Howard Ferstler said:

In other words, what we have is a strong technical mind
encapsulated in the body of a computer-keyboard thug.

Yup, that definitely did hurt.

It would have hurt even more if I were still in the
audio-writing business. As an "outsider" I can now take Mr.
Pierce's insults with a grain of salt. Well, almost.


You almost convined me here. Almost.


The problem is that in so many ways we are on the same side.
God help the enthusiast who thinks he is an ally of Mr.
Pierce.


Mr Pierce's outlook on audio might not be so different from mine, but
that's a subtlety you probably won't understand.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

Howard Ferstler said:

PS: Thanks for the cheap shot regarding my journalistic and
book-writing efforts in that other reply of yours. It
certainly opened my eyes - about you.


Owww......when will this wear off? ;-)

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

Howard Ferstler wrote:
It would have hurt even more if I were still in the
audio-writing business. As an "outsider" I can now take Mr.
Pierce's insults with a grain of salt. Well, almost.

Get over it.

The problem is that in so many ways we are on the same side.

Howard, we most assuredly are NOT "on the same side," and
never have been. For years you have been spouting your nonsense,
quite clearly and deliberately misrepresenting the position of
myself and others, you've been ducking responsibility for your
quite deliberate errors and generally blaming everyone else for
your own shortcomings. This has happened time and again and you
have demonstrated that you are either unable or unwilling to
change your attitude. The current thread is merely the latest
in a long series where you have been so cock-sure that you were
absolutely dead right, be it from how amplifiers work to how
objectivists or subjectivists "think."

You don't like having your nonsense given back to you in the form
of an enema? Then stop spouting it to begin with.

God help the enthusiast who thinks he is an ally of Mr.
Pierce.

No, God help the "enthusiast" who believes he knows absolutely
everything, and believes he can spout off his nonsense as some
holy "trvth".

Howard Ferstler said:

But he does know plenty, and that is the mystery for me. He
could have just set me straight with the basic information
he posted (I knew I was in a pickle well before his last
message, but I could not figure out how to gracefully get
out of it), but then he went on to impugn my journalistic
and book-writing integrity, as if all of the stuff I have
said about audio as a hobby and people like you both here
and in print was wrong. I will speculate that other than the
complementary biographical sketch of him that I did for The
Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound (he read the draft prior to
me sending it to the publisher) he has never read any of my
books or magazine articles. Yet he made it sound as if I was
the biggest promoter of audio claptrap in the business.


Priceless, Howard.

Ever heard of Guareschi's "Don Camillo"?
Well, you remind me of Peppone.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

Actually, I purchase good, reliable gear and hook it up
carefully. Consequently, I have never had the problems that
you seem to have encountered with your gear.

And here we go once again with Howard's BLATANT, dishonest
misrepresentation. At no point did I ever state that I had
ANY problems with ANY gear that I have. Instead, I simply
reconstructured a situation to demonstrate the basic
principles of the problem.

PS: Thanks for the cheap shot regarding my journalistic and
book-writing efforts in that other reply of yours.

Pointing out your long history of incompetence, dishonesty and
misrepresentation and the potential damage it could cause to
unsuspecting readers is hardly a cheap shop. An EASY shot, to be
sure, because of your long and fables history of egregious offenses
in this realm.

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
George Middius wrote:

Brother Horace the Shockingly Introspective croaked:

Unfortunately, he then went on to behave like an obnoxious
and insulting bully.

You don't say. Can you imagine? Just because he thinks he knows something
somebody else doesn't.

But he does know plenty, and that is the mystery for me. He
could have just set me straight with the basic information
he posted (I knew I was in a pickle well before his last
message, but I could not figure out how to gracefully get
out of it),

Howard, have you ever heard of harakiri? It is a great, honorable solution
employed by the japanese.

but then he went on to impugn my journalistic
and book-writing integrity, as if all of the stuff I have
said about audio as a hobby and people like you both here
and in print was wrong. I will speculate that other than the
complementary biographical sketch of him that I did for The
Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound (he read the draft prior to
me sending it to the publisher) he has never read any of my
books or magazine articles. Yet he made it sound as if I was
the biggest promoter of audio claptrap in the business.


Don't be so dramatic, Howard. It surely wasn't the first time you've heard
it.

Somebody being snotty and nasty and hostile, just because
of a question about audio? It's simply outrageous.

All I can say is that it's a good thing such behavior isn't widespread.
Don't
you agree, Harold?

I certainly do, Middius. Thank god for all of us that
high-end audio is such an insignificant institution. For me,
leaving the business has been notably painless and free of
remorse. I miss it like I miss a toothache.


