"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

Maybe Pooh Bear does not get that I wastalking about the music,
not electronics. I know its a very hard concept to grasp,
but with your intellect, you may eventually 'get it'.

In another thread in another group a poster recently commented that he
heard
Joni Mitchell on a very poor TV sound system but was moved by the
performance.

I was one of the first to explain that it isn't the sound equipment that
gives
that experience - it is the performer.

Increased quality of reproduction simply enhances the effect, it does not
substitute or replace it.


And one of the factors by which quality reproduction enhances the
effect is by better presenting the pace (no, not speed) of the music.

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...

Clyde Slick wrote:

He's finally willing to part with his dining room chair, the one with
the brown stripe down the middle.

It's comments like that that reveal you to be lacking /devoid of comment
worth considering meaningfully.

Personal abuse drivel marks you as a a non-contributor to anything of
meaning.

However, it warms my heart to find you following me down the
path of personal retribution.

Actually - the personal abuse in this NG is truly awful. I've seem other NGs
where it's endemic too and it's not a pretty sight.

If I say something harsh or critical - it doesn't mean I'm insulting you -
that's entirely a different matter. I'm trying to avoid the abuse element. I
won't call you a ****pig for example, simply 'cos I disagree with your view.

Although, I would be almost as
glad for you to forgo this and stick with the technobabbble, cause
eventually you will cross swords with the mighty Krueger,
and I so much want to see the **** fly between the two of you.

Since Arny speaks technological sense, I see little likelihood of a
disagreement on the lines you suggest.


Gragam

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message


However, it warms my heart to find you following me down the
path of personal retribution.

That's a pretty odd thing to say.

Although, I would be almost as
glad for you to forgo this and stick with the technobabbble, cause
eventually you will cross swords with the mighty Krueger,
and I so much want to see the **** fly between the two of you.

In short, Art is addicted to that personality game called "let's you and he
fight".

"George M. Middius" wrote in message

Maybe they don't give a **** about "scientific" because it has zero
relevance for consumers.

No George, or whatever your real name is.

Not all consumers are as technologically backward as you are.

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...

Clyde Slick wrote:

He's finally willing to part with his dining room chair, the one
with
the brown stripe down the middle.

It's comments like that that reveal you to be lacking /devoid of
comment
worth considering meaningfully.

Personal abuse drivel marks you as a a non-contributor to anything of
meaning.

However, it warms my heart to find you following me down the
path of personal retribution.

Actually - the personal abuse in this NG is truly awful. I've seem other
NGs
where it's endemic too and it's not a pretty sight.

If I say something harsh or critical - it doesn't mean I'm insulting you -
that's entirely a different matter. I'm trying to avoid the abuse element.
I
won't call you a ****pig for example, simply 'cos I disagree with your
view.

Although, I would be almost as
glad for you to forgo this and stick with the technobabbble, cause
eventually you will cross swords with the mighty Krueger,
and I so much want to see the **** fly between the two of you.

Since Arny speaks technological sense, I see little likelihood of a
disagreement on the lines you suggest.


Gragam



Graham, this group isn't about Audio. It is about Arny
Krueger, and to a lesser extent, Howard Ferstler.

Please note that I have engaged you in argument, and I
have not been demeaning or insulting to you, such as I am
to Arny and Howard (deservedly so, based upon their
histories). Yes, I have been sarcastic, that is my way, and I
sometimes use that to make a point. After all, we are arguing.
But really, overall, I have been fairly respectful to you, as a person.

I just want you to notice that there is a difference
between the way I treat you, and the way I treat Arny and
Howard. There are even differences between the
way I treat Howard and Arny. I just want you
to realize that this is the case, and that there are reasons
behind these differences.

Mark my words, when you get into the minutia of
technical discussions with Arny, differences are
bound to pop up, and you too will become victim
to Arnie's insatiable ego, and propensity to
believe in his omnipotence in all technical matters.
This has happened to people equal to, or perhaps
better than you, as far as technical competence, training,
and/or real world commercial or research experience
in the world of audio. Go back to the recent post
by Arnie containing quotes from Zelniker. Put aside
Glenn's anger. What he says about Arny is ABSOLUTELY true.

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


However, it warms my heart to find you following me down the
path of personal retribution.

That's a pretty odd thing to say.

Although, I would be almost as
glad for you to forgo this and stick with the technobabbble, cause
eventually you will cross swords with the mighty Krueger,
and I so much want to see the **** fly between the two of you.

