The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
ups.com...
The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ



----== 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 =----

John Atkinson wrote:
The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, sorry, that debate was a waste of money. The problem with it was
it totally lacked structure and in the end lacked direction. You guys
spent half the "debate" figuring out what you were arguing about. Then
when you found something to argue about one of you would go off in
another direction. By the time you guys went down the road of altered
states of mind the "debate" had become comepletely derailed. The
general complaints Arny was going to argue against Stereophile were no
longer in the picture. Next time you do somehting like this I suggest
you pick a specific topic and run a traditional debate with two minute
points and one minute rebuttals and counter rebuttals. Get panels so
participants can be well prepared and to the point. There is a good
reason this sort of structure is commonly used.


Scott Wheeler

"John Atkinson" wrote in message

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

The 'secrecy' of your own home? Don't you mean privacy?

The former has a pretty negative connotation.

wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, sorry, that debate was a waste of money.

I think it was worth the $140 or so I had to put up to
participate in it.

The problem with it was
it totally lacked structure and in the end lacked
direction.

My attempt at giving it structure with a simple concise
opening argument was kicked in the teeth by the wandering
anecdotal response of my opponent.

You guys spent half the "debate" figuring out what you
were arguing about.

Wrong, I spent my half of the debate following the cow's
trails that my opponent wandered down.

Then when you found something to argue about one of you
would go off in
another direction.

The audience was a continuous source of distractions and
blind alleys, led by Harry Lavo who tried to present a 4
hour discussion of his childish audio philosophies as a
question. Regrettably Mr Atkinson was fooled by Lavo.

By the time you guys went down the road of altered
states of mind the "debate" had become comepletely
derailed.

...and that was fairly early in the debate.

The general complaints Arny was going to argue against
Stereophile were no
longer in the picture.

Atkinson was essentially unable to cogently respond to them.
His only relevant excuse was that they were too hard for
someone at his primitive level of audio subjective testing
expertise and experience.

Next time you do somehting like this I suggest
you pick a specific topic and run a traditional debate
with two minute
points and one minute rebuttals and counter rebuttals.

Hard to do when you allow audience "questions" that are
rhetorical declarations that run several minutes all by
themselves.

Get panels so
participants can be well prepared and to the point. There
is a good
reason this sort of structure is commonly used.

Panel discussions are not a guarantee that the participants
are prepared. Our debate was preceeded by a sort of a panel
discussion, and it was pretty disappointing, as well.

I came to this debate with a prepared presentation, and a
short list of relevant points. Due to infrastructure
problems that weren't my fault, not even the presentation
could be done as intended. Things went downhill rapidly from
there. My opponent's response was a decade's old anecdote
about the bad listening tests that he had been party to in
the distant past. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

But rain aside, it was a nice weekend in NYC. The best sound
I heard that weekend was a one-man band playing in one of
the subway stations. Nousaine went to the conference Jazz
concert, and reported back to me that it was another
snoozer.

The major structural problem of the so-called HE2005 debate
was that the alleged moderator was one of the protagonists.
Duuuhhhh!

John Atkinson wrote:

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/


The web page itself is both funny and more than a little
factual:

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."

Hyperbole, anybody?

Bad theology aside, I have to admit that posting this
article on the web puts John Atkinson in my "Good Loser"
hall of fame for all audio history, and foreseeable future
times.

I can now why RAO's self-proclaimed subjectivist clique are
whining about the debate. Their champion got his clock
cleaned, pure and simple.

On Mon, 9 May 2005 06:21:31 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Due to infrastructure
problems that weren't my fault, not even the presentation
could be done as intended.

So you couldn't project the words you were saying on a screen. Big
deal.

"8 hz" dave :

So you couldn't project the words you were saying on a screen. Big
deal.

LOL !!!
....Just to see how *you* are desperate since he doesn't read anymore the
words you are trying to project on his screen.

:-D

In . com, John Atkinson
wrote :

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Does this recording answer to *THE* question ?
Nasal or not nasal ?

On Mon, 09 May 2005 17:00:46 +0200, Lionel
wrote:

"8 hz" dave :

So you couldn't project the words you were saying on a screen. Big
deal.

LOL !!!
...Just to see how *you* are desperate since he doesn't read anymore the
words you are trying to project on his screen.