Your only chance of being remembered is harakiri, Howard. Give it some
thought!


Cheers,

Margaret

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
"Margaret von B." wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Hey, Dick (assuming your commentary really came from Dick
Pierce, an expert I admire considerably),

irrelevant blather snipped

On the other hand, regarding your concluding statements
coming near the end of your informative commentary, dealing
with me and my work as a journalist and the so-called
"damage" I have done with my books (assuming that you have
indeed read through one or more of them), well, Dick, that
was a cheap shot, and so **** You, Asshole.

Well Howard, the wakeup call had to come sooner or later. I'm sure that
it
is *particularly* painful when a person you so admire basically repeated
*my* earlier statement about the damage you have caused with your
incompetence and arrogance.

Yeah, Pierce is the master of collateral damage.

How about that public apology and reparations I also mentioned, Howard?

Cheers,

Margaret

Not a chance. In any case, just because Pierce thinks I am a
misrepresenting troublemaker who does more harm than good

I think you're trying to mislead people again, Howard. Mr. Pierce more or
less said that you're an UTTER IDIOT who has accomplished NOTHING but DAMAGE
in the field of audio.

does not mean that he is in your camp.

You're lying again, Howard. He certainly did not say he's in your camp as
you are trying to insinuate here.

Yep, you guys STILL
have to deal with him and his tool box full of brass tacks.


With pleasure, Howard. Unlike you, he obviously knows what he's talking
about.


You have my deepest sympathies.


Sympathies? Just because he humiliated you with his knowledge, exposed your
garbage for what it is and demonstrated superior writing skills? Seems like
an OK guy to me!

Dick really gave it to you up the ass in front of the sold out stadium,
Howard. All you can do is bleed.

LOL!


Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret von B. said:

Somebody being snotty and nasty and hostile, just because
of a question about audio? It's simply outrageous.

All I can say is that it's a good thing such behavior isn't widespread.
Don't you agree, Harold?

I certainly do, Middius. Thank god for all of us that
high-end audio is such an insignificant institution. For me,
leaving the business has been notably painless and free of
remorse. I miss it like I miss a toothache.

Your only chance of being remembered is harakiri, Howard. Give it some
thought!

Slicing his gut open would certainly be a memorable act. I might recommend an
alternative: Harold, you could gouge out your eyeballs. That's what I'd call
putting your money where your mouth is.

Margaret von B. wrote:


Dick really gave it to you up the ass in front of the sold out stadium,
Howard. All you can do is bleed.


Why don't you guys cut the guy some slack, it's only audio ferchrissakes.

Fella said:

Dick really gave it to you up the ass in front of the sold out stadium,
Howard. All you can do is bleed.

Why don't you guys cut the guy some slack, it's only audio ferchrissakes.

It's not "only audio" for the Ferstlerian. How could you not know that?

"Fella" wrote in message
.. .
Margaret von B. wrote:


Dick really gave it to you up the ass in front of the sold out stadium,
Howard. All you can do is bleed.


Why don't you guys cut the guy some slack, it's only audio ferchrissakes.

Because "slack" is earned! :-)

Cheers,

Margaret

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

And if it is in parallel
with a speaker load that has way, way more resistance (not
to mention the additional AC impedance added) just how much
current is going to be available to pass through the
speaker?

**I suggest you read the words written by Mr Pinkerton and Mr Pierce. Mr
Pierce, in particular, has written eloquently and succinctly on this
topic.

I did, and they, and you are right and I was wrong.

**Excellent!

Sorry to
have pulled your chain so hard,

**Your apology is accepted.

although I still disagree
with you emphatically about that amp of yours, as well as
about wires.


**You dissagree with mathematics, physics and something you have no
experience with? Curious.


Incidentally, given how I have treated you I cannot fault
you for striking back hard. Also, Pinkerton's reply was to
the point and quite civil, and I acknowledge that he was on
the mark.

Pierce was on the mark, too, and with a degree of expertise
that would honor a college professor. Unfortunately, the
latter part of his response was not much more than a cheap
shot that I resent considerably.

**And how do you imagine I felt, after you continually berated me, in spite
of my education and experience?


Ironically, I wonder what Pierce thinks of your opinion
regarding that special amp of yours or the effects of
speaker wires?

**I am absolutely certain that Mr Pierce would consider the maths involved
and agree 100% with my opinion about wires. As for amplifiers, I am equally
certain that Mr Pierce would either not pass judgement on a product without
first examining it, or carefully considering the physics involved. Of
course, that is my guess. Mr Pierce may have a different take on things. In
any case, your strawman is duly noted.