In short, Art is addicted to that personality game called "let's you and
he
fight".



Feed Me !!!!!!

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message


Graham, this group isn't about Audio. It is about Arny
Krueger, and to a lesser extent, Howard Ferstler

You forgot Tom Nousaine and Mike McElvey. That was Middius *revealed truth*
just a few days ago, right?

Please note that I have engaged you in argument, and I
have not been demeaning or insulting to you, such as I am
to Arny and Howard (deservedly so, based upon their
histories).

Note that Art takes no responsibility for his past reprehensible behavior.

Yes, I have been sarcastic, that is my way, and I
sometimes use that to make a point. After all, we are arguing.
But really, overall, I have been fairly respectful to you, as a
person.

Spare us the hearts and flowers, Art.

I just want you to notice that there is a difference
between the way I treat you, and the way I treat Arny and
Howard.

Your abject fear of us is very clearly noticeable, Art.

There are even differences between the
way I treat Howard and Arny. I just want you
to realize that this is the case, and that there are reasons
behind these differences.

The reason has a great deal to do with fear and hatred on the part of Art
and the Middius clique.

Mark my words, when you get into the minutia of
technical discussions with Arny, differences are
bound to pop up, and you too will become victim
to Arnie's insatiable ego, and propensity to
believe in his omnipotence in all technical matters.

Trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, Art?

This has happened to people equal to, or perhaps
better than you, as far as technical competence, training,
and/or real world commercial or research experience
in the world of audio.

Who, those sick-o dupes Zelniker and Bamborough?

LOL!

Go back to the recent post
by Arnie containing quotes from Zelniker. Put aside
Glenn's anger.

If you can.

What he says about Arny is ABSOLUTELY true.

Only in the delusional world of Middius dupes.

Zelniker hated me because some people he respected worked him over in
advance. He was proud to try to play the role of hired gun. In the end, he
lacked the staying power that Middius needs to feed on.

Art has already revealed his true motivation - he is addicted to the human
game called "Let's you and he fight". He's like that villain in the original
Star Trek that fed on hatred and stimulated it in order to gorge itself on
hatred and fear.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message

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


However, it warms my heart to find you following me down the
path of personal retribution.

That's a pretty odd thing to say.

Although, I would be almost as
glad for you to forgo this and stick with the technobabbble, cause
eventually you will cross swords with the mighty Krueger,
and I so much want to see the **** fly between the two of you.

In short, Art is addicted to that personality game called "let's you
and he fight".

Feed Me !!!!!!

Thanks for sharing, Art/George/Michael.

Graham wrote:


Clyde Slick wrote:

Maybe Pooh Bear does not get that I wastalking about the music,
not electronics. I know its a very hard concept to grasp,
but with your intellect, you may eventually 'get it'.

In another thread in another group a poster recently commented that he heard
Joni Mitchell on a very poor TV sound system but was moved by the
performance.

I was one of the first to explain that it isn't the sound equipment that
gives
that experience - it is the performer.

Increased quality of reproduction simply enhances the effect, it does not
substitute or replace it.


Graham










I think there's something to be said for that. One of the nice things the late
Steve Zipser did for me, simply because I recommended a particular CD - yes, a
CD - to him, was to give *me* a CD of an artist I had never heard of before
named Jaintha.

Whenever I listen to Jacintha's rendition of Danny Boy (Londonderry Air), this
old classic tune takes on a whole different meaning. It's not just a song I've
heard thousands of time by many different artists. It's a moving, thoughtful,
and above all, extremely moving rendition of a famous Irish folk/pop song.

Guess what, I love it on CD, and even though the same performance later became
available on vinyl (since Jacintha is one of those very modern jazz/pop artists
that has delighted many audiophiles), I have never felt a burning need to get a
vinyl copy. Also, I've heard the CD on numerous types of players, from the
chain store players and boom boxes, to my own equipment (probably middle of the
road in terms of cost and refinement), right through to such gear as Levinson
pieces and others in that price range. It just doesn't matter that much. Her
performance is what counts. As Graham says, the better the equipment - within
limits - the more you might get out of it - but ultimately, the performance is
the thing.

My only regret is that I'll probably never get the chance to see her live in
concert, where the added benefits and noise and distortion are no doubt
audible. Apparently a lot of people like that audible noise and distortion
that one finds in live concert halls, amplified music (often with tubes at
least in the guitar amps if not the microphones as well), yet unfortunately
missing from anechoic chambers and test benches.

