claims.
Unfortunately, jakyourselfoff, this is exactly what we've seen from ALL
of you audio techs on this newsgroup, when making audio claims. You
freaks have never backed up a SINGLE solitary assertion against me with
facts. Let's see who can guess why that is, hmmm?


...because he is a troll. It seems, a very good one.

I must you people keep saying that, and I've never tried to be a
"troll", and I'm not sure I know what that is. So since you mentioned
it, what the **** IS a "troll", according to you freaks? Is it someone
who isn't sincere in his arguments and intellectually dishonest, like
say.... Arnie Krueger? The same Arnie Krueger that you pat on the back
and trade jokes with when ridiculing someone who doesn't conform to
your audio religion? Is it someone who spends their entire LIVES on
newsgroups, with about 6 billion posts to their name? Like say....
Arnie Krueger? Could someone who describes themselves as a "master
baiter", when talking about their posting to newsgroups, be accurately
assessed as a "troll"? Like, for example, your precious precious Arny
Krueger did, in his lifelong trolling of audio newsgroups? How about
someone who spammed newsgroups with the same message over and over and
over again... would THAT person be called a "troll"? Like, say, your
leader Arnie Krueger did? How about a guy who changes his name more
often than he changes his underwear... like say Arnie/Arny/Arnold
Kruger/Krueger did? Would THAT be what you people call a "troll"?

Or is your defintion of "troll" what I've come to understand: someone
who discusses something YOU don't believe in, and that you CAN'T refute
with factual evidence, and CAN'T successfully fight on ANY level, in
ANY degree? So does making up lies about the person and calling them a
"troll" in another pathetic effort to invalidate their claims (claims
which you've NEVER been able to disprove or even tried...) make you and
your little techie chummies feel better?

I think I understand now: A "TROLL", according to RATs, can be merely
anyone who is not welcome, for whatever reasons, on their newsgroup.
Unfortunately, although you've made a little techie geek boys club of
this group, it ain't YOUR newsgroup. I don't care how many years you
RAT junkies have been eating pellets on this newsgroup, and that this
is the first time I post to it. According to me, its as much MY group
as it is anyone of you dumb ignorant audio techs. The fact that you
call me names like "troll", which is akin to what 6-year olds do,
doesn't bother me in the slightest.

YOU are the ones who trolled ME, by piling on derisive attacks on me
when I asked what by the ****ing RAT charter, is a legitimate post for
this newsgroup. YOU are the ones who were clearly "itching to insult
ME". So if me fighting back against you ignorant goofs is "trolling",
then you saying Im a "very good troll" is a compliment to me - since I
took ALL of you ignorant mother****ers on single-handedly, and am still
winning the debate (due to preponderence of evidence on my part). And
lastly, if I'm the troll you say I am, considering that there are over
210 posts in my thread and you have been saying this from the beginning
of it, what the **** does that say about YOU!?! LOL!

In response to your question :
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache...ct=cln k&cd=6


http://www.jobmachine.net/fjamindex.....htm~mainframe


http://www.dickalba.demon.co.uk/usen.../faq_trol.html

To be clear, pond scum has more value than you, or your
highly developed vocabulary.
At least it produces something useful, oxygen.

wrote:
Geoff@home wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

You're right that marking the side of the cap will have an effect on
the sound. But in my experience, I don't think it will "completely
change the sound". And if it does change the sound, it might not be a
bad thing, provided you use the right ink. For example, I am currently
using blue permanent ink on the END CAPS of the fuses. It provides an
audible improvement pleasing to my ears. Different colors will produce
different results, and one may be more pleasant to you than another.
Not easy to experiment with though, unless you have many fuses of the
same rating (since once you apply it, you can't easily unapply it).

So green markers are on the 'out' now ?

I don't know, I've been out of the audio scene for some time now, and
never followed the "politics of audio" to begin with. Maybe the pens
are, but if so, that's just another aspect of our disposable society
with its fickle population (witness the major major decline of home
hifi sound quality coinciding with the moment that the movie companies
started brainwashing people that having a freaking home theatre in
their house with "5.1" speakers is a GREAT thing for music
reproduction, and so much better than merely two speakers and nasty
old-fashioned "stereo"). Point being, if it worked to begin with (and
it did to many who tried it, but of course didn't work so well to those
who didn't try it, and only flapped their stupid gums about it a
lot....), then the Stoplight marker will work as well now, or 20 years
from now. What many Stoplight owners don't know, is that it works as
well on vinyl records, audio tapes and videocassettes as it does on
CDs.

HOW it works is more of an interesting question, I think. According to
others, its very possible the manufacters are wrong about the
underlying principle, and that it works on a completely different field
of science (I will only say here that it is a little understood
field...). What we don't know about "audio", presently, is probably a
whole lot more than what we do know.

I think they were proved inferior
with CD-edges too.

That's not been my experience. And I remember speaking with many people
who used the pen, and "proved" that it did work. Not everyone can hear
differences, but you can say that over just about ANYTHING in audio.
That's usually because of the simple fact that some people have more
adept listening skills than others (which doesn't mean those with
lesser skills can't hear a given effect). I had a CD-Stoplight pen a
number of years ago, and found that it acheived good results, better to
my (highly trained) ears than other colors I tested at the time (it
uses a "paint" ink, which is quite different from that of a felt
marker). But I have not used the pen recently or compared it with
anything else in years.


Besides, I can't mark the glass of my fuses with anything, because the
glass is covered by strips of self-adhesive laser-etched silver foil
(which again, makes a tremendous difference to the sonics).