While he had an apparent field day insulting
me (after posting that to the point and expertly written
explanation of his), he has said nothing at all about your
claims regarding that special amp. Given that he has
bothered to read all of my comments, I assume that means he
agrees with you about its abilities. Congratulations.

**I doubt that Mr Pierce would be inclined to comment on anything he has no
direct experience with. That is just common-sense. I do not, for one
microsecond, consider that Mr Pierce agrees or dissagrees with my thoughts
on it. I, therefore, conclude that your congratulations are somewhat
premature.



I do not know where you got the idea that I am a defender of
Bose. I have reviewed the 901 systems (and published a
review), but my guess is that you never read the review. I
thought it was an interesting system with notable
limitations.

**The Bose 901 is a flawed speaker, designed around faulty logic.

I agree. The direct/reflection concept misses the point of
what speakers should be able to do with standard recordings
in home-listening situations. It still works for some
people, obviously, and does so because it fakes things
rather nicely, at least with some recordings.

It's
survival was based on the litigious nature of Dr Bose, combined with a
superb marketing department and dumb patent issuers. It's present
survival
is based solely on Bose's need to keep the illusion alive. Bose sells so
few
of the model that it is impossible to justify, based on sales alone.
There
never was anything to praise the Bose 901 on. "Helically wound voice
coils"
indeed! It's like saying: "The Pontiac GTO uses cylindrical pistons."

Actually, the pair I reviewed were not in my main listening
room, which is 18 x 22 feet, with an 8.5 foot ceiling.
Instead, they were installed in a rather large room at a
friend's place (21 x 31 feet, with a 8-10 foot cathedral
ceiling) and in that area they actually sounded quite good
with certain program materials. Note that he located them
several feet out from the front wall, instead of a foot or
two away. I would have trouble living with them, myself, but
they certainly sounded better in that room than some of the
other speakers I have auditioned in my own main room.

**Which becomes obsolete within 18 months.

Well, they may indeed face that problem in the realm of
surround sound. However, you can purchase a LOT of upscale
receivers over the years for what one super amp costs.

**No. Of course, your definition of "super amp" and mine may be quite
different.

No doubt, given your comments on that very special super amp
you promote.

And I'll bet that no other amp out there has such specs.

**Possibly.

My guess is that it has problems, assuming that it really
does sound different from good mainstream units.

**Of course your guesses are about as useful as anything else you have to
say.

Nobody is correct about everything 100% of the time, and I
admit that I got off on the wrong track considerably when it
came to the issue of speaker-wire shorts.

However, I have reviewed a number of amps (subjective
reviews, just like the tweakos do, but with very different
conclusions) and I continue to marvel that you say that the
reason so many "conventional" models sound the same, with
identical distortions, is their lack of a proper NFB design.
Supposedly, your amp corrects this problem and it sounds
more accurate than all other amps (be they rather expensive
or rather cheap, like those in typical receivers) that have
different topologies but do not follow the NFB structure of
your amp.

**Correct. However, there are a number of issues, you have not addressed.


Suffice to say that even rather
mundane receivers have distortion levels low enough to be
essentially transparent with typical speaker loads. What
more would anyone want?

**An amplifier which can deal with REAL speaker loads, up to and past the
point of clipping.

I think that you make the job of an amp much more mysterious
than it happens to be.

**No. There is no mystery.


Oops, I forgot, a typical tweako wants an amp (and wires)
that he can puff himself up over, and brag about.

**Some do. Some don't.

In many cases, even those who do not brag to others will
stand in front of their philosophical mirror and feel good
about themselves. Sometimes not bragging makes them feel
even better.

At least I do not con suckers into spending big on overkill
amps and wires.

**You just con people into buying books, written by one who ahs little
real
knowledge about the subject.

The books are guidelines for newcomers and are designed to
clue the reader into proper ways to sanely purchase gear and
also deal with people like you. In any case, just how many
of my books have you even looked over?

**None. Nor, given your comments here, am I likely to, anytime soon. I have
much to learn and I can't see what I could learn from anything your write.


**Indeed. However, these strawman arguments have little to do with
electrostatic speakers. Electrostatics manage some performance
parameters
which are simply impossible with other designs.

Read Stanley Lip****z' paper on the limitations of
line-source radiators. It is available as an AES reprint.

**I am aware of the limitations (and strengths) of line source arrays.
Are
you aware of the advantages of some electrostatic speakers?

I really cannot think of any. I suppose some people like to
listen primarily in the direct field, but the Lip****z paper
indicated that this is where the line-source speaker really
goes to hell.

Those performance parameters
come at a cost (amplifier-wise). Make no mistake: Electrostatic
speakers
are
not perfect. Far from it. They can often be comprehensively
outperformed
by
far less expensive designs.