:-D

This concludes a test of The Emergency Pavlov Response Testing System.
If this had been an actual emergency, someone would have been tasked
to clean up the mass of exploded French brains.

PS, what's depserate is your fixation on me and your monitoring of my
posts on RAO. I'm glad to have filled an obvious void in your life,
although you should probably look to work and family to fill that
void.

PPS, I rather doubt that he "doesn't read anymore the words" that I
project on his screen. But it's irrelevant anyway. Whether or not he
comments is not really an issue. What's funny is the way he uses you
to repspond anyway, and that you are content with your current lot in
life in this regard (talk about lapdogs! g). I guess it gives you
the sense of purpose that fatherhood can't fill.

dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 09 May 2005 17:00:46 +0200, Lionel
wrote:


"8 hz" dave :


So you couldn't project the words you were saying on a screen. Big
deal.

LOL !!!
...Just to see how *you* are desperate since he doesn't read anymore the
words you are trying to project on his screen.

:-D


This concludes a test of The Emergency Pavlov Response Testing System.
If this had been an actual emergency, someone would have been tasked
to clean up the mass of exploded French brains.

PS, what's depserate is your fixation on me and your monitoring of my
posts on RAO. I'm glad to have filled an obvious void in your life,
although you should probably look to work and family to fill that
void.

PPS, I rather doubt that he "doesn't read anymore the words" that I
project on his screen. But it's irrelevant anyway. Whether or not he
comments is not really an issue. What's funny is the way he uses you
to repspond anyway, and that you are content with your current lot in
life in this regard (talk about lapdogs! g). I guess it gives you
the sense of purpose that fatherhood can't fill.

PPPS, ???

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, sorry, that debate was a waste of money.

I think it was worth the $140 or so I had to put up to
participate in it.


Well. I'm glad you feel you that way. I was actually refering to the
cost of flying you out there and putting you up.





The problem with it was
it totally lacked structure and in the end lacked
direction.

My attempt at giving it structure with a simple concise
opening argument was kicked in the teeth by the wandering
anecdotal response of my opponent.


I found your opening statement neither simple nor concise. You wasted a
lot of time on material that was not the least bit relevant to your
points. Unfortunately you saved your points to the end of your opening
statement then offered no support for them. That's just bad structure.
You could have skipped your ramblings on personal philosophies, made
your three points about what is wrong with Stereophile and then
supported those points with specific evidence. Maybe had you spent time
supporting your points Atkinson might have felt compelled to rebut
them.You left him with nothing to rebut. That left him the oppurtunity
to talk about whatever he wanted to. Part of that is your fault since
you are not an experienced public speaker and seem to lack basic debate
experience in general. I suspected this would be a big problem for you
and it was. I must say your lack of preparedness to support your
attacks on Stereophile seemed particularly amatuerish. How can you make
"what's wrong with Stereophile" your theme for the debate and fail to
bring any actual examples of your points with you in the form of
offending Stereophile articles? But it wasn't entirely your fault. You
both walked into a debate with no set agenda? If that isn't determined
ahead of time debates will wander as this one did.




You guys spent half the "debate" figuring out what you
were arguing about.

Wrong, I spent my half of the debate following the cow's
trails that my opponent wandered down.


Same thing only with you not accepting partial responsibility for the
problem.




Then when you found something to argue about one of you
would go off in
another direction.

The audience was a continuous source of distractions and
blind alleys, led by Harry Lavo who tried to present a 4
hour discussion of his childish audio philosophies as a
question. Regrettably Mr Atkinson was fooled by Lavo.


I should have said so in advance but I was specifically speaking of the
"debate" that took place before the audience got hold of it. Once a
debate is opened to the audience the participants are not the least bit
responsible for any wanderings.




By the time you guys went down the road of altered
states of mind the "debate" had become comepletely
derailed.

..and that was fairly early in the debate.


yeah.





The general complaints Arny was going to argue against
Stereophile were no
longer in the picture.

Atkinson was essentially unable to cogently respond to them.


No. You were unable to support them. That lead to a very simple basic
exchange. You would make a charge and Atkinson would say if you read
the magazine you would see that charge isn't true. That was your
achillies heel. If you are going to make charges against Stereophile in
your debate you needed to support them with specific examples.


His only relevant excuse was that they were too hard for
someone at his primitive level of audio subjective testing
expertise and experience.