I find enveloping the fuse in aluminium foil sounds better than the silver,
though the 'laser etch' may well go better with CD players. The other
advantage of this process (as well as the sound improvement) it that the
fuses seldom blow.

We were talking about "foiling" the fuses of an audio amplifier. I
don't see how you could have come to a logical conclusion that one foil
or other on the glass of the amp fuse is better for cd sound or
anything else. I think you need to revisit basic principles of how an
amplifier works. An improvement in the sound of the amp should yield
the same order of improvement with anything connected to it. Ive never
had an experience that ran contrary to that principle in all my years
of audio experimentation. Perhaps the difference you heard with CD
corrected some of your players sonic flaws that you found displeasing,
which led you to conclude the foil on the amp fuse somehow works better
on one input than another.

Aluminum foil is a completely different material than the laminated
foil Ive been using, notwithstanding the fact that it isn't normally
adhesive. I would expect to either have a completely different sound,
or make no difference at all. But Im willing to try it on something, if
you've compared it to the same type of foil Ive been using, and claim
it sounds better to you. If your CD player does not perform to
satisfaction, or you simply want something better, you can simply foil
the fuse of the CD player.

I do not beleive the foiling process has any effect on whether the
fuses blow or don't blow. I don't see the connection and that's not
been my experience in foiling fuses. If you did what I did yesterday,
which was to smear oil on the plug blades of my amplifier, then I can
understand if you find this tweak is more likely to cause fuses to
blow! ;-)

It is obvious that you have been foiled, a common method of bypassing
a safety device that is causing your instant gratification to cease.
" I don't know why it's blowing fuses, but the foil makes it stop
blowing them."
Now your fuse is tweaked twit.

Bypassing the fuse is like shooting the messenger.

wrote:
wrote:
Geoff@home wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

You're right that marking the side of the cap will have an effect on
the sound. But in my experience, I don't think it will "completely
change the sound". And if it does change the sound, it might not be a
bad thing, provided you use the right ink. For example, I am currently
using blue permanent ink on the END CAPS of the fuses. It provides an
audible improvement pleasing to my ears. Different colors will produce
different results, and one may be more pleasant to you than another.
Not easy to experiment with though, unless you have many fuses of the
same rating (since once you apply it, you can't easily unapply it).

So green markers are on the 'out' now ?

I don't know, I've been out of the audio scene for some time now, and
never followed the "politics of audio" to begin with. Maybe the pens
are, but if so, that's just another aspect of our disposable society
with its fickle population (witness the major major decline of home
hifi sound quality coinciding with the moment that the movie companies
started brainwashing people that having a freaking home theatre in
their house with "5.1" speakers is a GREAT thing for music
reproduction, and so much better than merely two speakers and nasty
old-fashioned "stereo"). Point being, if it worked to begin with (and
it did to many who tried it, but of course didn't work so well to those
who didn't try it, and only flapped their stupid gums about it a
lot....), then the Stoplight marker will work as well now, or 20 years
from now. What many Stoplight owners don't know, is that it works as
well on vinyl records, audio tapes and videocassettes as it does on
CDs.

HOW it works is more of an interesting question, I think. According to
others, its very possible the manufacters are wrong about the
underlying principle, and that it works on a completely different field
of science (I will only say here that it is a little understood
field...). What we don't know about "audio", presently, is probably a
whole lot more than what we do know.

I think they were proved inferior
with CD-edges too.

That's not been my experience. And I remember speaking with many people
who used the pen, and "proved" that it did work. Not everyone can hear
differences, but you can say that over just about ANYTHING in audio.
That's usually because of the simple fact that some people have more
adept listening skills than others (which doesn't mean those with
lesser skills can't hear a given effect). I had a CD-Stoplight pen a
number of years ago, and found that it acheived good results, better to
my (highly trained) ears than other colors I tested at the time (it
uses a "paint" ink, which is quite different from that of a felt
marker). But I have not used the pen recently or compared it with
anything else in years.


Besides, I can't mark the glass of my fuses with anything, because the
glass is covered by strips of self-adhesive laser-etched silver foil
(which again, makes a tremendous difference to the sonics).


I find enveloping the fuse in aluminium foil sounds better than the silver,
though the 'laser etch' may well go better with CD players. The other
advantage of this process (as well as the sound improvement) it that the
fuses seldom blow.

We were talking about "foiling" the fuses of an audio amplifier. I
don't see how you could have come to a logical conclusion that one foil
or other on the glass of the amp fuse is better for cd sound or
anything else. I think you need to revisit basic principles of how an
amplifier works. An improvement in the sound of the amp should yield
the same order of improvement with anything connected to it. Ive never
had an experience that ran contrary to that principle in all my years
of audio experimentation. Perhaps the difference you heard with CD
corrected some of your players sonic flaws that you found displeasing,
which led you to conclude the foil on the amp fuse somehow works better
on one input than another.

Aluminum foil is a completely different material than the laminated
foil Ive been using, notwithstanding the fact that it isn't normally
adhesive. I would expect to either have a completely different sound,
or make no difference at all. But Im willing to try it on something, if
you've compared it to the same type of foil Ive been using, and claim
it sounds better to you. If your CD player does not perform to
satisfaction, or you simply want something better, you can simply foil
the fuse of the CD player.

I do not beleive the foiling process has any effect on whether the
fuses blow or don't blow. I don't see the connection and that's not
been my experience in foiling fuses. If you did what I did yesterday,
which was to smear oil on the plug blades of my amplifier, then I can
understand if you find this tweak is more likely to cause fuses to
blow! ;-)

It is obvious that you have been foiled, a common method of bypassing
a safety device that is causing your instant gratification to cease.