(Jacintha's recordings are now available on CD, SACD and LP - pick your
poison).



Bruce J. Richman

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?


Graham

"George M. Middius" wrote:

SO MUCH MEANINGLESS DRIVEL THAT I BARELY KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN !


Graham

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message



My only regret is that I'll probably never get the chance to see her
live in concert, where the added benefits and noise and distortion
are no doubt audible.

The live performance as the reference sound, has neither noise nor
distortion.

Apparently a lot of people like that audible
noise and distortion that one finds in live concert halls, amplified
music (often with tubes at least in the guitar amps if not the
microphones as well), yet unfortunately missing from anechoic
chambers and test benches.

That's the difference between producing music and reproducing music.

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Getting people to fight so that he can sop up the fear and hatred.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message


Oh, one last thought -- Art predicted that when you eventually try to
have a "discussion" with Krooger (i.e. about a disagreement), the
light will dawn for you. He's right. And no sane human being has ever
before insisted with such stubbornness that Krooger "makes sense" or
"supports science", or whatever silly claims you've been making.

You're lying again, George, or just being stupid.

Know what, I'll go with stupid with liberal doses of selfish thrown in.

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


Graham, this group isn't about Audio. It is about Arny
Krueger, and to a lesser extent, Howard Ferstler

You forgot Tom Nousaine and Mike McElvey. That was Middius *revealed
truth*
just a few days ago, right?

Please note that I have engaged you in argument, and I
have not been demeaning or insulting to you, such as I am
to Arny and Howard (deservedly so, based upon their
histories).

Note that Art takes no responsibility for his past reprehensible behavior.

Yes, I have been sarcastic, that is my way, and I
sometimes use that to make a point. After all, we are arguing.
But really, overall, I have been fairly respectful to you, as a
person.

Spare us the hearts and flowers, Art.

I just want you to notice that there is a difference
between the way I treat you, and the way I treat Arny and
Howard.

Your abject fear of us is very clearly noticeable, Art.

There are even differences between the
way I treat Howard and Arny. I just want you
to realize that this is the case, and that there are reasons
behind these differences.

The reason has a great deal to do with fear and hatred on the part of Art
and the Middius clique.

Mark my words, when you get into the minutia of
technical discussions with Arny, differences are
bound to pop up, and you too will become victim
to Arnie's insatiable ego, and propensity to
believe in his omnipotence in all technical matters.

Trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, Art?

This has happened to people equal to, or perhaps
better than you, as far as technical competence, training,
and/or real world commercial or research experience
in the world of audio.

Who, those sick-o dupes Zelniker and Bamborough?

LOL!

Go back to the recent post
by Arnie containing quotes from Zelniker. Put aside
Glenn's anger.

If you can.

What he says about Arny is ABSOLUTELY true.

Only in the delusional world of Middius dupes.

Zelniker hated me because some people he respected worked him over in
advance. He was proud to try to play the role of hired gun. In the end, he
lacked the staying power that Middius needs to feed on.

Art has already revealed his true motivation - he is addicted to the human
game called "Let's you and he fight". He's like that villain in the
original
Star Trek that fed on hatred and stimulated it in order to gorge itself on
hatred and fear.



Graham,

Can you sense the paranoia yet?

Arny Krueger wrote:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message

Maybe they don't give a **** about "scientific" because it has zero
relevance for consumers.

No George, or whatever your real name is.

Not all consumers are as technologically backward as you are.

Chuckle.

Graham

if only consumers knew just how good the kit is these days ! For the
money at least.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Pooh Bear" wrote in message

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Getting people to fight so that he can sop up the fear and hatred.



Feed me!!!
I want more!!

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

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


However, it warms my heart to find you following me down the
path of personal retribution.

That's a pretty odd thing to say.

Although, I would be almost as
glad for you to forgo this and stick with the technobabbble, cause
eventually you will cross swords with the mighty Krueger,
and I so much want to see the **** fly between the two of you.

In short, Art is addicted to that personality game called "let's you
and he fight".

Feed Me !!!!!!

Thanks for sharing, Art/George/Michael.


no, Levi Stubbs

Clyde Slick wrote:

Graham, this group isn't about Audio. It is about Arny
Krueger, and to a lesser extent, Howard Ferstler.