So why purchase them?

**Because they do some things better than other speakers.

What things?

**Coherency, for one.


I mean, they have all sorts of
limitations and I see no sonic advantages to them at all.

**Who said they have no sonic advantages? Certainly not me. And certainly
not anyone who has experienced them.

Some people like the direct-field sound. The problem is that
fixed-length line sources are at their weakest under those
conditions.

By the way, I am retired and not a
professional writer. However, at least, unlike you, I have
published material.

**So what? You write about stuff you have no real knowledge of.

But I do not CON people, pal.

**You've conned publishers.

This assumes you have read the books and articles and have
spotted errors that show I was conning people: readers and
publishers.

Go read some of my books, as well as some of my entries and
editing work in the new edition of The Encyclopedia of
Recorded Sound (Routledge, 2005), and see if you can
understand some of the stuff I write about basic audio.

**Why? You have amply demonstrated that I can learn nothing useful from
any
of your books.

Well, reading them would give you the opportunity to post
quotes from the books and then demolish them. "On page XX
Ferstler claims that people should do XXXXX, and this is
patently wrong. Here's why."

**If I felt the need to do that. I don't feel the need and I don't have the
time.


Well, just how much current is passing through that speaker
in parallel with the near short?

**That would depend on a great number of factors. These include:
* Source impedance.
* Impedance of the cable.
* Impedance and efficiency of the speakers.
* The location of the short circuit.
* The actual impedance of the short circuit.

Without knowing ALL of the above, with a fair degree of precision, it is
impossible to say.

I agree 100%.

**Now we're getting somewhere.


**No. I am waiting for an apology and an admission from you that you
are
wrong.

Don't hold your breath. I do not apologize to people like
you.

**Of course. I expected nothing less.

Actually, I do now apologize for being wrong about the
short/speaker sound issue, and attacking you in that area.

**Thank you. Apology accepted.


However, I do not apologize in the least for what I said
regarding your special amp and the impact of special wires.

**You should. You should, at the very least, examine the maths, before you
comment.


Some people like speakers that, when listened to from a
precisely determined sweet spot, sound like super-sized
headphones. Not my cup of tea from a live-music perspective.

**BINGO! Not YOUR cup of tea. That is an opinion you are entitled to.

And I have stated just that in several of my speaker reviews
and commentary articles. I cut speaker builders a lot of
slack. Speaker sound can indeed interact strongly with
taste.

MOST surround sound receiver manufacturers
are aware of this and they make serious compromises in the analogue
sections
of their products.

Perhaps in the phono preamp and tuner sections.

**And the line stages. And the power amp stages. And the power supplies.
Try
running a decent 2 channel amp, at 40% and 100% of maximum power for 30
mins
and see what happens. Then do the same thing with a decent 5 (or 6 or 7)
channel amp. Watch what happens.

Assuming a good receiver with at least 100 wpc on those 6 or
7 channels, what civilized person listens that loud?

**Not relevant. Under certain circumstances, a listener may cause demands to
be placed on an amplifier which requires it to deliver maximum power from
all channels. The amplifier should be able to deliver it's rated power. If I
buy a car rated at 150kW and find that it can only deliver 120kW, I'd take
it back.


**Nope. Never. In fact, I never "push" fancy speaker cables.
Depending
on
the system, I may make a reccommendation for low inductance speaker
cables.

Hair splitting: pushing vs recommending. Funny how language
can make a con artist feel good about what he does.

**It is a BIG difference.

To you, maybe.

**To anyone with a brain.

Go glassy-eyed audio buffs, rejecting a "recommendation"
from a high-end audio salesman is practically an admission
of having a tin ear. No buff would chance that, and every
slick salesman knows this.

**Nonsense.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Which ones, and where in them did I go wrong? Knowing that
will help me to straighten out my act.


Try juggleing two wrecking balls, intead of three.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

George Middius wrote:

Did you just tell us *again* that your oft-postponed retirement from the "audio
business" is now imminent? If you ever do retire (and let's not forget you've
made the same announcement several times previously), that will curtail the
obnoxious behavior a little.

Yes, this is it, both here and in regular print. I recently
purchased a blood-pressure monitor (doctor's suggestion) and
have discovered that every time I sit down and correspond
with you nitwits my readings climb.

So, dickhead, this is it. Enjoy your audio system, such as
it is.

Howard Ferstler

Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

Sure. I use dbx dynamic range enhancers and bass
synthesizers with SOME pop materials and also with SOME (non
DD or DTS) movie sources. I also use DSP to synthesize
additional channels with two-channel sources. All sorts of
options are there.