"They " what? dbts? Your attack on Stereophile was that they don't do
dbts? That was not clear at all. You didn't even bring that up in your
opening statement. You just made some very general charges against
Stereophile. John brought up dbts in *his* opening statement. You guys
rambled a bit about them but you never tied them to a problem with
Stereophile. Gosh if you had, John had an easy rebuttal for that since
none of the audio journals out there regularly do dbts your attack
would be arbitrary unless leveled against all audio publications.




Next time you do somehting like this I suggest
you pick a specific topic and run a traditional debate
with two minute
points and one minute rebuttals and counter rebuttals.

Hard to do when you allow audience "questions" that are
rhetorical declarations that run several minutes all by
themselves.


That can always be saved for the end as it was this time.




Get panels so
participants can be well prepared and to the point. There
is a good
reason this sort of structure is commonly used.

Panel discussions are not a guarantee that the participants
are prepared.


True but it makes it easier.



Our debate was preceeded by a sort of a panel
discussion, and it was pretty disappointing, as well.


IYO. I didn't see that panel discussion so I would reserve my opinion
on that.





I came to this debate with a prepared presentation, and a
short list of relevant points. Due to infrastructure
problems that weren't my fault, not even the presentation
could be done as intended.



I know you don't like to take responsibility for anything but your lack
of preparedness was your fault. Fact is John set himself up for a fal
and you fell on your sword on the way to the battle field. *You* had
the opportunity to make this debate about anything. There is no way to
prepare for a debate about anything. You had John over a barrel. Your
basic theme was "what i think is wrong with Stereophile" and you
brought no evidence via actual excerpts from Stereophile to support
your case. This should have been a turkey shoot for you.




Things went downhill rapidly from
there. My opponent's response was a decade's old anecdote
about the bad listening tests that he had been party to in
the distant past. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!



And yet you managed to lose most of the points. You got shot by a fish
in a barrel. The really sad thing is John's anecdote does raise a lot
of interesting questions. None of which were explored.





But rain aside, it was a nice weekend in NYC. The best sound
I heard that weekend was a one-man band playing in one of
the subway stations. Nousaine went to the conference Jazz
concert, and reported back to me that it was another
snoozer.


Of course your biases have nothing to do with your view on the show.





The major structural problem of the so-called HE2005 debate
was that the alleged moderator was one of the protagonists.
Duuuhhhh!

No, That wasn't one of the problems at all.




Scott Wheeler

Arny Krueger wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/


The web page itself is both funny and more than a little
factual:

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."

Hyperbole, anybody?

Bad theology aside, I have to admit that posting this
article on the web puts John Atkinson in my "Good Loser"
hall of fame for all audio history, and foreseeable future
times.

I can now why RAO's self-proclaimed subjectivist clique are
whining about the debate. Their champion got his clock
cleaned, pure and simple.

Not even close.



Scott Wheeler

Lionel wrote:
In . com, John
Atkinson
wrote :

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Does this recording answer to *THE* question ?
Nasal or not nasal ?


I was wondering just where that "squeaky", "whiny", "high-pitched",
etc., voice of Arny's all the "Normals" claimed to have heard on "The
Tape" went.

Among the possibilities:

a)"The Tape" never existed at all

b)The "Normals" lied about the sound of Arny's voice on "The Tape"

c)The psychotic posting as "the Devil" altered Arny's voice on "The
Tape"

d)"The Tape" existed but was a complete fabrication by "the Davil" that
had absolutely no basis in reality, but was merely "the Devil" playing
both parts and, perhaps, using a digital pitch change device to alter
the "Arny" parts


I'm going with "d". ;-)

wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, sorry, that debate was a waste of money.

I think it was worth the $140 or so I had to put up to
participate in it.

Well. I'm glad you feel you that way. I was actually
refering to the
cost of flying you out there and putting you up.

Since you never made a corresponding offer Scott, you never
got the pleasure of my company! ;-)

The problem with it was
it totally lacked structure and in the end lacked
direction.

My attempt at giving it structure with a simple concise
opening argument was kicked in the teeth by the wandering
anecdotal response of my opponent.

I found your opening statement neither simple nor concise.

Sorry that is was over your head, Scotty. Next time I'll try
to work at your level, which is something like
cosmetologist, right?

You wasted
a lot of time on material that was not the least bit
relevant to your
points.

It was sufficient to make Atkinson look like a deer that was
caught in my headlights.

Unfortunately you saved your points to the end of your
opening
statement then offered no support for them.

Hopefully that support would have come out in the debate. I
think it did, but again they may have gone over your head,
Scotty. Cosmetology courses are generally given at the
6th-grade reading level, right?

That's just bad structure.

No, its good debating style. You provide a concise list of
points for debate and let your opponent stumble around them
as they can. Worked for everybody, even the two golden-ears
who published articles about it.

You could have skipped your ramblings on personal
philosophies, made
your three points about what is wrong with Stereophile and
then
supported those points with specific evidence.

Those weren't my personal philosophies Scott, but formal
definitions of objectivity and subjectivity. Thanks for
showing that cosemtology classes aren't exactly heavy with a
discusison of philosophy, Scotty.

Maybe had you spent
time supporting your points Atkinson might have felt
compelled to
rebut them.

Anybody with a brain who has read Stereophile would know
what I'm talking about, Scotty. Many who were there seemed
to get my points right away.

You left him with nothing to rebut.

He managed to blather on quite extensively, as did several
from the audience. Don't get me wrong, some relevant points
were raised as well.

That left him the oppurtunity to talk about whatever he
wanted to.

If Atkinson had prepared for the debate then his opening
points would have been the same no matter what I said.

Part of that is your
fault since you are not an experienced public speaker and
seem to
lack basic debate experience in general.

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.

I suspected this would be a
big problem for you and it was. I must say your lack of
preparedness
to support your attacks on Stereophile seemed particularly
amatuerish.

That's why even the Sterophile writer, who seems to be a
well-known whistler
http://www.planeteria.net/home/whistler/ granted me
vicrtory, before any number of Harry-Lavo-like unrebuttable
comments about his philosophies about love, life and you
guessed it, soy sauce. What is it about you radical
subjectivists and soy sauce? ;-)

snip remaining childish prattle

In article ,
Lionel wrote:

In . com, John Atkinson
wrote :

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Does this recording answer to *THE* question ?
Nasal or not nasal ?

Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded over a telephone.

Stephen

On Mon, 09 May 2005 17:30:35 +0200, Lionel
wrote:

dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 09 May 2005 17:00:46 +0200, Lionel
wrote:


"8 hz" dave :


So you couldn't project the words you were saying on a screen. Big
deal.

LOL !!!
...Just to see how *you* are desperate since he doesn't read anymore the
words you are trying to project on his screen.

:-D


This concludes a test of The Emergency Pavlov Response Testing System.
If this had been an actual emergency, someone would have been tasked
to clean up the mass of exploded French brains.

PS, what's depserate is your fixation on me and your monitoring of my
posts on RAO. I'm glad to have filled an obvious void in your life,
although you should probably look to work and family to fill that
void.

PPS, I rather doubt that he "doesn't read anymore the words" that I
project on his screen. But it's irrelevant anyway. Whether or not he
comments is not really an issue. What's funny is the way he uses you
to repspond anyway, and that you are content with your current lot in
life in this regard (talk about lapdogs! g). I guess it gives you
the sense of purpose that fatherhood can't fill.

PPPS, ???

Thanks for dangling like a marionette.

MINe 109 wrote:
In article ,
Lionel wrote:

In
. com, John
Atkinson wrote :

The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Does this recording answer to *THE* question ?
Nasal or not nasal ?

Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded over a
telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for reference.
So,Stephen can say anything that he wants to. As a
co-conspirator, he's hardly a reliable source of
information.

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, sorry, that debate was a waste of money.

I think it was worth the $140 or so I had to put up to
participate in it.

Well. I'm glad you feel you that way. I was actually
refering to the
cost of flying you out there and putting you up.

Since you never made a corresponding offer Scott, you never
got the pleasure of my company! ;-)


When I am provided with air travel and lodging I come prepared. No one
has ever wasted their money flying me anywhere.





The problem with it was
it totally lacked structure and in the end lacked
direction.

My attempt at giving it structure with a simple concise
opening argument was kicked in the teeth by the wandering
anecdotal response of my opponent.

I found your opening statement neither simple nor concise.

Sorry that is was over your head, Scotty. Next time I'll try
to work at your level, which is something like
cosmetologist, right?


Wrong, as usual. :::yawn:::





You wasted
a lot of time on material that was not the least bit
relevant to your
points.

It was sufficient to make Atkinson look like a deer that was
caught in my headlights.



The only one with a dumb look on their face was you Arny. John looked
quite comfortable in every picture I've seen.




Unfortunately you saved your points to the end of your
opening
statement then offered no support for them.

Hopefully that support would have come out in the debate.


Hopefully? LOL it's up to you to support your claims dude. You failed
and yet you are now proclaiming to have cleaned John's clock. Did you
mean this literally? Did he provide you with some house hold chores
before the debate including one clock cleaning? You pretty much just
floundered in the debate.



I
think it did, but again they may have gone over your head,
Scotty.


Nope, it just didn't happen. You cited no examples of that which you
claimed was wrong with Stereophile. That is a lack of evidence and a
lack of preparedness on your part no matter how much posturing you do
now with claims that things went over my head. You flopped. Deal with
it.




Cosmetology courses are generally given at the
6th-grade reading level, right?


Gosh I don't know Arny. Never took one. But OTOH we can ask this
question of the engineering classes taught at your Alma mader.





That's just bad structure.

No, its good debating style.


You had no style other than chasing your own tail. The debate in
general lacked stucture. I guess your third rate education never
provided you with the tools to understand the differences between style
and structure. Oh well.



You provide a concise list of
points for debate and let your opponent stumble around them
as they can.


If you want to walk away a loser sure. You make charges and fail to
support them and your opponent is free to deny the charges. That's what
happened and that's why you scored no points on *your* choice of
subject matter. Pathetic really.




Worked for everybody, even the two golden-ears
who published articles about it.



Yeah right. Dude, not even your friends on RAHE have called your
performance a victory. What does that tell you?





You could have skipped your ramblings on personal
philosophies, made
your three points about what is wrong with Stereophile and
then
supported those points with specific evidence.

Those weren't my personal philosophies Scott, but formal
definitions of objectivity and subjectivity. Thanks for
showing that cosemtology classes aren't exactly heavy with a
discusison of philosophy, Scotty.

Well my point did go right over your head. Of course this is typical of
you Arny. You are a sore loser who resorts to personal attacks when
faced with your own failings. Business as usual. Maybe in your next
post you can start making unsavery false accusations against me and
start pointing out any typos or spelling errors. That will make your
failure to deliver magically disappear.







Maybe had you spent
time supporting your points Atkinson might have felt
compelled to
rebut them.

Anybody with a brain who has read Stereophile would know
what I'm talking about, Scotty.


Riiight. IOW you expected the audience to already agree with you.
There's a winning formula for persuasion. You are just making excuses
Arny. You weren't prepared to support your points and that is a failure
in debate tactics at the most basic level. You blew it and you allowed
John to dictate the debate and in effect score far more points. You
came to a turkey shoot and walked away with lead in your ass.




Many who were there seemed
to get my points right away.




Riiiiiight. Nousaine and whop else? What a joke.








You left him with nothing to rebut.

He managed to blather on quite extensively, as did several
from the audience.


No, he managed to take the debate in any direction he chose since you
gave him nothing to defend.




Don't get me wrong, some relevant points
were raised as well.

That left him the oppurtunity to talk about whatever he
wanted to.

If Atkinson had prepared for the debate then his opening
points would have been the same no matter what I said.


There is no way to prepare for an open debate like this unless you
dropped the ball. You did and that allowed Atkinson to do what he did.
If you had made your three points from the outset and then provided
specific examples from the pages of Stereophile that supported your
charges he wouldn't have been able to tell some story about his
experience with dbts. The debate would have been about your points and
you would have been armed with evidence that John would have no way of
preparing for. You blew it. You can't even shoot a fish in a barrel.




Part of that is your
fault since you are not an experienced public speaker and
seem to
lack basic debate experience in general.

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty.


Oh, that's sad. You mean you can't use lack of experience as an excuse
for your poor performance. WOW. You just suck at it anyways.



BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do


No it isn't. Gosh, if I didn't do well I'd have an excuse.



- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


Ah, making things up about me again. This won't cover your miserable
failure in this debate Arny. You can make things up about me all you
want, you still blew any easy victory that any smart person would have
easily seized.




I suspected this would be a
big problem for you and it was. I must say your lack of
preparedness
to support your attacks on Stereophile seemed particularly
amatuerish.

That's why even the Sterophile writer, who seems to be a
well-known whistler
http://www.planeteria.net/home/whistler/ granted me
vicrtory, before any number of Harry-Lavo-like unrebuttable
comments about his philosophies about love, life and you
guessed it, soy sauce. What is it about you radical
subjectivists and soy sauce? ;-)


I heard the debate Arny. You blew it.




snip remaining childish prattle



Self serving editing noted. I can see why you never excelled at
anything Arny. You couldn't even prepare for the debate you've been
waiting for all these years.




scott Wheeler

dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 09 May 2005 17:30:35 +0200, Lionel
wrote:


dave weil a écrit :

On Mon, 09 May 2005 17:00:46 +0200, Lionel
wrote:



"8 hz" dave :



So you couldn't project the words you were saying on a screen. Big
deal.

LOL !!!
...Just to see how *you* are desperate since he doesn't read anymore the
words you are trying to project on his screen.

:-D


This concludes a test of The Emergency Pavlov Response Testing System.
If this had been an actual emergency, someone would have been tasked
to clean up the mass of exploded French brains.

PS, what's depserate is your fixation on me and your monitoring of my
posts on RAO. I'm glad to have filled an obvious void in your life,
although you should probably look to work and family to fill that
void.

PPS, I rather doubt that he "doesn't read anymore the words" that I
project on his screen. But it's irrelevant anyway. Whether or not he
comments is not really an issue. What's funny is the way he uses you
to repspond anyway, and that you are content with your current lot in
life in this regard (talk about lapdogs! g). I guess it gives you
the sense of purpose that fatherhood can't fill.

PPPS, ???


Thanks for dangling like a marionette.

;-)

MINe 109 a écrit :
In article ,
Lionel wrote:


In . com, John Atkinson
wrote :


The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Does this recording answer to *THE* question ?
Nasal or not nasal ?


Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded over a telephone.

Good, "The Great Debate" has answered a question.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to go with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well done, Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only count if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you (dung beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far as I can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change to prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag but you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret von B. wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to go
with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well done,
Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and
boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only count
if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you (dung
beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far as I
can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change to
prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag but
you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto
still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret


Life advice from RAO's cyber-transvestite! ;-)

Arny Krueger wrote:
MINe 109 wrote:
Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded
over a telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for
reference.

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

It helps to get everything out in the open, don't you
agree.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

wrote:
Margaret von B. wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to go
with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well
done,
Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and
boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only
count
if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you
(dung
beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far as
I
can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change to
prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag
but
you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto
still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret


Life advice from RAO's cyber-transvestite! ;-)




Perhaps we can get some pearls of wisdom on life from the guy that
can't manage to make it on his own and move out form his mom and dad's
home.



Scott Wheeler

"John Atkinson" said:

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.


Just a note: the person known as "The Devil" objected to distribution
of said recording by third parties, and has never given anyone
permission to do so.

--

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

Schizoid Man wrote:
The 'secrecy' of your own home? Don't you mean privacy?

I was originally going to say "privacy," but "secrecy"
conveyed more of the furtive nature of the believers in
"scientism," I thought. :-)

The former has a pretty negative connotation.

Yes it does. What's your point? My point is that tests
performed in private with no-one observing are meaningless
for anything other than personal gratification. And as
Jason Serinus wrote, Arny's PC-ABX tests of amplifiers
are meaningless, due to the presence of interfering
variables. This was something Paul Bamborough demonstrated
a couple of years ago on r.a.o. without any substantive
response from Mr. Krueger.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

In .com,
wrote :


Margaret von B. wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to go
with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well done,
Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and
boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only count
if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you (dung
beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far as I
can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change to
prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag but
you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto
still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret


Life advice from RAO's cyber-transvestite! ;-)

"She" hasn't had the courage to speak to Arnold directly when "she" was in
NY and now she's giving lesson of humanity...
Her hypocrisy hasn't any limits.

:-D

On 9 May 2005 13:07:03 -0700, "John Atkinson"
wrote:


Arny Krueger wrote:
MINe 109 wrote:
Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded
over a telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for
reference.

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

Ummmm, I don't think that the Horned One really wants that. In fact, I
think that Beeb wants that recording to disappear, as it wasn't his
intention for it to get into general circulation. I think you've been
the victim of a similar situation, so I'm sure you sympathize with Mr.
S.

It helps to get everything out in the open, don't you
agree.

I think that The Prince of Darkness would disagree.

In .com, John Atkinson
wrote :


Arny Krueger wrote:
MINe 109 wrote:
Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded
over a telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for
reference.

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

Is it legal ?

Sander deWaal wrote:
"John Atkinson" said:
As you are making an issue of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be
happy to email people an extract of the "Devil" recording
so that they can compare it with the recording of the Debate.

Just a note: the person known as "The Devil" objected to
distribution of said recording by third parties, and has
never given anyone permission to do so.

Of course, but as the one featured on the recording, Arny
Krueger can give permission if he wishes. If he withholds
that permission, then of course I would honor the Devil's
request. But if Mr. Krueger does withhold permission, then
people will wonder what he has to hide.

And I really don't believe it is appropriate for Mr. Krueger
to make public reference to the recording while not allowing
anyone to hear it for themselves. Remember poor Howard
Ferstler, blustering away about what a hatchet job my copy
editor did on his Audiophile Voice essay while at the same
time refusing to let anyone see it for themselves. The usual
moral cowardice, in my opinion.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John "unctuous" Atkinson wrote:


snipped

Remember poor Howard
Ferstler, blustering away about what a hatchet job my copy
editor did on his Audiophile Voice essay while at the same
time refusing to let anyone see it for themselves.


You smarmy, sleazy little prick. You wanted that edited copy made
public, but lacked the balls to makr it so. Indtead, you arranged for
it to be "leaked" and cried a few crocodile tears after the fact.


The usual
moral cowardice, in my opinion.

Yes, from high-end audio's number one sleaze ball:
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the
people we're after."- excerpted from the $tereopile mission statement

In .com, John Atkinson
wrote :

The usual moral cowardice, in my opinion.

Is he speaking about George M. Middius ? Margaret Von Trou'd'balles ?

wrote:
wrote:
Margaret von B. wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to
go
with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well
done,
Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and
boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only
count
if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you
(dung
beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far
as
I
can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change
to
prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag
but
you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto
still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret


Life advice from RAO's cyber-transvestite! ;-)




Perhaps we can get some pearls of wisdom on life from the guy that
can't manage to make it on his own and move out form his mom and
dad's
home.


And now, gibberish from RAO's litiguous asshole. :-(

Lionel wrote:
In .com,
wrote :


Margaret von B. wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I've bought a new car or two with money earned essentially
doing public speaking Scotty. BTW, public speaking is not
the same as what you do- gossip around the chair in that
cosemtology shop you work in.


I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you decided to go
with the
proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why am I here? Well
done,
Mr.
Expert.

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of bragging and
boasting
will *never* get you anywhere. Compliments/accomplishments only
count
if
they are aired by people who know you and have worked with you
(dung
beetles
don't count). Not too many of those have ever come forth as far as
I
can
tell (again, dung beetles don't count). How come, Arny?

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a change to
prove
yourself to be something else besides a hateful and bitter gasbag
but
you
keep constantly letting me down. At your advanced age your motto
still seems
to be "it wasn't my fault, it was all the other guys". That *IS*
embarrassing, Arny.

Shape up!


Cheers,

Margaret


Life advice from RAO's cyber-transvestite! ;-)

"She" hasn't had the courage to speak to Arnold directly when "she"
was in
NY and now she's giving lesson of humanity...
Her hypocrisy hasn't any limits.

:-D


"Maggie" wasn't properly (cross)dressed at HE2005, so an introduction
to Arny would have been awkward, at best. ;-)

In .com, John Atkinson
wrote :


Sander deWaal wrote:
"John Atkinson" said:
As you are making an issue of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be
happy to email people an extract of the "Devil" recording
so that they can compare it with the recording of the Debate.

Just a note: the person known as "The Devil" objected to
distribution of said recording by third parties, and has
never given anyone permission to do so.

Of course, but as the one featured on the recording, Arny
Krueger can give permission if he wishes. If he withholds
that permission, then of course I would honor the Devil's
request. But if Mr. Krueger does withhold permission, then
people will wonder what he has to hide.

And I really don't believe it is appropriate for Mr. Krueger
to make public reference to the recording while not allowing
anyone to hear it for themselves. Remember poor Howard
Ferstler, blustering away about what a hatchet job my copy
editor did on his Audiophile Voice essay while at the same
time refusing to let anyone see it for themselves. The usual
moral cowardice, in my opinion.

Note that if you still have the recording despite Devil's request to destroy
it this means that you haven't had any respect for the Devil's wish.
Between you and me you are more and more looking like a guy with a revenge
agenda.

wrote:
Margaret von B. wrote:
I don't believe you. And I tell you why.

For example, being such a public speaking expert you
decided to go
with the proven :-) Stockdale strategy: Who am I? Why
am I here?
Well done, Mr. Expert.

What's your point? If I followed an outline that is so well
proven that it is well-known, how does that make me an
incompetent speaker?

Arny, when are you going to learn that your line of
bragging and
boasting will *never* get you anywhere.

It got me a free trip to NYC, and award of Atkinson's
figurative tail and horns by one of his employer's own
writers.

Compliments/accomplishments
only count if they are aired by people who know you and
have worked
with you (dung beetles don't count).

What's unclear about:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that Arnold B. Krueger was God and John
Atkinson was a pathetic girly man."



Not too many of those have ever
come forth as far as I can tell (again, dung beetles
don't count).

Thanks for calling the Stereophile web site author a dung
beatle. This only discredits you, Maggie.

How come, Arny?

Because you don't seem to know what you are talking about,
Maggie.

I'm really trying to be neutral about you and give you a
change to
prove yourself to be something else besides a hateful and
bitter
gasbag but you keep constantly letting me down.

Let you down how, Maggie? By gaining favorable mention on
Stereophile's own web site?

At your advanced age
your motto still seems to be "it wasn't my fault, it was
all the
other guys". That *IS* embarrassing, Arny.

Yup, its my fault that Primedia can't follow through on
their promise of a computer and a video projector -
especially ironic in the midst of one of the largest
nationwide if not international A/V exibitions around.

Shape up!

Exactly what would shaping up be like Maggie?

Would it somehow be better if the Stereophile article read:

"By the end of the hour, if you had been a recent arrival
from another planet and had oriented yourself to life in the
USA by watching action flicks and video games, you would
have been certain that John Atkinson was God and Arnold B.
Krueger
was a pathetic girly man."

LOL!

In article . com,
says...


The recording of the Atkinson vs Arny debate at Home
Entertainment 2005 is now available. Go to:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John, thank you for hosting the debate and posting the audio recording.

Contrary to what Arny has said, I don't think either you or he 'won' or
'lost'. Both of you made your points clearly. It was easy to understand
how your views differ.

My views on the announced topic of the debate have been posted to my
web page for years and are generally in line with Arny's. Those views
aren't modified in any way by what I've heard nor by Arny's behavior in
this newsgroup.

John, again, your story about what you did with your amps in your 20's was
interesting, but your decision making wasn't based on any scientific
method, but on your opinion/feelings. And yes, there _may_ have been
problems with the test you did that originally led you to purchase the SS
amp. Arny did point out that methods have improved and there are practical
methods for doing the tests. Not that there's anything wrong with the
straight listening you did for your amp decision, if that's what you want
to do and it makes you happy. I choose to rely on more scientific methods
to decern _real_ differences in equipment. And, as I say on my web page,
often those differences aren't important, even if they exist.

whosbest54
--
The flamewars are over...if you want it.

Unofficial rec.audio.opinion Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://members.aol.com/whosbest54/

Unofficial rec.music.beatles Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://members.aol.com/whosbest54/rmb.html

On Mon, 9 May 2005 16:58:14 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

It got me a free trip to NYC

Actually, it cost you over $100, by your own admission.

John Atkinson wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
MINe 109 wrote:
Same voice, not as nasal because it wasn't recorded
over a telephone.

Note that no recording is generally available for
reference.

It's obviously the same voice. As you are making an issue
of this, Mr. Krueger, I'd be happy to email people an
extract of the "Devil" recording so that they can compare
it with the recording of the Debate.

Since this extract has only been available since the debate
recording came into existence, it is highly suspect to say
the least.

It helps to get everything out in the open, don't you
agree.

Looks like a Red Herring to me.

Speaks to the kind of weak proof you seem to want people to
accept, John.