Please note that I have engaged you in argument, and I
have not been demeaning or insulting to you, such as I am
to Arny and Howard (deservedly so, based upon their
histories). Yes, I have been sarcastic, that is my way, and I
sometimes use that to make a point. After all, we are arguing.
But really, overall, I have been fairly respectful to you, as a person.

I just want you to notice that there is a difference
between the way I treat you, and the way I treat Arny and
Howard. There are even differences between the
way I treat Howard and Arny. I just want you
to realize that this is the case, and that there are reasons
behind these differences.

Mark my words, when you get into the minutia of
technical discussions with Arny, differences are
bound to pop up, and you too will become victim
to Arnie's insatiable ego, and propensity to
believe in his omnipotence in all technical matters.
This has happened to people equal to, or perhaps
better than you, as far as technical competence, training,
and/or real world commercial or research experience
in the world of audio. Go back to the recent post
by Arnie containing quotes from Zelniker. Put aside
Glenn's anger. What he says about Arny is ABSOLUTELY true.

Well Clyde,

I appreciate your honesty and your lack of the name-calling that seems endemic
here. It's good to see that one can have a sensible discussion.

I'll be pleased to chat to someone who's interested in discussing issues of
mutual interest.

I'll take my chances with Arny.

To be sure I don't actually really have a choice !

If he talks **** - I'll be the first to tell him off !


Graham

Sander de Waal wrote:


(Bruce J. Richman) said:

Actually, if you read what I said, I *did* say and/or, but if somebody can
identify differences as due to distortion, then presumably they have already
made the distinction that they are different. The use of and/or was via
force
of habit. I'm quite aware that there are different types of distortion that
can be measured.

I'm still diving in a pile of literature that seems to sat that
problems in the time domain can certainly be responsible for things
like listening fatigue, detailing and imaging.

I have no doubt that hearing acuity and discrimination is a function of
attention span, which in turn is a fuction of listening fatigue. A "fatigued"
listener is less likely in my opinion to appreciate system differences in such
variables as details of a recording and the imaging conveyed by the LP, CD or
other media.

Since you mentioned "fatigue", have you noticed, as I have, that many of those
that favor (relatively speaking) the sound of vinyl and/or tubes will make
comments such as "I just find it less fatiguing" (in many cases? While I
realize that this is a subjective term, my strong suspicion is that may well
have to do with certain frequency response variations that appear to be
frequently found with tubes and/or vinyl. Perhaps this may even have something
to do with extreme high end roll offs or the effects of digital filters on
overtones at the upper end of the audible frequency spectrum. Whatever the
causes may be, would you accept (or entertain) the notion that when a listener
finds music - for whatever reason - to be less fatiguing - then they are indeed
more likely to notice such qualities as imaging and details in comparing audio
systems?
I also happen to think that loop (global) feedback, when applied
heavily, can create certain dstortions that weren't there before, and
also in some cases have no relation with the original signal.
Because of our relatively simple measuring methods (at least the ones
I'm familiar with as a hobbyist!) , some of those distortions are
still either unknown or unnamed.
While I'm reading on, I might discover that these types of distortion
*are* measurable, but somehow never quoted in commercial literature
about audio components.


Given the fact that most manufacturers want to place the most favorable spin
possible on their products and sell them, is it not reasonable to assume that
they focus on reporting measurements that look good on a spec sheet? As you
say, there may be other measurements taken in audio labs or R&D facilities that
are not generally made available to the public.

Unfortunately, due to the putrid reputation acquired by RAO and perhaps for
other reasons as well, it's been a long time since since I've seen many
legitmate audio professionals, other than John Atkinson and less frequently,
Glen Zelniker post anything here. One of the nice thing about a few of the
moderated forums such as Phonogram (Internet mailing list) and Audio Asylum is
that manufacturers from different audio companies are active posters and are
generally willing to answer questions about their products.


And that brings me to the following: we're still looking at "audio"
with a too narrow view, IMO.
We should direct our attention to the system as a whole, including the
room acoustics.
Then, and only then, we might get a glimpse about what serious
reproduction is all about.
And again IMO, it might entirely be possible that a SET amp with THD
levels of 1...5% (which in itself are meaningless unless the
*spectrum* is published as well) might give a more realistic
reproduction of a certain musical event than a Crook 2000 Special BJT
monster with DF of 10.000, FR of DC to light and distortion of
nanopercents.


Agreed. Hence, the wise advice to prospective consumers to audition in any
prospective purchase in their normal listening environment prior to purchase
whenever possible.



Of course, despite his frequent and repetitious attempts to smear users of
either tubed equipment or vinyl by repeating inflammatory propaganda about
distortion ad nauseum in his many attacks against analogue users, Krueger
has
not presented evidence to support his overgeneralizations motivated by his
bigotry.

I'll let Arny's ( and all other's) posts speak by itself, and let
others decide what they think of it.
I have some kind of truce with him right now, as I'm actually sick of
the allegations going back and forth about pedophilia, unlicensed
psychologists, obese people, liars, sockpuppets et al.


Actually, so am I. But it is human nature, unfortunately, to have long
memories, hold grudges, promote agendas by ridiculing others, etc. That said,
it is also human nature to strike back when attacked Ironically, there is a
way to end all this nonsense. Pretend that RAO is a moderated Usenet NG in
which viewpoints can be argued or debated, but personal attacks are not
allowed. This approach is not foolproof, of course, On RAHE, for example,
vicious fights over vinyl vs. CDs and objectivist vs. subjectivist positions
occur. And while there are not very many personal attacks because of the
moderators, the "fighters" simply call the other person's post "rubbish",
"worthless", and use a multisyllabic equivalent of "prove it" For some reason,
perhaps having to do with the sheer volume of posts and international flavor,
the Audio Asylum, perhaps the largest Internet site devoted to discussion of
audio seems also IMHO to be the most flame free. It too is moderated. People
there simply trade subjective opinions about all types of equipment, music,
etc. So why can not that be done here?



I've not suddenly turned in some humorless audio clown, note.
From now on, I'm just trying to stick to interesting audio subjects,
due to a couple of factors in my life.
Time restriction is one of them, some insight about how life could be
a bit better for me and my wife is another.
You get to see the world in a different light when one of your dearest
and beloved is very ill, sometimes on the verge of death.
Slinging insults back and forth isn't going to make me any happier,
note.

When I look back at my RAO "career", I'm not proud of what I've
written sometimes.
I'll let others speak for themselves, and I'm determined not to judge
anybody anymore by whatever they write. I *know* that most people are
a lot different offline than online. And besides, everyone is himself
responsible for what they write and how they act.

I'd prefer it to be remembered as an audio hobbyist rather than a foul
mouthed and insulting person.

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






Bruce J. Richman

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

SO MUCH MEANINGLESS DRIVEL THAT I BARELY KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN !

I agree. You're a total lost cause, beyond hope, a dismal failure for me.

Go back to your church. I give up.

The 'church' of rational discussion ?

OK !


Oh, one last thought -- Art predicted that when you eventually try to have
a "discussion" with Krooger (i.e. about a disagreement), the light will
dawn for you. He's right. And no sane human being has ever before insisted
with such stubbornness that Krooger "makes sense" or "supports science", or
whatever silly claims you've been making.

(a) I don't make silly claims.

(b) I'm familiar with Arny from other NGs where he shows his clear and
practical knowledge of audio. If he was indeed a charlatan, I would have
figured that by now. I don't say he's infallible - just normally pretty
accurate.

(c) There is room for debate about various audio issues. It's an area that I'm
interested in or I wouldn't be here ! As has been stated, it's about 'opinion'.
I wasn't aware previously that it meant that certain 'opinions' aren't welcome
! Maybe this NG needs a kick up the ass ? I'm pleased to see that a few regs
here have been open to the possibility of free speech, whereas a few have had
closed minds. Nuff said.


Graham

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


Graham, this group isn't about Audio. It is about Arny
Krueger, and to a lesser extent, Howard Ferstler

You forgot Tom Nousaine and Mike McElvey. That was Middius *revealed
truth*
just a few days ago, right?


Tom hardly ever posts here.
Mike is a sideshow, he does not engender many discussions
of his own role here. Not like you, not at all
like you.


Please note that I have engaged you in argument, and I
have not been demeaning or insulting to you, such as I am
to Arny and Howard (deservedly so, based upon their
histories).

Note that Art takes no responsibility for his past reprehensible behavior.


Let's tell Graham about your reprehensible behavior. Some years ago
you claimed on RAO to have received pornographic pictures via email from
an anonymous source. You described the 'action' depicted in these
photographs
in detail. You claimed that some of the participants were minors, and
that these pictures you supposedly received were child pornography.
You claim to have kept these pictures on your hard drive for at least three
years. Also, over that period of time you have accused many different
RAO participants of supposedly having sent you those pictures.
You have publicly accused Marc Phillips, George Middius, Bruce Richman,
Jamie Benchimol and myself, among others, of having sent you those pictures.
You have even accused John Atkinson, the editor of Stereophile
magazine, as being behind the 'plot' to send you those pictures.

At some point approximately three years after having 'allegedly'
received those pictures, it was pointed out to you that your
continued possession of these pictures, if indeed you
really had such pictures, and indeed if there really were underage
children in said pictures, it was illegal for you to possess such pictures
on your hard drive. So, you then 'claimed' to have shown
these pictures to the Michigan State Police, and that the particular
detective you were involved with provided you with his opinion
that the participants in these 'alleged' pictures were all of
legal agae or older, therefore releasing you of any liability
of having child pornography in your possession.

How convenient!!!!!!!!!

Yet, all the time you have possessed these pictures, you have accused
a number of individuals of having emailed you child pornography. Well, after
having 'discovered' that mo childred were involved, have you apoligized
to any of these people you have falsley accused? No! AS a matter of fact, to
this
day, you STILL accuse these same people of hjaving sent you
child pornography, while at the same time denying that these very same
pictures, kept on your hard drive, ahve any underage participants in them.
What is going on with these pictures? Did the images on these pictures
age whilst sitting in your hard drive? A particular picture of a sixteen
year old girl taken three years ago, in the same picture, she is now
a nintenn year old girl.

For my money, Arny never received any pictures at all. He made up the
whole incident. When he was embarrassed to find out about
his complicity in owning kiddie porn (had the allegations had
any truth to them at all), he made up a further story about
showing them to the Michigan State Police. Then, he was caught
between his own two lies. ARny lies so much, he can't keep his
own lies straight, and they fall apart in a sea of inconsistency.

Graham, do you get the picture yet?????

Can you see the nature of The Beast?

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Art has already revealed his true motivation - he is addicted to the human
game called "Let's you and he fight". He's like that villain in the
original
Star Trek that fed on hatred and stimulated it in order to gorge itself on
hatred and fear.

Graham,

Can you sense the paranoia yet?

Errr.. sounds more like a joke to me !

It's BJR who seems to take it personally and really goes for the invective.

Graham

Sander de Waal wrote:


"Arny Krueger" said:

Let's put it this way, Richman. If your tubed amp sounds no different from a
good SS amp, then your preference for its sound over of that of a good SS
amp would be delusional behavior on your part. If your tubed amp sounds
different from a good SS amp, then your preference for its sound would be
evidence of preference for the sound of music with audible noise and
distortion added.

If you look at the amplifier (or turntable) by itself, that could be
true.
In the entire *chain*, claims like this become meaningless IMO.
More on that tomorrow.

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








Agreed. And that is precisely the point. People don't buy amplifiers,
preamplifiers, or turntables to use in isolation. Practically everybody would
agree that speakers are easily differentiated in many objective bias-controlled
tests. Similarly, while I don't know if such tests have been done (although I
would not be surprised if they have), put the exact same audio system in two
different listening envronments and listeners will be able to tell the
difference - even allowing for the unfortunate effects of short term audio
memory.

Here are a few examples from my own experience. Yours may differ. When I
started putting together my car's audio system - which has now been in two
different vehicles, I started with the speakers and audtioned a number of
different brands. I finally narrowed it down to either KEF or MBQuart. I had
the opportunity to audition both types in both typical dealer exhibits where
quick switching was possible, and fortunately for me, also in some actual car
installations. For whatever reason, I ended up choosing the MB Quart component
sets (6.5" midrange/woofers and 1.25" titanium dome tweeters, separate
crossovers). Well, a number of people think that titanium dome tweeters are on
the bright side. And they also think that some SS amplifiers are on the
"bright" side. All that said, I knew that I would be using this equipment
primarily to play back metal cassettes encoded with Dolby C (SS of course)
recorded through a combination of both tubed and SS equipment, often, but not
entirely dubbed from vinyl. So I assumed that a certain number of general
frequency response variations might be present. More precisely, although I
can't specify in it general terms, a relatively large car environment
(full-size 4 door sedan with rear wheel drive), relatively large speaker
enclosures (for a car), including rear speakers loading directly into the
trunk, relatively bright tweeters (perhaps) and relatively "warm" (or not
bright in terms of frequency) head unit and
media (Nakamichi cassette player, Dolby C, metal with high head room) and
relatively neutral (in fact, very neutral to my ears) SS 4-channel amplifer.
Add all the ingredients of the system together, and what do you get? Synergy.
(IMHO). A very pleasing sound with appropriate dynamics, detail and an
impression of music that is neither overly bright nor overly mellow.

By the same token, my home electrostatic speakers are situated in a listening
environment that is relatively bright (tiled floors), consist, as you know of
speakers that because of their technology have minimal distortion and a dipolar
radiation pattern that minimizes room reflections to some extent. Many people,
including this listener, consider electrostatics, perhaps because of their
relatively low mass and minimal excursion rates, along with an absence of
traditional cabinet effects, to be relatively "fast" (in the transient response
sense) and if not paired with the right equipment, often too bright. (Part of
this is due also to their relative difficulty in reproducing the lowest octive
of the audio spectrum because of the laws of physics). Perhaps because of all
these reasons, tubed amplification (or at least preamplification) seems to
sound better than many SS amplifiers that I've tried with the same system in
the same listening environment. But, that's not to say that different SS
amplifiers don't sound similar to my tubed equipment. Maybe they do. But in
my listening environment with my equipment, I'm satisfied for now, and that's
all that matters.


Bruce J. Richman

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...


Clyde Slick wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Art has already revealed his true motivation - he is addicted to the
human
game called "Let's you and he fight". He's like that villain in the
original
Star Trek that fed on hatred and stimulated it in order to gorge
itself on
hatred and fear.

Graham,

Can you sense the paranoia yet?

Errr.. sounds more like a joke to me !

It's BJR who seems to take it personally and really goes for the
invective.



AFAIK, its all a joke

Pretty funny stuff, huh?

"Howard Ferstler" wrote

I am not sure at all what "microdynamics" are, by the way.

Terminology like microdynamics has commonly been in
use for more than twenty years. The advent of the CD
brought dynamics to the forefront in audio publications'
discussions. Even today the capability of digital
technology is often improperly applied by audio engineers
in the master recordings they produce.

Microdynamics is one of two components of dynamics.
The other is macrodynamics. In general dynamic range
is the difference between the noise floor of electronic
components or music source (CD, vinyl, tapes, etc.) and
the loudest sound produced. It is not, however,
considered to be how loud a system will play but rather
the difference between loud and soft. For example an
orchestra may approach 100 dB in range while rock only
10 dB or so.

Within this mix dynamics exhibit the characteristics of
macro and micro dynamics. With macrodynamics we
are concerned with attributes like slam, impact and
power of music. If music is improperly mastered we
often use terms like compressed to describe the
macrodynamics. In its most elemental form it's the
difference between pianissimo and triple forte.

OTOH, microdynamics describes the dynamic
activities happening within the musical event. In
high dynamic situations like orchestra music where
several instruments are playing simultaneously,
with instruments of dynamic ranges (pp to fff), the
resolution of individual instruments may smear
together, particularly as we increase the volume level.
This resolving power/attribute is the microdynamics
at play. The triangle, for example, should be clear and
articulated even though it is not very loud, located in
the back of the stage and competes in the surrounding
mix of sounds.

Poop Bear said:

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Quite honestly, I don't think this is the place for you.

That didn't, however, stop Lionel.

Boon

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote:

I have no doubt that hearing acuity and discrimination is a function of
attention span, which in turn is a fuction of listening fatigue.

I'll say 'agreed'.

A "fatigued" listener is less likely in my opinion to appreciate system
differences in such
variables as details of a recording and the imaging conveyed by the LP, CD or
other media.

I'll agree to that too.

So, tired listeners can't discriminate much of interest !

Thanks for that *news* !

I'm so much more enlightened now !


Graham


( p.s. what was the point of that post btw ? )

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message
...
Poop Bear said:

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Quite honestly, I don't think this is the place for you.

That didn't, however, stop Lionel.

Boon

Although, I don't think the two of them belong in the same place.

Powell wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote

I am not sure at all what "microdynamics" are, by the way.

Terminology like microdynamics has commonly been in
use for more than twenty years

It has ?

I must have missed something.

I'm well aware that hi-fi 'audiophiles' like to create new terms to
describe their view of the world but dividing dynamics into macro and
micro parts seems to me like a form of navel gazing.


Graham

Subject: Equalizers
From: Pooh Bear
Date: 8/14/2004 10:39 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:



"George M. Middius" wrote:

SO MUCH MEANINGLESS DRIVEL THAT I BARELY KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN !

You just had a "Bad 'Middius' Experience"!

Graham

Subject: Equalizers
From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 8/14/2004 10:41 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Getting people to fight so that he can sop up the fear and hatred.

BINGO!

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Getting people to fight so that he can sop up the fear and hatred.

So, the ppl here are clueless ****wits ?


Graham

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 02:49:49 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

*Better* is subjective to the listener.

Now you're finally starting to get it.

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 03:52:25 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

Although, I would be almost as
glad for you to forgo this and stick with the technobabbble, cause
eventually you will cross swords with the mighty Krueger,
and I so much want to see the **** fly between the two of you.

Since Arny speaks technological sense, I see little likelihood of a
disagreement on the lines you suggest.

Don't be so sure. Many have discovered the wrong side of Arnold
Krueger.

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message



My only regret is that I'll probably never get the chance to see her
live in concert, where the added benefits and noise and distortion
are no doubt audible.

The live performance as the reference sound, has neither noise nor
distortion.


For those that want their audio systems to come as close as possible to the
sound of a live concert, then environmental sounds such as those produced by
the audience, are an accepted factor. Further, there is no evidence to suggest
that the amplification typically used in live concerts - which is what the
listener seated in the audience actually hears is produced by noise-free,
distortion-free microphones, amplifiers, guitar-pickups, etc.


Apparently a lot of people like that audible
noise and distortion that one finds in live concert halls, amplified
music (often with tubes at least in the guitar amps if not the
microphones as well), yet unfortunately missing from anechoic
chambers and test benches.

That's the difference between producing music and reproducing music.



Both, because of the electronics involved, have a certain amount of noise and
distortion. The amounts no doubt vary according to the properties of the
equipment used. Even live musical presentations that are purely acoustic and
unamplified *might* contain some distortion depending on such things as the
condition of the musical instruments and/or prehaps the vagaries of the human
voice. And of course, some electronic music *intentionally* produces
distortion through various devices (fuzz boxes, etc.).
And even if this were not the case, ambient sounds from the audience, the
rustling of the trees (?), sounds of people coughing and/or moving around, etc.
are certainly part of the "pure musical signal".



Bruce J. Richman

Mr. Phillips wrote:


Poop Bear said:

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Quite honestly, I don't think this is the place for you.

That didn't, however, stop Lionel.

Boon








His lack of humor, wit, and tolerance and tendency to read things only in a
literal sense, suggest you're right.



Bruce J. Richman

Clyde wrote:

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message
...
Poop Bear said:

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Pooh Bear said:

No *religion* involved.

Wrong.

It was posted in this thread that pace is a measure of time.

This is you, being religious.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Time and pace being related is meaasure of *religion* ?

Do you live on the planet Zog ?

What is your agenda ?

Quite honestly, I don't think this is the place for you.

That didn't, however, stop Lionel.

Boon

Although, I don't think the two of them belong in the same place.









Well, I hope not, since Lionel mentioned he is a sewer worker.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.
(Seinfeld reference)



Bruce J. Richman

Pooh Bear wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote:

I have no doubt that hearing acuity and discrimination is a function of
attention span, which in turn is a fuction of listening fatigue.

I'll say 'agreed'.

A "fatigued" listener is less likely in my opinion to appreciate system
differences in such
variables as details of a recording and the imaging conveyed by the LP, CD
or
other media.

I'll agree to that too.

So, tired listeners can't discriminate much of interest !

Thanks for that *news* !

I'm so much more enlightened now !


Graham


( p.s. what was the point of that post btw ? )










I'm so glad. Thanks for refraining from the personal attacks and non-audio
comments you so ardently despise !



Nice show of interpersonal skills, also !

Your ability to empathise with others is in a class by itself !




Bruce J. Richman

Clyde Slick wrote:



"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...


Clyde Slick wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Art has already revealed his true motivation - he is addicted to the
human
game called "Let's you and he fight". He's like that villain in the
original
Star Trek that fed on hatred and stimulated it in order to gorge
itself on
hatred and fear.

Graham,

Can you sense the paranoia yet?

Errr.. sounds more like a joke to me !

It's BJR who seems to take it personally and really goes for the
invective.



AFAIK, its all a joke

Pretty funny stuff, huh?










Apparently, Graham thinks that 7 years of documented and provable libel re.
another person's identity, educational background, professional activities, and
statre licensure................ is a "joke".

And he calls himself a scientist?

LOL !!!

Now, *that* is a joke.



Bruce J. Richman