What is better: a contraption where almost every parameter can be
(mis) adjusted by the ignorant user or a fixed correction (like the
RIAA- or NAB correction in a phono- or tape head preamp) ?

But those corrections are designed to restore a dialed in
equalization curve by the recording engineer (to aid in
making a proper recording) to flat-response, pristine
status. Your dialed-in amp diddlings are not that way at
all. They intentionally color the sound and run completely
counter to the need for per-channel clean performance.

However, you STILL want the amps to do nothing more than
amplify. Having them color all source materials in the same
way is, as I noted, akin to looking through the world full
time while wearing colored sun glasses.

And I maintain my position that for a certain preferred sound from the
entire system, a fixed correction in just one link of the chain is
entirely justified.

Enjoy your toys, slick.

As a "professional audio clown" you should know that.

Note that I am retired.

Make that "retired professional audio clown", note.

If you only knew. Yes, I am getting out of it. I recently
started reading heavily again (librarian, remember?) and
discovered just how much I had been missing since becoming
an audio writer. I just finished a book published 42 years
ago and not only enjoyed the hell out of it (it was an
intellectual history book written by Crane Brinton) but also
marveled at its excellent condition. Like new, actually.
Quite in contrast to computers that go into obsolescence
after four or five years.

But it cannot be adjusted. And switching amps to color the
sound that way sounds like an awkward way to achieve goals
that should be very simple.

An amp is just a link in a long chain.
you accept the choices the recorcing and mastering engineer made, why
not accept the choice your amp designer made, especially when you like
the final result?

There is no figuring the taste of the unsophisticated mind.

Face it. You like toys, and toy playing is your primary
goal.

I must admit to liking toys, but only when they run on 250V.
My primary goal is to create a reproduction of my preferred music that
pleases me.

Ignorance is bliss.

Tell me Howard: if you could sue those tweakos for that, you'd do so,
wouldn't you? ;-)

No, I now realize that there is no point in hanging around
with fools.

Howard Ferstler

Sander deWaal wrote:

Mr Pierce's outlook on audio might not be so different from mine, but
that's a subtlety you probably won't understand.

For some reason, I agree with you. And, no, I do not care to
understand in the least. After fooling with the hobby for
years I have come to the conclusion that both sides,
"serious" subjectivists and "serious" objectivists alike,
are goofballs. It is a good group to leave behind.

Howard Ferstler

Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

PS: Thanks for the cheap shot regarding my journalistic and
book-writing efforts in that other reply of yours. It
certainly opened my eyes - about you.

Owww......when will this wear off? ;-)

Right after I submit my final post.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler wrote:
George Middius wrote:

Blah, blah, blah etc

STOP CROSS POSTING THIS **** TO AUS.HI-FI ! ! ! !

wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
It would have hurt even more if I were still in the
audio-writing business. As an "outsider" I can now take Mr.
Pierce's insults with a grain of salt. Well, almost.

Get over it.

Not a chance. Actually, your little straw "broke the camel's
back" as it relates to my situation, and for that I thank
you. I have been itching to get out of the audio-writing
business for a while, and after getting back into book
reading (retired library clerk, remember?) I have recently
remembered just how much I miss that and how much I abhor
writing audio commentaries.

Yeah, it was fun for a while, and it even paid a bit, but
when I started to dread the deadlines and started to wince
whenever I was notified that a product was on the way to be
reviewed, I knew it was time to fold up my keyboard and get
back to books. Thanks for delivering the final impetus to
quit. I leave the audio-commentary field to you. Welcome
back to the fool's paradise.

The problem is that in so many ways we are on the same side.

Howard, we most assuredly are NOT "on the same side,"
and
never have been.

Speaking of never, never have I been so glad to read
something printed here. That I thought I could be on the
side of a guy like you mystifies even me. Hell, there are
tweakos here who think that you are on their side.
Congratulations.

For years you have been spouting your nonsense,
quite clearly and deliberately misrepresenting the position of
myself and others, you've been ducking responsibility for your
quite deliberate errors and generally blaming everyone else for
your own shortcomings.

Hey, Dick, do not take this personally, but **** You.

This has happened time and again and you
have demonstrated that you are either unable or unwilling to
change your attitude.

Dick, the hobby is populated by opportunists, con artists,
goofballs and true believers. You actually think that I want
to continue to hang around with such people. Heck, the
Circuit City and Best Buy shopper crowd is a full order of
magnitude saner than the typical "serious" audio buff. And
happier, too. And, Dick, this "serious" gathering is a group
that you belong to. Charter member.