No you stupid ****, I never talked about foiling fuses to bypass them.
You must love the taste of your foot in your mouth, ya ****ing pervert.


" I don't know why it's blowing fuses, but the foil makes it stop
blowing them."
Now your fuse is tweaked twit.

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just how ****ing
stupid you really are, by not being able to follow a conversation
between two people longer than two words. What you just quoted didn't
come from me, but from my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any
more of your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie princess?
You've been stalking me from the get go. You just can't tear your lips
off my ass, can you, westpussy?

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Geoff@home wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

You're right that marking the side of the cap will have an effect on
the sound. But in my experience, I don't think it will "completely
change the sound". And if it does change the sound, it might not be a
bad thing, provided you use the right ink. For example, I am currently
using blue permanent ink on the END CAPS of the fuses. It provides an
audible improvement pleasing to my ears. Different colors will produce
different results, and one may be more pleasant to you than another.
Not easy to experiment with though, unless you have many fuses of the
same rating (since once you apply it, you can't easily unapply it).

So green markers are on the 'out' now ?

I don't know, I've been out of the audio scene for some time now, and
never followed the "politics of audio" to begin with. Maybe the pens
are, but if so, that's just another aspect of our disposable society
with its fickle population (witness the major major decline of home
hifi sound quality coinciding with the moment that the movie companies
started brainwashing people that having a freaking home theatre in
their house with "5.1" speakers is a GREAT thing for music
reproduction, and so much better than merely two speakers and nasty
old-fashioned "stereo"). Point being, if it worked to begin with (and
it did to many who tried it, but of course didn't work so well to those
who didn't try it, and only flapped their stupid gums about it a
lot....), then the Stoplight marker will work as well now, or 20 years
from now. What many Stoplight owners don't know, is that it works as
well on vinyl records, audio tapes and videocassettes as it does on
CDs.

HOW it works is more of an interesting question, I think. According to
others, its very possible the manufacters are wrong about the
underlying principle, and that it works on a completely different field
of science (I will only say here that it is a little understood
field...). What we don't know about "audio", presently, is probably a
whole lot more than what we do know.

I think they were proved inferior
with CD-edges too.

That's not been my experience. And I remember speaking with many people
who used the pen, and "proved" that it did work. Not everyone can hear
differences, but you can say that over just about ANYTHING in audio.
That's usually because of the simple fact that some people have more
adept listening skills than others (which doesn't mean those with
lesser skills can't hear a given effect). I had a CD-Stoplight pen a
number of years ago, and found that it acheived good results, better to
my (highly trained) ears than other colors I tested at the time (it
uses a "paint" ink, which is quite different from that of a felt
marker). But I have not used the pen recently or compared it with
anything else in years.


Besides, I can't mark the glass of my fuses with anything, because the
glass is covered by strips of self-adhesive laser-etched silver foil
(which again, makes a tremendous difference to the sonics).


I find enveloping the fuse in aluminium foil sounds better than the silver,
though the 'laser etch' may well go better with CD players. The other
advantage of this process (as well as the sound improvement) it that the
fuses seldom blow.

We were talking about "foiling" the fuses of an audio amplifier. I
don't see how you could have come to a logical conclusion that one foil
or other on the glass of the amp fuse is better for cd sound or
anything else. I think you need to revisit basic principles of how an
amplifier works. An improvement in the sound of the amp should yield
the same order of improvement with anything connected to it. Ive never
had an experience that ran contrary to that principle in all my years
of audio experimentation. Perhaps the difference you heard with CD
corrected some of your players sonic flaws that you found displeasing,
which led you to conclude the foil on the amp fuse somehow works better
on one input than another.

Aluminum foil is a completely different material than the laminated
foil Ive been using, notwithstanding the fact that it isn't normally
adhesive. I would expect to either have a completely different sound,
or make no difference at all. But Im willing to try it on something, if
you've compared it to the same type of foil Ive been using, and claim
it sounds better to you. If your CD player does not perform to
satisfaction, or you simply want something better, you can simply foil
the fuse of the CD player.

I do not beleive the foiling process has any effect on whether the
fuses blow or don't blow. I don't see the connection and that's not
been my experience in foiling fuses. If you did what I did yesterday,
which was to smear oil on the plug blades of my amplifier, then I can
understand if you find this tweak is more likely to cause fuses to
blow! ;-)

It is obvious that you have been foiled, a common method of bypassing
a safety device that is causing your instant gratification to cease.

No you stupid ****, I never talked about foiling fuses to bypass them.
You must love the taste of your foot in your mouth, ya ****ing pervert.


" I don't know why it's blowing fuses, but the foil makes it stop
blowing them."
Now your fuse is tweaked twit.

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just how ****ing
stupid you really are, by not being able to follow a conversation
between two people longer than two words. What you just quoted didn't
come from me, but from my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any
more of your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie princess?
You've been stalking me from the get go. You just can't tear your lips
off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Foil mouth,

Your latest rant, has all the characteristics of trolling for a
response.
Your ability to write technical commentary shows that you surely
must have had excellent instructors in your electronics training.

wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Interesting how these supposedly highly intellgient subjectivists can't keep
a clean mouth, eh?

For the past 10 years I've been calling this "The prerequisite subjectivist
personal attack".

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Geoff@home wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

You're right that marking the side of the cap will have an effect on
the sound. But in my experience, I don't think it will "completely
change the sound". And if it does change the sound, it might not be a
bad thing, provided you use the right ink. For example, I am currently
using blue permanent ink on the END CAPS of the fuses. It provides an
audible improvement pleasing to my ears. Different colors will produce
different results, and one may be more pleasant to you than another.
Not easy to experiment with though, unless you have many fuses of the
same rating (since once you apply it, you can't easily unapply it).

So green markers are on the 'out' now ?

I don't know, I've been out of the audio scene for some time now, and
never followed the "politics of audio" to begin with. Maybe the pens
are, but if so, that's just another aspect of our disposable society
with its fickle population (witness the major major decline of home
hifi sound quality coinciding with the moment that the movie companies
started brainwashing people that having a freaking home theatre in
their house with "5.1" speakers is a GREAT thing for music
reproduction, and so much better than merely two speakers and nasty
old-fashioned "stereo"). Point being, if it worked to begin with (and
it did to many who tried it, but of course didn't work so well to those
who didn't try it, and only flapped their stupid gums about it a
lot....), then the Stoplight marker will work as well now, or 20 years
from now. What many Stoplight owners don't know, is that it works as
well on vinyl records, audio tapes and videocassettes as it does on
CDs.

HOW it works is more of an interesting question, I think. According to
others, its very possible the manufacters are wrong about the
underlying principle, and that it works on a completely different field
of science (I will only say here that it is a little understood
field...). What we don't know about "audio", presently, is probably a
whole lot more than what we do know.

I think they were proved inferior
with CD-edges too.

That's not been my experience. And I remember speaking with many people
who used the pen, and "proved" that it did work. Not everyone can hear
differences, but you can say that over just about ANYTHING in audio.
That's usually because of the simple fact that some people have more
adept listening skills than others (which doesn't mean those with
lesser skills can't hear a given effect). I had a CD-Stoplight pen a
number of years ago, and found that it acheived good results, better to
my (highly trained) ears than other colors I tested at the time (it
uses a "paint" ink, which is quite different from that of a felt
marker). But I have not used the pen recently or compared it with
anything else in years.


Besides, I can't mark the glass of my fuses with anything, because the
glass is covered by strips of self-adhesive laser-etched silver foil
(which again, makes a tremendous difference to the sonics).


I find enveloping the fuse in aluminium foil sounds better than the silver,
though the 'laser etch' may well go better with CD players. The other
advantage of this process (as well as the sound improvement) it that the
fuses seldom blow.

We were talking about "foiling" the fuses of an audio amplifier. I
don't see how you could have come to a logical conclusion that one foil
or other on the glass of the amp fuse is better for cd sound or
anything else. I think you need to revisit basic principles of how an
amplifier works. An improvement in the sound of the amp should yield
the same order of improvement with anything connected to it. Ive never
had an experience that ran contrary to that principle in all my years
of audio experimentation. Perhaps the difference you heard with CD
corrected some of your players sonic flaws that you found displeasing,
which led you to conclude the foil on the amp fuse somehow works better
on one input than another.

Aluminum foil is a completely different material than the laminated
foil Ive been using, notwithstanding the fact that it isn't normally
adhesive. I would expect to either have a completely different sound,
or make no difference at all. But Im willing to try it on something, if
you've compared it to the same type of foil Ive been using, and claim
it sounds better to you. If your CD player does not perform to
satisfaction, or you simply want something better, you can simply foil
the fuse of the CD player.

I do not beleive the foiling process has any effect on whether the
fuses blow or don't blow. I don't see the connection and that's not
been my experience in foiling fuses. If you did what I did yesterday,
which was to smear oil on the plug blades of my amplifier, then I can
understand if you find this tweak is more likely to cause fuses to
blow! ;-)

It is obvious that you have been foiled, a common method of bypassing
a safety device that is causing your instant gratification to cease.

No you stupid ****, I never talked about foiling fuses to bypass them.
You must love the taste of your foot in your mouth, ya ****ing pervert.


" I don't know why it's blowing fuses, but the foil makes it stop
blowing them."
Now your fuse is tweaked twit.

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just how ****ing
stupid you really are, by not being able to follow a conversation
between two people longer than two words. What you just quoted didn't
come from me, but from my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any
more of your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie princess?
You've been stalking me from the get go. You just can't tear your lips
off my ass, can you, westpussy?

You failed to mention in your specification, that the adhesive on
your silver foil , laser etched fuse sheathing was dielectric,
or which side of the foil was etched.
Is there a gap between the end cap and the glass or does
the silver foil cover both the glass and the end caps?
How can we possibly duplicate your research without
full disclosure?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Interesting how these supposedly highly intellgient subjectivists can't
keep a clean mouth, eh?

For the past 10 years I've been calling this "The prerequisite
subjectivist personal attack".

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors. The only question I have is: Why are you wasting your valuable
time on trolls? I know you have better things to do.

Stuart Welwood
6 sigma

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Interesting how these supposedly highly intellgient subjectivists can't keep
a clean mouth, eh?

For the past 10 years I've been calling this "The prerequisite subjectivist
personal attack".

I'm not a "subjectivist", so you can cram your derisive labels up your
fat Nazi ass, KKKrueger. And if there was even ONE so-called "highly
intelligent objectivist" on this newsgroup, well after 220 posts in
this thread, you'd think that person would be able to prove my fuse
tweak wrong, or anything else I've said about audio for that matter,
with facts and solid evidence. Instead, not ONE of you so-called
"objectivists" (which you're anything but), can figure out how to
perform the same experiment that I did, to even be able to attempt to
prove me wrong. You've all spent about 60 times longer writing ad
hominem attacks to me, than it would have taken to repeat my
experiment. No kidding you're so ****ing ignorant about the hobby of
music reproduction. I don't know what you people are calling
yourselves, but you're certainly NOT audiophiles.

What I find interesting is that not only have you proven to everyone to
be too much of of a chicken**** to debate me back when I challenged you
way back in this thread, but you're too much of a fat pussy****** to
even respond to me directly. Instead, you use your usual tactic of
making snide remarks about me to your "safe" tech buddies here. On
Usenet, you're an "audio nazi", who just like your real Nazi brothers,
only found courage and the means to bully others who don't follow your
"fascist audio credo", when in groups of like-minded "brothers". If you
faced me alone and tried to act half as brave, you would cream in your
disco pants, you fat faggot.

As for the curse words, we'll obviously, I don't reserve my finest
language for ****ing ignorant cretins like you that don't deserve it,
so get over it already. You're just flogging a dead horse again. If
vulgarity alone was a sign of stupidity you dumb ****, what do you call
spewing out a string of putrid curse words when one of your opponents
on a newsgroup calls you at your home to talk to you about your
reprehensible behavior on the newsgroups? For that matter, what do you
call falsely accusing the editor of a major high end magazine of
sending you child pornography in email and slanderizing, which you did
in your many infamous "debating tricks", as Google archives will
attest? What's your phone number again, I'd like to see how civil and
curse-free you sound toward me when I call you and start chatting it up
with your wife about you, if she responds first?

Stuart Welwood wrote:

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or
"slew rate" of an amplifier my friend, or how to measure such, will not
tell you JACK **** about what it sounds like. All it will do is help to
send you down the downward spiral of this crazy religion of theirs,
which might help you design gear that sounds like **** (no shortage of
that on the market), but will get you much further away from
reproducing music in your home, that has any hope of sounding like real
music. Although they insist otherwise to me, I've never heard a hifi
system from a techie that sounded more musical than just the system in
my kid's room. That's what you get when audio ignorants put together a
system based on amplitude (ie. bass, mid, treble), watts, or other
irrelevant technical aspects, and where the speaker is king.

You have a LOT more to learn about audio than what you will learn from
your so-called "serious contributors", and if you stay in this religion
of theirs, you'll never get there.

The only question I have is: Why are you wasting your valuable
time on trolls?

The answer, is because I'm not a "troll". Its your beanie buddies that
are the trolls. Its your beanie buddies that first attacked me, and
that continued to do so, even after declaring how horrible I am to
still be here responding to their attacks. Face it, slo-mo: your best
friends in life are nothing but vile, disgusting, low-life
TROLLLLLLLLLZZZZZ! Oooooh, doesn't the ssscare you? What did you say?
I'm wrong?? Did you just say I'm WRONG?? Okay, ****face, then let's
make a test. I'm writing this at 12:54pm on Wedensday, (my time). If we
see any further posts added to this thread that are not by me after
this point, then I will have be proven right. Your sick, twisted,
pathetic techie freak friends have basically nothing better to do in
life but hang around on newsgroups, trolling people like me, who post
legitimate on-topic technical queries, looking for straight answers to
a serious question. (Of course, I forgot the question by now...)


I know you have better things to do.

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread, mostly attacks against me from your
techie buds, says that obviously they DON'T, and that you're an
ignorant twit who doesn't want to see that.

Stuart Welwood wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Interesting how these supposedly highly intellgient subjectivists can't
keep a clean mouth, eh?

For the past 10 years I've been calling this "The prerequisite
subjectivist personal attack".

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or
"slew rate" of an amplifier my friend, or how to measure such, will not
tell you JACK **** about what it sounds like. All it will do is help to
send you down the downward spiral of this crazy religion of theirs,
which might help you design gear that sounds like **** (no shortage of
that on the market), but will get you much further away from
reproducing music in your home, that has any hope of sounding like real
music. Although they insist otherwise to me, I've never heard a hifi
system from a techie that sounded more musical than just the system in
my kid's room. I'm sure Dick Pierce's is no exception to that. That's
what you get when audio ignorants put together a system based on
amplitude (ie. bass, mid, treble), watts, or other irrelevant technical
aspects, and where the speaker is king.

You have a LOT more to learn about audio than what you will learn from
your so-called "serious contributors", and if you stay in this religion
of theirs, you'll never get there.

The only question I have is: Why are you wasting your valuable
time on trolls?

The answer, is because I'm not a "troll". Its your beanie buddies that
are the trolls. Its your beanie buddies that first attacked me, and
that continued to do so, even after declaring how horrible I am to
still be here responding to their attacks. Face it, slo-mo: your best
friends in life are nothing but vile, disgusting, low-life
TROLLLLLLLLLZZZZZ! Oooooh, doesn't the ssscare you? What did you say?
I'm wrong?? Did you just say I'm WRONG?? Okay, ****face, then let's
make a test. I'm writing this at 12:54pm on Wedensday, (my time). If we
see any further posts added to this thread that are not by me after
this point, then I will have be proven right. Your sick, twisted,
pathetic techie freak friends have basically nothing better to do in
life but hang around on newsgroups, trolling people like me, who post
legitimate on-topic technical queries, looking for straight answers to
a serious question. (Of course, I forgot the question by now...)


I know you have better things to do.

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread, mostly attacks against me from your
techie buds, says that obviously they DON'T, and that you're an
ignorant twit who doesn't want to see that.

Stuart Welwood wrote:

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or
"slew rate" of an amplifier my friend, or how to measure such, will not
tell you JACK **** about what it sounds like. All it will do is help to
send you down the downward spiral of this crazy religion of theirs,
which might help you design gear that sounds like **** (no shortage of
that on the market), but will get you much further away from
reproducing music in your home, that has any hope of sounding like real
music. Although they insist otherwise to me, I've never heard a hifi
system from a techie that sounded more musical than just the system in
my kid's room. I'm sure Dick Pierce's system is no exception. That's
what you get when audio ignorants put together a system based on
amplitude (ie. bass, mid, treble), watts, or other irrelevant technical
aspects, and where the speaker is king.

You have a LOT more to learn about audio than what you will learn from
your so-called "serious contributors", and if you stay in this religion
of theirs, you'll never get there.

The only question I have is: Why are you wasting your valuable
time on trolls?

The answer, is because I'm not a "troll". Its your beanie buddies that
are the trolls. Its your beanie buddies that first attacked me, and
that continued to do so, even after declaring how horrible I am to
still be here responding to their attacks. Face it, slo-mo: your best
friends in life are nothing but vile, disgusting, low-life
TROLLLLLLLLLZZZZZ! Oooooh, doesn't the ssscare you? What did you say?
I'm wrong?? Did you just say I'm WRONG?? Okay, ****face, then let's
make a test. I'm writing this at 12:54pm on Wedensday, (my time). If we
see any further posts added to this thread that are not by me after
this point, then I will have be proven right. Your sick, twisted,
pathetic techie freak friends have basically nothing better to do in
life but hang around on newsgroups, trolling people like me, who post
legitimate on-topic technical queries, looking for straight answers to
a serious question. (Of course, I forgot the question by now...)


I know you have better things to do.

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread, mostly attacks against me from your
techie buds, says that obviously they DON'T, and that you're an
ignorant twit who doesn't want to see that.

Stuart Welwood wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Interesting how these supposedly highly intellgient subjectivists can't
keep a clean mouth, eh?

For the past 10 years I've been calling this "The prerequisite
subjectivist personal attack".

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or
"slew rate" of an amplifier my friend, or how to measure such, will not
tell you JACK **** about what it sounds like. All it will do is help to
send you down the downward spiral of this crazy religion of theirs,
which might help you design gear that sounds like **** (no shortage of
that on the market), but will get you much further away from
reproducing music in your home, that has any hope of sounding like real
music. Although they insist otherwise to me, I've never heard a hifi
system from a techie that sounded more musical than just the system in
my kid's room. That's what you get when audio ignorants put together a
system based on amplitude (ie. bass, mid, treble), watts, or other
irrelevant technical aspects, and where the speaker is king.

You have a LOT more to learn about audio than what you will learn from
your so-called "serious contributors", and if you stay in this religion
of theirs, you'll never get there.

The only question I have is: Why are you wasting your valuable
time on trolls?

The answer, is because I'm not a "troll". Its your beanie buddies that
are the trolls. Its your beanie buddies that first attacked me, and
that continued to do so, even after declaring how horrible I am to
still be here responding to their attacks. Face it, slo-mo: your best
friends in life are nothing but vile, disgusting, low-life
TROLLLLLLLLLZZZZZ! Oooooh, doesn't the ssscare you? What did you say?
I'm wrong?? Did you just say I'm WRONG?? Okay, ****face, then let's
make a test. I'm writing this at 12:54pm on Wedensday, (my time). If we
see any further posts added to this thread that are not by me after
this point, then I will have be proven right. Your sick, twisted,
pathetic techie freak friends have basically nothing better to do in
life but hang around on newsgroups, trolling people like me, who post
legitimate on-topic technical queries, looking for straight answers to
a serious question. (Of course, I forgot the question by now...)


I know you have better things to do.

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread, mostly attacks against me from your
techie buds, says that obviously they DON'T, and that you're an
ignorant twit who doesn't want to see that.

Stuart Welwood
6 sigma

Stuart Welwood wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Interesting how these supposedly highly intellgient subjectivists can't
keep a clean mouth, eh?

For the past 10 years I've been calling this "The prerequisite
subjectivist personal attack".

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or
"slew rate" of an amplifier my friend, or how to measure such, will not
tell you JACK **** about what it sounds like. All it will do is help to
send you down the downward spiral of this crazy religion of theirs,
which might help you design gear that sounds like **** (no shortage of
that on the market), but will get you much further away from
reproducing music in your home, that has any hope of sounding like real
music. Although they insist otherwise to me, I've never heard a hifi
system from a techie that sounded more musical than just the system in
my kid's room. I'm sure Dick Pierce's is no exception to that. That's
what you get when audio ignorants put together a system based on
amplitude (ie. bass, mid, treble), watts, or other irrelevant technical
aspects, and where the speaker is king.

You have a LOT more to learn about audio than what you will learn from
your so-called "serious contributors", and if you stay in this religion
of theirs, you'll never get there.

The only question I have is: Why are you wasting your valuable
time on trolls?

The answer, is because I'm not a "troll". Its your beanie buddies that
are the trolls. Its your beanie buddies that first attacked me, and
that continued to do so, even after declaring how horrible I am to
still be here responding to their attacks. Face it, slo-mo: your best
friends in life are nothing but vile, disgusting, low-life
TROLLLLLLLLLZZZZZ! Oooooh, doesn't the ssscare you? What did you say?
I'm wrong?? Did you just say I'm WRONG?? Okay, ****face, then let's
make a test. I'm writing this at 12:54pm on Wedensday, (my time). If we
see any further posts added to this thread that are not by me after
this point, then I will have be proven right. Your sick, twisted,
pathetic techie freak friends have basically nothing better to do in
life but hang around on newsgroups, trolling people like me, who post
legitimate on-topic technical queries, looking for straight answers to
a serious question. (Of course, I forgot the question by now...)


I know you have better things to do.

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread, mostly attacks against me from your
techie buds, says that obviously they DON'T, and that you're an
ignorant twit who doesn't want to see that.

Stuart Welwood wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

Interesting how these supposedly highly intellgient subjectivists can't
keep a clean mouth, eh?

For the past 10 years I've been calling this "The prerequisite
subjectivist personal attack".

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or
"slew rate" of an amplifier my friend, or how to measure such, will not
tell you JACK **** about what it sounds like. All it will do is help to
send you down the downward spiral of this crazy religion of theirs,
which might help you design gear that sounds like **** (no shortage of
that on the market), but will get you much further away from
reproducing music in your home, that has any hope of sounding like real
music. Although they insist otherwise to me, I've never heard a hifi
system from a techie that sounded more musical than just the system in
my kid's room. That's what you get when audio ignorants put together a
system based on amplitude (ie. bass, mid, treble), watts, or other
irrelevant technical aspects, and where the speaker is king.

You have a LOT more to learn about audio than what you will learn from
your so-called "serious contributors", and if you stay in this religion
of theirs, you'll never get there.

The only question I have is: Why are you wasting your valuable
time on trolls?

The answer, is because I'm not a "troll". Its your beanie buddies that
are the trolls. Its your beanie buddies that first attacked me, and
that continued to do so, even after declaring how horrible I am to
still be here responding to their attacks. Face it, slo-mo: your best
friends in life are nothing but vile, disgusting, low-life
TROLLLLLLLLLZZZZZ! Oooooh, doesn't the ssscare you? What did you say?
I'm wrong?? Did you just say I'm WRONG?? Okay, ****face, then let's
make a test. I'm writing this at 12:54pm on Wedensday, (my time). If we
see any further posts added to this thread that are not by me after
this point, then I will have be proven right. Your sick, twisted,
pathetic techie freak friends have basically nothing better to do in
life but hang around on newsgroups, trolling people like me, who post
legitimate on-topic technical queries, looking for straight answers to
a serious question. (Of course, I forgot the question by now...)


I know you have better things to do.

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread, mostly attacks against me from your
techie buds, says that obviously they DON'T, and that you're an
ignorant twit who doesn't want to see that.

Stuart Welwood
6 sigma

wrote:

You failed to mention in your specification, that the adhesive on
your silver foil , laser etched fuse sheathing was dielectric,
or which side of the foil was etched.
Is there a gap between the end cap and the glass or does
the silver foil cover both the glass and the end caps?
How can we possibly duplicate your research without
full disclosure?

I'm sorry, but as a rule, I don't debate with trolls like yourself, or
vulgar name-calling assholes like yourself. I already told you I didn't
want to hear from you, didn't I. So **** off and stop responding to me,
TROLL.

wrote:

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread...

Congratulations! That's something that any troll would be proud of.

//Walt

Your repeating yourself, quite pointlessly.

wrote:

You failed to mention in your specification, that the adhesive on
your silver foil , laser etched fuse sheathing was dielectric,
or which side of the foil was etched.
Is there a gap between the end cap and the glass or does
the silver foil cover both the glass and the end caps?
How can we possibly duplicate your research without
full disclosure?

I'm sorry, but as a rule, I don't debate with trolls like yourself, or
vulgar name-calling assholes like yourself. I already told you I didn't
want to hear from you, didn't I. So **** off and stop responding to me,
TROLL.

In article .com, wrote:

Stuart Welwood wrote:

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or

Either you post under different names or somethings up. Its hard to believe
one just listens to newsgroups and does not reply, untill ALL OF A SUDDEN
just creating a big stir are ya!!!???


greg

wrote:
wrote:

You failed to mention in your specification, that the adhesive on
your silver foil , laser etched fuse sheathing was dielectric,
or which side of the foil was etched.
Is there a gap between the end cap and the glass or does
the silver foil cover both the glass and the end caps?
How can we possibly duplicate your research without
full disclosure?

I'm sorry, but as a rule, I don't debate with trolls like yourself, or
vulgar name-calling assholes like yourself. I already told you I didn't
want to hear from you, didn't I. So **** off and stop responding to me,
TROLL.

Please quote the vulgar name calling parts of my posts,
I believe your confused with your own material.
This is a discussion, not a debate, and other may be
interested in your responses to my inquiries.

wrote in news:1139157220.975816.217990
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

I remind you that I am still the current champ and winner of any of the
audio debates in this thread, as not a single ONE of you chicken****
whiners ever proved me wrong abotu ANYTHING, with anything even close
to solid factual evidence (and not simply faulty theories).



Ladbury, you need to get a clue.
The one who makes the assertion has the burden of proof in a debate.
You made the looney assertion that bypassing a fuse will change the
sound of audio.
Prove it, and state why.
Otherwise, stop making foolish claims.

"GregS" wrote in message

In article
.com,
wrote:

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of
beanie heads. About the technical side of audio.
Although "Dick" is one of the biggest dicks on the audio
newsgroups, he does know something or other about this
technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't
know jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real
music. Neither does anyone else on this group. Knowing
the ****ing "damping factor" or

Either you post under different names or somethings up.
Its hard to believe
one just listens to newsgroups and does not reply, untill
ALL OF A SUDDEN
just creating a big stir are ya!!!???

Serial sockpuppets. Nothing new.

wrote in message
oups.com

wrote in message
oups.com

Once again, you ignorant bum****, you demonstrate just
how ****ing stupid you really are, by not being able to
follow a conversation between two people longer than two
words. What you just quoted didn't come from me, but from
my subject, you ****ing cretin. Do you have any more of
your patheticly dumb trolls for me, faery beanie
princess? You've been stalking me from the get go. You
just can't tear your lips off my ass, can you, westpussy?

I'm sorry, but as a rule, I don't debate with trolls like
yourself, or vulgar name-calling assholes like yourself.

Obviously this Ladbury sockpuppet has one standard for himself that is set
abysmally low, and one for everybody else that is set reasonably high.

Hypocrisy 101, right? ;-)

"Joe Blough" wrote in message
0...
wrote in news:1139157220.975816.217990
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

I remind you that I am still the current champ and winner of any of
the
audio debates in this thread, as not a single ONE of you chicken****
whiners ever proved me wrong abotu ANYTHING, with anything even close
to solid factual evidence (and not simply faulty theories).



Ladbury, you need to get a clue.
The one who makes the assertion has the burden of proof in a debate.
You made the looney assertion that bypassing a fuse will change the
sound of audio.
Prove it, and state why.
Otherwise, stop making foolish claims.

He probably even thinks he is the first one to "discover"
this "phenomenon"! Perhaps if he knew of the fate of his
predecessors, he would present a more sane profile.
Nah, I must be dreaming again.

GregS wrote:
In article .com, wrote:

Stuart Welwood wrote:

Through the years, I have learned much from this group, especially from the
more knowledgeable "members" such as yourself, Dick Pierce (I'll never think
in terms of damping factor again!), Scott Dorsey, and several other serious
contributors.

I have no doubt you learned "much" from this group of beanie heads.
About the technical side of audio. Although "Dick" is one of the
biggest dicks on the audio newsgroups, he does know something or other
about this technical nature of audio. Unfortunately, he doesn't know
jack **** about how to get audio to sound like real music. Neither
does anyone else on this group. Knowing the ****ing "damping factor" or

Either you post under different names or somethings up. Its hard to believe
one just listens to newsgroups and does not reply, untill ALL OF A SUDDEN
just creating a big stir are ya!!!???

First of all, moron, there are plenty of people who read newsgroups and
dont reply. I believe they call them "lurkers" in your lingo. Second of
all, when did I say I dont respond to newsgroups, you stupid
presumptious ****wit? And whats this ALL OF A SUDDEN ****, you
ignorant ****? I'm not the one who made a stir. Rather, over 200
responses to my posts is what made the stir. If you don't like it, shut
the **** up already, and dont ****ing reply. Let this be the last I see
of you in my thread.


greg

Walt wrote:
wrote:

Right! LOL! 220 posts in my thread...

Congratulations! That's something that any troll would be proud of.

//Walt

You would know, wouldn't you, TROLL?

I. Care wrote:
In article .com,
says...
wrote:

You failed to mention in your specification, that the adhesive on
your silver foil , laser etched fuse sheathing was dielectric,
or which side of the foil was etched.
Is there a gap between the end cap and the glass or does
the silver foil cover both the glass and the end caps?
How can we possibly duplicate your research without
full disclosure?

I'm sorry, but as a rule, I don't debate with trolls like yourself, or
vulgar name-calling assholes like yourself. I already told you I didn't
want to hear from you, didn't I. So **** off and stop responding to me,
TROLL.


You post in a "Public" group, you request responses from the public, you
get responses from the public. If you don't want to hear from specific
people killfile them or don't respond. If you want responses only from
specific individuals e-mail them privately and take it off here.

Are you kidding me? If I killfiled all the assholes that responded to
me, what fun would there be in continuing to hang around here, among
this hive of ignorant audio ****s? Besides, I don't see you chiding
your RAT brothers when they whine about my presence here and beg their
comrades to ignore me (245 posts says theres a fat ****ing chance of
THAT happening on this group of do-nothing newsgroup junkies,
unfortunately), do I? Where is your demands to them to killfile me or
email me privately, instead of whining about me responding to their
moronic posts?


--
I. Care
Address fake until the SPAM goes away ;-}

Joe Blough wrote:
wrote in news:1139157220.975816.217990
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

I remind you that I am still the current champ and winner of any of the
audio debates in this thread, as not a single ONE of you chicken****
whiners ever proved me wrong abotu ANYTHING, with anything even close
to solid factual evidence (and not simply faulty theories).



Ladbury, you need to get a clue.
The one who makes the assertion has the burden of proof in a debate.
You made the looney assertion that bypassing a fuse will change the
sound of audio.
Prove it, and state why.
Otherwise, stop making foolish claims.

Oh nice. An ignorant sockpuppet ****wit telling me I need to get a
clue. First of all, since your sockpuppet name is Joe Blough, you can
suck my dick. Second of all, I was just informed by one of your RAT
buddies this wasn't a debate, but a discussion. You can argue that one
out amongst yourselves. Third of all, the only loony assertions are
coming from you, kook, and from the other sockpuppets on this group. If
you claim that mine is a loony assertion, then the burden of proof is
now on your shoulders, to PROVE your claim and state why. Otherwise,
STOP MAKING FOOLISH CLAIMS. And suck my dick.