The current thread is merely the latest
in a long series where you have been so cock-sure that you were
absolutely dead right, be it from how amplifiers work to how
objectivists or subjectivists "think."

I know how they think better than you do by a long shot. I
also know how a bloated egotist such as yourself thinks.

You don't like having your nonsense given back to you in the form
of an enema? Then stop spouting it to begin with.

I certainly will. Good luck with your work.

PS: just joking about the final sentence.

Howard Ferstler (retired, and glad of it)

wrote:

Actually, I purchase good, reliable gear and hook it up
carefully. Consequently, I have never had the problems that
you seem to have encountered with your gear.

And here we go once again with Howard's BLATANT, dishonest
misrepresentation.

Chill out, Dick. It was a joke.

PS: Thanks for the cheap shot regarding my journalistic and
book-writing efforts in that other reply of yours.

Pointing out your long history of incompetence, dishonesty and
misrepresentation and the potential damage it could cause to
unsuspecting readers is hardly a cheap shop.

It was cheap, because you base it upon the give and take
here and not my published materials. Talk about
misrepresentation. Give me a break.

An EASY shot, to be
sure, because of your long and fables history of egregious offenses
in this realm.

Yeah, but you still have never read any of the books, have
you, and probably none of my The Sensible Sound articles,
either. Heck, I had articles in Fanfare, The American Record
Guide, Stereo Review, High Fidelity, and Audio years ago,
and I'll bet you have not seen any of those, either. How in
the hell would you know how much good or bad I have done for
a hobby when your opinions are based upon venomous exchanges
between me and the lunatic fringe on this ratty little
series of usenet soapboxes?

Howard Ferstler

"Margaret von B." wrote:

Howard, have you ever heard of harakiri? It is a great, honorable solution
employed by the japanese.

Only if they lose, pinhead. The only losers here are you
guys.

Howard Ferstler

"Margaret von B." wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Not a chance. In any case, just because Pierce thinks I am a
misrepresenting troublemaker who does more harm than good

I think you're trying to mislead people again, Howard. Mr. Pierce more or
less said that you're an UTTER IDIOT who has accomplished NOTHING but DAMAGE
in the field of audio.

I assume you are his spokesperson. In any case, the hobby
has gone to pot without my help, thank you.

Yep, you guys STILL
have to deal with him and his tool box full of brass tacks.

With pleasure, Howard. Unlike you, he obviously knows what he's talking
about.

I wonder what his opinion is of you, slick. One can only
speculate - for now.

You have my deepest sympathies.

Sympathies? Just because he humiliated you with his knowledge, exposed your
garbage for what it is and demonstrated superior writing skills? Seems like
an OK guy to me!

No doubt he is glad to join you in the world of tweako
audio. Congratulations to both of you. Gad, if this were
true I pity the both of you.

Dick really gave it to you up the ass in front of the sold out stadium,
Howard. All you can do is bleed.

Not really. Tweako style high end audio is bleeding more
than enough as it is to satisfy me. Actually, you guys
deserve each other. Pierce, who misses the target
automatically and you guys who ought to be an easy target
for him to work over. He treats all of you with too much
kindness.

Now, I think I will go read a good book and leave you
nitwits to your toys.

Howard Ferstler

George Middius wrote:

Fella said:

Dick really gave it to you up the ass in front of the sold out stadium,
Howard. All you can do is bleed.

Why don't you guys cut the guy some slack, it's only audio ferchrissakes.

It's not "only audio" for the Ferstlerian. How could you not know that?

No, he is correct. It is "only audio" and that all of us (me
included) have spent so much time here dealing with
trivialities is more pathetic than comic.

Gad, am I glad to be getting away from this madhouse. I
wrote my last review article a month ago (not yet in print,
but in the pipeline) and staying away from the work has
allowed me to unwind decently for the first time in years.
Now all I need to do is emancipate myself from this lunatic
asylum you occupy on a daily basis and that is it.

No more books and no more articles. I suppose that will make
you happy, but your happiness is trivial compared to mine.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

**I am aware of the limitations (and strengths) of line source arrays.
Are
you aware of the advantages of some electrostatic speakers?

I really cannot think of any. I suppose some people like to
listen primarily in the direct field, but the Lip****z paper
indicated that this is where the line-source speaker really
goes to hell.

Those performance parameters
come at a cost (amplifier-wise). Make no mistake: Electrostatic
speakers
are
not perfect. Far from it. They can often be comprehensively
outperformed
by
far less expensive designs.

So why purchase them?

**Because they do some things better than other speakers.

What things?

**Coherency, for one.

I am going to make this short. What does coherency mean?
Certainly if the sound is coming from a line the whole line
cannot be the same distance from the ears. Consequently, if
anything a line source is less coherent than typical cone
and dome populated systems.

And planar-magnetic speakers would have the same advantages
(as you indicate) as electrostatic jobs. Nope, I cannot see
any advantage of the latter over the former, and I cannot
see any advantage of either over good cone/dome systems.

**Why? You have amply demonstrated that I can learn nothing useful from
any
of your books.

Well, reading them would give you the opportunity to post
quotes from the books and then demolish them. "On page XX
Ferstler claims that people should do XXXXX, and this is
patently wrong. Here's why."

**If I felt the need to do that. I don't feel the need and I don't have the
time.

I am rather short of time, myself, which is why I have cut
up this post and do not intend to respond any more.

Of course, if you spent less time writing lengthy
commentaries here and tried to hunt up a copy of one of my
books you might actually discover that I do make some good
points in them.

Enjoy your work.

Howard Ferstler

Ayn Marx wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
George Middius wrote:

Blah, blah, blah etc

STOP CROSS POSTING THIS **** TO AUS.HI-FI ! ! ! !

Your wish is my command. This is the last one from me. Good
luck handling Middius.

Howard Ferstler

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
"Margaret von B." wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Not a chance. In any case, just because Pierce thinks I am a
misrepresenting troublemaker who does more harm than good

I think you're trying to mislead people again, Howard. Mr. Pierce more or
less said that you're an UTTER IDIOT who has accomplished NOTHING but
DAMAGE
in the field of audio.

I assume you are his spokesperson. In any case, the hobby
has gone to pot without my help, thank you.

Yep, you guys STILL
have to deal with him and his tool box full of brass tacks.

With pleasure, Howard. Unlike you, he obviously knows what he's talking
about.

I wonder what his opinion is of you, slick. One can only
speculate - for now.

You have my deepest sympathies.

Sympathies? Just because he humiliated you with his knowledge, exposed
your
garbage for what it is and demonstrated superior writing skills? Seems
like
an OK guy to me!

No doubt he is glad to join you in the world of tweako
audio. Congratulations to both of you. Gad, if this were
true I pity the both of you.

Dick really gave it to you up the ass in front of the sold out stadium,
Howard. All you can do is bleed.

Not really. Tweako style high end audio is bleeding more
than enough as it is to satisfy me. Actually, you guys
deserve each other. Pierce, who misses the target
automatically and you guys who ought to be an easy target
for him to work over. He treats all of you with too much
kindness.

Now, I think I will go read a good book and leave you
nitwits to your toys.


It is gonna be boring without you, Howard!

Please don't leave us. Our flamethrowers will rust and our asskickers will
collect dust. After all, what is a circus without a clown?

Pretty please.....


Cheers,

Margaret

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
"Margaret von B." wrote:

Howard, have you ever heard of harakiri? It is a great, honorable
solution
employed by the japanese.

Only if they lose, pinhead. The only losers here are you
guys.


Indeed, it will be like cable TV without the E Channel. I'd rather lose that
Wittlessmongrel (sp) guy who just tries to bore us to death and that ain't
fair.

Cheers,

Margaret


PS. I'll honestly miss you, you hairy-arsed old goon :-)

Brother Horace the Posturing Poseur whined:

Pointing out your long history of incompetence, dishonesty and
misrepresentation and the potential damage it could cause to
unsuspecting readers is hardly a cheap shop.

It was cheap, because you base it upon the give and take
here and not my published materials. Talk about
misrepresentation. Give me a break.

And there you have it, folks & guys. Harold Ferstler out-and-out admits that
nothing he says on Usenet should be taken seriously. So much for all the
boasting about expertise with "tests" and knowledge of electronics. It's all
a bunch of Clerkian bluster, not even worth the bytes it occupies in
cyberspace.

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
George Middius wrote:

Brother Horace the Shockingly Introspective croaked:

Unfortunately, he then went on to behave like an obnoxious
and insulting bully.

You don't say. Can you imagine? Just because he thinks he knows something
somebody else doesn't.

But he does know plenty, and that is the mystery for me. He
could have just set me straight with the basic information
he posted (I knew I was in a pickle well before his last
message, but I could not figure out how to gracefully get
out of it).

How about admit you had made an error? The sooner
the better usually. Most the animosity comes from your refusal to
admit your error.

ScottW

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...


I certainly do, Middius. Thank god for all of us that
high-end audio is such an insignificant institution. For me,
leaving the business has been notably painless and free of
remorse. I miss it like I miss a toothache.


Correction: You miss it like you miss your hair.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Not a chance. In any case, just because Pierce thinks I am a
misrepresenting troublemaker who does more harm than good
does not mean that he is in your camp. Yep, you guys STILL
have to deal with him and his tool box full of brass tacks.


The Ferstler toolbox:

1 Clarabelle bicycle horn
3 Lemon meringue pies
4 extra bulbous red noses
1 pair yellow and red polka dot extra large shoes
1 Fisher toy wrecking ball

The mini car is parked in the garage.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
George Middius wrote:

Did you just tell us *again* that your oft-postponed retirement from the
"audio
business" is now imminent? If you ever do retire (and let's not forget
you've
made the same announcement several times previously), that will curtail
the
obnoxious behavior a little.

Yes, this is it, both here and in regular print. I recently
purchased a blood-pressure monitor (doctor's suggestion) and
have discovered that every time I sit down and correspond
with you nitwits my readings climb.

So, dickhead, this is it. Enjoy your audio system, such as
it is.

Howard Ferstler

So, in the next one hour and one minute since this post, you
posted thirteen more times. Settle down, you're going to ahve a stroke.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

PS: Thanks for the cheap shot regarding my journalistic and
book-writing efforts in that other reply of yours. It
certainly opened my eyes - about you.

Owww......when will this wear off? ;-)

Right after I submit my final post.



Every time you get a spanking, you go run up to your
room and hide for a week or two. You'll be back.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Ayn Marx" wrote in message
oups.com...


Howard Ferstler wrote:
George Middius wrote:

Blah, blah, blah etc

STOP CROSS POSTING THIS **** TO AUS.HI-FI ! ! ! !


Talk to the aus. hi fi guy who made the very first post in this thread
and crossposted to RAO.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Ayn Marx wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
George Middius wrote:

Blah, blah, blah etc

STOP CROSS POSTING THIS **** TO AUS.HI-FI ! ! ! !

Your wish is my command. This is the last one from me. Good
luck handling Middius.



Can you make your goodbyes a little shorter?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:54:45 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

What would Howard do?

Actually, I purchase good, reliable gear and hook it up
carefully. Consequently, I have never had the problems that
you seem to have encountered with your gear.

NEVER?

Au contraire, mon ami.

dave weil said:

Actually, I purchase good, reliable gear and hook it up
carefully. Consequently, I have never had the problems that
you seem to have encountered with your gear.

NEVER?
Au contraire, mon ami.

Harold's collection of humuidifiers and needle-nose pliers is legendary,
pal.

Howard Ferstler said:

Not a chance. Actually, your little straw "broke the camel's
back" as it relates to my situation, and for that I thank
you. I have been itching to get out of the audio-writing
business for a while, and after getting back into book
reading (retired library clerk, remember?) I have recently
remembered just how much I miss that and how much I abhor
writing audio commentaries.

Yeah, it was fun for a while, and it even paid a bit, but
when I started to dread the deadlines and started to wince
whenever I was notified that a product was on the way to be
reviewed, I knew it was time to fold up my keyboard and get
back to books. Thanks for delivering the final impetus to
quit. I leave the audio-commentary field to you. Welcome
back to the fool's paradise.


Sic transit gloria mundi.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

Howard Ferstler said:

If you only knew. Yes, I am getting out of it. I recently
started reading heavily again (librarian, remember?) and
discovered just how much I had been missing since becoming
an audio writer. I just finished a book published 42 years
ago and not only enjoyed the hell out of it (it was an
intellectual history book written by Crane Brinton) but also
marveled at its excellent condition. Like new, actually.
Quite in contrast to computers that go into obsolescence
after four or five years.


I know you posess at least a fraction of a sense of humour, so allow
me to introduce to you the works of Guareschi, most notably the
excellent series of "Don Camillo".

Those stories are at least 50 years old, and if you're lucky you'll be
able to pick up a first print edition somewhere at an antique books
shop.

Read them and watch especially the character of Peppone.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:53:58 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

If you only knew. Yes, I am getting out of it. I recently
started reading heavily again (librarian, remember?) and
discovered just how much I had been missing since becoming
an audio writer. I just finished a book published 42 years
ago and not only enjoyed the hell out of it (it was an
intellectual history book written by Crane Brinton) but also
marveled at its excellent condition. Like new, actually.
Quite in contrast to computers that go into obsolescence
after four or five years.


I know you posess at least a fraction of a sense of humour, so allow
me to introduce to you the works of Guareschi, most notably the
excellent series of "Don Camillo".

Those stories are at least 50 years old, and if you're lucky you'll be
able to pick up a first print edition somewhere at an antique books
shop.

Read them and watch especially the character of Peppone.

I have the Don Camillo Omnibus, and Peppone does seem a lot like
Hiddius! :-)

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering