The Audio Critic [Archive] - AudioBanter.com

February 17th 05, 04:11 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> nk.net
> > Is now a web magazine.
> >
> > www.theaudiocritic.com
> >
> > They have a great review of the Linkwitz Labs Orion speakers. Very
> > favorable and a steal for the money.
>
> They are also giving away this article, which is a classic:
>
> http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
>
> 2. The Vacuum-Tube Lie
> This lie is also, in a sense, about a peripheral
> matter, since vacuum tubes are
> hardly mainstream in the age of silicon.
> It's an all-pervasive lie, however,
> in the high-end audio market; just
> count the tube-equipment ads as a percentage
> of total ad pages in the typical
> high-end magazine. Unbelievable! And
> so is, of course, the claim that vacuum
> tubes are inherently superior to transistors
> in audio applications-don't
> you believe it.
>
> Tubes are great for high-powered
> RF transmitters and microwave ovens
> but not, at the turn of the century, for
> amplifiers, preamps, or (good grief!)
> digital components like CD and DVD
> players.
>
> What's wrong with tubes?
> Nothing, really. There's nothing wrong
> with gold teeth, either, even for upper
> incisors (that Mideastern grin); it's just
> that modern dentistry offers more attractive
> options. Whatever vacuum
> tubes can do in a piece of audio equipment,
> solid-state devices can do better,
> at lower cost, with greater reliability.
>
> Even the world's best-designed tube
> amplifier will have higher distortion
> than an equally well-designed transistor
> amplifier and will almost certainly need
> more servicing (tube replacements,
> rebiasing, etc.) during its lifetime. (Idiotic
> designs such as 8-watt single-ended
> triode amplifiers are of course exempt,
> by default, from such comparisons since
> they have no solid-state counterpart.)
>
> As for the "tube sound," there are
> two possibilities: (1) It's a figment of
> the deluded audiophile's imagination,
> or (2) it's a deliberate coloration introduced
> by the manufacturer to appeal
> to corrupted tastes, in which case a
> solid-state design could easily mimic
> the sound if the designer were perverse
> enough to want it that way.
>
> Yes, there exist very special situations
> where a sophisticated designer of hi-fi
> electronics might consider using a tube
> (e.g., the RF stage of an FM tuner), but
> those rare and narrowly qualified exceptions
> cannot redeem the common,
> garden-variety lies of the tube marketers,
> who want you to buy into an obsolete
> technology
>
>

The "ten biggest lies" from the Audio Critic, if inverted, could easily
be the "top ten truths" from $tereopile. I hope many Audio Critic types
show up for the debate.
>
>
Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.

[email protected]

February 17th 05, 04:20 AM

wrote:
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> > nk.net
> > > Is now a web magazine.
> > >
> > > www.theaudiocritic.com
> > >
> > > They have a great review of the Linkwitz Labs Orion speakers.
Very
> > > favorable and a steal for the money.
> >
> > They are also giving away this article, which is a classic:
> >
> > http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
> >
> > 2. The Vacuum-Tube Lie
> > This lie is also, in a sense, about a peripheral
> > matter, since vacuum tubes are
> > hardly mainstream in the age of silicon.
> > It's an all-pervasive lie, however,
> > in the high-end audio market; just
> > count the tube-equipment ads as a percentage
> > of total ad pages in the typical
> > high-end magazine. Unbelievable! And
> > so is, of course, the claim that vacuum
> > tubes are inherently superior to transistors
> > in audio applications-don't
> > you believe it.
> >
> > Tubes are great for high-powered
> > RF transmitters and microwave ovens
> > but not, at the turn of the century, for
> > amplifiers, preamps, or (good grief!)
> > digital components like CD and DVD
> > players.
> >
> > What's wrong with tubes?
> > Nothing, really. There's nothing wrong
> > with gold teeth, either, even for upper
> > incisors (that Mideastern grin); it's just
> > that modern dentistry offers more attractive
> > options. Whatever vacuum
> > tubes can do in a piece of audio equipment,
> > solid-state devices can do better,
> > at lower cost, with greater reliability.
> >
> > Even the world's best-designed tube
> > amplifier will have higher distortion
> > than an equally well-designed transistor
> > amplifier and will almost certainly need
> > more servicing (tube replacements,
> > rebiasing, etc.) during its lifetime. (Idiotic
> > designs such as 8-watt single-ended
> > triode amplifiers are of course exempt,
> > by default, from such comparisons since
> > they have no solid-state counterpart.)
> >
> > As for the "tube sound," there are
> > two possibilities: (1) It's a figment of
> > the deluded audiophile's imagination,
> > or (2) it's a deliberate coloration introduced
> > by the manufacturer to appeal
> > to corrupted tastes, in which case a
> > solid-state design could easily mimic
> > the sound if the designer were perverse
> > enough to want it that way.
> >
> > Yes, there exist very special situations
> > where a sophisticated designer of hi-fi
> > electronics might consider using a tube
> > (e.g., the RF stage of an FM tuner), but
> > those rare and narrowly qualified exceptions
> > cannot redeem the common,
> > garden-variety lies of the tube marketers,
> > who want you to buy into an obsolete
> > technology
> >
> >
>
>
> The "ten biggest lies" from the Audio Critic, if inverted, could
easily
> be the "top ten truths" from $tereopile. I hope many Audio Critic
types
> show up for the debate.

If they show up in proportion to the buyers of the two magazines (not
likely given it is a Stereophile show) you may have some fraction of
one person represent the Audio Critic. If Arny shows up to the debate
he will likely be facing an unsympathetic audience. I still expect him
to be a no show at the debate.

> >
> >
> Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.

Good luck.

Scott Wheeler

[email protected]

February 17th 05, 04:29 AM

wrote:
> wrote:
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> > > "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> > > nk.net
> > > > Is now a web magazine.
> > > >
> > > > www.theaudiocritic.com
> > > >
> > > > They have a great review of the Linkwitz Labs Orion speakers.
> Very
> > > > favorable and a steal for the money.
> > >
> > > They are also giving away this article, which is a classic:
> > >
> > > http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
> > >
> > > 2. The Vacuum-Tube Lie
> > > This lie is also, in a sense, about a peripheral
> > > matter, since vacuum tubes are
> > > hardly mainstream in the age of silicon.
> > > It's an all-pervasive lie, however,
> > > in the high-end audio market; just
> > > count the tube-equipment ads as a percentage
> > > of total ad pages in the typical
> > > high-end magazine. Unbelievable! And
> > > so is, of course, the claim that vacuum
> > > tubes are inherently superior to transistors
> > > in audio applications-don't
> > > you believe it.
> > >
> > > Tubes are great for high-powered
> > > RF transmitters and microwave ovens
> > > but not, at the turn of the century, for
> > > amplifiers, preamps, or (good grief!)
> > > digital components like CD and DVD
> > > players.
> > >
> > > What's wrong with tubes?
> > > Nothing, really. There's nothing wrong
> > > with gold teeth, either, even for upper
> > > incisors (that Mideastern grin); it's just
> > > that modern dentistry offers more attractive
> > > options. Whatever vacuum
> > > tubes can do in a piece of audio equipment,
> > > solid-state devices can do better,
> > > at lower cost, with greater reliability.
> > >
> > > Even the world's best-designed tube
> > > amplifier will have higher distortion
> > > than an equally well-designed transistor
> > > amplifier and will almost certainly need
> > > more servicing (tube replacements,
> > > rebiasing, etc.) during its lifetime. (Idiotic
> > > designs such as 8-watt single-ended
> > > triode amplifiers are of course exempt,
> > > by default, from such comparisons since
> > > they have no solid-state counterpart.)
> > >
> > > As for the "tube sound," there are
> > > two possibilities: (1) It's a figment of
> > > the deluded audiophile's imagination,
> > > or (2) it's a deliberate coloration introduced
> > > by the manufacturer to appeal
> > > to corrupted tastes, in which case a
> > > solid-state design could easily mimic
> > > the sound if the designer were perverse
> > > enough to want it that way.
> > >
> > > Yes, there exist very special situations
> > > where a sophisticated designer of hi-fi
> > > electronics might consider using a tube
> > > (e.g., the RF stage of an FM tuner), but
> > > those rare and narrowly qualified exceptions
> > > cannot redeem the common,
> > > garden-variety lies of the tube marketers,
> > > who want you to buy into an obsolete
> > > technology
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > The "ten biggest lies" from the Audio Critic, if inverted, could
> easily
> > be the "top ten truths" from $tereopile. I hope many Audio Critic
> types
> > show up for the debate.
>
>
>
> If they show up in proportion to the buyers of the two magazines (not
> likely given it is a Stereophile show) you may have some fraction of
> one person represent the Audio Critic. If Arny shows up to the debate
> he will likely be facing an unsympathetic audience. I still expect
him
> to be a no show at the debate.
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.
>
>
>
> Good luck.
>
>
>
Don't know much about NYC, eh, Bloated GasBag?

Clyde Slick

February 17th 05, 05:08 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> nk.net
>> Is now a web magazine.
>>
>> www.theaudiocritic.com
>>
>> They have a great review of the Linkwitz Labs Orion speakers. Very
>> favorable and a steal for the money.
>
> They are also giving away this article, which is a classic:
>
> http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
>
> 2. The Vacuum-Tube Lie
> This lie is also, in a sense, about a peripheral
> matter, since vacuum tubes are
> hardly mainstream in the age of silicon.
> It's an all-pervasive lie, however,
> in the high-end audio market; just
> count the tube-equipment ads as a percentage
> of total ad pages in the typical
> high-end magazine. Unbelievable! And
> so is, of course, the claim that vacuum
> tubes are inherently superior to transistors
> in audio applications-don't
> you believe it.
>
> Tubes are great for high-powered
> RF transmitters and microwave ovens
> but not, at the turn of the century, for
> amplifiers, preamps, or (good grief!)
> digital components like CD and DVD
> players.
>
> What's wrong with tubes?
> Nothing, really. There's nothing wrong
> with gold teeth, either, even for upper
> incisors (that Mideastern grin); it's just
> that modern dentistry offers more attractive
> options. Whatever vacuum
> tubes can do in a piece of audio equipment,
> solid-state devices can do better,
> at lower cost, with greater reliability.
>
> Even the world's best-designed tube
> amplifier will have higher distortion
> than an equally well-designed transistor
> amplifier and will almost certainly need
> more servicing (tube replacements,
> rebiasing, etc.) during its lifetime. (Idiotic
> designs such as 8-watt single-ended
> triode amplifiers are of course exempt,
> by default, from such comparisons since
> they have no solid-state counterpart.)
>
> As for the "tube sound," there are
> two possibilities: (1) It's a figment of
> the deluded audiophile's imagination,
> or (2) it's a deliberate coloration introduced
> by the manufacturer to appeal
> to corrupted tastes, in which case a
> solid-state design could easily mimic
> the sound if the designer were perverse
> enough to want it that way.
>

I can't wait for my next issue of Stereophile,
chock full of ads for SS amps claiming to sound like
tube amps, at a fraction of the cost!

Aczel is so flummoxed, he can't even tell
us which of the two alternatives (as to tube sound)
he presented is operative. It can't be both!/

----== 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 =----

Arny Krueger

February 17th 05, 10:10 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com
> wrote:

>> The "ten biggest lies" from the Audio Critic, if inverted, could
>> easily be the "top ten truths" from $tereopile. I hope many Audio
>> Critic types show up for the debate.

Point well taken.

> If they show up in proportion to the buyers of the two magazines (not
> likely given it is a Stereophile show) you may have some fraction of
> one person represent the Audio Critic.

I know that SP has by far the larger circulation, but this seems a bit
hyperbolic. IOW, in keeping with the SP tradition.

> If Arny shows up to the debate
> he will likely be facing an unsympathetic audience.

Doooh! That's the whole point.

> I still expect him to be a no show at the debate.

If I'm not there, it won't be my fault. I'm going to make every reasonable
effort to be there.

Arny Krueger

February 17th 05, 11:02 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com

> Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.

Begs the question as to whether or not he knows better.

Clyde Slick

February 17th 05, 01:21 PM

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

>
>> I still expect him to be a no show at the debate.
>
> If I'm not there, it won't be my fault. I'm going to make every reasonable
> effort to be there.
>

Here we go!!!!

----== 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 =----

[email protected]

February 17th 05, 02:23 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
> > Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.
>
> Begs the question as to whether or not he knows better.
>
>

I think the way Atkinson dances around certain issues indicates he is
more of a deceiver than an ignoramus.

February 17th 05, 04:49 PM

>>
> Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.

If I'm not mistaken, John Atkinson is an American.

Norm Strong

John Atkinson

February 17th 05, 05:05 PM

wrote:
> >Someone wrote
> > Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, John Atkinson is an American.

These days, yes Norm. I became a US citizen in August '03.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Sander deWaal

February 17th 05, 05:07 PM

"Arny Krueger" > quoted:

>"What's wrong with tubes?
>Nothing, really. "

Thanks, Arnold ;-)

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Joseph Oberlander

February 17th 05, 05:54 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:

> As for the "tube sound," there are
> two possibilities: (1) It's a figment of
> the deluded audiophile's imagination,
> or (2) it's a deliberate coloration introduced
> by the manufacturer to appeal
> to corrupted tastes, in which case a
> solid-state design could easily mimic
> the sound if the designer were perverse
> enough to want it that way.

Bzzt. More than likely, it is simply that they are trying
to run that amplifier that really should be rated at 30-40W
instead of a "how large a spike can it produce before it
blows out" 100W they stick on it for marketing purposes
through inefficient speakers.

Of course, the result is a nice 5-10%+ distortion.

Since Tubes distort the harmonics instead of creating
white noise, you get the classic "tube" sound. Just
ask any guitar player. :)

Tom

February 17th 05, 06:09 PM

"John Atkinson" wrote:
>
> These days, yes Norm. I became a US citizen in August '03.

Hi John -
As I'm sure you read, "someone" wrote that the reason you
feel this debate is "necessary" is because Arny has put a
serious dent in the credibility of your magazine.
Could you stop laughing for a moment and elaborate a little
bit on your statement re: "necessary".

John Atkinson

February 17th 05, 07:33 PM

Tom wrote:
> As I'm sure you read, "someone" wrote that the reason
> you feel this debate is "necessary" is because Arny has
> put a serious dent in the credibility of your magazine.

:-)

> Could you stop laughing for a moment and elaborate a
> little bit on your statement re: "necessary".

Sure. There are a number of reasons.

1) I am responsible for coming up with a program of
"fringe" events for our Shows, and I thought the debate
would add to the appeal of HE2005 for would-be showgoers.

2) The subject of blind testing methodology is one that
deserves some public discussion. I hope I can make the
case that its relevance to audio reviewing has been
oversold by those who uncritically believe in it. If
not, then I will still have been able to present that
case.

3) I welcome public discussion of how published reviews
are performed. My writers and I should be prepared to
defend what we write, I feel, which is why every show
I have helped organize in the US since the first one
in 1987 has had one or more "Ask the Editors"
sessions where members of the audience are encouraged
to "roast" the reviewers. I see this debate continuing
in that tradition, as I expect both Mr. Krueger and
myself to have our beliefs and experiences challenged
by the audience.

3) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that I am not
willing to debate my beliefs and activities in public.
Putting to one side the fact that I have done just
that at every one of the hi-fi shows in which I have
been involved from 1981 to the present, I thought it
wwould be appropriate to put an end to his claim.

4) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that he is
willing to repeat the accusations of supposed fraud and
incompetence on my part that he makes on the newsgroups
to my face in a public debate. I thought it time for
him to make good on that claim.

5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
some great-sounding systems.

6) Mr. Krueger has been criticizing me ad nauseum on
the newsgroups since the winter of 1997. Speaking
personally, I would like to meet the man in person.
And as I reassured Mr. Krueger last week, this _not_
to serve him with legal papers. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

randy

February 17th 05, 10:32 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
> Tom wrote:
> > As I'm sure you read, "someone" wrote that the reason
> > you feel this debate is "necessary" is because Arny has
> > put a serious dent in the credibility of your magazine.
>
> :-)
>
> > Could you stop laughing for a moment and elaborate a
> > little bit on your statement re: "necessary".
>
> Sure. There are a number of reasons.
>
> 1) I am responsible for coming up with a program of
> "fringe" events for our Shows, and I thought the debate
> would add to the appeal of HE2005 for would-be showgoers.
>
> 2) The subject of blind testing methodology is one that
> deserves some public discussion. I hope I can make the
> case that its relevance to audio reviewing has been
> oversold by those who uncritically believe in it. If
> not, then I will still have been able to present that
> case.
>
> 3) I welcome public discussion of how published reviews
> are performed. My writers and I should be prepared to
> defend what we write, I feel, which is why every show
> I have helped organize in the US since the first one
> in 1987 has had one or more "Ask the Editors"
> sessions where members of the audience are encouraged
> to "roast" the reviewers. I see this debate continuing
> in that tradition, as I expect both Mr. Krueger and
> myself to have our beliefs and experiences challenged
> by the audience.
>
> 3) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that I am not
> willing to debate my beliefs and activities in public.
> Putting to one side the fact that I have done just
> that at every one of the hi-fi shows in which I have
> been involved from 1981 to the present, I thought it
> wwould be appropriate to put an end to his claim.
>
> 4) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that he is
> willing to repeat the accusations of supposed fraud and
> incompetence on my part that he makes on the newsgroups
> to my face in a public debate. I thought it time for
> him to make good on that claim.
>
> 5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
> high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
> best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
> inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
> possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
> some great-sounding systems.
>
> 6) Mr. Krueger has been criticizing me ad nauseum on
> the newsgroups since the winter of 1997. Speaking
> personally, I would like to meet the man in person.
> And as I reassured Mr. Krueger last week, this _not_
> to serve him with legal papers. :-)
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile

How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
relevance to anything.

John Atkinson

February 17th 05, 11:44 PM

randy wrote:
> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
> newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
> relevance to anything.

For people to be discussing the outcome of this debate 10 weeks before
it is due to take place seems at best premature and at worst dumb, in
my opinion. But I do note that the majority of people posting to
r.a.h-e seem to feel Arny Krueger is being set up for a fall,
having to debate me in what they feel to be an unsuitable venue
in front of an unsuitable audience.

I'd like to reassure Mr. Krueger and his supporters on r.a.h-e that
the debate will be fair. And as it will be available as a live webcast,
as a subsequently streamed audio file, or both, everyone will be able
to judge for themselves.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Tom

February 18th 05, 03:44 AM

"John Atkinson" > wrote
>
> :-)
>
>> Could you stop laughing for a moment and elaborate a
>> little bit on your statement re: "necessary".
>
> Sure. There are a number of reasons.
>
> 1) I am responsible for coming up with a program of
> "fringe" events for our Shows, and I thought the debate
> would add to the appeal of HE2005 for would-be showgoers.

seems reasonable.
>
> 2) The subject of blind testing methodology is one that
> deserves some public discussion. I hope I can make the
> case that its relevance to audio reviewing has been
> oversold by those who uncritically believe in it. If
> not, then I will still have been able to present that
> case.

seems reasonable.

> 3) I welcome public discussion of how published reviews
> are performed. My writers and I should be prepared to
> defend what we write, I feel, which is why every show
> I have helped organize in the US since the first one
> in 1987 has had one or more "Ask the Editors"
> sessions where members of the audience are encouraged
> to "roast" the reviewers. I see this debate continuing
> in that tradition, as I expect both Mr. Krueger and
> myself to have our beliefs and experiences challenged
> by the audience.

seems reasonable.

> 3) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that I am not
> willing to debate my beliefs and activities in public.
> Putting to one side the fact that I have done just
> that at every one of the hi-fi shows in which I have
> been involved from 1981 to the present, I thought it
> wwould be appropriate to put an end to his claim.

seems reasonable. gosh - all these very reasonable
reasons for inviting Arny to this debate. It's not like
the little guy said at all. hmmm...

> 4) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that he is
> willing to repeat the accusations of supposed fraud and
> incompetence on my part that he makes on the newsgroups
> to my face in a public debate. I thought it time for
> him to make good on that claim.

we'll see.

> 5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
> high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
> best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
> inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
> possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
> some great-sounding systems.

but you know he's "been there - done that."

> 6) Mr. Krueger has been criticizing me ad nauseum on
> the newsgroups since the winter of 1997. Speaking
> personally, I would like to meet the man in person.

there are a few "men" we'd like to meet in person, aren't there.
this will be interesting. kudos to him providing he shows up.
kudos to him if he manages to present and defend his case
without acting like a complete fool. i've met you. i know
you're a normal guy and a gentleman. i've heard the "illicit
recording". i think there' a slight chance Arny's a little to the
side of normal. i wonder if he's really coming there with the
objective to "kick a little limey butt!" there's a little guy
somewhere that will be very disappointed that doesn't happen.
but i think we'll all be glued to our terminals for the show.

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 03:48 AM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com

> 5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
> high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
> best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
> inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
> possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
> some great-sounding systems.

So says the big man looking down his nose. What kind of a wounded ego does
it take to make posts like this?

Clyde Slick

February 18th 05, 04:53 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
>> 5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
>> high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
>> best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
>> inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
>> possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
>> some great-sounding systems.
>
> So says the big man looking down his nose. What kind of a wounded ego does
> it take to make posts like this?
>

Well, now we can all see what's behind your disdain of Stereophile, high
end and JA: It's ENVY.CLASS

Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
that no one else can be able to enjoy it.
A perverse schadenfreude.

----== 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 =----

randy

February 18th 05, 04:59 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
> randy wrote:
> > How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
> > newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
> > relevance to anything.
>
> For people to be discussing the outcome of this debate 10 weeks
before
> it is due to take place seems at best premature and at worst dumb, in
> my opinion. But I do note that the majority of people posting to
> r.a.h-e seem to feel Arny Krueger is being set up for a fall,
> having to debate me in what they feel to be an unsuitable venue
> in front of an unsuitable audience.
>
> I'd like to reassure Mr. Krueger and his supporters on r.a.h-e that
> the debate will be fair. And as it will be available as a live
webcast,
> as a subsequently streamed audio file, or both, everyone will be able
> to judge for themselves.
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile

Maybe so, but I posted the event was coming on a thread "do all amps
sound the same" on the AVS forum and this was a response from one of
the people (a seller of audio equipment in St. Louis, I believe)--

"John will chew her up and spit her out. I've heard her arguements
before (and she makes good ones) but I feel she's outgunned by JA.
Thanks for the tip, I'll try to make that show."

Sounds like Dick may be onto something, but I guess it IS an
"entertainment show".

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 11:09 AM

"randy" > wrote in message
oups.com

> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
> newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
> relevance to anything.

Thanks for treating me like I don't exist, Randy.

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 11:18 AM

"randy" > wrote in message
oups.com
> John Atkinson wrote:
>> randy wrote:

>>> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
>>> newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
>>> relevance to anything.

The alleged debate is going to be what John Atkinson makes it. So far he's
done the expected high-handed job of misrepresenting my activities and my
viewpoint. He's been corrected, but that effort was just as futile as I
expected it to be.

>> For people to be discussing the outcome of this debate 10 weeks
>> before it is due to take place seems at best premature and at worst
>> dumb, in my opinion. But I do note that the majority of people
>> posting to r.a.h-e seem to feel Arny Krueger is being set up for a
>> fall, having to debate me in what they feel to be an unsuitable venue
>> in front of an unsuitable audience.

The venue doesn't matter as long as the mics and the video projector works
well enough. If Atkinson can't keep his crowd under control any better than
he does on RAO, then it's going to be a mess.

>> I'd like to reassure Mr. Krueger and his supporters on r.a.h-e that
>> the debate will be fair. And as it will be available as a live
>> webcast, as a subsequently streamed audio file, or both, everyone
>> will be able to judge for themselves.

Atkinson's debating style on RAO has relied heavily on others to intimidate
and harass those who might stand up to his self-serving weirdness. It would
be even more ugly in person. If he makes it happen, I think it will happen.

> Maybe so, but I posted the event was coming on a thread "do all amps
> sound the same" on the AVS forum and this was a response from one of
> the people (a seller of audio equipment in St. Louis, I believe)--

Is this the same Tom Grooms who shills for Monster Cable?

http://www.monstercable.com/speakup/page_review.asp?ID=916

> "John will chew her up and spit her out. I've heard her arguements
> before (and she makes good ones) but I feel she's outgunned by JA.

It's hard to get through to people with minds this closed. I'm amazed that
he can follow my arguments at all.

> Thanks for the tip, I'll try to make that show."

> Sounds like Dick may be onto something, but I guess it IS an
> "entertainment show".

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 11:49 AM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>
>>> 5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
>>> high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
>>> best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
>>> inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
>>> possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
>>> some great-sounding systems.
>>
>> So says the big man looking down his nose. What kind of a wounded
>> ego does it take to make posts like this?
>>
>
> Well, now we can all see what's behind your disdain of Stereophile,
> high end and JA: It's ENVY.CLASS

It is true that I have more "old rich" values than "new rich" values. I'm
not especially into conspicious consumption. I believe that the true measure
of wealth is what you give away.

> Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
> that no one else can be able to enjoy it.

That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to good mid-fi.

> A perverse schadenfreude.

John's your guy, Art. Straighten him out if you can. ;-)

Lionel

February 18th 05, 12:03 PM

Clyde Slick a écrit :

> It's ENVY.CLASS

Is it a new amplifier class ?

(sounds like if Middius was piloting 99% of your posts now.
Since you was already suffering of lack of personality...
....Take care you are vanishing Sackman. ;-)

John Atkinson

February 18th 05, 01:01 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "randy" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >> randy wrote:
> >>> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
> >>> newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
> >>> relevance to anything.
>
> The alleged debate is going to be what John Atkinson makes it. So far
> he's done the expected high-handed job of misrepresenting my
activities
> and my viewpoint.

I am not sure why you feel that way, Mr. Krueger. The only instance of
my discussing your "activities and viewpoints" was the announcement on
www.stereophile.com of your particiaption in the HE2005 debate
(reprinted, BTW, in the April issue of Stereophile). I initially
got the full name of the SWMWTMS wrong, which I admitted and corrected,
but you assured me in a r.a.o. posting that I had not misrepresented
your viewpoints otherwise. Let's reach for the Google record, yes,
here it is:

-------------------------------------------------
Arny Krueger wrote in message >
>"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
ups.com
>> Whatever your reason, I don't think I misresrepresented your
position
>> on this subject. [Arny Krueger's opinions of hi-rez media vs CD]
>
> Never said you did John...
---------------------------------------------------

So if I didn't misrepresent your views, what are you talking about?
Or is this another case of the words you write not conveying what
you meant to say?

> He's been corrected, but that effort was just as futile as I
> expected it to be.

But the only point I got wrong was the correct name of SWMWTMS
and I did correct that. So why was your effort futile? And I still
don't see why this error of mine was so egregious given that a
similar error was made in a letter cowritten by you, Mr. Krueger,
that was published in Stereophile.

> >> For people to be discussing the outcome of this debate 10 weeks
> >> before it is due to take place seems at best premature and at
> >> worst dumb, in my opinion. But I do note that the majority of
> >> people posting to r.a.h-e seem to feel Arny Krueger is being set
> >> up for a fall, having to debate me in what they feel to be an
> >> unsuitable venue in front of an unsuitable audience.
>
> The venue doesn't matter as long as the mics and the video projector
> works well enough.

On this subject, you complained that I ignored your request for
PowerPoint facilities for more than a week. Again let's reach for
Google:

------------------------------------------------------------------
Arny Krueger wrote in message >
> I seem to recall that I asked you about the availability of means
> for displaying a Powerpoint presentation.
> Yes, here it is over a week and no response.
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/f5e91a97eea9de75
> I guess working without a response to this seemingly reasonble
question
> would be something like blind speaking... ;-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I apologized for not answering your question, explained that I had
missed your posting in which you made it. I agreed that we would make
this facility available to you, but asked you some followup questions
of my own, specifically "In the case of a Powerpoint presentation,
would you be using your own laptop, or would you need a PC or Mac to
be supplied?" That was on February 10, yet here we are "over a week
without a response to this seemingly reasonable question."

Why is it so egregious for me to not respond for a week but not
egregious for you to do likewise, Mr. Krueger?

Please note, BTW, that the Powerpoint presentation you wish to
give should last no longer than the 5 minutes you have already
agreed to for your opening statement. It is also inappropriate for
you to use the PowerPoint presentation for commercial purposes,
unless what you wish to say is relevant to the debate.

>If Atkinson can't keep his crowd under control any better than
> he does on RAO, then it's going to be a mess.

As I have repeatedly reassured you, I control no-one on r.a.o.
Everyone here posts on their own initiative. At HE2005, I shall
do my best to ensure that members of the audience behave with the
appropriate decorum. but I will also not shield either of us, Mr.
Krueger, from awkward questions.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Clyde Slick

February 18th 05, 01:13 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "randy" > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
>> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
>> newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
>> relevance to anything.
>
> Thanks for treating me like I don't exist, Randy.
>

You always seem to get more than you deserve.

----== 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 =----

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 01:16 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "randy" > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>> John Atkinson wrote:
>>>> randy wrote:
>>>>> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
>>>>> newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
>>>>> relevance to anything.
>>
>> The alleged debate is going to be what John Atkinson makes it. So far
>> he's done the expected high-handed job of misrepresenting my
> activities
>> and my viewpoint.
>
> I am not sure why you feel that way, Mr. Krueger.

John, it's because you're too dense to bother with!

I've responded to your weird article on Stereophile once, it was a waste of
my time. I shan't make that mistake again!

Clyde Slick

February 18th 05, 01:19 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>>> oups.com
>>>
>>>> 5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
>>>> high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
>>>> best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
>>>> inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
>>>> possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
>>>> some great-sounding systems.
>>>
>>> So says the big man looking down his nose. What kind of a wounded
>>> ego does it take to make posts like this?
>>>
>>
>> Well, now we can all see what's behind your disdain of Stereophile,
>> high end and JA: It's ENVY.CLASS
>
> It is true that I have more "old rich" values than "new rich" values. I'm
> not especially into conspicious consumption. I believe that the true
> measure of wealth is what you give away.
>
>> Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
>> that no one else can be able to enjoy it.
>
> That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to good
> mid-fi.
>

I've seen numerous positive reviews of good mid fi products in SP
Of course, with your lack of taste, and lack
of spending power, what you would consider mid fi,
the rest of us would conside junk.

>> A perverse schadenfreude.
>
> John's your guy, Art. Straighten him out if you can. ;-)

Which gives you greater joy?
Seeing others miserable or seeing yourself miserable?

----== 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 =----

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 01:36 PM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

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

>>> Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
>>> that no one else can be able to enjoy it.

>> That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to good
>> mid-fi.

> I've seen numerous positive reviews of good mid fi products in SP

Prove it with cites from their web site.

JA is currently bragging about trashing a mid fi DVD player.

John Atkinson

February 18th 05, 02:02 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> "randy" > wrote in message
> >> oups.com
> >> The alleged debate is going to be what John Atkinson makes it. So
> >> far he's done the expected high-handed job of misrepresenting my
> >> activities and my viewpoint.
> >
> > I am not sure why you feel that way, Mr. Krueger.
>
> John, it's because you're too dense to bother with!

All I am asking, Mr. Krueger, is for you to tell me _how_ I
misrepresented your views in the www.stereophile.com article.
I have corrected the only error you pointed out, so doesn't the
article now correctly describe how you feel about hi-rez media
vs CD, LP, tube amplifiers, high-end audio, and Stereophile?

> I've responded to your weird article on Stereophile once, it was a
> waste of my time. I shan't make that mistake again!

You said in the posting I quoted that I _hadn't_ misrepresented
your views but now you say I have. If you let me know what I have
written that is untrue concerning your views, Mr. Krueger, I can
correct it.

And you still haven;t responded to my question from over a week
ago: "In the case of a Powerpoint presentation, would you be using
your own laptop, or would you need a PC or Mac to be supplied?"

The hotel will supply an LCD projector for you to use but if you
also need a computer to be available at the debate, I need to know
that in advance. Perhaps I _am_ being "dense" but I fail to comprehend
why you are avoiding having to answer this question.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John Atkinson

February 18th 05, 02:11 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> JA is currently bragging about trashing a mid fi DVD player.

Not in any posting retrievable by Google, Mr. Krueger. Here's what
Google quotes me as saying on this subject:

-------------------------------------------------
"John Atkinson" > wrote in
Message . com>
>Arny Krueger wrote in >:
>>Atkinson can't bring himself to admit despite his alarmist
>>posturing, the better $39.95 DVD players can recover audio
>>signals from real-world CDs that are audibly indistinguishable
>>from the original signal used to produce the CD.
>> ...
>>So much for the possibility of a fair sighted golden ear
>>audiophile test comparing a good $39.95 DVD player to one of
>>the $3995 behemoths that litter the pages of Stereophile.
>
> You really do need to read Stereophile beforing venturing opinions
> on its content, Mr. Krueger. We recently published just such a
> comparison (though I suppose that as the DVD player cost $50, not
> $39.95, you will argue that that is a different matter altogether).
:-)
---------------------------------------------------

Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison. In
actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison than
I had expected from its measured performance.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

randy

February 18th 05, 02:23 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "randy" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >> randy wrote:
>
> >>> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
> >>> newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
> >>> relevance to anything.
>
> The alleged debate is going to be what John Atkinson makes it. So far
he's
> done the expected high-handed job of misrepresenting my activities
and my
> viewpoint. He's been corrected, but that effort was just as futile as
I
> expected it to be.
>
> >> For people to be discussing the outcome of this debate 10 weeks
> >> before it is due to take place seems at best premature and at
worst
> >> dumb, in my opinion. But I do note that the majority of people
> >> posting to r.a.h-e seem to feel Arny Krueger is being set up for a
> >> fall, having to debate me in what they feel to be an unsuitable
venue
> >> in front of an unsuitable audience.
>
> The venue doesn't matter as long as the mics and the video projector
works
> well enough. If Atkinson can't keep his crowd under control any
better than
> he does on RAO, then it's going to be a mess.
>
> >> I'd like to reassure Mr. Krueger and his supporters on r.a.h-e
that
> >> the debate will be fair. And as it will be available as a live
> >> webcast, as a subsequently streamed audio file, or both, everyone
> >> will be able to judge for themselves.
>
> Atkinson's debating style on RAO has relied heavily on others to
intimidate
> and harass those who might stand up to his self-serving weirdness. It
would
> be even more ugly in person. If he makes it happen, I think it will
happen.
>
> > Maybe so, but I posted the event was coming on a thread "do all
amps
> > sound the same" on the AVS forum and this was a response from one
of
> > the people (a seller of audio equipment in St. Louis, I believe)--
>
> Is this the same Tom Grooms who shills for Monster Cable?
>
> http://www.monstercable.com/speakup/page_review.asp?ID=916
>
> > "John will chew her up and spit her out. I've heard her arguements
> > before (and she makes good ones) but I feel she's outgunned by JA.
>
> It's hard to get through to people with minds this closed. I'm amazed
that
> he can follow my arguments at all.
>
>
>
> > Thanks for the tip, I'll try to make that show."
>
> > Sounds like Dick may be onto something, but I guess it IS an
> > "entertainment show".
First, didn't mean to treat you like you don't exist. Yes, it is Tom
Grooms.

randy

February 18th 05, 02:26 PM

I apologize for that-how do you respond to same question I asked John.

[email protected]

February 18th 05, 03:22 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > "John Atkinson" > wrote in
message
> > oups.com
> > > Arny Krueger wrote:
> > >> "randy" > wrote in message
> > >> oups.com
> > >> The alleged debate is going to be what John Atkinson makes it.
So
> > >> far he's done the expected high-handed job of misrepresenting my
> > >> activities and my viewpoint.
> > >
> > > I am not sure why you feel that way, Mr. Krueger.
> >
> > John, it's because you're too dense to bother with!
>
> All I am asking, Mr. Krueger, is for you to tell me _how_ I
> misrepresented your views in the www.stereophile.com article.
> I have corrected the only error you pointed out, so doesn't the
> article now correctly describe how you feel about hi-rez media
> vs CD, LP, tube amplifiers, high-end audio, and Stereophile?
>
> > I've responded to your weird article on Stereophile once, it was a
> > waste of my time. I shan't make that mistake again!
>
> You said in the posting I quoted that I _hadn't_ misrepresented
> your views but now you say I have. If you let me know what I have
> written that is untrue concerning your views, Mr. Krueger, I can
> correct it.
>
> And you still haven;t responded to my question from over a week
> ago: "In the case of a Powerpoint presentation, would you be using
> your own laptop, or would you need a PC or Mac to be supplied?"
>
> The hotel will supply an LCD projector for you to use but if you
> also need a computer to be available at the debate, I need to know
> that in advance. Perhaps I _am_ being "dense" but I fail to
comprehend
> why you are avoiding having to answer this question.
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile

So what happens when Arny does not show up for the debate? He is
already planting a lawn full of excuses. What makes you think you
aren't just buying Arny a weekend in New York?

Scott Wheeler

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 03:45 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> "randy" > wrote in message
>>>> oups.com
>>>> The alleged debate is going to be what John Atkinson makes it. So
>>>> far he's done the expected high-handed job of misrepresenting my
>>>> activities and my viewpoint.
>>>
>>> I am not sure why you feel that way, Mr. Krueger.
>>
>> John, it's because you're too dense to bother with!
>
> All I am asking, Mr. Krueger, is for you to tell me _how_ I
> misrepresented your views in the www.stereophile.com article.

I told you once. You admitted to the gross error and dismissed most of the
rest.

> I have corrected the only error you pointed out, so doesn't the
> article now correctly describe how you feel about hi-rez media
> vs CD, LP, tube amplifiers, high-end audio, and Stereophile?

That would be the only gross error that could be proven so completely wrong
that it was totally inarguable.

>> I've responded to your weird article on Stereophile once, it was a
>> waste of my time. I shan't make that mistake again!

> You said in the posting I quoted that I _hadn't_ misrepresented
> your views but now you say I have.

Usual inability to recognize a qualified statement in context, noted.

> If you let me know what I have
> written that is untrue concerning your views, Mr. Krueger, I can
> correct it.

Been there, done that.

> And you still haven;t responded to my question from over a week
> ago: "In the case of a Powerpoint presentation, would you be using
> your own laptop, or would you need a PC or Mac to be supplied?"

It would lighten my burden if I didn't have to bring a PC laptop along. I
will bring a brief presentation illustrated with Powerpoint 2000 or
2003-compatible images.

> The hotel will supply an LCD projector for you to use but if you
> also need a computer to be available at the debate, I need to know
> that in advance. Perhaps I _am_ being "dense" but I fail to comprehend
> why you are avoiding having to answer this question.

I was considering my options. I've decided that if possible, I'll travel
light.

> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 03:52 PM

"randy" > wrote in message
oups.com
> I apologize for that-how do you respond to same question I asked John.

Being:

"How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
relevance to anything."

I can't control the future or even the present actions of John Atkinson.

My goal is to give a short technical presentation about why reliable
listening tests are a good idea, and who should be doing them, and what the
benefits would be. I don't intend to make many conversions. ;-)

I noticed that that while Atkinson posted links to my web sites, and my web
sites are reasonably active, the links had negligible impact. Given the
history of the web sites, particularly PCABX, it appears that SP readers are
already as familiar with them as they want to be.

Then, as attendees ask reasonable questions, I'll try to provide reasonable
answers. I will attempt to comment only minimally on such things as Atkinson
says, so that if it turns into a ****ing match, it will be rather obviously
one-sided.

John Atkinson

February 18th 05, 04:07 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > If you let me know what I have written that is untrue concerning
> > your views, Mr. Krueger, I can correct it.
>
> Been there, done that.

I which case I shall consider the matter closed, Mr. Krueger. Given
your unwillingness to substantiate your claims, I request you to stop
complaining that I misrepresented your views on these matters.

> It would lighten my burden if I didn't have to bring a PC laptop
> along. I will bring a brief presentation illustrated with Powerpoint
> 2000 or 2003-compatible images.

I will make sure we have a PC available for you to use, Mr. Krueger.
It will have PowerPoint 2000 on it running under Windows 2000, which
is what Primedia's IT department currently makes available to staff.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John Atkinson

February 18th 05, 04:25 PM

wrote:
> So what happens when Arny does not show up for the debate? He is
> already planting a lawn full of excuses.

Arny Krueger has give his word that he will attend HE2005 to take
part in the debate, Scott. I take his commitment at its face value.

> What makes you think you aren't just buying Arny a weekend in New
> York?

If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 05:02 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:

> I which case I shall consider the matter closed, Mr. Krueger. Given
> your unwillingness to substantiate your claims, I request you to stop
> complaining that I misrepresented your views on these matters.

I will stop complaining about that when you properly represent my views on
every matter that you represent my views.

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 05:04 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> JA is currently bragging about trashing a mid fi DVD player.
>
> Not in any posting retrievable by Google, Mr. Krueger. Here's what
> Google quotes me as saying on this subject:
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
> Message . com>

>> Arny Krueger wrote in >:
>>> Atkinson can't bring himself to admit despite his alarmist
>>> posturing, the better $39.95 DVD players can recover audio
>>> signals from real-world CDs that are audibly indistinguishable
>>> from the original signal used to produce the CD.
...
>>> So much for the possibility of a fair sighted golden ear
>>> audiophile test comparing a good $39.95 DVD player to one of
>>> the $3995 behemoths that litter the pages of Stereophile.

>> You really do need to read Stereophile beforing venturing opinions
>> on its content, Mr. Krueger. We recently published just such a
>> comparison (though I suppose that as the DVD player cost $50, not
>> $39.95, you will argue that that is a different matter altogether).
> :-)

> Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison. In
> actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison than
> I had expected from its measured performance.

Whatever that means. You understand that this statement is meaningless,
right John?

John Atkinson

February 18th 05, 06:35 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> JA is currently bragging about trashing a mid fi DVD player.
> >
> > Not in any posting retrievable by Google, Mr. Krueger.
> > snip of only JA message that mentioned a "mid-fi DVD player"
> > Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison.
> > In actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison
> > than I had expected from its measured performance.
>
> Whatever that means.

It means, Mr. Krueger, that your statement that I am "bragging about
trashing a mid-fi DVD player" is wrong on all counts: I didn't "trash"
the cheap Toshiba player, neither did I brag about doing so. You are
very quick to accuse me of misrepresenting your views, yet you fail
to offer any substantiation whatsoever of my supposed misdeeds while
blatantly lying about what I have said or done.

> You understand that this statement is meaningless, right John?

I am sure this is something you can address at the New York debate,
Mr. Krueger.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

February 18th 05, 06:44 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> wrote:
>> >Someone wrote
>> > Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.
>>
>> If I'm not mistaken, John Atkinson is an American.
>
> These days, yes Norm. I became a US citizen in August '03.
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile

Welcome! We're glad to have you--at least I am. :-)

Norm

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 09:27 PM

"Paul Dormer" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" emitted :
>
>> I was considering my options. I've decided that if possible, I'll
>> travel light.
>
> You're gonna drop the payload before you board?

Dormer, I knew you wanted to be there to get your mouth full.

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 09:30 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> oups.com

>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> JA is currently bragging about trashing a mid fi DVD player.

>>> Not in any posting retrievable by Google, Mr. Krueger.
>>> snip of only JA message that mentioned a "mid-fi DVD player"
>>> Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison.
>>> In actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison
>>> than I had expected from its measured performance.

>> Whatever that means.

> It means, Mr. Krueger, that your statement that I am "bragging about
> trashing a mid-fi DVD player" is wrong on all counts: I didn't "trash"
> the cheap Toshiba player, neither did I brag about doing so.

Atkinson, you seem to be loathe to admit exactly what you did say about the
Toshiba player.

>You are very quick to accuse me of misrepresenting your views, yet you
>fail
> to offer any substantiation whatsoever of my supposed misdeeds while
> blatantly lying about what I have said or done.

Gee, I thought I was just giving my opinion of what you said, John.

>> You understand that this statement is meaningless, right John?

> I am sure this is something you can address at the New York debate,
> Mr. Krueger.

I donno, it looks like you have changed the deal.

Clyde Slick

February 18th 05, 09:32 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>
>
>>>> Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
>>>> that no one else can be able to enjoy it.
>
>>> That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to good
>>> mid-fi.
>
>> I've seen numerous positive reviews of good mid fi products in SP
>
> Prove it with cites from their web site.
>

No, you know it, and I know it.
Examples
PSB, NHT some Adcom pieces.
even a Radio Shack cheapie, once.
inexpensive Grado cartridges

----== 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 =----

Lionel

February 18th 05, 09:49 PM

Clyde Slick a écrit :
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

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

>>
>>>>>Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
>>>>>that no one else can be able to enjoy it.
>>
>>>>That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to good
>>>>mid-fi.
>>
>>>I've seen numerous positive reviews of good mid fi products in SP
>>
>>Prove it with cites from their web site.
>>
>
>
> No, you know it, and I know it.
> Examples
> PSB, NHT some Adcom pieces.
> even a Radio Shack cheapie, once.
> inexpensive Grado cartridges

Since you seems to know perfectly the revue, from you POV
what is Stereophile approximative ratio between mid and
high-end material ?

Mike McKelvy

February 18th 05, 09:55 PM

You're gonna drop the payload before you board?

You mean take a Dormer?

Clyde Slick

February 18th 05, 09:55 PM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Scott said:
>
>> So what happens when Arny does not show up for the debate? He is
>> already planting a lawn full of excuses.
>
> Good metaphor. :-) But something's missing to complete it. Hmm....
>

The manure?

----== 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

February 18th 05, 11:04 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > I am sure this is something you can address at the New York
> > debate, Mr. Krueger.
>
> I donno, it looks like you have changed the deal.

No, not at all, Mr. Krueger. Is there something that you now
take exception to? If so, then I am sure we can resolve the issue.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 11:57 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>> I am sure this is something you can address at the New York
>>> debate, Mr. Krueger.
>>
>> I donno, it looks like you have changed the deal.
>
> No, not at all, Mr. Krueger.

No new conditions?

Arny Krueger

February 18th 05, 11:58 PM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>
>>>>> Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
>>>>> that no one else can be able to enjoy it.
>>
>>>> That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to
>>>> good mid-fi.
>>
>>> I've seen numerous positive reviews of good mid fi products in SP
>>
>> Prove it with cites from their web site.
>>
>
> No, you know it, and I know it.

What I know about is a tiny dribble of reviews of mid-fi products.

> Examples PSB, NHT some Adcom pieces.

That's not classic mid-fi - those are higher-end brands.

> even a Radio Shack cheapie, once.

Once.

> inexpensive Grado cartridges

Grado - another high end brand.

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 12:58 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Paul Dormer" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" emitted :
>>
>>> I was considering my options. I've decided that if possible, I'll
>>> travel light.
>>
>> You're gonna drop the payload before you board?
>
> Dormer, I knew you wanted to be there to get your mouth full.
>

Not to worry, there's no shortage of Arny's brown stuff.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 01:00 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com

>
>> I am sure this is something you can address at the New York debate,
>> Mr. Krueger.
>
> I donno, it looks like you have changed the deal.
>
>

In that he expects to be refunded your expenses in case
you fail to show. But you are going to show, so it
is a moot point.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 01:01 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

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

>>>
>>>>>>Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
>>>>>>that no one else can be able to enjoy it.
>>>
>>>>>That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to good
>>>>>mid-fi.
>>>
>>>>I've seen numerous positive reviews of good mid fi products in SP
>>>
>>>Prove it with cites from their web site.
>>>
>>
>>
>> No, you know it, and I know it.
>> Examples
>> PSB, NHT some Adcom pieces.
>> even a Radio Shack cheapie, once.
>> inexpensive Grado cartridges
>
>
> Since you seems to know perfectly the revue, from you POV what is
> Stereophile approximative ratio between mid and high-end material ?

Ask Arny, he brought up the subject.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 01:05 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Since you can't afford to enjoy it, you poison it so
>>>>>> that no one else can be able to enjoy it.
>>>
>>>>> That is exactly what it seems that John Atkinson wants to do to
>>>>> good mid-fi.
>>>
>>>> I've seen numerous positive reviews of good mid fi products in SP
>>>
>>> Prove it with cites from their web site.
>>>
>>
>> No, you know it, and I know it.
>
> What I know about is a tiny dribble of reviews of mid-fi products.
>
>> Examples PSB, NHT some Adcom pieces.

> That's not classic mid-fi - those are higher-end brands.
>

Bull****, they said good things about their $200 per pair models

>> even a Radio Shack cheapie, once.
>
> Once.
>
>> inexpensive Grado cartridges
>
> Grado - another high end brand.
>

Bull****, they said good things about cheap $30 Grados.

Of course, I realize that $30 puts quite
a crimp in your audio budget.
You might want to consider selling off some
of your obsolete sound cards.

----== 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

February 19th 05, 02:00 AM

John Atkinson wrote:

> Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison. In
> actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison than
> I had expected from its measured performance.

John, I believe that you may have actually learned
something.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 19th 05, 02:01 AM

randy wrote:

> How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
> newsgroup, that it will be just a ****ing contest with no real
> relevance to anything.

Boy oh boy, did Pierce hit the nail on the head.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 19th 05, 02:08 AM

John Atkinson wrote:

> randy wrote:
> > How do you respond to I think Pierce's comment in the high end
> > newsgroup, that it will be just a pis-ing contest with no real
> > relevance to anything.

> For people to be discussing the outcome of this debate 10 weeks before
> it is due to take place seems at best premature and at worst dumb, in
> my opinion. But I do note that the majority of people posting to
> r.a.h-e seem to feel Arny Krueger is being set up for a fall,
> having to debate me in what they feel to be an unsuitable venue
> in front of an unsuitable audience.
>
> I'd like to reassure Mr. Krueger and his supporters on r.a.h-e that
> the debate will be fair. And as it will be available as a live webcast,
> as a subsequently streamed audio file, or both, everyone will be able
> to judge for themselves.

John, what on earth are you going to say that would put the
DBT protocol in doubt? What audio engineer (real audio
engineer) would back you with that kind of position?

Rather than debate, why don't you two set up a carefully
proctored DBT session (get somebody like Eargle, Toole,
Olive, Keele, or Pierce for that matter, to do the
proctoring) and actually see what transpires. You ought to
be able to find somebody with good technical and integrity
credentials to do the job.

Arguing about issues that offer no proof that will satisfy
anybody is a waste of time. Work together to get some REAL
data that involves both of you together in the same
comparison session, and then do your debate. Bring along
some supporters who will also be involved in the comparison
series. Get everybody some first-person experience with the
issues.

PS: you might also consider publishing the results in your
magazine.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 19th 05, 02:21 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Tom wrote:

> > Could you stop laughing for a moment and elaborate a
> > little bit on your statement re: "necessary".

> Sure. There are a number of reasons.
>
> 1) I am responsible for coming up with a program of
> "fringe" events for our Shows, and I thought the debate
> would add to the appeal of HE2005 for would-be showgoers.

But a debate would have more impact if you and Arny both
participated in an independently proctored series of DBT
comparisons prior to the face off. The best kind of
comparison would be one that matched one of your favorite
amps and set of super wires against some cheapo integrated
amp and set of lamp-cord wires that Arny selected. That way,
any results would be dramatic, one way or the other.

> 2) The subject of blind testing methodology is one that
> deserves some public discussion. I hope I can make the
> case that its relevance to audio reviewing has been
> oversold by those who uncritically believe in it. If
> not, then I will still have been able to present that
> case.

It is obviously not relevant to editors who have a vested
interest in amps and wires having significant differences.
However, I am sure that you will agree (along with scads of
top-tier audio engineers) that in terms of absolute use, a
DBT protocol making use of precise level matching is
superior to sighted comparisons or single-presentation
evaluations. If this works for science, why cannot it work
for product evaluations, particularly when the reviewer has
a tendency to go overboard in his praise of amps and wires
that may not sound any better than cheaper stuff.

> 3) I welcome public discussion of how published reviews
> are performed. My writers and I should be prepared to
> defend what we write, I feel, which is why every show
> I have helped organize in the US since the first one
> in 1987 has had one or more "Ask the Editors"
> sessions where members of the audience are encouraged
> to "roast" the reviewers. I see this debate continuing
> in that tradition, as I expect both Mr. Krueger and
> myself to have our beliefs and experiences challenged
> by the audience.

And I am sure that if you are challenged on the subject of
DBT comparisons you will have a canned response all ready to
go.

> 3) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that I am not
> willing to debate my beliefs and activities in public.

But are you prepared to go further and actually do some DBT
comparisons "in public," so that your claims about the the
so-called sound of super amps and super wires can be
validated right there on the spot? This would certainly be
more dramatic than a debate. Hell, any good debater can win
a debate, even if he is wrong. You are making the debate the
issue, when the real issue is whether or not the DBT
protocol is an effective comparison tool when it comes to
amps and wires. The best way to do that is to set up a DBT
session at the show. Compare cheap stuff to favored
expensive stuff.

> 4) Mr. Krueger has repeatedly claimed that he is
> willing to repeat the accusations of supposed fraud and
> incompetence on my part that he makes on the newsgroups
> to my face in a public debate. I thought it time for
> him to make good on that claim.

Gee, basically, Pierce was correct. It is going to be a
****ing contest.

> 5) I believe that much of Mr. Krueger's criticisms of
> high-end audio are not based on any experience of the
> best of what the audio industry has to offer. By
> inviting Arny Krueger to HE2005, I could make it
> possible for him to take a listen, if he wished, to
> some great-sounding systems.

Well, it would be interesting if he brought along an ABX
device and a cheap integrated amp and some lamp cord and set
up some DBT comparisons against that exotic gear. Maybe he
could get Nousaine to set up a comparison booth for that
sort of thing to take place.

I know, shows like that are bad places to do serious
comparing, because of all the noise and potential for
intimidation. However, you seem to think that HE2005 is an
adequately exacting environment to set up sighted
demonstrations that would wow Arny. Certainly, then, the
environment is exacting enough to let him and/or Nousaine
set up some DBT demonstrations. This would be way, way
superior to a debate.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson

February 19th 05, 02:28 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> ups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
message
> >> oups.com
> >>> I am sure this is something you can address at the New York
> >>> debate, Mr. Krueger.
> >>
> >> I donno, it looks like you have changed the deal.
> >
> > No, not at all, Mr. Krueger.
>
> No new conditions?

Not that I am aware of, Mr. Krueger. What are you referring to?
Please note that my recent comment about what to do about the
expenses I would still incur should you fail to show up -- a
matter of several hundred dollars -- was certainly not intended
to be a "condition." My invitation to you was _un_conditional.

I don't see any point in arguing now what would would happen should
you fail to appear. You have given me your word that you will
debate me in New York at HE2005 and I am certainly prepared to trust
in your reasonableness at that time in the event that something
untoward might happen.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 02:35 AM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...
> John Atkinson wrote:
>
>> Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison. In
>> actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison than
>> I had expected from its measured performance.
>
> John, I believe that you may have actually learned
> something.
>

He knows not to make absurd assumptions
that all units in a particular class of products all
sound the same. When are you going to learn that?

----== 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

February 19th 05, 02:36 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> > ups.com
> > > Arny Krueger wrote:
> > >> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
> message
> > >> oups.com
> > >>> I am sure this is something you can address at the New York
> > >>> debate, Mr. Krueger.
> > >>
> > >> I donno, it looks like you have changed the deal.
> > >
> > > No, not at all, Mr. Krueger.
> >
> > No new conditions?

> Not that I am aware of, Mr. Krueger. What are you referring to?
> Please note that my recent comment about what to do about the
> expenses I would still incur should you fail to show up -- a
> matter of several hundred dollars -- was certainly not intended
> to be a "condition." My invitation to you was _un_conditional.
>
> I don't see any point in arguing now what would would happen should
> you fail to appear. You have given me your word that you will
> debate me in New York at HE2005 and I am certainly prepared to trust
> in your reasonableness at that time in the event that something
> untoward might happen.

For audio enthusiasts, this "debate" is going to be the butt
of jokes for a decade.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson

February 19th 05, 02:37 AM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> John Atkinson wrote:
> > I'd like to reassure Mr. Krueger and his supporters on r.a.h-e
> > that the debate will be fair. And as it will be available as a
> > live webcast, as a subsequently streamed audio file, or both,
> > everyone will be able to judge for themselves.
>
> John, what on earth are you going to say that would put the
> DBT protocol in doubt?

For the answer to that question, Mr. Ferstler, you need to
wait until the debate at the end of April.

> What audio engineer (real audio engineer) would back you with
> that kind of position?

As you have in the past defined "real audio engineer" as an
engineer who disagrees with me on this subject, Mr. Ferstler,
your question is semantically void.

> Rather than debate, why don't you two set up a carefully
> proctored DBT session...?

Mike McKelvy suggested a one-on-one debate and that is what I
proposed, that is what Mr. Krueger accepted, and that is what
I have promoted in my magazine, on my website, and on the
newsgroups and audio forums. The die is cast, Mr. Ferstler, but
thank you for offering your concern.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Howard Ferstler

February 19th 05, 02:39 AM

Clyde Slick wrote:
>
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
> ...
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >
> >> Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison. In
> >> actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison than
> >> I had expected from its measured performance.
> >
> > John, I believe that you may have actually learned
> > something.
> >
>
> He knows not to make absurd assumptions
> that all units in a particular class of products all
> sound the same. When are you going to learn that?

When are John, and you, too, for that matter, going to get
involved in a properly proctored DBT, in order to see you,
he, and guys like you, back up your claims with real proofs?

Basically, all of you are running scared, either because of
potential money losses (tweak-audio journalism depends upon
simple-minded and even sometimes deluded magazine
subscribers to survive) or because your little religious
systems are failing.

Hey, you tweako freakos are now fighting a defensive action.
Must be tough.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson

February 19th 05, 02:43 AM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> For audio enthusiasts, this "debate" is going to be the butt
> of jokes for a decade.

Why?

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 02:47 AM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick wrote:
>>
>> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > John Atkinson wrote:
>> >
>> >> Note that I made no mention of the results of this comparison. In
>> >> actual fact, the $50 player did much better in this comparison than
>> >> I had expected from its measured performance.
>> >
>> > John, I believe that you may have actually learned
>> > something.
>> >
>>
>> He knows not to make absurd assumptions
>> that all units in a particular class of products all
>> sound the same. When are you going to learn that?
>
> When are John, and you, too, for that matter, going to get
> involved in a properly proctored DBT, in order to see you,
> he, and guys like you, back up your claims with real proofs?
>
> Basically, all of you are running scared, either because of
> potential money losses (tweak-audio journalism depends upon
> simple-minded and even sometimes deluded magazine
> subscribers to survive) or because your little religious
> systems are failing.
>
> Hey, you tweako freakos are now fighting a defensive action.
> Must be tough.
>

Next time you come back here, bring your
wreckingball

----== 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 =----

Arny Krueger

February 19th 05, 02:48 AM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

George offers his services:

> Perhaps a little charity is in order here, John. The forthcoming
> debate might benefit from a comedic opening act. I think you might be
> able to recruit a Professional Audio Clown to amuse the crowd, and
> I'm sure the additional expense would be nominal. Especially if you
> throw in brunch passes at the hotel cafe. ;-)

Arny Krueger

February 19th 05, 02:49 AM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> ups.com
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
>>>> message oups.com
>>>>> I am sure this is something you can address at the New York
>>>>> debate, Mr. Krueger.
>>>>
>>>> I donno, it looks like you have changed the deal.
>>>
>>> No, not at all, Mr. Krueger.
>>
>> No new conditions?
>
> Not that I am aware of, Mr. Krueger. What are you referring to?
> Please note that my recent comment about what to do about the
> expenses I would still incur should you fail to show up -- a
> matter of several hundred dollars -- was certainly not intended
> to be a "condition." My invitation to you was _un_conditional.
>
> I don't see any point in arguing now what would would happen should
> you fail to appear. You have given me your word that you will
> debate me in New York at HE2005 and I am certainly prepared to trust
> in your reasonableness at that time in the event that something
> untoward might happen.

OK!

Howard Ferstler

February 19th 05, 02:49 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> > > I'd like to reassure Mr. Krueger and his supporters on r.a.h-e
> > > that the debate will be fair. And as it will be available as a
> > > live webcast, as a subsequently streamed audio file, or both,
> > > everyone will be able to judge for themselves.
> >
> > John, what on earth are you going to say that would put the
> > DBT protocol in doubt?

> For the answer to that question, Mr. Ferstler, you need to
> wait until the debate at the end of April.

But I am still going to assume that you are going to outline
objections to the DBT protocol. As an alternative, you will
favor sighted comparisons by certified golden ears who would
never let their knowledge of what is playing color their
perceptions.

And the moon is made out of green cheese.

> > What audio engineer (real audio engineer) would back you with
> > that kind of position?

> As you have in the past defined "real audio engineer" as an
> engineer who disagrees with me on this subject, Mr. Ferstler,
> your question is semantically void.

Well, would guys like Toole, Olive, Eargle, Pierce, Keele,
Lip****z, Thiele, Small, and guys of their stature side with
you on the DBT issue? I find it simply incredible that
anyone with an ounce of technical sense could find fault
with the DBT protocol as a comparison tool, either for
scientific research or product evaluations. I mean, if any
reviewer says that he hear differences in a sighted
comparisons, he automatically should set up a DBT to see if
his observations hold.

> > Rather than debate, why don't you two set up a carefully
> > proctored DBT session...?

> Mike McKelvy suggested a one-on-one debate and that is what I
> proposed, that is what Mr. Krueger accepted, and that is what
> I have promoted in my magazine, on my website, and on the
> newsgroups and audio forums. The die is cast, Mr. Ferstler, but
> thank you for offering your concern.

So, McKelvy is calling the shots?

Pierce was right. It will be a ****ing contest, with the
best showboater winning.

Do a public, properly proctored, level-matched DBT with
expensive vs cheap gear. That show would trump any debate.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 19th 05, 02:56 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > For audio enthusiasts, this "debate" is going to be the butt
> > of jokes for a decade.
>
> Why?

Because it will settle nothing.

What will settle something is for you and Arny to both set
up a properly proctored DBT series for you two and your
buddies (his and yours) to participate in. The results could
then be debated intelligently. Hopefully, those results
would also be published in your magazine.

John, I have to be candid here. I simply do not believe that
you believe DBT comparisons are no good. I see other motives
that are related to your magazine needing to survive. It
cannot do that without the good will of the subscriber base,
and that base is made up of people who "believe."

I am sorry, but that is what I see.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 19th 05, 02:57 AM

"George M. Middius" wrote:
>
> John Atkinson said:
>
> > Mike McKelvy suggested a one-on-one debate and that is what I
> > proposed, that is what Mr. Krueger accepted, and that is what
> > I have promoted in my magazine, on my website, and on the
> > newsgroups and audio forums. The die is cast, Mr. Ferstler, but
> > thank you for offering your concern.

> Perhaps a little charity is in order here, John. The forthcoming debate
> might benefit from a comedic opening act. I think you might be able to
> recruit a Professional Audio Clown to amuse the crowd,

Hey, George, you are hired!

Howard Ferstler

[email protected]

February 19th 05, 03:43 AM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
>
>
<snipped>
>
> John, I have to be candid here. I simply do not believe that
> you believe DBT comparisons are no good. I see other motives
> that are related to your magazine needing to survive. It
> cannot do that without the good will of the subscriber base,
> and that base is made up of people who "believe."
>
>

I think it is more a matter of having the "right" (naive, gullible)
readership than maintaining the "good will of the subscriber base". The
vast majority of the $tereopile revenue is generated from advertising.
Subscription revenue is incidental. That's why one can subscribe at
such a low rate. The magazine must be able to deliver the gullible to
the charlatans, like lambs to the slaughter. Having the "wrong" (i.e.,
educated, skeptical, discerning)readership, even in very large numbers,
will not be as effective in generating advertising revenue.
>
>

> I am sorry, but that is what I see.
>
>
Hard to see it any other way.

Lionel

February 19th 05, 08:22 AM

Clyde Slick a écrit :

>>Since you seems to know perfectly the revue, from you POV what is
>>Stereophile approximative ratio between mid and high-end material ?
>
>
> Ask Arny, he brought up the subject.

:-D

Arny Krueger

February 19th 05, 10:56 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com
> Howard Ferstler wrote:

>> John, I have to be candid here. I simply do not believe that
>> you believe DBT comparisons are no good.

Given that www.pcabx.com enables people to do good DBTs in the privacy of
their home without anybody looking, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if
more than a few of their staff have been secretly *enjoying* the *dirty*
little pleasures that my DBT online site affords. ;-)

>> I see other motives
>> that are related to your magazine needing to survive.

There's no way I can see that Stereophile could clean up its act and
survive.

>> It cannot do that without the good will of the subscriber base,
>> and that base is made up of people who "believe."

> I think it is more a matter of having the "right" (naive, gullible)
> readership than maintaining the "good will of the subscriber base".

It's about where the money is. Let everybody who is surprised, raise their
hand! ;-)

> The vast majority of the $tereopile revenue is generated from
> advertising. Subscription revenue is incidental. That's why one can
> subscribe at such a low rate.

Very obviously so.

>The magazine must be able to deliver
> the gullible to the charlatans, like lambs to the slaughter.

Hence JJ's comments about DBTs being not for consumers. If the system worked
the way it should, the developers and manufacturers of high end gear would
be doing the DBTs for themselves, and the snake oil would never see the
pages of Stereophile.

> Having the "wrong" (i.e., educated, skeptical, discerning)readership,
> even
> in very large numbers, will not be as effective in generating
> advertising revenue.

Agreed. I've got a more than a little experience with people who have bought
the high end line that the ragazines push, hook, rod and sinker. It's sad.

John Atkinson

February 19th 05, 12:20 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> a debate would have more impact if you and Arny both
> participated in an independently proctored series of DBT
> comparisons prior to the face off.

The neverending cry of the impotent, powerless audio critic.
"Put it to a DBT" and now "Put JA to a DBT." As someone who
has faked your published test results, Mr. Ferstler, and
copied someone else's text to claim it was your own, you
might wish to reflect on the propriety of you criticizing
a colleague.

> AI am sure that if you are challenged on the subject of
> DBT comparisons you will have a canned response all ready
> to go.

Well duh, Mr. Ferstler. First we have Mr. Krueger complaining
that I did not present his case for him on my website, now
you complaining that I might prepare my presentation in
advance.

> are you prepared to go further and actually do some DBT
> comparisons "in public," so that your claims about the the
> [sic] so-called sound of super amps and super wires can be
> validated right there on the spot?

What becomes frustrating in discussing audio matters with you,
Mr. Ferstler, is that you pay no attention to what others say.
If you did, you would remember that you and I have already
discussed blind tests that I have performed at hi-fi shows,
specifically on speaker stand spikes, amplifiers, and
absoluter polarity. I have even published the results of
such public tests in the magazines I have edited, so yes, I
guess I am preapred to go "further."

But as to "validating" my claims, I note that neither you nor
any other of the skeptical community has been persuaded by
the results of my tests. :-)

And yet again, I should point out that someone who uses
almost exclusively sighted tests in his own reviewing stands
on shakey philosophical ground when he a) criticizes such tests
as used by others and b) demands those others use DBTs. As was
pointed out to you by Dr. John Feng and others, getting the results
you feel to be correct, Mr. Ferstler, does not validate your
methodology.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John Atkinson

February 19th 05, 12:33 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> it would be interesting if [Arny Krueger] brought along an ABX
> device and a cheap integrated amp and some lamp cord and set
> up some DBT comparisons against that exotic gear. Maybe he
> could get Nousaine to set up a comparison booth for that
> sort of thing to take place.

If Mr. Krueger or Tom Nousaine wish to do live demonstrations
at HE 2005, I would have no objection. But not in place of
the debate that has you so bothered.

> you seem to think that HE2005 is an adequately exacting
> environment to set up sighted demonstrations that would wow Arny.
> Certainly, then, the environment is exacting enough to let him
> and/or Nousaine set up some DBT demonstrations.

Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
more demanding than setting up a system to play music. But as I
said, if they wish to do so, that would be fine by me. However,
it is relevant to point out that they would have to pay Primedia
the same rate for the room and facilities as any other show
exhibitor (though they would, of course, then be eligible for the
"best sound at the show" voting).

> This would be way, way superior to a debate.

And still I ask why you are so against the idea of this debate, Mr.
Ferstler? Arny Krueger has long claimed that he is prepared to
discuss his audio philosophy with me one-on-one in public. If _he_
doesn't object to the idea, why are _you_ getting so flustered, to
the point that you are accusing me a) of preparing my presentation
in advance and b) claiming that no-one who listens to Mr. Krueger's
presentation will be persuaded by it? It appears, Mr. Ferstler, that,
despite your bluster, you don't actusally have the courage of your
convictions!

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Lionel

February 19th 05, 12:54 PM

John Atkinson a écrit :

> Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
> more demanding than setting up a system to play music.

Does this explain why you never perform these tests even
(especially ?) when the audio devices are little bit "esoteric".

Sander deWaal

February 19th 05, 03:01 PM

George M. Middius > said:

>And so the die is cast, revoked, and shat upon.

Veni, vidi, faecii........

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

John Atkinson

February 19th 05, 03:11 PM

wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > wrote:
> >> If I'm not mistaken, John Atkinson is an American.
> >
> > These days, yes Norm. I became a US citizen in August '03.
>
> Welcome! We're glad to have you--at least I am. :-)

Thanks Norm. And rest assured that I have used my new voting
power in the manner I thought appropriate.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[email protected]

February 19th 05, 03:42 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
> wrote:
> > So what happens when Arny does not show up for the debate? He is
> > already planting a lawn full of excuses.
>
> Arny Krueger has give his word that he will attend HE2005 to take
> part in the debate, Scott. I take his commitment at its face value.
>
> > What makes you think you aren't just buying Arny a weekend in New
> > York?
>
> If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
> for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
> he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile

What if he doesn't turn up and he doesn't reimburse you? Do you have a
writen agreement that implicitely states quid pro quo airfare and hotel
costs for presence at debate for full 90 minutes? Am I the only one who
sees this guy going to New York on your dime and not showing or leaving
after a minute based on some lame brained excuse cooked up in advance
just to make Stereophile eat his airfare and hotel costs? Does nobody
else not see this guy doing a dine and dash? How do you plan on
collecting your reimbursement?

Scott Wheeler

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 03:51 PM

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> John Atkinson wrote:
>> wrote:
>> > So what happens when Arny does not show up for the debate? He is
>> > already planting a lawn full of excuses.
>>
>> Arny Krueger has give his word that he will attend HE2005 to take
>> part in the debate, Scott. I take his commitment at its face value.
>>
>> > What makes you think you aren't just buying Arny a weekend in New
>> > York?
>>
>> If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
>> for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
>> he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).
>>
>> John Atkinson
>> Editor, Stereophile
>
>
> What if he doesn't turn up and he doesn't reimburse you? Do you have a
> writen agreement that implicitely states quid pro quo airfare and hotel
> costs for presence at debate for full 90 minutes? Am I the only one who
> sees this guy going to New York on your dime and not showing or leaving
> after a minute based on some lame brained excuse cooked up in advance
> just to make Stereophile eat his airfare and hotel costs? Does nobody
> else not see this guy doing a dine and dash? How do you plan on
> collecting your reimbursement?
>
>

I don't expect that outcome, but if it happens,
it will have its own inherent rewards for JA.
That's why I don't expect it to happen.
I predict Arny will show. He will make
his case, and there will be a debate. This will
be Arny's 15 minutes of fame, for better or for worse.
Sorry, its just how I see it playing out. This is just
too 'necessary' for Arny's fulfillment of his audio meglamania.

----== 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 =----

[email protected]

February 19th 05, 03:58 PM

Lionel wrote:
> John Atkinson a =E9crit :
>
> > Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
> > more demanding than setting up a system to play music.
>
> Does this explain why you never perform these tests even
> (especially ?) when the audio devices are little bit "esoteric".

If they never do them then "especially" simply does not apply. You do
realize that most of the reviewers for Stereophile do not make their
livings as reviewers? You do realize that DBTs are not the norm for
reviews done by the magazines that advocate such tests? It simply isn't
a reasonable demand to place on subjective reviewers. It seems the
demand only comes up when an objectivist disagrees with a subjective
review. I suppose in a perfect world all reviews would have at least
some blind listening included, especially for speakers, but that just
isn't going to happen with small review journals that report on a
hobby. Just about everyone who reads these magazines knows how the
reviews are being done. If you think subjective reviews of things like
amps and cables are bogus then I suggest you ignore them, write a
letter of complaint or simply don't purchase the magazines that print
such reviews.=20

Scott Wheeler

[email protected]

February 19th 05, 04:07 PM

Clyde Slick wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> >
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >> > So what happens when Arny does not show up for the debate? He is
> >> > already planting a lawn full of excuses.
> >>
> >> Arny Krueger has give his word that he will attend HE2005 to take
> >> part in the debate, Scott. I take his commitment at its face
value.
> >>
> >> > What makes you think you aren't just buying Arny a weekend in
New
> >> > York?
> >>
> >> If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
> >> for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
> >> he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).
> >>
> >> John Atkinson
> >> Editor, Stereophile
> >
> >
> > What if he doesn't turn up and he doesn't reimburse you? Do you
have a
> > writen agreement that implicitely states quid pro quo airfare and
hotel
> > costs for presence at debate for full 90 minutes? Am I the only one
who
> > sees this guy going to New York on your dime and not showing or
leaving
> > after a minute based on some lame brained excuse cooked up in
advance
> > just to make Stereophile eat his airfare and hotel costs? Does
nobody
> > else not see this guy doing a dine and dash? How do you plan on
> > collecting your reimbursement?
> >
> >
>
> I don't expect that outcome, but if it happens,
> it will have its own inherent rewards for JA.
> That's why I don't expect it to happen.
> I predict Arny will show. He will make
> his case, and there will be a debate. This will
> be Arny's 15 minutes of fame, for better or for worse.
> Sorry, its just how I see it playing out. This is just
> too 'necessary' for Arny's fulfillment of his audio meglamania.
>
>
>

Are you forgetting who we are talking about? Where is the reward for
JA? Are you forgetting that we are talking about a guy who lives in
complete disconnect with reality? Look at Arny's history on RAO and ask
yourself if this would be a victory for JA or a subject of fantasy for
Arny for years to come?

Scott Wheeler

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 04:19 PM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> said:
>
>> > If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
>> > for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
>> > he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).
>
>> What if he doesn't turn up and he doesn't reimburse you? Do you have a
>> writen agreement that implicitely states quid pro quo airfare and hotel
>> costs for presence at debate for full 90 minutes? Am I the only one who
>> sees this guy going to New York on your dime and not showing or leaving
>> after a minute based on some lame brained excuse cooked up in advance
>> just to make Stereophile eat his airfare and hotel costs? Does nobody
>> else not see this guy doing a dine and dash? How do you plan on
>> collecting your reimbursement?
>
> Some victories are costly and some are cheap. This one would be cheap.
>

LOL!
You sure said it lots better than I did

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 04:22 PM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
> Also communists.
>

That covers the class envy part, and the schadenfruede.
If they can't have something good, no one else should have it.

----== 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

February 19th 05, 04:22 PM

wrote:
> John Atkinson wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > What makes you think you aren't just buying Arny a weekend in New
> > > York?
> >
> > If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
> > for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
> > he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).
>
> What if he doesn't turn up and he doesn't reimburse you?

I don't see the point of discussing something that may well not
happen, Scott.

> Do you have a writen agreement that implicitely states quid pro quo
> airfare and hotel costs for presence at debate for full 90 minutes?

No, I didn't feel it necessary given that Mr. Krueger has given his
word that he will attend the Show and take part in the debate.

> Am I the only one who sees this guy going to New York on your dime
> and not showing or leaving after a minute based on some lame brained
> excuse cooked up in advance just to make Stereophile eat his airfare
> and hotel costs?

If that happens, Scott, I may well ending losing money but Mr.
Krueger will lose something more important. However, as I said, Mr.
Krueger has given me his word that he will attend HE2005 as planned
and that he will debate me one-on-one. Regardless of how Arny Krueger
has behaved in the past, I feel that I owe him that level of trust.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[email protected]

February 19th 05, 05:01 PM

John Atkinson is steamed:
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > a debate would have more impact if you and Arny both
> > participated in an independently proctored series of DBT
> > comparisons prior to the face off.
>
> The neverending cry of the impotent, powerless audio critic.
> "Put it to a DBT" and now "Put JA to a DBT."
>
>

Temper, temper. ;-)
>
>

Clyde Slick

February 19th 05, 06:22 PM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Clyde Slick said:
>
>> > Also communists.
>
>> That covers the class envy part, and the schadenfruede.
>> If they can't have something good, no one else should have it.
>
> Arnii has told us he can't get a BJ. Even things that are valuable yet
> cheap are out of his reach.
>

so, Arny also suffers from ass envy.

----== 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 =----

Lionel

February 19th 05, 07:43 PM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> said:
>>
>>> > If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
>>> > for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
>>> > he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).
>>
>>> What if he doesn't turn up and he doesn't reimburse you? Do you have a
>>> writen agreement that implicitely states quid pro quo airfare and hotel
>>> costs for presence at debate for full 90 minutes? Am I the only one who
>>> sees this guy going to New York on your dime and not showing or leaving
>>> after a minute based on some lame brained excuse cooked up in advance
>>> just to make Stereophile eat his airfare and hotel costs? Does nobody
>>> else not see this guy doing a dine and dash? How do you plan on
>>> collecting your reimbursement?
>>
>> Some victories are costly and some are cheap. This one would be cheap.
>>
>
>
> LOL!
> You sure said it lots better than I did

LOL, this remember me S888Wheel's lawsuit. As long as the money doesn't get
out from Middius' pocket it's cheap...

George, Mr Wheeler has proposed you to go on with his "cheap" lawsuit.
Why have you refused ?

;-)

Lionel

February 19th 05, 08:08 PM

In om>,
wrote :

>
> Lionel wrote:
>> John Atkinson a écrit :
>>
>> > Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
>> > more demanding than setting up a system to play music.
>>
>> Does this explain why you never perform these tests even
>> (especially ?) when the audio devices are little bit "esoteric".
>
> If they never do them then "especially" simply does not apply. You do
> realize that most of the reviewers for Stereophile do not make their
> livings as reviewers?

Do you really think that it is a "fair" argument ?

> You do realize that DBTs are not the norm for
> reviews done by the magazines that advocate such tests? It simply isn't
> a reasonable demand to place on subjective reviewers. It seems the
> demand only comes up when an objectivist disagrees with a subjective
> review. I suppose in a perfect world all reviews would have at least
> some blind listening included, especially for speakers,

Why especially for speakers ?

> but that just
> isn't going to happen with small review journals that report on a
> hobby.

You know Scott, I worked for industry (valves for gas and water) since a
long time. I have been in a lot of specialized exhibitions and shows BUT
I've never seen such demonstration of luxe than in high-end HiFi shows.

I guess that this hobby generate very important margin... ;-)

> Just about everyone who reads these magazines knows how the
> reviews are being done. If you think subjective reviews of things like
> amps and cables are bogus then I suggest you ignore them, write a
> letter of complaint or simply don't purchase the magazines that print
> such reviews.

According to your proposal I would be interested that "rich" magazines like
Stereophile (Diapason, NDRS... in France) participate to scientific
progress in organizing one or twice a year DBT tests to confirm *analytic*
of the reviewers... Especially when the tested devices aren't supported by
a strong (published) scientific theory.

Lionel_Chapuis

February 19th 05, 08:34 PM

George M. Middius wrote:

>
>
> Scott said:
>
> > If you think subjective reviews of things like
> > amps and cables are bogus then I suggest you ignore them, write a
> > letter of complaint or simply don't purchase the magazines that print
> > such reviews.
>
> Sorry, but the "objectivists" ;-) do not believe in live and let live.
> They are fascists. Also communists.

This is a *very* interesting point George.
Communists... This is the word that Bill Gates used recently to qualified Richard Stallman's "free software foundation".

----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[email protected]

February 19th 05, 09:27 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
> wrote:
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> > > wrote:
> > > > What makes you think you aren't just buying Arny a weekend in
New
> > > > York?
> > >
> > > If Mr. Krueger doesn't turn up, then he will have to reimburse me
> > > for the airfare and the cost of the hotel room, of course (unless
> > > he gives me sufficient notice to cancel the reservations).
> >
> > What if he doesn't turn up and he doesn't reimburse you?
>
> I don't see the point of discussing something that may well not
> happen, Scott.

Fair enough. Consider it food for thought and nothing more.

>
> > Do you have a writen agreement that implicitely states quid pro quo
> > airfare and hotel costs for presence at debate for full 90 minutes?
>
> No, I didn't feel it necessary given that Mr. Krueger has given his
> word that he will attend the Show and take part in the debate.

His word. OK.........

>
> > Am I the only one who sees this guy going to New York on your dime
> > and not showing or leaving after a minute based on some lame
brained
> > excuse cooked up in advance just to make Stereophile eat his
airfare
> > and hotel costs?
>
> If that happens, Scott, I may well ending losing money but Mr.
> Krueger will lose something more important.

You can't loose what you don't have. Just look at Ferstler and how he
has behaved since being exposed as a fraud and a plagiarist. If you are
expecting Arny to act like a normal person with self respect, dignity
and integrity you must be suffering from the same amnesia as Art. I do
hope for the best but IME no matter how low you set the bar for Krueger
he manages to fly under it.

However, as I said, Mr.
> Krueger has given me his word that he will attend HE2005 as planned
> and that he will debate me one-on-one. Regardless of how Arny Krueger
> has behaved in the past, I feel that I owe him that level of trust.

You are entitled to that opinion. I don't share it. Hope you are right.

Scott Wheeler

[email protected]

February 19th 05, 09:40 PM

Lionel wrote:
> In om>,
> wrote :
>
> >
> > Lionel wrote:
> >> John Atkinson a =E9crit :
> >>
> >> > Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
> >> > more demanding than setting up a system to play music.
> >>
> >> Does this explain why you never perform these tests even
> >> (especially ?) when the audio devices are little bit "esoteric".
> >
> > If they never do them then "especially" simply does not apply. You
do
> > realize that most of the reviewers for Stereophile do not make
their
> > livings as reviewers?
>
> Do you really think that it is a "fair" argument ?

Absolutely. The option is no review. There simply isn't a market to
support Stereophile if Stereophile were to put all of it's writers on
staff and pay them a wage that would make reviewing a worth while
endevour. I think it is asking too much to ask part time reviewers who
are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time needed to
do legitimate DBTs of every component they review. It simply will not
happen. It doesn't happen with magazines that advocate DBTs.

>
>
> > You do realize that DBTs are not the norm for
> > reviews done by the magazines that advocate such tests? It simply
isn't
> > a reasonable demand to place on subjective reviewers. It seems the
> > demand only comes up when an objectivist disagrees with a
subjective
> > review. I suppose in a perfect world all reviews would have at
least
> > some blind listening included, especially for speakers,
>
> Why especially for speakers ?

Because they are every bit as prone to sighted bias effects and no one
doubts their importance to sound quality.

>
> > but that just
> > isn't going to happen with small review journals that report on a
> > hobby.
>
> You know Scott, I worked for industry (valves for gas and water)
since a
> long time. I have been in a lot of specialized exhibitions and shows
BUT
> I've never seen such demonstration of luxe than in high-end HiFi
shows.
>
> I guess that this hobby generate very important margin... ;-)

I think shows are just that, shows. I have been to any number of such
shows in other industries and I think the appearance of wealth is just
that in many cases, appearance. The look of success sells. I think you
will find the hard numbers tell a different kind of story. I think they
tell a story of little margin for magazines and massive turnover for
small manufacturers.

>
>
> > Just about everyone who reads these magazines knows how the
> > reviews are being done. If you think subjective reviews of things
like
> > amps and cables are bogus then I suggest you ignore them, write a
> > letter of complaint or simply don't purchase the magazines that
print
> > such reviews.
>
> According to your proposal I would be interested that "rich"
magazines like
> Stereophile (Diapason, NDRS... in France) participate to scientific
> progress in organizing one or twice a year DBT tests to confirm
*analytic*
> of the reviewers... Especially when the tested devices aren't
supported by
> a strong (published) scientific theory.

How do you figure Stereophile is a "rich" magazine? Do you really think
the money is there for these guys to do legitimate scientific testing?
I don't. I think that is why it is quite absent in the world of audio.
Valid scientific research is ****ing expensive. It is usually funded by
major corperate grants or governmemt grants. I think it is way beyond
the ways and means of any hobbyist publication.

Scott Wheeler

Kalman Rubinson

February 20th 05, 12:20 AM

On 19 Feb 2005 13:40:35 -0800, wrote:

>How do you figure Stereophile is a "rich" magazine? Do you really think
>the money is there for these guys to do legitimate scientific testing?
>I don't. I think that is why it is quite absent in the world of audio.
>Valid scientific research is ****ing expensive. It is usually funded by
>major corperate grants or governmemt grants. I think it is way beyond
>the ways and means of any hobbyist publication.

Bingo! I would be happy to retire from my university position and
devote full time to audio reviewing including DBT if there was any
entity willing to fund the operation. Of course, Stereophile
subscriptions might rise in cost to approach those of scientific
journals, running thousands of $$ per year. Any takers?

Kal

John Atkinson

February 20th 05, 12:41 AM

wrote:
> I think it is asking too much to ask part time reviewers who
> are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time needed
> to do legitimate DBTs of every component they review....
> It doesn't happen with magazines that advocate DBTs.

This, to me, is an important point. That even magazines and
reviewers who promote the use of DBTs actually use the same sighted
listening methodology as those the criticize. Whic to me suggests
their railing and ranting is more about envy and sour grapes and
a naive belief in "scientism" than anything rational.

There is also the fact that there is very little demand from
magzine readers for DBTs. I spnet a lot of time and money in
the early 1990s organizing blind testing of loudspeakers, yet
the reviews based on this testing were not at all popular.
In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
prepared to read or cease publishing, as happened with the
erstwhile magazine that has given its name to this thread.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Margaret von B.

February 20th 05, 02:04 AM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...
> "George M. Middius" wrote:
>>
>> John Atkinson said:
>>
>> > Mike McKelvy suggested a one-on-one debate and that is what I
>> > proposed, that is what Mr. Krueger accepted, and that is what
>> > I have promoted in my magazine, on my website, and on the
>> > newsgroups and audio forums. The die is cast, Mr. Ferstler, but
>> > thank you for offering your concern.
>
>> Perhaps a little charity is in order here, John. The forthcoming debate
>> might benefit from a comedic opening act. I think you might be able to
>> recruit a Professional Audio Clown to amuse the crowd,
>
> Hey, George, you are hired!
>
> Howard Ferstler

People who live in trailers don't hire other people. Stupid.

Cheers,

Margaret

[email protected]

February 20th 05, 02:43 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
>
<snipped>
>
> I spnet a lot of time and money in
> the early 1990s organizing blind testing of loudspeakers, yet
> the reviews based on this testing were not at all popular.
>
>
So, first you tried promoting blind testing of the audio component
least in need of such testing and when that failed, you decided to
become a handmaiden for the charlatans promoting Bedini Clarifiers,
Mpingo Discs, Shakti Stones, etc. Do you take solace in a failed
attempt at virtue before you became a whoremonger?
>
>
> In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
> prepared to read or cease publishing, as happened with the
> erstwhile magazine that has given its name to this thread.
>
>
How much for "around the world"? ;-)

Clyde Slick

February 20th 05, 03:30 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>
> You can't loose what you don't have. Just look at Ferstler and how he
> has behaved since being exposed as a fraud and a plagiarist. If you are
> expecting Arny to act like a normal person with self respect, dignity
> and integrity you must be suffering from the same amnesia as Art.

I don't remember that.

Anyways, I expect Arny to show up not because he is honorable,
but rather because he is insane.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 20th 05, 03:33 AM

"Kalman Rubinson" > wrote in message
...
> On 19 Feb 2005 13:40:35 -0800, wrote:
>
>>How do you figure Stereophile is a "rich" magazine? Do you really think
>>the money is there for these guys to do legitimate scientific testing?
>>I don't. I think that is why it is quite absent in the world of audio.
>>Valid scientific research is ****ing expensive. It is usually funded by
>>major corperate grants or governmemt grants. I think it is way beyond
>>the ways and means of any hobbyist publication.
>
> Bingo! I would be happy to retire from my university position and
> devote full time to audio reviewing including DBT if there was any
> entity willing to fund the operation. Of course, Stereophile
> subscriptions might rise in cost to approach those of scientific
> journals, running thousands of $$ per year. Any takers?
>
> Kal

I like the idea of spending thousands of dollars for
DBT results to save me thousands of dollars
in audio purchases I wouldm't make anyway.

----== 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 =----

Arny Krueger

February 20th 05, 12:38 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com
> John Atkinson wrote:

>> However, as I said, Mr.
>> Krueger has given me his word that he will attend HE2005 as planned
>> and that he will debate me one-on-one. Regardless of how Arny Krueger
>> has behaved in the past, I feel that I owe him that level of trust.

> You are entitled to that opinion. I don't share it.

Scott, ironically you're bitter because I promised to not answer your vanity
libel suit, and kept my word - which helped it fail.

Arny Krueger

February 20th 05, 12:54 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com

> Absolutely. The option is no review. There simply isn't a market to
> support Stereophile if Stereophile were to put all of it's writers on
> staff and pay them a wage that would make reviewing a worth while
> endevour. I think it is asking too much to ask part time reviewers who
> are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time needed to
> do legitimate DBTs of every component they review. It simply will not
> happen. It doesn't happen with magazines that advocate DBTs.

I think it's fine if everbody agrees that these poor reviewers lack the
resources to properly document their reviews.

Arny Krueger

February 20th 05, 12:58 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com
> John Atkinson wrote:

>> I spent a lot of time and money in
>> the early 1990s organizing blind testing of loudspeakers, yet
>> the reviews based on this testing were not at all popular.

> So, first you tried promoting blind testing of the audio component
> least in need of such testing and when that failed, you decided to
> become a handmaiden for the charlatans promoting Bedini Clarifiers,
> Mpingo Discs, Shakti Stones, etc. Do you take solace in a failed
> attempt at virtue before you became a whoremonger?

I think that Atkinson did his bogus DBTs of amps and capacitors before the
early 1990s.

>> In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
>> prepared to read or cease publishing, as happened with the
>> erstwhile magazine that has given its name to this thread.

Note the false claim by Atkinson that The Audio Critic has ceased
publishing. All I see is a transition to web publishing, which seems very
appropriate. TAS is also leaning heavily on web publishing, yet AFAIK
Atkinson hasn't rung their death knell.

[email protected]

February 20th 05, 03:50 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > John Atkinson wrote:
>
> >> However, as I said, Mr.
> >> Krueger has given me his word that he will attend HE2005 as
planned
> >> and that he will debate me one-on-one. Regardless of how Arny
Krueger
> >> has behaved in the past, I feel that I owe him that level of
trust.
>
> > You are entitled to that opinion. I don't share it.
>
> Scott, ironically you're bitter because I promised to not answer your
vanity
> libel suit, and kept my word - which helped it fail.

The real irony is that you would proudly allude to one of the finest
examples of your lack of character. You said a lot of things back then.
You falsely accused me of being a pedophile. You claimed you would hire
a lawyer, run up my bill and put a lean on my house. What you chose not
to do was actually retract the claims of pedophilia to end the law
suit. You failed on every level to show any decency or integrity. I'm
not bitter but I have learned my lesson about you. Thanks for reminding
the rest of RAO just why you deserve absolutely no trust. Like I said
before, no matter how low I set the bar for you, you always manage to
fly under it. Your word is worthless and I expect you to remind us all
of that fact again with this debate. I also expect you to find some
kind of bizzarre victory in it just as you have found some sort of
bizzarre victory in being sued for libel over false accusations of
pedophilia. I suppose ripping off Stereophile for a free trip to New
York would be a victory in your book.

Scott Wheeler

Lionel

February 20th 05, 04:56 PM

John Atkinson a écrit :

> In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
> prepared to read or cease publishing

Very Good !!! Excellent !!! The ultimate argument.

Now Arnold can go to NY very serenely, there's nothing to
discuss anymore. No more bloody debate, no more shock of
Titans, just discussion about weather, cars and economical
conjoncture. ;-)

Have a nice and peaceful visit Arnold...
....Lucky ******* ! ;-)

Lionel_Chapuis

February 20th 05, 05:06 PM

George M. Middius wrote:

>
>
> Clyde Slick said:
>
> > Anyways, I expect Arny to show up not because he is honorable,
> > but rather because he is insane.
>
> And because he's a cheapskate, and a free lunch is a free lunch.

LOL, not class envy but envy anyway. :-D

----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[email protected]

February 20th 05, 06:08 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
> > Absolutely. The option is no review. There simply isn't a market to
> > support Stereophile if Stereophile were to put all of it's writers
on
> > staff and pay them a wage that would make reviewing a worth while
> > endevour. I think it is asking too much to ask part time reviewers
who
> > are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time needed
to
> > do legitimate DBTs of every component they review. It simply will
not
> > happen. It doesn't happen with magazines that advocate DBTs.
>
> I think it's fine if everbody agrees that these poor reviewers lack
the
> resources to properly document their reviews.

This makes no sense. clearly no reviewer lacks the resources to
"document their reviews." If they did we would never see them. Maybe
you were trying to say something else?

Scott Wheeler

Arny Krueger

February 20th 05, 06:24 PM

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>> John Atkinson wrote:
>>
>>>> However, as I said, Mr.
>>>> Krueger has given me his word that he will attend HE2005 as
> planned
>>>> and that he will debate me one-on-one. Regardless of how Arny
>>>> Krueger has behaved in the past, I feel that I owe him that level
>>>> of
> trust.
>>
>>> You are entitled to that opinion. I don't share it.
>>
>> Scott, ironically you're bitter because I promised to not answer
>> your vanity libel suit, and kept my word - which helped it fail.
>
> The real irony is that you would proudly allude to one of the finest
> examples of your lack of character.

Letsee Scott do I have this right? I lack character because you filed a
vanity lawsuit against me? LOL!

>You said a lot of things back then.

I managed to pull your chain pretty hard, Scott.

>You falsely accused me of being a pedophile.

How many times did I do that Scott?

> You claimed you
> would hire a lawyer, run up my bill and put a lean on my house.

Prove it. BTW Scott I'm quite sure I never promised to put a lean on your
house, because unlike you I know the difference between lean and lien. As
far as liens on houses go, I seem to recall you making that threat against
me. Nice job of projecting your wierdness!

> What you chose not to do was actually retract the claims of pedophilia to
> end the law suit.

Claims, Scott? I think that means more than one. I seem to recall Lionel
making numerous such claims against you. How's you're lawsuit against him
coming? LOL!

> You failed on every level to show any decency or
> integrity.

Not at all Scott, and the law seems to agree with me.

> I'm not bitter but I have learned my lesson about you.

You're not bitter Scott? It's a good thing you posted this after prime
coffee drinking time in most of the English-speaking parts of the world,
because otherwise a lot of CRTs and LCDs would be bathed in coffee by now!

> Thanks for reminding the rest of RAO just why you deserve absolutely
> no trust.

I deserve no trust for what Scott, being victimized by your vanity law suit?

> Like I said before, no matter how low I set the bar for
> you, you always manage to fly under it.

So says a guy who is so ashamed of himeself that he wouldn't publicly admit
his profession for many months.

> Your word is worthless and I
> expect you to remind us all of that fact again with this debate. I
> also expect you to find some kind of bizzarre victory in it just as
> you have found some sort of bizzarre victory in being sued for libel
> over false accusations of pedophilia. I suppose ripping off
> Stereophile for a free trip to New York would be a victory in your
> book.

Atkinson should know me by now. How can I rip him off?

Arny Krueger

February 20th 05, 06:27 PM

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>
>>> Absolutely. The option is no review. There simply isn't a market to
>>> support Stereophile if Stereophile were to put all of it's writers
>>> on staff and pay them a wage that would make reviewing a worth while
>>> endevour. I think it is asking too much to ask part time reviewers
>>> who are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time
>>> needed to do legitimate DBTs of every component they review. It
>>> simply will not happen. It doesn't happen with magazines that
>>> advocate DBTs.
>>
>> I think it's fine if everbody agrees that these poor reviewers lack
>> the resources to properly document their reviews.
>
> This makes no sense. clearly no reviewer lacks the resources to
> "document their reviews." If they did we would never see them. Maybe
> you were trying to say something else?

Scott, thanks for showing that you can't properly read and comprehend the
word "properly". Come to think of it, you won't be able to understand this
sentence, either. Oh, well! ;-)

[email protected]

February 20th 05, 06:28 PM

Lionel wrote:
> John Atkinson a =E9crit :
>
> > In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
> > prepared to read or cease publishing
>
> Very Good !!! Excellent !!! The ultimate argument.
>
>
Indeed, Atkinson's position is becoming clear: $tereopile may be filled
with techno-babble, psuedo-science, fraudulent products and purple
prose, but that's what the readers (and, of course, the advertisers)
*want*. What's a publisher to do? :-(
>
>

[email protected]

February 20th 05, 06:59 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> > wrote in message
> >> oups.com
> >>> John Atkinson wrote:
> >>
> >>>> However, as I said, Mr.
> >>>> Krueger has given me his word that he will attend HE2005 as
> > planned
> >>>> and that he will debate me one-on-one. Regardless of how Arny
> >>>> Krueger has behaved in the past, I feel that I owe him that
level
> >>>> of
> > trust.
> >>
> >>> You are entitled to that opinion. I don't share it.
> >>
> >> Scott, ironically you're bitter because I promised to not answer
> >> your vanity libel suit, and kept my word - which helped it fail.
> >
> > The real irony is that you would proudly allude to one of the
finest
> > examples of your lack of character.
>
> Letsee Scott do I have this right?

Not likely but let's see.

I lack character because you filed a
> vanity lawsuit against me? LOL!

Nope, as usual, you don't have it right. I'm sure you will misrepresent
the facts leading to your failure to debate JA in the same way.

>
> >You said a lot of things back then.
>
> I managed to pull your chain pretty hard, Scott.

Just like you are pulling JA's right now? Anyone without personal
integrity can pull another person's chain Arny. Hell, you can **** off
your neighbors by throwing rocks through their windows in the middle of
the night. One of the differences between you and normal people is that
normal people will not stoop so low just to pull someone's chain.

>
> >You falsely accused me of being a pedophile.
>
> How many times did I do that Scott?

I suppose this matters to someone with no sense of decency. Three times
if you don't remember.

>
> > You claimed you
> > would hire a lawyer, run up my bill and put a lean on my house.
>
> Prove it.

Check the google records for yourself if you don't believe me. Kinda
sad you don't remember what you said. If you can't find it let me know.
I'll find it for you. I forget that google rrealize you think google
lies to you.

> BTW Scott I'm quite sure I never promised to put a lean on your
> house, because unlike you I know the difference between lean and
lien.

"Definately"

>As
> far as liens on houses go, I seem to recall you making that threat
against
> me. Nice job of projecting your wierdness!

Nice job of using selctive memory.

>
> > What you chose not to do was actually retract the claims of
pedophilia to
> > end the law suit.
>
> Claims, Scott?

Yeah? Was that too big a word for you to understand Arny?

>I think that means more than one.

Yeah it does.

> I seem to recall Lionel
> making numerous such claims against you. How's you're lawsuit against
him
> coming? LOL!

Thanks for showing your ignorance on the issue of over seas lawsuits.

>
> > You failed on every level to show any decency or
> > integrity.
>
> Not at all Scott, and the law seems to agree with me.

Another one of your fanatsies. I look forward to your fantasies about
why you failed to show for the debate.

>
> > I'm not bitter but I have learned my lesson about you.
>
> You're not bitter Scott?

Having trouble with the English language Arny?

> It's a good thing you posted this after prime
> coffee drinking time in most of the English-speaking parts of the
world,
> because otherwise a lot of CRTs and LCDs would be bathed in coffee by
now!

More fantasies. Dream on dude.

>
> > Thanks for reminding the rest of RAO just why you deserve
absolutely
> > no trust.
>
> I deserve no trust for what Scott, being victimized by your vanity
law suit?

I supposed someone so lost in their fantasy world on RAO as you would
have trouble understanding why. Have you not noticed that you are the
only one not getting it?

>
> > Like I said before, no matter how low I set the bar for
> > you, you always manage to fly under it.
>
> So says a guy who is so ashamed of himeself that he wouldn't publicly
admit
> his profession for many months.

Just more fantasies. I'm sure you will come up with some wild ones for
being a no show at the debate. By the way, it is nice to actually have
a profession and excel at it. Would you like me to tell you what it is
like?

>
> > Your word is worthless and I
> > expect you to remind us all of that fact again with this debate. I
> > also expect you to find some kind of bizzarre victory in it just as
> > you have found some sort of bizzarre victory in being sued for
libel
> > over false accusations of pedophilia. I suppose ripping off
> > Stereophile for a free trip to New York would be a victory in your
> > book.
>
> Atkinson should know me by now. How can I rip him off?

Are you really this stupid? You can rip Stereophile off by going to New
York on Stereophile's dime and not participating in the debate. DUH! I
agree with you though that Atkinson should know you by now and see this
coming from a mile away.

Scott Wheeler

[email protected]

February 20th 05, 07:03 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> > wrote in message
> >> oups.com
> >>
> >>> Absolutely. The option is no review. There simply isn't a market
to
> >>> support Stereophile if Stereophile were to put all of it's
writers
> >>> on staff and pay them a wage that would make reviewing a worth
while
> >>> endevour. I think it is asking too much to ask part time
reviewers
> >>> who are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time
> >>> needed to do legitimate DBTs of every component they review. It
> >>> simply will not happen. It doesn't happen with magazines that
> >>> advocate DBTs.
> >>
> >> I think it's fine if everbody agrees that these poor reviewers
lack
> >> the resources to properly document their reviews.
> >
> > This makes no sense. clearly no reviewer lacks the resources to
> > "document their reviews." If they did we would never see them.
Maybe
> > you were trying to say something else?
>
> Scott, thanks for showing that you can't properly read and comprehend
the
> word "properly". Come to think of it, you won't be able to understand
this
> sentence, either. Oh, well! ;-)

You really are an idiot. To bad you won't actually debate JA. Would
have been good for laughs.

Scott Wheeler

Lionel

February 20th 05, 08:08 PM

a écrit :
> Lionel wrote:
>
>>In om>,
wrote :
>>
>>
>>>Lionel wrote:
>>>
>>>>John Atkinson a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
>>>>>more demanding than setting up a system to play music.
>>>>
>>>>Does this explain why you never perform these tests even
>>>>(especially ?) when the audio devices are little bit "esoteric".
>>>
>>>If they never do them then "especially" simply does not apply. You
>
> do
>
>>>realize that most of the reviewers for Stereophile do not make
>
> their
>
>>>livings as reviewers?
>>
>>Do you really think that it is a "fair" argument ?
>
>
> Absolutely. The option is no review. There simply isn't a market to
> support Stereophile if Stereophile were to put all of it's writers on
> staff and pay them a wage that would make reviewing a worth while
> endevour. I think it is asking too much to ask part time reviewers who
> are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time needed to
> do legitimate DBTs of every component they review. It simply will not
> happen. It doesn't happen with magazines that advocate DBTs.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>>You do realize that DBTs are not the norm for
>>>reviews done by the magazines that advocate such tests? It simply
>
> isn't
>
>>>a reasonable demand to place on subjective reviewers. It seems the
>>>demand only comes up when an objectivist disagrees with a
>
> subjective
>
>>>review. I suppose in a perfect world all reviews would have at
>
> least
>
>>>some blind listening included, especially for speakers,
>>
>>Why especially for speakers ?
>
>
>
>
> Because they are every bit as prone to sighted bias effects and no one
> doubts their importance to sound quality.

IMHO it is not pertinent.
Speaker is the only device which can federated opinions.

IMHO, analytic DBT tests would be more interesting
concerning controverted, "disputed" devices.

>>>but that just
>>>isn't going to happen with small review journals that report on a
>>>hobby.
>>
>>You know Scott, I worked for industry (valves for gas and water)
>
> since a
>
>>long time. I have been in a lot of specialized exhibitions and shows
>
> BUT
>
>>I've never seen such demonstration of luxe than in high-end HiFi
>
> shows.
>
>>I guess that this hobby generate very important margin... ;-)
>
>
>
> I think shows are just that, shows. I have been to any number of such
> shows in other industries and I think the appearance of wealth is just
> that in many cases, appearance. The look of success sells. I think you
> will find the hard numbers tell a different kind of story. I think they
> tell a story of little margin for magazines and massive turnover for
> small manufacturers.

These massive turnovers generate massive margins...
The most part of the reinvested money is put in
communication not R&D (unfortunatly ;-) ).
And as magazines like "Stereophile" are among the most
courted communication supports.
So...

>>>Just about everyone who reads these magazines knows how the
>>>reviews are being done. If you think subjective reviews of things
>
> like
>
>>>amps and cables are bogus then I suggest you ignore them, write a
>>>letter of complaint or simply don't purchase the magazines that
>
> print
>
>>>such reviews.
>>
>>According to your proposal I would be interested that "rich"
>
> magazines like
>
>>Stereophile (Diapason, NDRS... in France) participate to scientific
>>progress in organizing one or twice a year DBT tests to confirm
>
> *analytic*
>
>>of the reviewers... Especially when the tested devices aren't
>
> supported by
>
>>a strong (published) scientific theory.
>
>
>
> How do you figure Stereophile is a "rich" magazine? Do you really think
> the money is there for these guys to do legitimate scientific testing?
> I don't. I think that is why it is quite absent in the world of audio.
> Valid scientific research is ****ing expensive.

When a manufacturer generate massive turnover and massive
margin it seems prudent to reinvest part of these massive
incomes in R&D programs, no ?

> It is usually funded by
> major corperate grants or governmemt grants. I think it is way beyond
> the ways and means of any hobbyist publication.

A magazine like Stereophile should have the means at the
levels of its goal.
I cannot understand that tests and reviews of "esoteric"
devices aren't published with more reserve, modesty
considering the lacks of the testing methodology.

Lionel

February 20th 05, 08:29 PM

a écrit :
> Lionel wrote:
>
>>John Atkinson a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
>>>prepared to read or cease publishing
>>
>>Very Good !!! Excellent !!! The ultimate argument.
>>
>>
>
> Indeed, Atkinson's position is becoming clear: $tereopile may be filled
> with techno-babble, psuedo-science, fraudulent products and purple
> prose, but that's what the readers (and, of course, the advertisers)
> *want*. What's a publisher to do? :-(

In a debate when one of the debaters uses such extrem
argument he implicitly exonerates the other debater of using
"fair" or "unfair" arguments. In one word it can be
considered as a quitus, a discharge of debating obligations.

If I was you I would take in count that starting from now
the debate is closed, rest only a courteous meeting between
2 audio hobbyists... And for you an invitation to an
intersting show.

Have a nive visit. ;-)

Lionel

February 20th 05, 08:31 PM

a écrit :
> Lionel wrote:
>
>>John Atkinson a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
>>>prepared to read or cease publishing
>>
>>Very Good !!! Excellent !!! The ultimate argument.
>>
>>
>
> Indeed, Atkinson's position is becoming clear: $tereopile may be filled
> with techno-babble, psuedo-science, fraudulent products and purple
> prose, but that's what the readers (and, of course, the advertisers)
> *want*. What's a publisher to do? :-(

In a debate when one of the debaters uses such "extrem"
argument he implicitly exonerates the other debater of using
"fair" or "unfair" arguments. In one word it can be
considered as a quitus, a discharge of debating obligations.

If I was Arnold I would take in count that starting from now
the debate is closed, rest only a courteous meeting between
2 audio hobbyists... And an invitation to an intersting show.

What a lucky ******* ! ;-)

John Atkinson

February 20th 05, 08:38 PM

wrote:
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > > wrote in message
> > ups.com
> > > Your word is worthless and I expect you to remind us all of
> > > that fact again with this debate. I also expect you to find
> > > some kind of bizzarre victory in it just as you have found
> > > some sort of bizzarre victory in being sued for libel over
> > > false accusations of pedophilia. I suppose ripping off
> > > Stereophile for a free trip to New York would be a victory in
> > > your book.
> >
> > Atkinson should know me by now. How can I rip him off?
>
> Are you really this stupid? You can rip Stereophile off by going to
> New York on Stereophile's dime and not participating in the debate.
> DUH!

If Arny Krueger does something along those lines, Scott, then I
believe he would become a laughing stock. I feel that such an
outcome will be sufficient incentive for Mr. Krueger to live up to
his word.

> I agree with you though that Atkinson should know you by now and
> see this coming from a mile away.

We shall see what happens, Scott. But I have found that placing a
degree of trust in people almost always produces positive results.
Mr. Krueger has given me his word; I shall continue to take that word
at face value.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Arny Krueger

February 20th 05, 09:13 PM

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> Atkinson should know me by now. How can I rip him off?

> Are you really this stupid?

I'm not so stupid that I file vanity lawsuits in California Superior Court
like this guy who posts as Scott Wheeler, and make a laughingstock out of
myself.

> You can rip Stereophile off by going to
> New York on Stereophile's dime and not participating in the debate.

I could jump off the Ambassador Bridge, or even just the freeway bridge down
the road a couple of miles.

> DUH! I agree with you though that Atkinson should know you by now and
> see this coming from a mile away.

Well Scott, it appears that not only do you have this persistent delusion
that you are smarter than I am, but you think you are smarter than Atkinson.
Frankly Scott, I suspect that you think that you are extraordinarily smart,
but there's this little problem with your zillions of really stupid posts to
Usenet. On the scale of Usenet Audio Idiots Scott, you're right up there
with Middius, Dormer, Phillips and Sackman.

Arny Krueger

February 20th 05, 09:18 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com
> Lionel wrote:
>> John Atkinson a écrit :
>>
>>> In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
>>> prepared to read or cease publishing
>>
>> Very Good !!! Excellent !!! The ultimate argument.
>>
>>
> Indeed, Atkinson's position is becoming clear: $tereopile may be
> filled with techno-babble, psuedo-science, fraudulent products and
> purple prose, but that's what the readers (and, of course, the
> advertisers) *want*. What's a publisher to do? :-(

Hustler and The White Worker seem to be good examples of magazines that
appear to be pursuing the same basic marketing approach.

Clyde Slick

February 20th 05, 10:01 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> I could jump off the Ambassador Bridge, or even just the freeway bridge
> down the road a couple of miles.
>

I would consider that more than an adequate excuse for bailing out of The
Debate.

----== 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 =----

Lionel

February 20th 05, 10:04 PM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> I could jump off the Ambassador Bridge, or even just the freeway bridge
>> down the road a couple of miles.
>>
>
> I would consider that more than an adequate excuse for bailing out of The
> Debate.

Which debate ?

Howard Ferstler

February 20th 05, 10:08 PM

wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> >
> >
> <snipped>
> >
> > John, I have to be candid here. I simply do not believe that
> > you believe DBT comparisons are no good. I see other motives
> > that are related to your magazine needing to survive. It
> > cannot do that without the good will of the subscriber base,
> > and that base is made up of people who "believe."

> I think it is more a matter of having the "right" (naive, gullible)
> readership than maintaining the "good will of the subscriber base".

I agree. I should have worded my comment a bit differently.
However, to keep those people satisfied John and his
associates must generate good will.

> The
> vast majority of the $tereopile revenue is generated from advertising.
> Subscription revenue is incidental.

Not actually. Ad revenue will be dependent upon the number
of subscription and news stand sales. The more magazines
that are sold, the more the publisher can charge for ads.
This is why a large-circulation publication like Sound &
Vision can charge a fortune for ads and smaller magazines,
like the one I write for, The Sensible Sound, charges much
less. So, the subscription base is quite important, because
it ultimately determines ad revenues.

Of course, one positive thing about smaller-circulation
magazines is that smaller audio companies can at least
afford to advertise their wares somewhere.

> That's why one can subscribe at
> such a low rate. The magazine must be able to deliver the gullible to
> the charlatans, like lambs to the slaughter. Having the "wrong" (i.e.,
> educated, skeptical, discerning) readership, even in very large numbers,
> will not be as effective in generating advertising revenue.

Nope. Those gullible people may actually spend more for
upscale and expensive products then what we have with the
intelligent types. Indeed, intelligent types may be quite
tight fisted when it comes to paying for upscale gear. The
result are high-end manufacturers who are willing to spend
big for ads in the magazine. The subscription base is the
ultimate determiner of how much the magazine earns.

In any case, John must humor his readers to keep the sales
up. In essence, they have created a Frankenstein Monster,
and now they must feed it to survive.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 20th 05, 10:28 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > a debate would have more impact if you and Arny both
> > participated in an independently proctored series of DBT
> > comparisons prior to the face off.

> The neverending cry of the impotent, powerless audio critic.
> "Put it to a DBT" and now "Put JA to a DBT."

Yep. That looks like the way to go.

> As someone who
> has faked your published test results, Mr. Ferstler, and
> copied someone else's text to claim it was your own, you
> might wish to reflect on the propriety of you criticizing
> a colleague.

Cheap shot, John, illustrating a clever "change the subject"
tactic. No published test results were faked, and you
certainly are aware that I made plenty of excuses for my
statistical ignorance in a follow-up column. In any case, I
certainly did not hear the kind of differences that some of
your reviewers claim to hear when they compare stuff.

Also in any case, what we are discussing here are your
claims about the ineffectiveness of the DBT protocol as it
relates to high-end gear, or at least some high-end gear.

> > AI am sure that if you are challenged on the subject of
> > DBT comparisons you will have a canned response all ready
> > to go.

> Well duh, Mr. Ferstler. First we have Mr. Krueger complaining
> that I did not present his case for him on my website, now
> you complaining that I might prepare my presentation in
> advance.

Yep. Heck, John, you no doubt have that canned response
memorized. Do you spout it off when you discuss the topic
with genuine audio engineers? I'd love to hear one of those
exchanges. Actually, in a way your magazine has some of
those guys (mainly the ones who build products that your
magazine might review) over a barrel. If they publicly point
out your manifest errors concerning the viability of blind
comparisons, they may never get their stuff reviewed. And a
positive review in even a crank magazine can be important to
a company's survival.

> > are you prepared to go further and actually do some DBT
> > comparisons "in public," so that your claims about the the
> > [sic] so-called sound of super amps and super wires can be
> > validated right there on the spot?

> What becomes frustrating in discussing audio matters with you,
> Mr. Ferstler, is that you pay no attention to what others say.

Often, this is because they either (1) speak with forked
tongue or else (2) speak baloney.

> If you did, you would remember that you and I have already
> discussed blind tests that I have performed at hi-fi shows,
> specifically on speaker stand spikes, amplifiers, and
> absoluter polarity. I have even published the results of
> such public tests in the magazines I have edited, so yes, I
> guess I am preapred to go "further."

Good. Stick with it. Of course, what matters here (with a
nod to Bill Clinton) is what we mean by the word "further."

> But as to "validating" my claims, I note that neither you nor
> any other of the skeptical community has been persuaded by
> the results of my tests. :-)

Well, as I see it you have a pretty obvious agenda: keeping
your magazine circulation bumped up. If you did do a DBT
expose and had the procedure proctored by someone with real,
unbiased integrity (I previously listed Toole, or Olive, or
Eargle, or Lip****z, among maybe a few others) and you and
your associates could not hear differences, and you reported
the results in Stereophile, just what would many of your
subscribers do? My guess is that a lot of them would dump
you.

Yep, John, you and your buddies have created a monster and
if you try to kill the thing it will turn on you. You cannot
become really scientific and forthright about the DBT
protocol even if you wanted to.

> And yet again, I should point out that someone who uses
> almost exclusively sighted tests in his own reviewing stands
> on shakey philosophical ground when he a) criticizes such tests
> as used by others and b) demands those others use DBTs.

Well, we DO need to point out that when I do sighted
comparisons of wires or amps (which I am going to try to
avoid doing in print in the future, because it is mostly
pointless) I DO NOT wax poetic about hearing differences.

> As was
> pointed out to you by Dr. John Feng and others, getting the results
> you feel to be correct, Mr. Ferstler, does not validate your
> methodology.

I think that there is a huge difference between doing
sighted comparisons (level matched, needless to say) and not
hearing differences and doing perhaps non-level matched
comparisons and proclaiming to the readers that profound
audible differences were detected. Well, if the levels were
not matched no doubt there really were audible differences.

Frankly, much as I admire Arny as a potential debater and
debunker, I would prefer that if you were going to debate
somebody about the inexactness of the DBT protocol that
somebody would be Floyd Toole, Sean Olive, John Eargle, or
Stan Lip****z.

They would clean your pump, John.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 20th 05, 10:39 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > it would be interesting if [Arny Krueger] brought along an ABX
> > device and a cheap integrated amp and some lamp cord and set
> > up some DBT comparisons against that exotic gear. Maybe he
> > could get Nousaine to set up a comparison booth for that
> > sort of thing to take place.
>
> If Mr. Krueger or Tom Nousaine wish to do live demonstrations
> at HE 2005, I would have no objection. But not in place of
> the debate that has you so bothered.

I agree. However, the results of the comparison series
should certainly help to liven up the debate.

> > you seem to think that HE2005 is an adequately exacting
> > environment to set up sighted demonstrations that would wow Arny.
> > Certainly, then, the environment is exacting enough to let him
> > and/or Nousaine set up some DBT demonstrations.

> Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
> more demanding than setting up a system to play music.

Hey, tell me about it. A pain in the neck, actually.

> But as I
> said, if they wish to do so, that would be fine by me. However,
> it is relevant to point out that they would have to pay Primedia
> the same rate for the room and facilities as any other show
> exhibitor (though they would, of course, then be eligible for the
> "best sound at the show" voting).

Nothing like making it difficult for people to prove you to
be in error.

> > This would be way, way superior to a debate.

> And still I ask why you are so against the idea of this debate, Mr.
> Ferstler?

Because it will evaluate the ability of the participants to
argue persuasively and not deal with the issues. Also, given
the attitude of most members in the audience, I would guess
that the debate will have a large cheering section in your
corner.

The only way to deal with the "issues" is for you and some
of your associates to participate in a properly proctored
DBT series and then publish the results in your magazine.
You could also debate the results at one of your hi-fi
shows, preferably with you in one corner and someone like
Toole, Olive, Eargle, or Lip****z in the other. They might
not have Arny's debating skills (I am unfamiliar with them),
but they will have the large-scale prestige required to
score some serious points.

> Arny Krueger has long claimed that he is prepared to
> discuss his audio philosophy with me one-on-one in public. If _he_
> doesn't object to the idea, why are _you_ getting so flustered, to
> the point that you are accusing me a) of preparing my presentation
> in advance

Good grief, John, I find it hard to believe that ANY debater
would not have material prepared in advance.

and b) claiming that no-one who listens to Mr. Krueger's
> presentation will be persuaded by it?

Depends upon the crowd. My guess is that those who go to
this show will be anything but sympathetic to a rational
approach to audio. They will be keyed up and ready to hoot
and holler every time Arny makes a point. Hey, John, these
guys are believers. They help to bankroll your magazine.

> It appears, Mr. Ferstler, that,
> despite your bluster, you don't actusally [sic] have the courage of your
> convictions!

Well, my convictions do not involve waxing poetic about
usually profound sonic differences between wires or between
amps.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 20th 05, 10:46 PM

wrote:
>
> Lionel wrote:
> > John Atkinson a écrit :
> >
> > > Performing a scientifically valid DBT, Mr. Ferstler, is rather
> > > more demanding than setting up a system to play music.
> >
> > Does this explain why you never perform these tests even
> > (especially ?) when the audio devices are little bit "esoteric".

> If they never do them then "especially" simply does not apply. You do
> realize that most of the reviewers for Stereophile do not make their
> livings as reviewers?

But they do depend upon the good will of all of those
upscale-product designers. They need that good will to get
those good deals on esoteric gear. Plus, more than a few of
them are as deluded as their readers.

> You do realize that DBTs are not the norm for
> reviews done by the magazines that advocate such tests? It simply isn't
> a reasonable demand to place on subjective reviewers.

It is, if they have a habit of waxing poetic about so-called
sound differences between sets of wires or amplifiers. If a
reviewer cannot hear differences, well, then that is that.
However, if a guy claims that a certain $5000 amp sounds
manifestly better than a competing $3000 amp (perish the
thought of doing a comparison between said amps and the amp
section of a $600 receiver) I believe he needs to justify
that claim with more than a sighted comparison that does not
involve precise level matching.

> It seems the
> demand only comes up when an objectivist disagrees with a subjective
> review.

He would object, because the reviewer heard profound
differences between components that by all rational
estimates should sound the same.

> I suppose in a perfect world all reviews would have at least
> some blind listening included, especially for speakers, but that just
> isn't going to happen with small review journals that report on a
> hobby.

It is not that difficult to set up a blind comparison,
particularly with items like wires. Sure, if no differences
are reported during a sighted comparison, then the readers
can be reasonably sure that the two components were at least
not radically different sounding. However, if big
differences are claimed, then I think the readers have a
right to expect a DBT to make sure that the reviewer was not
letting his imagination get the better of him.

> Just about everyone who reads these magazines knows how the
> reviews are being done. If you think subjective reviews of things like
> amps and cables are bogus then I suggest you ignore them, write a
> letter of complaint or simply don't purchase the magazines that print
> such reviews.

I sure do second the latter option. Scan the things on the
news stands, at least until they go out of business.

Howard Ferstler

[email protected]

February 20th 05, 11:01 PM

Yes,one superiority of transformer coupled tube amplifiers is they
overdrive in a perceptionally palatable and non-speaker-destroying
manner. Since amplifying music with realistic dynamic range makes
occasionally overdriving the amplifier almost inevitable, (unless you
have 10 kW of amplifier power, and if you did you would have many
other problems...) tube amplifiers represent a case of cost-effective,
simple management of conflicting parameters.

By accepting the necessity for occasionally replacing and rebiasing
power tubes, we accept a "system weak link" that is manageable and
relatively convenient. As opposed to replacing drivers, or sets of
soldered-in semiconductors.

Howard Ferstler

February 20th 05, 11:01 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> wrote:
> > I think it is asking too much to ask part time reviewers who
> > are making a living doing other jobs to take the extra time needed
> > to do legitimate DBTs of every component they review....
> > It doesn't happen with magazines that advocate DBTs.

> This, to me, is an important point. That even magazines and
> reviewers who promote the use of DBTs actually use the same sighted
> listening methodology as those the criticize.

Sure. However, they do not go overboard and make all sorts
of wild-assed claims about profound differences. They do not
sell their readers a bill of goods.

> Whic [sic] to me suggests
> their railing and ranting is more about envy and sour grapes and
> a naive belief in "scientism" than anything rational.

Give me a break. Your team could at least set up an initial
DBT series, carefully level matched and proctored by a
prestigious outsider, to get a decent idea about just how
audible differences might be between a group of amps or
group of wires. (This would best be done by comparing cheap
stuff to expensive stuff, to better dramatize the resulting
psychological impact.) Once that was done, I think that your
"reviewers" might settle down a bit when they compare
sighted down the line and thought they heard profound
differences.

Sure, they do not have to do DBTs every time, but they owe
it to their readers (and to themselves, too, for that
matter) to do a few carefully level-matched DBT comparisons
at the beginning to get a handle on just what they think
they might hear later on.

> There is also the fact that there is very little demand from
> magzine [sic] readers for DBTs.

Correct. However, this is because your people have made a
point of turning audio into a know-nothing, subjective,
preference-oriented hobby that attracts borderline misfits.

> I spnet [sic] a lot of time and money in
> the early 1990s organizing blind testing of loudspeakers, yet
> the reviews based on this testing were not at all popular.

Which reflects the generally minimized intelligence and lack
of curiosity we have with the average tweako high-end audio
enthusiast.

> In the end a magazine has to publish what its readers are
> prepared to read or cease publishing, as happened with the
> erstwhile magazine that has given its name to this thread.

Yes, it is paradoxical. The high-end audio industry has
reached a point (probably because of guys like you) where
the only enthusiastic people involved are the misfits and
sub-intellectuals.

Frankly, I think that the whole audio-journalism business
ought to cash in their chips and then start all over again,
with rational behavior set up as a paradigm.

Sure, things would start off slow, given that the freakos
would not subscribe to rational literature. However, over a
period of time the new paradigm might actually start to
attract all of those intelligent types who have over the
years dumped audio in favor of computers and other more
technically exciting and demanding technologies. Guys like
you have helped to drive off the smart people (admittedly,
many also left because computers are more of challenge than
audio) and what we have left over are goofballs.

Frankly, I have no use for goofballs, which is one reason
that I refuse to associate with most audiophiles.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 20th 05, 11:04 PM

wrote:
>
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > wrote:
> >> >Someone wrote
> >> > Let's kick a little Lyin' Limey butt.
> >>
> >> If I'm not mistaken, John Atkinson is an American.
> >
> > These days, yes Norm. I became a US citizen in August '03.
> >
> > John Atkinson
> > Editor, Stereophile
>
> Welcome! We're glad to have you--at least I am. :-)

Yeah, even I am.

Now if only he and his buddies would only help to set up a
really serious and exacting (and proctored by an outsider
with impeccable credentials) DBT series to prove or disprove
their points.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson

February 20th 05, 11:53 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> John Atkinson wrote:
> > As someone who has faked your published test results, Mr.
> > Ferstler, and copied someone else's text to claim it was your
> > own, you might wish to reflect on the propriety of you criticizing
> > a colleague.
>
> Cheap shot, John...

Not at all, Mr. Ferstler, Here you are accusing me and my writers
at best of being fools and at worst of being frauds, yet the only
documented case of an audio writer faking his test results was _you_,
in the Sensible Sound. And the only documented case of an audio
writer presenting someone else's work as his own was again you.
In both cases you blustered and bitched before being forced to
correct your dishonesty.

>...illustrating a clever "change the subject" tactic.

Not at all. If ayone is going to be tarred with the stigma of being
dishonest, it is you, Mr. Ferstler, particularly as you also appear
to be holding on to review samples without having paid for them.

> In any case, I certainly did not hear the kind of differences that
> some of your reviewers claim to hear when they compare stuff.

How does being deaf excuse your lamentable lapses of ethics, Mr.
Ferstler? You appear to be no better in this respect than that
other skeptic, Peter Aczel. Both of you behave in blatantly
dishonest fashion whiel claiming the moral high ground. Didn't
someone wise once say something about "motes in eyes." Ask
Arny Krueger what it means.

> > yet again, I should point out that someone who uses
> > almost exclusively sighted tests in his own reviewing stands
> > on shakey philosophical ground when he a) criticizes such
> > tests as used by others and b) demands those others use DBTs.
>
> Well, we DO need to point out that when I do sighted
> comparisons of wires or amps (which I am going to try to
> avoid doing in print in the future, because it is mostly
> pointless) I DO NOT wax poetic about hearing differences.

Do you even grasp logic and philosophy, Mr. Ferstler? Getting results
that fulfill your expectations neither validates your methodology
nor does it shield you from your own criticisms. If _you_ use
sighted listening, Mr. Fesrtler, then you have no justification
for criticizing others for doing likewise. Period.

> > As was pointed out to you by Dr. John Feng and others, getting
> > the results you feel to be correct, Mr. Ferstler, does not
> > validate your methodology.
>
> I think that there is a huge difference between doing
> sighted comparisons (level matched, needless to say) and not
> hearing differences and doing perhaps non-level matched
> comparisons and proclaiming to the readers that profound
> audible differences were detected.

Yeah, right Mr. Ferstler. You _work_ that strawman.

> Frankly, much as I admire Arny as a potential debater and
> debunker, I would prefer that if you were going to debate
> somebody about the inexactness of the DBT protocol that
> somebody would be Floyd Toole, Sean Olive, John Eargle, or
> Stan Lip****z.

Interestingly, I am visiting Floyd and Sean next month. I'll
ask them what they think about audio writers who fake their test
date, Mr. Ferstler. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 12:07 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> > > As someone who has faked your published test results, Mr.
> > > Ferstler, and copied someone else's text to claim it was your
> > > own, you might wish to reflect on the propriety of you criticizing
> > > a colleague.
> >
> > Cheap shot, John...

> Not at all, Mr. Ferstler, Here you are accusing me and my writers
> at best of being fools and at worst of being frauds, yet the only
> documented case of an audio writer faking his test results was _you_,
> in the Sensible Sound.

Give me a break. I wrote a follow-up column explaining my
statistical inadequacies. I also urged my readers to do
their own DBT work. Do your reviewers suggest such
approaches to your readers?

> And the only documented case of an audio
> writer presenting someone else's work as his own was again you.
> In both cases you blustered and bitched before being forced to
> correct your dishonesty.

Give me a break. I downloaded a web-site blurb and edited it
to fit the book's style. I was nearing the end of a project
that involved writing and editing hundreds of articles for
the Encyclopedia, and I was pressed for time. You know all
about deadlines, John. In any case, the published material
was re-written considerably.

Funny that you consider perceived plagiarism as being a
crime worse than leading readers astray.

> >...illustrating a clever "change the subject" tactic.

> Not at all. If ayone is going to be tarred with the stigma of being
> dishonest, it is you, Mr. Ferstler, particularly as you also appear
> to be holding on to review samples without having paid for them.

Hey, John, at least I do not sell my readers a bill of goods
and con them into spending big on overkill or not-any-better
products. Of course, most of your subscribers are jerks, and
so perhaps they like being buffaloed. I am sure that is your
take on the issue, too.

> > In any case, I certainly did not hear the kind of differences that
> > some of your reviewers claim to hear when they compare stuff.

> How does being deaf excuse your lamentable lapses of ethics, Mr.
> Ferstler?

Give me a break. Heck, if my readers think that my hearing
caused me to come to bogus conclusions they should do the
DBT work themselves and discover the real truth: that your
team is fooling people in order to keep them renewing
subscriptions.

> You appear to be no better in this respect than that
> other skeptic, Peter Aczel. Both of you behave in blatantly
> dishonest fashion whiel claiming the moral high ground. Didn't
> someone wise once say something about "motes in eyes." Ask
> Arny Krueger what it means.

Give me a break. One thing that I do NOT do is con my
readers into spending on overkill products.

> > > yet again, I should point out that someone who uses
> > > almost exclusively sighted tests in his own reviewing stands
> > > on shakey philosophical ground when he a) criticizes such
> > > tests as used by others and b) demands those others use DBTs.

> > Well, we DO need to point out that when I do sighted
> > comparisons of wires or amps (which I am going to try to
> > avoid doing in print in the future, because it is mostly
> > pointless) I DO NOT wax poetic about hearing differences.

> Do you even grasp logic and philosophy, Mr. Ferstler? Getting results
> that fulfill your expectations neither validates your methodology
> nor does it shield you from your own criticisms.

Hey, I could not hear differences. At least my readers are
not being talked into spending big for outrageously
overpriced products.

> If _you_ use
> sighted listening, Mr. Fesrtler, then you have no justification
> for criticizing others for doing likewise. Period.

Well, I did my comparing of amps and wires and admitted that
they sounded the same. Your "team," on the other hand, will
review similar products and wax poetic about the supposed
differences. Some of your readers then go out and spend food
money on the stuff.

> > > As was pointed out to you by Dr. John Feng and others, getting
> > > the results you feel to be correct, Mr. Ferstler, does not
> > > validate your methodology.

> > I think that there is a huge difference between doing
> > sighted comparisons (level matched, needless to say) and not
> > hearing differences and doing perhaps non-level matched
> > comparisons and proclaiming to the readers that profound
> > audible differences were detected.

> Yeah, right Mr. Ferstler. You _work_ that strawman.

> > Frankly, much as I admire Arny as a potential debater and
> > debunker, I would prefer that if you were going to debate
> > somebody about the inexactness of the DBT protocol that
> > somebody would be Floyd Toole, Sean Olive, John Eargle, or
> > Stan Lip****z.

> Interestingly, I am visiting Floyd and Sean next month. I'll
> ask them what they think about audio writers who fake their test
> date [sic], Mr. Ferstler. :-)

Ask them about DBT comparisons, too, you magazine salesman.
I would be astounded if those two gentlemen really respected
you. They do realize that you have the power to make or
break certain products, and so they will defer to you for
pragmatic reasons.

However, if you bring up the topic of Ferstler, make sure
you ask them about my other writings.

Howard Ferstler

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 02:44 AM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message

> Give me a break. Your team could at least set up an initial
> DBT series, carefully level matched and proctored by a
> prestigious outsider, to get a decent idea about just how
> audible differences might be between a group of amps or
> group of wires. (This would best be done by comparing cheap
> stuff to expensive stuff, to better dramatize the resulting
> psychological impact.) Once that was done, I think that your
> "reviewers" might settle down a bit when they compare
> sighted down the line and thought they heard profound
> differences.

IMO, this would be a commercially suicidal thing for Stereopile or TAS for
example, to do. They raise their reader's interest with elaborate fairy
tales about people who hear differences that it is now known can reasonbly
be expected to disappear when bias is controlled in the listening tests.

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 02:47 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com

> Yes,one superiority of transformer coupled tube amplifiers is they
> overdrive in a perception palatable and non-speaker-destroying
> manner.

Not really.

>Since amplifying music with realistic dynamic range makes
> occasionally overdriving the amplifier almost inevitable, (unless you
> have 10 kW of amplifier power, and if you did you would have many
> other problems...) tube amplifiers represent a case of cost-effective,
> simple management of conflicting parameters.

Tubed audio amplifiers only make sense as audible EFX generators.

> By accepting the necessity for occasionally replacing and rebiasing
> power tubes, we accept a "system weak link" that is manageable and
> relatively convenient. As opposed to replacing drivers, or sets of
> soldered-in semiconductors.

I have to admit that its been so long since I had a power amp in use that
required replacement of any transistors except after one or more decades of
use, that I have no distinct memory of such a thing ever happening.

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 03:16 AM

>Since amplifying music with realistic dynamic range makes
> occasionally overdriving the amplifier almost inevitable, (unless you

> have 10 kW of amplifier power, and if you did you would have many
> other problems...) tube amplifiers represent a case of
cost-effective,
> simple management of conflicting parameters.

>Tubed audio amplifiers only make sense as audible EFX generators.

If only all those square-wave cooked voice coils could talk....they'd
call bull****. A good tubed amp does the same things a good solid state
one does, but its failure and overdrive modes tend to be more benign.
You could design most of its virtues in a solid state amp, but weight
and build cost and thermal dissipation will be just as bad. It will
probably cost more to build in fact. Of course if you love tough-dog
troubleshooting challenges solid state amps can sure generate them.
They can occasionally frustrate you into shotgunning
them....occasionally literally but more often to stripping them to a
chasssis and power xfmr and starting fresh. And think of the delightful
hours you can spend matching P and N devices with a curve tracer. I
suppose solid state is ultimately more fun, since Nelson Pass seems
like a genuinely bright guy, as do several other solid state
designers...but tubes are just easier to get going.

dave weil

February 21st 05, 07:15 AM

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 19:07:27 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> wrote:

>> And the only documented case of an audio
>> writer presenting someone else's work as his own was again you.
>> In both cases you blustered and bitched before being forced to
>> correct your dishonesty.
>
>Give me a break. I downloaded a web-site blurb and edited it
>to fit the book's style. I was nearing the end of a project
>that involved writing and editing hundreds of articles for
>the Encyclopedia, and I was pressed for time. You know all
>about deadlines, John. In any case, the published material
>was re-written considerably.

I have to jump in here.

The published material was NOT re-written considerably. 2/3rd of it
was an almost word-for-word copy from the original.

>Funny that you consider perceived plagiarism as being a
>crime worse than leading readers astray.

Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.

Lionel

February 21st 05, 09:24 AM

dave weil a écrit :

> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.

What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 11:13 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message

> dave weil a écrit :
>
>> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>
> What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?

That's easy. Not getting published.

Let's review the published works of David Weil:

<end of post>

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 11:14 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com
>> Since amplifying music with realistic dynamic range makes
>> occasionally overdriving the amplifier almost inevitable, (unless you
>
>> have 10 kW of amplifier power, and if you did you would have many
>> other problems...) tube amplifiers represent a case of
> cost-effective,
>> simple management of conflicting parameters.
>
>> Tubed audio amplifiers only make sense as audible EFX generators.
>
> If only all those square-wave cooked voice coils could talk....they'd
> call bull****.

Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice square
waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.

dave weil

February 21st 05, 01:52 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:24:05 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>
>> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>
>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?

Wello, that was predictable.

I love that you live just to reply to every one of my posts.

dave weil

February 21st 05, 01:53 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:13:14 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Lionel" > wrote in message

>> dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>
>> What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>
>That's easy. Not getting published.
>
>Let's review the published works of David Weil:

I'm as published as you are.

Tom

February 21st 05, 02:14 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote
>
> Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice
> square waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.

Were you ignorant when you accused me of calling your wife
"Kroobitch" three times or were you lying? Which was it, Arny?

Lionel

February 21st 05, 02:36 PM

dave weil a écrit :
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:24:05 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.

Dave Weil life achievement :
one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
introduction text of a company from its website.
LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
his the RAO hero.

>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>
>
> Wello, that was predictable.

Because you are a dirty stinky **** Weil, a vain and
conceited stinky little ****...

> I love that you live just to reply to every one of my posts.

I am astonished that a third class waiter who has exhibited
his familial tragedies *without* any *shame* on an *audio*
NG for attention purposes *only* arrogate to himself the
right to give lessons to a guy who has dedicated his life to
audio.
You are a ****, a coward Dave Weil.

The worse crime for a writer, you little *******, is to sell
his family proudness to make money or *worst* to get
attention only.

I have a french editor for you Dave :
http://www.harlequin.fr/livres.php?src=collections

I am sure that they will love the story of the soldier who
is obliged to return in his country while his desperate girl
friend have only one solution : the abortion of the fruit of
their love... :-D
If you can also romanticize and detail the suicide of your
father and the cancer of your mother I am sure you will have
a lot of success.

Lionel

February 21st 05, 02:52 PM

dave weil a écrit :
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:13:14 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>"Lionel" > wrote in message

>>
>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>
>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>
>>That's easy. Not getting published.
>>
>>Let's review the published works of David Weil:

Dave Weil is an envious sack of ****, he is so limited and
inibhited by is inferiority complex.

Do you remember the grotesque Jupiter Audio speaker review ?
LOL, *nobody* has never read him except me and Bob Morein
because it was full of material to make and ass of him and
Trotsky.
Once with his usual petty vanity he has proudly given us a
link pointing to a review of an Elvis costello concert that
he has written... The most funny is that the guy at the
publication has forgotten Weil's name so the signature was
wrong... :-D
For the rest it was of the same quality than the children
hand-ball matches reviews that I use to write once or twice
a month in my local newspaper...

> I'm as published as you are.

Dave Weil will soon publish romans about his numerous
familial tragedies(that he has already exhibited on this
*audio* NG). I am sure that such litterature would interest
the basic, bored US housewifes. :-)

Lionel

February 21st 05, 02:55 PM

Tom a écrit :
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>
>>Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice
>>square waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.
>
>
>
> Were you ignorant when you accused me of calling your wife
> "Kroobitch" three times or were you lying? Which was it, Arny?

As you seem to be a proud and courageous guy can you confirm
us solemnly that you never participated to the pedophile
cabale against Arnold Krueger ?

dave weil

February 21st 05, 03:13 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:36:41 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:24:05 +0100, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>
>
>Dave Weil life achievement :
>one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
>class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
>introduction text of a company from its website.
>LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
>his the RAO hero.

Well, it DID keep Mr. Ferstler from a possible copyright infringment
suit since he dropped the offending material. He SHOULD thank me for
helping him out.

>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>
>>
>> Wello, that was predictable.
>
>Because you are a dirty stinky **** Weil, a vain and
>conceited stinky little ****...

<s******>

>> I love that you live just to reply to every one of my posts.
>
>I am astonished that a third class waiter who has exhibited
>his familial tragedies *without* any *shame* on an *audio*
>NG for attention purposes *only* arrogate to himself the
>right to give lessons to a guy who has dedicated his life to
>audio.
>You are a ****, a coward Dave Weil.

<s******>

It's telling that a "professional writer" has to be given a lesson in
ethics and legalities by a waiter.

>The worse crime for a writer, you little *******, is to sell
>his family proudness to make money or *worst* to get
>attention only.

Liar. Plagiarism is the worst crime that a writer can commit. The
right of intellectual protection is at the heart of the job.

>I have a french editor for you Dave :
>http://www.harlequin.fr/livres.php?src=collections
>
>I am sure that they will love the story of the soldier who
>is obliged to return in his country while his desperate girl
>friend have only one solution : the abortion of the fruit of
>their love... :-D
>If you can also romanticize and detail the suicide of your
>father and the cancer of your mother I am sure you will have
>a lot of success.

The fact that you make light of peoples' personal tragedy shows what
kind of person you are.

I love how you live to respond to my posts...

dave weil

February 21st 05, 03:14 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:52:25 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:13:14 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Lionel" > wrote in message

>>>
>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>>
>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>
>>>That's easy. Not getting published.
>>>
>>>Let's review the published works of David Weil:
>
>Dave Weil is an envious sack of ****, he is so limited and
>inibhited by is inferiority complex.

<s******>

>Do you remember the grotesque Jupiter Audio speaker review ?
>LOL, *nobody* has never read him except me and Bob Morein
>because it was full of material to make and ass of him and
>Trotsky.
>Once with his usual petty vanity he has proudly given us a
>link pointing to a review of an Elvis costello concert that
>he has written... The most funny is that the guy at the
>publication has forgotten Weil's name so the signature was
>wrong... :-D
>For the rest it was of the same quality than the children
>hand-ball matches reviews that I use to write once or twice
>a month in my local newspaper...

<s******>

>> I'm as published as you are.
>
>Dave Weil will soon publish romans about his numerous
>familial tragedies(that he has already exhibited on this
>*audio* NG). I am sure that such litterature would interest
>the basic, bored US housewifes. :-)

Look to your own house.

dave weil

February 21st 05, 03:15 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:55:31 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>Tom a écrit :
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>>
>>>Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice
>>>square waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.
>>
>>
>>
>> Were you ignorant when you accused me of calling your wife
>> "Kroobitch" three times or were you lying? Which was it, Arny?
>
>As you seem to be a proud and courageous guy can you confirm
>us solemnly that you never participated to the pedophile
>cabale against Arnold Krueger ?

Who cares? You obviously think that anything is OK when fighting an
enemy.

Lionel

February 21st 05, 03:20 PM

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:36:41 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:24:05 +0100, Lionel >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>
>>
>>Dave Weil life achievement :
>>one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
>>class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
>>introduction text of a company from its website.
>>LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
>>his the RAO hero.
>
> Well, it DID keep Mr. Ferstler from a possible copyright infringment
> suit since he dropped the offending material. He SHOULD thank me for
> helping him out.
>
>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Wello, that was predictable.
>>
>>Because you are a dirty stinky **** Weil, a vain and
>>conceited stinky little ****...
>
> <s******>

Thank you for confirming that you are a little coward stinky ****.

>>> I love that you live just to reply to every one of my posts.
>>
>>I am astonished that a third class waiter who has exhibited
>>his familial tragedies *without* any *shame* on an *audio*
>>NG for attention purposes *only* arrogate to himself the
>>right to give lessons to a guy who has dedicated his life to
>>audio.
>>You are a ****, a coward Dave Weil.
>
> <s******>
>
> It's telling that a "professional writer" has to be given a lesson in
> ethics and legalities by a waiter.

Thank you for confirming us that your inferiority complex make you suffer so
much. LOL !!!

>>The worse crime for a writer, you little *******, is to sell
>>his family proudness to make money or *worst* to get
>>attention only.
>
> Liar. Plagiarism is the worst crime that a writer can commit. The
> right of intellectual protection is at the heart of the job.

No the worst is to publish lies knowing that they are lies for money purpose
or for vanity only.

>>I have a french editor for you Dave :
>>http://www.harlequin.fr/livres.php?src=collections
>>
>>I am sure that they will love the story of the soldier who
>>is obliged to return in his country while his desperate girl
>>friend have only one solution : the abortion of the fruit of
>>their love... :-D
>>If you can also romanticize and detail the suicide of your
>>father and the cancer of your mother I am sure you will have
>>a lot of success.
>
> The fact that you make light of peoples' personal tragedy shows what
> kind of person you are.

How can I be informed of this *personal* tragedies if without shame you
haven't made a public matter of them ? Eh Dave ?

> I love how you live to respond to my posts...

Because you are a masochist. What's new ?

Lionel

February 21st 05, 03:23 PM

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:55:31 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>>Tom a écrit :
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>>>
>>>>Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice
>>>>square waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Were you ignorant when you accused me of calling your wife
>>> "Kroobitch" three times or were you lying? Which was it, Arny?
>>
>>As you seem to be a proud and courageous guy can you confirm
>>us solemnly that you never participated to the pedophile
>>cabale against Arnold Krueger ?
>
> Who cares? You obviously think that anything is OK when fighting an
> enemy.

You are not an enemy Dave Weil, you are just an astonishing little crybaby
who love to bring the attention on him and who is ready to all outrage for
this even make a public matter of his familial tragedies.

<s******> :-D

So what happened after you girlfriend's abortion ?

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 03:31 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> >> Atkinson should know me by now. How can I rip him off?
>
> > Are you really this stupid?
>
> I'm not so stupid that I file vanity lawsuits in California Superior
Court
> like this guy who posts as Scott Wheeler, and make a laughingstock
out of
> myself.

You have been the laughing stock of RAO for years. You are too stupid
to answer a simple question. Too bad you won't show up for the debate.
this inability to answer simple questions is something that many of us
would enjoy seeing in the flesh. I'm sure it is one of the many reasons
many people including your pal Ferstler are dreading this debate.

>
> > You can rip Stereophile off by going to
> > New York on Stereophile's dime and not participating in the debate.
>
> I could jump off the Ambassador Bridge, or even just the freeway
bridge down
> the road a couple of miles.

I have no doubt that showing up to the debate would be the same thing
in your terrified little mind as jumping off your local bridge. Too bad
you didn't understand the fact that the above statement was an answer
to *your* question. A question anyone with a brain would never need to
ask.

>
> > DUH! I agree with you though that Atkinson should know you by now
and
> > see this coming from a mile away.
>
> Well Scott, it appears that not only do you have this persistent
delusion
> that you are smarter than I am, but you think you are smarter than
Atkinson.

Yeah, I do believe I am smarter than you. You obviously believe it too.
Your fear of taking IQ tests at our local Mensas and comparing results
is pretty strong evidence of that fact. Of course if you think you are
smarter than me we can always take the tests. Hell, if you are
confident we can always consider a wager as to who will score higher.
Time for you to make some lame excuse or some unrelated personal attack
to avoid the challenge. It will be good practice for excusing yourself
from the debate.

> Frankly Scott, I suspect that you think that you are extraordinarily
smart,
> but there's this little problem with your zillions of really stupid
posts to
> Usenet.

The problem exists in your imagination. Yet another reason you won't
show up for the debate. The debate would happen in the real world. A
world where you have no respect or credibility. A world where you
cannot just proclaim victory when everyone is laughing at you. Arny,
most of us know why you live life on Usenet. It suits you.

> On the scale of Usenet Audio Idiots Scott, you're right up there
> with Middius, Dormer, Phillips and Sackman.

A group of guys that are far smarter than you. OTOH you seem to be
right down there with Ferstler. But at lest he is published *and* has a
drill press.

Scott Wheeler

John Atkinson

February 21st 05, 03:35 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote in > in
message >
>John Atkinson wrote:
>>Howard Ferstler wrote:
>>>John Atkinson wrote:
>>>>As someone who has faked your published test results, Mr.
>>>>Ferstler, and copied someone else's text to claim it was
>>>>your own, you might wish to reflect on the propriety of you
>>>> criticizing a colleague.
>>>
>>>Cheap shot, John...
>>
>>Not at all, Mr. Ferstler. Here you are accusing me and my writers
>>at best of being fools and at worst of being frauds, yet the only
>>documented case of an audio writer faking his test results was
>>_you_, in the Sensible Sound.
>
>Give me a break.

Why? You are insistent that no slack be allowed your fellow
reviewers and writers for failing to live up to a standard that
you yourself also fail.

>I wrote a follow-up column explaining my statistical inadequacies.

After much argument on your part that your work did not have such
inadequacies. And even then, in the followup column you still
denied the statistical significance of your own results (as you are
_still_ doing in another current thread). Your behavior illustrates
about as convincing a case for the power of preconceptions and
the expectation effect that I have witnessed.

>I also urged my readers to do their own DBT work. Do your reviewers
>suggest such approaches to your readers?

My reviewers urge their readers to listen for themselves, Mr.
Ferstler. And again, why do you insist on others doing "DBT
work" when the vast majority of your published reviews involve
sighted listening _only_.

>>And the only documented case of an audio writer presenting someone
>>else's work as his own was again you. In both cases you blustered
>>and bitched before being forced to correct your dishonesty.
>
>Give me a break.

Again why? This is an umambiguous example of dishonest behavior on
the part of someone who claims the status of a published writer.

>I downloaded a web-site blurb and edited it to fit the book's style.

The text that you posted on this newsgroup as an example of "your"
work was to a signficant extent word-for-word identical to the
text on the website. How is that an example of you "editing it to
fit the book's style," Mr. Ferstler?

>I was nearing the end of a project that involved writing and editing
>hundreds of articles for the Encyclopedia, and I was pressed for time.

I am sure that every petty crook can come up with reasons for their
dishonest behavior, Mr. Ferstler. You were "pressed for time," so
that made it okay to present someone's else's text as your own?
Give _me_ a break, Mr. Ferstler! It was plagiarism pure and simple.
You were caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

> You know all about deadlines, John.

Of course. And even though I write 20% of Stereophile's content,
I haven't resorted to plagiarism, Mr. Ferstler, or to any other
unethical behavior, for that matter.

>In any case, the published material was re-written considerably.

Not having read the published encyclopedia, I will have to take
your word on that, Mr. Ferstler. Not that that appears to be worth
very much. And please remember that it was only after much kicking
and screaming on your part that you even agreed to rewrite the
article in question. I wonder how many of the other articles you
"wrote" for the encyclopedia were actually the work of others
that you copied because you were "pressed for time."

>Funny that you consider perceived plagiarism as being a crime
>worse than leading readers astray.

For a published writer, Mr. Ferstler, plagiarism is about as bad as
it gets. The fact that your editors continue to publish you
suggest that either they share your disdain for ethical behavior, or
that they cynically regard you as a cheap means of filling pages.
And whether or not I "lead readers astray" is a matter of opinion.
By contrast:

1) Your presenting the work of others as your own is documented
fact.

2) Your faking your published test data to fit your preconceived
conclusion is documented fact.

3) Despite your very vocal advocacy for reviewers to exclusively
use a blind test regime, you excuse yourelf from that requirement.

And while we are on the subject of your ethical lapses, Mr. Ferstler:

4) Your fabrication of ficitious material in a supposedly factual
published article is also documented fact.

>>If [anyone] is going to be tarred with the stigma of being
>>dishonest, it is you, Mr. Ferstler, particularly as you also appear
>>to be holding on to review samples without having paid for them.
>
>Hey, John, at least I do not sell my readers a bill of goods and
>con them into spending big on overkill or not-any-better products.

"At least..." the thief doesn't deny the charges. And again, Mr.
Ferstler, whether or not I "sell my readers a bill of goods" is
a matter of opinion. Your grossly unethical behavior is a matter
of documented fact, Mr. Ferstler.

>Of course, most of your subscribers are jerks...

Given that the circulations of the magazines to which you contribute
are almost entirely subsets of Stereophile's, Mr. Ferstler, you
are dissing your own readers here. Not something a writer is advised
to do, in my professional opinion.

>Give me a break...your team is fooling people in order to keep
>them renewing subscriptions.
>...
>Give me a break. One thing that I do NOT do is con my
>readers into spending on overkill products.

And how do these claims on your part excuse your own dishonesty,
Mr. Ferstler?

>>>>yet again, I should point out that someone who uses almost
>>>>exclusively sighted tests in his own reviewing stands on
>>>>shakey philosophical ground when he a) criticizes such tests
>>>> as used by others and b) demands those others use DBTs.
>>>
>>>Well, we DO need to point out that when I do sighted
>>>comparisons of wires or amps (which I am going to try to
>>>avoid doing in print in the future, because it is mostly
>>>pointless) I DO NOT wax poetic about hearing differences.
>>
>>Do you even grasp logic and philosophy, Mr. Ferstler? Getting
>>results that fulfill your expectations neither validates your
>>methodology nor does it shield you from your own criticisms.
>
>Hey, I could not hear differences.

That is not what the correct statistical analysis of your DBT
implied, Mr. Ferstler. Everthing else you have written on this
subject is merely you trying to deny that analysis so that the
test results conform to your expectations.

>At least my readers are not being talked into spending big for
>outrageously overpriced products....Some of your readers then go
>out and spend food money on the stuff.

I see that you have not forgotten how to write fiction, Mr.
Ferstler. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 03:45 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
> wrote:
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> > > > wrote in message
> > > ups.com
> > > > Your word is worthless and I expect you to remind us all of
> > > > that fact again with this debate. I also expect you to find
> > > > some kind of bizzarre victory in it just as you have found
> > > > some sort of bizzarre victory in being sued for libel over
> > > > false accusations of pedophilia. I suppose ripping off
> > > > Stereophile for a free trip to New York would be a victory in
> > > > your book.
> > >
> > > Atkinson should know me by now. How can I rip him off?
> >
> > Are you really this stupid? You can rip Stereophile off by going to
> > New York on Stereophile's dime and not participating in the debate.
> > DUH!
>
> If Arny Krueger does something along those lines, Scott, then I
> believe he would become a laughing stock.

That would be a bit redundant now wouldn't it?

> I feel that such an
> outcome will be sufficient incentive for Mr. Krueger to live up to
> his word.

I think you are setting the bar way too high. One would figure that
after Ferstler demonstrated a complete lack of shame over his fraud and
plagiarism you would realize that Krueger, a person with arguably less
integrity and self-awareness, would be completely immune to the shame a
normal person would feel under such circumstances. I think Arny will
bask in the attention he would get on Usenet for being a no show. A
loser like Arny knows deep down inside that attention through
outrageous behavior is the best he will ever do in his quest to feed
his ego. I think such attention would further feed his fantasies. His
fantasies are all he really has. I continue to be surprised how you and
others seem to being ignoring this guy's long history of this very sort
of behavior.

>
> > I agree with you though that Atkinson should know you by now and
> > see this coming from a mile away.
>
> We shall see what happens, Scott.

Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would be
completely out of character for him to show up.

> But I have found that placing a
> degree of trust in people almost always produces positive results.
> Mr. Krueger has given me his word; I shall continue to take that word
> at face value.
>

Good luck.

Scott Wheeler

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 03:52 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> dave weil a écrit :
>
>> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>
> What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?

Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.

----== 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 =----

Lionel

February 21st 05, 03:54 PM

Clyde Slick a écrit :
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>
>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>
>
> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.

Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?

:-D

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 03:55 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Tom a écrit :
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>>
>>>Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice
>>>square waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.
>>
>>
>>
>> Were you ignorant when you accused me of calling your wife
>> "Kroobitch" three times or were you lying? Which was it, Arny?
>
> As you seem to be a proud and courageous guy can you confirm us solemnly
> that you never participated to the pedophile cabale against Arnold Krueger
> ?

The one he started himself.

----== 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

February 21st 05, 04:06 PM

dave weil wrote:
>
> On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 19:07:27 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> > wrote:
>
> >> And the only documented case of an audio
> >> writer presenting someone else's work as his own was again you.
> >> In both cases you blustered and bitched before being forced to
> >> correct your dishonesty.
> >
> >Give me a break. I downloaded a web-site blurb and edited it
> >to fit the book's style. I was nearing the end of a project
> >that involved writing and editing hundreds of articles for
> >the Encyclopedia, and I was pressed for time. You know all
> >about deadlines, John. In any case, the published material
> >was re-written considerably.

> I have to jump in here.

Nice to know you are keeping close tabs. At least sitting at
your computer scoping the commentaries keeps you off of the
street.

> The published material was NOT re-written considerably. 2/3rd of it
> was an almost word-for-word copy from the original.

> >Funny that you consider perceived plagiarism as being a
> >crime worse than leading readers astray.

> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.

If the material was published.

Dave, I am still waiting for you to spring into action and
discredit me elsewhere than RAO, where any loudmouth can
sound like a mainstream operator. Quit playing small time,
Dave, and move into the big leagues.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 04:19 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:

> > Frankly, much as I admire Arny as a potential debater and
> > debunker, I would prefer that if you were going to debate
> > somebody about the inexactness of the DBT protocol that
> > somebody would be Floyd Toole, Sean Olive, John Eargle, or
> > Stan Lip****z.

> Interestingly, I am visiting Floyd and Sean next month. I'll
> ask them what they think about audio writers who fake their test
> date, Mr. Ferstler. :-)

John, I want to make a couple of comments. Normally, I hit
my email every three or four days, but I got a brilliant
idea late last night and so I am taking off from writing
some review articles and posting this message.

First, this "debate" between you and me began with me
pointing out that it would be better for you and some of
your fellow Stereophile "Golden Ears" to participate in a
properly proctored DBT and then published the results than
for you to get involved in a debate with Arny that Dick
Pierce apparently likened to a "****ing contest."

In response, you changed the subject and brought up some of
my so-called past crimes against audio. This is a typical
topic-switching tactic that somebody would engage in when
they were in the process of looking bad. I will leave it at
that, because your approach is beyond contempt.

Second (and this is the main thrust of this message) I think
that it is great that you are visting Floyd and Sean next
month. When you bring up my deficiencies as a reviewer and
commentator, I hope you also bring up my suggestion about
one or both of them proctoring a DBT series for you and your
buddies that hopefully will settle for once and for all
(well, at least for a while, until you and your buddies
dream up some new excuses) the DBT issue as it relates to
upscale amps and wires sounding superior to cheaper
versions.

Indeed, I am formatting an email to Floyd and Sean right now
(yeah, RIGHT NOW), and will suggest to them that they maybe
get with you when you arrive and see if such a mega-series
of comparisons could be put together. Not only could it
involve them and you, but it might also involve Arny, Tom
Nousaine, and a few other brass tackers. Hopefully, if such
a comparison series could be done not only will you and your
buddies publish the results in Stereophile. However, what I
am hoping for is that maybe Floyd or Sean will do an article
about the enterprise that would show up in Sound & Vision.
(The magazine lacks even the minor-grade bite that Stereo
Review had a decade back, but perhaps Ankosko can be
convinced to do something meaningful for a change.)

You may want to discuss the "dishonesty and/or treachery of
Ferstler" when you arrive, but I am hoping that they will
mainly want to discuss the validity of the DBT protocol with
you and arrange to have a super face off.

Howard Ferstler

dave weil

February 21st 05, 05:13 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 16:23:56 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>In >, dave weil wrote :
>
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:55:31 +0100, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Tom a écrit :
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>>>>
>>>>>Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice
>>>>>square waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Were you ignorant when you accused me of calling your wife
>>>> "Kroobitch" three times or were you lying? Which was it, Arny?
>>>
>>>As you seem to be a proud and courageous guy can you confirm
>>>us solemnly that you never participated to the pedophile
>>>cabale against Arnold Krueger ?
>>
>> Who cares? You obviously think that anything is OK when fighting an
>> enemy.
>
>You are not an enemy Dave Weil, you are just an astonishing little crybaby
>who love to bring the attention on him and who is ready to all outrage for
>this even make a public matter of his familial tragedies.
>
><s******> :-D
>
>So what happened after you girlfriend's abortion ?

That's a nice little Pavlov's dog...

dave weil

February 21st 05, 05:30 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:06:06 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> wrote:

>> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>
>If the material was published.

So, an acknowledgment that you did wrong since you pulled the article
from publication. Hopefully, you found the time to rewrite the article
in your own words.

Nice to also see that you finally agree with the premise.

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 05:32 PM

dave weil wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:36:41 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:

> >Dave Weil life achievement :
> >one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
> >class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
> >introduction text of a company from its website.
> >LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
> >his the RAO hero.

> Well, it DID keep Mr. Ferstler from a possible copyright infringment
> suit since he dropped the offending material. He SHOULD thank me for
> helping him out.

Well, Dave, I do indeed thank you. I also went through all
of the other articles that I had struggled with (ones
involving non responses to questionnaires I sent out) and
gave them lookovers. Note that some manufacturers, when I
asked them for info, simply referred me to their web sites.
This often made things even worse, because the web-site data
did not always answer all of the questions that I was
submitting on the forms I sent out. Many were just PR
messages.

> >The worse crime for a writer, you little *******, is to sell
> >his family proudness to make money or *worst* to get
> >attention only.

> Liar. Plagiarism is the worst crime that a writer can commit. The
> right of intellectual protection is at the heart of the job.

Actually, the worst crime a writer can commit is to
knowingly publish wrong material. I wonder just how many
tweako journalists do this when they review amps and wires
and actually bother to do DBT work to see if their fantasies
hold up... and then discover that they do not, but go on to
publish baloney commentaries anyway.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 05:43 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>
>
> > Give me a break. Your team could at least set up an initial
> > DBT series, carefully level matched and proctored by a
> > prestigious outsider, to get a decent idea about just how
> > audible differences might be between a group of amps or
> > group of wires. (This would best be done by comparing cheap
> > stuff to expensive stuff, to better dramatize the resulting
> > psychological impact.) Once that was done, I think that your
> > "reviewers" might settle down a bit when they compare
> > sighted down the line and thought they heard profound
> > differences.
>
> IMO, this would be a commercially suicidal thing for Stereopile or TAS for
> example, to do. They raise their reader's interest with elaborate fairy
> tales about people who hear differences that it is now known can reasonbly
> be expected to disappear when bias is controlled in the listening tests.

Yes, they have created the Monster and if they stop feeding
it the creature will turn and devour them.

To be truthful, if the magazines were not so damned
detrimental to the survival of serious audio the situation
would be positively funny.

Howard Ferstler

Lionel

February 21st 05, 05:57 PM

dave weil a écrit :

> That's a nice little Pavlov's dog...

Plagiarism alert !!!
This one isn't from you idiot.

Lionel

February 21st 05, 06:06 PM

dave weil a écrit :
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:06:06 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> > wrote:
>
>
>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>
>>If the material was published.
>
>

Loser alert

> So, an acknowledgment that you did wrong since you pulled the article
> from publication. Hopefully, you found the time to rewrite the article
> in your own words.
>
> Nice to also see that you finally agree with the premise.

It's interesting to see that Dave Weil who is the most
dogged, the most implacable on this matter...
No doubt it's the revenge of the *failure*.
Dave has never been able to do something right in his life,
even not a child... ;-)

I would not be surprise that his behviour of loser is the
direct cause of the familial tragedy that he loves to
publicly narrate with his habitual stupid complacency.

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 06:28 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote in > in
> message >
> >John Atkinson wrote:
> >>Howard Ferstler wrote:
> >>>John Atkinson wrote:
> >>>>As someone who has faked your published test results, Mr.
> >>>>Ferstler, and copied someone else's text to claim it was
> >>>>your own, you might wish to reflect on the propriety of you
> >>>> criticizing a colleague.

> >>>Cheap shot, John...

> >>Not at all, Mr. Ferstler. Here you are accusing me and my writers
> >>at best of being fools and at worst of being frauds, yet the only
> >>documented case of an audio writer faking his test results was
> >>_you_, in the Sensible Sound.

> >Give me a break.

> Why? You are insistent that no slack be allowed your fellow
> reviewers and writers for failing to live up to a standard that
> you yourself also fail.

John, I do not give false information to my readers that
would cause them to go out and spend serious money on
expensive audio components. You and your fellow writers do
that, however.

> >I wrote a follow-up column explaining my statistical inadequacies.

> After much argument on your part that your work did not have such
> inadequacies. And even then, in the followup column you still
> denied the statistical significance of your own results (as you are
> _still_ doing in another current thread). Your behavior illustrates
> about as convincing a case for the power of preconceptions and
> the expectation effect that I have witnessed.

John, anyone who has ever participated in a proper,
level-matched DBT will have experiences just like what I
encountered. I marveled at how much alike the stuff sounded
(although during level-matched sighted comparisons I had
done in the past I heard the same lack of differences),
because the ABX device made the procedure so cool.

What I have problems with concerning you and your associates
is that nearly all of you have probably participated in some
really good DBT exercises in the past just to get a handle
on what is going on. The problem with your take on this is
that they and you openly deny the validity of the procedure.
Frankly, the ONLY reason I can see for you and them doing
this is to protect your financial turf.

Incidentally, I have no turf to protect myself. I have been
retired for some time now, draw a pension, am about ready to
draw Social Security, have a wife that works, have a
paid-for house and cars (nice 2004/2005 models, yet) and
have enough socked away in stock holdings to have a nice
dividend income. So, unlike you and your associates, who
probably sweat bullets at the thought of the magazine losing
readers, I can happily report my exact findings to my
readers with no fear of losing income or losing work.

Life is sometimes tough, John, but you have built yourself a
monster and now it has you in a headlock.

> >I also urged my readers to do their own DBT work. Do your reviewers
> >suggest such approaches to your readers?

> My reviewers urge their readers to listen for themselves, Mr.
> Ferstler.

DBT style? Heck, they encourage them to compare as they do
(sighted, with no care regarding level matching) and turn
the situation into a sight-driven popularity contest, with
the prize almost always going to the most exotic and/or
upscale products.

> And again, why do you insist on others doing "DBT
> work" when the vast majority of your published reviews involve
> sighted listening _only_.

Because my reviews do not incite my readers into heading
towards a high-end shop to spend the kid's college money on
expensive hardware.

> >>And the only documented case of an audio writer presenting someone
> >>else's work as his own was again you. In both cases you blustered
> >>and bitched before being forced to correct your dishonesty.

> >Give me a break.

> Again why?

Because, John, you have switched the topic away from our
discussion concerning you forgetting about debating Arny and
instead getting involved in a meaningful level-matched DBT
series proctored by someone with integrity, and then
reporting the results in your magazine. This scares the
blazes out of you, and so you change topics and turn the
thread into an attack on my integrity.

> This is an umambiguous example of dishonest behavior on
> the part of someone who claims the status of a published writer.

Gee, John, you are again making plagiarism sound like a
capital offense, even though there is no plagiarized work of
mine in print. It is a bad thing (not done by me, by the
way), but a far, far more serious thing is for a writer to
knowingly publish false data that cons readers into behaving
like idiots.

> >I downloaded a web-site blurb and edited it to fit the book's style.

> The text that you posted on this newsgroup as an example of "your"
> work was to a signficant extent word-for-word identical to the
> text on the website. How is that an example of you "editing it to
> fit the book's style," Mr. Ferstler?

The material was never published, John. However, please note
that the comment as it was edited by me did not undercut the
integrity of the company. Like Weil, I'll bet you poured
over that material with red pen in hand. Why? Well, John, it
looks like I have become a serious threat to your magazine's
bottom line and you have to do what is necessary to save the
day.

> >I was nearing the end of a project that involved writing and editing
> >hundreds of articles for the Encyclopedia, and I was pressed for time.

> I am sure that every petty crook can come up with reasons for their
> dishonest behavior, Mr. Ferstler. You were "pressed for time," so
> that made it okay to present someone's else's text as your own?
> Give _me_ a break, Mr. Ferstler! It was plagiarism pure and simple.
> You were caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

Look who's talking. John, you and your writers get your
hands caught in cookie jars every time time you publish a
glowing review of an exotic amp, exotic CD player, or exotic
wires.

Incidentally, John, read my other reply to your message.
(One that I should have thought of immediately after reading
your comments about visiting Toole and Olive.) When you get
out to California to visit Toole and Olive and bring up the
topic of the nasty and deceitful Howard Ferstler, be sure to
ask them if they will proctor a DBT series that you and your
buddies would like to take part in. Heck, ask them about
their take on DBT procedures and then give them your
counterpoint take. See how they deal with that. Well, they
already know what you are, but they are not about to cross a
magazine editor. No smart company employee will do that sort
of thing.

> > You know all about deadlines, John.

> Of course. And even though I write 20% of Stereophile's content,
> I haven't resorted to plagiarism, Mr. Ferstler, or to any other
> unethical behavior, for that matter.

GIVE ME A BREAK. This is like someone saying that they never
lie, with the statement itself being the proof. John, your
magazine is full of unethical behavior. It built its
readership by means of unethical behavior. Well, perhaps
there is a bit of delusional behavior also mixed in
somewhere.

> >In any case, the published material was re-written considerably.

> Not having read the published encyclopedia, I will have to take
> your word on that, Mr. Ferstler. Not that that appears to be worth
> very much. And please remember that it was only after much kicking
> and screaming on your part that you even agreed to rewrite the
> article in question. I wonder how many of the other articles you
> "wrote" for the encyclopedia were actually the work of others
> that you copied because you were "pressed for time."

Pick up a copy and do some research. Incidentally, the two
big volumes total 1,200 pages, so I hope you have been
pumping iron lately. Lots of articles on audio notables by
me, as well as company history and technical articles. Did I
mention that I am listed on the title page as technical
editor?

> >Funny that you consider perceived plagiarism as being a crime
> >worse than leading readers astray.

> For a published writer, Mr. Ferstler, plagiarism is about as bad as
> it gets.

No, John, willingly deceiving readers is about as bad as it
gets, and your magazine's staff does that as a matter of
policy. Well, I hope those writers are intelligent enough to
at least be consciously misleading people and not just
downright deluded and stupid.

> The fact that your editors continue to publish you
> suggest that either they share your disdain for ethical behavior, or
> that they cynically regard you as a cheap means of filling pages.

Or, perhaps they realize that my stuff at least does not con
my readers into mortgaging the farm to purchase overpriced
hardware.

> And whether or not I "lead readers astray" is a matter of opinion.
> By contrast:
>
> 1) Your presenting the work of others as your own is documented
> fact.

Bunk. Find any published material of mine that fits into
that category. On the other hand, every time we read an
article by one of your writers that lauds an amp or set of
wires as being esoterically superior and special, we are
reading a con job.

> 2) Your faking your published test data to fit your preconceived
> conclusion is documented fact.

That I misunderstood statistical analysis does not mean I
was faking things. That was an error, John. On the other
hand, unless some of your writers are jerks, what they have
been saying for years about amps, CD players, and wires is
misrepresentation of facts.

Heck, this is the big question among audio skeptics when it
comes to those who write for Stereophile: are they deceivers
or just jerks?

> 3) Despite your very vocal advocacy for reviewers to exclusively
> use a blind test regime, you excuse yourelf from that requirement.

Because I do not claim to hear any mysterious qualities in
wires and amps. Your people often do, and much of the time
the upshot is a review that tells readers to spend much,
much more to get really good hi-fi sound.

> And while we are on the subject of your ethical lapses, Mr. Ferstler:

> 4) Your fabrication of ficitious material in a supposedly factual
> published article is also documented fact.

What are you talking about? You are starting to repeat
yourself.

> >>If [anyone] is going to be tarred with the stigma of being
> >>dishonest, it is you, Mr. Ferstler, particularly as you also appear
> >>to be holding on to review samples without having paid for them.

> >Hey, John, at least I do not sell my readers a bill of goods and
> >con them into spending big on overkill or not-any-better products.

> "At least..." the thief doesn't deny the charges. And again, Mr.
> Ferstler, whether or not I "sell my readers a bill of goods" is
> a matter of opinion.

John, you know what you should do? During your visit to
California you need to ask Floyd Toole and Sean Olive of
their opinions of the product reviews in your magazine. When
they give those opinions, you should publish them in the
magazine, and also mention them here.

> Your grossly unethical behavior is a matter
> of documented fact, Mr. Ferstler.

Every issue of your magazine is a documented fact when it
comes to illustrating how to con people.

> >Of course, most of your subscribers are jerks...

> Given that the circulations of the magazines to which you contribute
> are almost entirely subsets of Stereophile's, Mr. Ferstler, you
> are dissing your own readers here. Not something a writer is advised
> to do, in my professional opinion.

See my comments above about my financial situation compared
to yours. Unlike you, I do not to kiss the asses of often
gullible readers.

Actually, I feel uncomfortable when I am around most audio
buffs, even those who are ostensibly rational and agree with
me. As for the tweakos, when I am around them I feel
positively creepy.

> >Give me a break...your team is fooling people in order to keep
> >them renewing subscriptions.
> >...
> >Give me a break. One thing that I do NOT do is con my
> >readers into spending on overkill products.

> And how do these claims on your part excuse your own dishonesty,
> Mr. Ferstler?

Because there is no dishonesty, Mr. Atkinson.

> >>Do you even grasp logic and philosophy, Mr. Ferstler? Getting
> >>results that fulfill your expectations neither validates your
> >>methodology nor does it shield you from your own criticisms.

> >Hey, I could not hear differences.

> That is not what the correct statistical analysis of your DBT
> implied, Mr. Ferstler. Everthing else you have written on this
> subject is merely you trying to deny that analysis so that the
> test results conform to your expectations.

John, I could not hear differences, and I do not think you
can hear differences, either. I think you say what you say,
because if you came forth with the real truth you would lose
magazine subscribers.

> >At least my readers are not being talked into spending big for
> >outrageously overpriced products....Some of your readers then go
> >out and spend food money on the stuff.

> I see that you have not forgotten how to write fiction, Mr.
> Ferstler. :-)

John, you are posting a lot lately. It must take up a lot of
your time. Being retired, I have time to spare. However, you
supposedly do not, and the fact of your writing so much on
RAO tells me that you are either desperate to defend your
turf or else there is not much going on at Stereophile
headquarters these days in the way of work.

Probably a bit of both.

Howard Ferstler

dave weil

February 21st 05, 06:29 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:06:55 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:06:06 -0500, Howard Ferstler
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>
>>>If the material was published.
>>
>>
>
>Loser alert

Agreed.

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 06:29 PM

wrote:
>
> John Atkinson wrote:

> > We shall see what happens, Scott.

> Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would be
> completely out of character for him to show up.

Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
and debate the head con artist?

Howard Ferstler

dave weil

February 21st 05, 06:30 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 12:32:08 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:36:41 +0100, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>
>> >Dave Weil life achievement :
>> >one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
>> >class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
>> >introduction text of a company from its website.
>> >LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
>> >his the RAO hero.
>
>> Well, it DID keep Mr. Ferstler from a possible copyright infringment
>> suit since he dropped the offending material. He SHOULD thank me for
>> helping him out.
>
>Well, Dave, I do indeed thank you. I also went through all
>of the other articles that I had struggled with (ones
>involving non responses to questionnaires I sent out) and
>gave them lookovers. Note that some manufacturers, when I
>asked them for info, simply referred me to their web sites.
>This often made things even worse, because the web-site data
>did not always answer all of the questions that I was
>submitting on the forms I sent out. Many were just PR
>messages.

You're welcome, Howard.

Lionel

February 21st 05, 06:30 PM

Howard Ferstler a écrit :
> dave weil wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:36:41 +0100, Lionel >
>>wrote:
>
>
>>>Dave Weil life achievement :
>>>one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
>>>class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
>>>introduction text of a company from its website.
>>>LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
>>>his the RAO hero.
>
>
>
>>Well, it DID keep Mr. Ferstler from a possible copyright infringment
>>suit since he dropped the offending material. He SHOULD thank me for
>>helping him out.
>
>
> Well, Dave, I do indeed thank you. I also went through all
> of the other articles that I had struggled with (ones
> involving non responses to questionnaires I sent out) and
> gave them lookovers. Note that some manufacturers, when I
> asked them for info, simply referred me to their web sites.
> This often made things even worse, because the web-site data
> did not always answer all of the questions that I was
> submitting on the forms I sent out. Many were just PR
> messages.
>
>
>>>The worse crime for a writer, you little *******, is to sell
>>>his family proudness to make money or *worst* to get
>>>attention only.
>
>
>
>>Liar. Plagiarism is the worst crime that a writer can commit. The
>>right of intellectual protection is at the heart of the job.
>
>
> Actually, the worst crime a writer can commit is to
> knowingly publish wrong material.

I fully agree with the above.
Plagiarism isn't glorious but deliberate lies are the plague
of the job.
Dave Weil is a failure except the above "exploit" he has
never been done something positive and creative in his
miserable life.
He is dying of jealousy this explains why he is so
relentless... :-)

To bad you never read his review of Trotsky speakers !
LOL, what a garbage, what a bull**** ! Nobody read these
long and boring part 1 - 2 - 3... and Dave imperturbable was
continuing up to the foreseeable clash.
I'm *sure* now that he was secretly dreaming of futur
contacts with Mr Atkinson.

What a failure !!!

> I wonder just how many
> tweako journalists do this when they review amps and wires
> and actually bother to do DBT work to see if their fantasies
> hold up... and then discover that they do not, but go on to
> publish baloney commentaries anyway.

True. This works like that :

1 - Under the *financial* pressure of the manufacturer the
magazine publish an "advertising review".
2 - The readers purchase the very expensive crappy device.
3 - The magazines editors answer to the opponents that he is
obliged to publish what the readers are waiting for.

Obviously when you have been conned like and idiot you don't
want to read that in your prefered magazine. :-)

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 06:34 PM

dave weil wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:06:06 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> > wrote:
>
> >> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
> >
> >If the material was published.

> So, an acknowledgment that you did wrong since you pulled the article
> from publication.

It was not. I got with the chief editor about the essay and
he said "So what?" I then re-edited it anyway, to make it
more acceptable to guys like you.

> Hopefully, you found the time to rewrite the article
> in your own words.

Hey, Dave, I am retired. I have lots of time.

> Nice to also see that you finally agree with the premise.

Dave, go get a copy of the set (two volumes, 1,200 pages)
and read through it for two reasons: 1) check to see if
there are more Ferstler gaffes and 2) to enjoy the articles
and maybe learn from them. Yes, there are articles in there
written by a number of people, and the majority involve
music and musicians and not the technical aspects of audio
or biographical sketches of audio notables.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 06:37 PM

dave weil wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 12:32:08 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> > wrote:
>
> >dave weil wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:36:41 +0100, Lionel >
> >> wrote:
> >
> >> >Dave Weil life achievement :
> >> >one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
> >> >class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
> >> >introduction text of a company from its website.
> >> >LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
> >> >his the RAO hero.
> >
> >> Well, it DID keep Mr. Ferstler from a possible copyright infringment
> >> suit since he dropped the offending material. He SHOULD thank me for
> >> helping him out.

> >Well, Dave, I do indeed thank you. I also went through all
> >of the other articles that I had struggled with (ones
> >involving non responses to questionnaires I sent out) and
> >gave them lookovers. Note that some manufacturers, when I
> >asked them for info, simply referred me to their web sites.
> >This often made things even worse, because the web-site data
> >did not always answer all of the questions that I was
> >submitting on the forms I sent out. Many were just PR
> >messages.

> You're welcome, Howard.

Trust me on this, Dave, but some of the source material I
had to work with was sketchy as hell, and in some cases I
just gave up and forgot about doing an article at all.
Remember, I wrote over 100,000 original words and then
edited additional articles from the first edition that
totaled at least another 100,000.

Howard Ferstler

dave weil

February 21st 05, 06:48 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:30:54 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>He is dying of jealousy this explains why he is so
>relentless... :-)

Irony alert!

dave weil

February 21st 05, 06:50 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:34:08 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:06:06 -0500, Howard Ferstler
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>> >
>> >If the material was published.
>
>> So, an acknowledgment that you did wrong since you pulled the article
>> from publication.
>
>It was not. I got with the chief editor about the essay and
>he said "So what?" I then re-edited it anyway, to make it
>more acceptable to guys like you.

Implied is the phrase "as written". I'm glad that you were still able
to submit an article on Mr. Walker. And I'm still glad that I was able
to spare you possible legal action.

>> Hopefully, you found the time to rewrite the article
>> in your own words.
>
>Hey, Dave, I am retired. I have lots of time.

Unless there are deadlines involved.

>> Nice to also see that you finally agree with the premise.
>
>Dave, go get a copy of the set (two volumes, 1,200 pages)
>and read through it for two reasons: 1) check to see if
>there are more Ferstler gaffes and 2) to enjoy the articles
>and maybe learn from them. Yes, there are articles in there
>written by a number of people, and the majority involve
>music and musicians and not the technical aspects of audio
>or biographical sketches of audio notables.

No, I don't think I will.

dave weil

February 21st 05, 06:52 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:37:19 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 12:32:08 -0500, Howard Ferstler
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >dave weil wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:36:41 +0100, Lionel >
>> >> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Dave Weil life achievement :
>> >> >one day this litte vain sack of ****, this stinky third
>> >> >class waiter has point out that Mr Ferstler has copied the
>> >> >introduction text of a company from its website.
>> >> >LOL, our stinky little McDonald waiter estimate now that he
>> >> >his the RAO hero.
>> >
>> >> Well, it DID keep Mr. Ferstler from a possible copyright infringment
>> >> suit since he dropped the offending material. He SHOULD thank me for
>> >> helping him out.
>
>> >Well, Dave, I do indeed thank you. I also went through all
>> >of the other articles that I had struggled with (ones
>> >involving non responses to questionnaires I sent out) and
>> >gave them lookovers. Note that some manufacturers, when I
>> >asked them for info, simply referred me to their web sites.
>> >This often made things even worse, because the web-site data
>> >did not always answer all of the questions that I was
>> >submitting on the forms I sent out. Many were just PR
>> >messages.
>
>> You're welcome, Howard.
>
>Trust me on this, Dave, but some of the source material I
>had to work with was sketchy as hell, and in some cases I
>just gave up and forgot about doing an article at all.
>Remember, I wrote over 100,000 original words and then
>edited additional articles from the first edition that
>totaled at least another 100,000.

Well, we know that there were close to a thousand "non-original
words". That's what we KNOW about. However, if you really didn't think
that you had done anything wrong, you wouldn't have re-written the
sketch.

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 06:53 PM

dave weil wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:34:08 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> > wrote:
>
> >dave weil wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:06:06 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
> >> >
> >> >If the material was published.

> >> So, an acknowledgment that you did wrong since you pulled the article
> >> from publication.

> >It was not. I got with the chief editor about the essay and
> >he said "So what?" I then re-edited it anyway, to make it
> >more acceptable to guys like you.

> Implied is the phrase "as written". I'm glad that you were still able
> to submit an article on Mr. Walker.

Remember, there was no article specifically dealing with Mr.
Walker. I simply could not come up with enough biographical
material to work with. The article in question involved a
history of Quad, and of course he was mentioned. However,
that is not a biographical article.

> And I'm still glad that I was able
> to spare you possible legal action.

Given that I lauded the company in the article, it is
doubtful that any legal action would have been taken. The
essay was not that big a deal, Dave, as evidenced by the
comment of my main editor.

> >> Hopefully, you found the time to rewrite the article
> >> in your own words.

> >Hey, Dave, I am retired. I have lots of time.

> Unless there are deadlines involved.

This is one reason I am giving up on books. It is one long
battle as you plead for extra time. Admittedly, my first
four book drafts were complete before sending them off to a
publisher. However, the companies did send back their edited
final drafts that I had to rush to final proof and get back
to them way faster than I would have liked. In some cases,
their editing jobs did not appeal to me and I had to retype
whole sections. As for magazine work, I pretty much call the
shots there. I do not sweat deadlines.

> >> Nice to also see that you finally agree with the premise.

> >Dave, go get a copy of the set (two volumes, 1,200 pages)
> >and read through it for two reasons: 1) check to see if
> >there are more Ferstler gaffes and 2) to enjoy the articles
> >and maybe learn from them. Yes, there are articles in there
> >written by a number of people, and the majority involve
> >music and musicians and not the technical aspects of audio
> >or biographical sketches of audio notables.

> No, I don't think I will.

Well, I did have hope. Try a big library. You never can
tell.

Howard Ferstler

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 06:54 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> wrote:
> >
> > John Atkinson wrote:
>
> > > We shall see what happens, Scott.
>
> > Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would
be
> > completely out of character for him to show up.
>
> Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
> and debate the head con artist?
>
> Howard Ferstler

Too bad there aren't any formal frauds and plagiarists conventions for
you to attend. Maybe it's because most frauds and plagiarists don't
share your painful lack of self-awareness. Get a life.

Scott Wheeler

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 06:59 PM

dave weil wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:37:19 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> > wrote:

> >> >Well, Dave, I do indeed thank you. I also went through all
> >> >of the other articles that I had struggled with (ones
> >> >involving non responses to questionnaires I sent out) and
> >> >gave them lookovers. Note that some manufacturers, when I
> >> >asked them for info, simply referred me to their web sites.
> >> >This often made things even worse, because the web-site data
> >> >did not always answer all of the questions that I was
> >> >submitting on the forms I sent out. Many were just PR
> >> >messages.

> >> You're welcome, Howard.

> >Trust me on this, Dave, but some of the source material I
> >had to work with was sketchy as hell, and in some cases I
> >just gave up and forgot about doing an article at all.
> >Remember, I wrote over 100,000 original words and then
> >edited additional articles from the first edition that
> >totaled at least another 100,000.

> Well, we know that there were close to a thousand "non-original
> words". That's what we KNOW about. However, if you really didn't think
> that you had done anything wrong, you wouldn't have re-written the
> sketch.

I did not think it was wrong, but I did realize that 1)
their copy was not that well written in the first place and
my modified version was not modified enough and 2) the more
original an article is, the better.

Actually, when you consider the volume of work I did on the
book articles over a nine-month period (remember, I also had
to proof, edit, and update all of the articles that were
being carried over from the 900 page first edition), the
result was pretty good.

Incidentally, did you receive the attached drafts I
previously sent to you in an email? You know, the speaker
review drafts? I sent them to give you an idea of my
reviewing style, since you apparently have not read many of
my TSS product reviews.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 07:01 PM

wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:

> > Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
> > and debate the head con artist?

> Too bad there aren't any formal frauds and plagiarists conventions for
> you to attend. Maybe it's because most frauds and plagiarists don't
> share your painful lack of self-awareness. Get a life.

You seem so sure of this plagiarism thing. Perhaps you
should contact the authorities, and go beyond just mouthing
off on RAO. Think of the awards you would receive from the
other lunatics if you could clobber Ferstler out in the real
world.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 21st 05, 07:06 PM

wrote:
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > > wrote in message

> You have been the laughing stock of RAO for years. You are too stupid
> to answer a simple question. Too bad you won't show up for the debate.
> this inability to answer simple questions is something that many of us
> would enjoy seeing in the flesh. I'm sure it is one of the many reasons
> many people including your pal Ferstler are dreading this debate.

Aside from the fact that the audience will be made up mostly
of loud-hooting, semi-intelligent clowns like you, I think
that Arny will massacre Atkinson.

Why? Because Arny is correct about the DBT protocol and John
is not correct.

> The problem exists in your imagination. Yet another reason you won't
> show up for the debate. The debate would happen in the real world. A
> world where you have no respect or credibility. A world where you
> cannot just proclaim victory when everyone is laughing at you. Arny,
> most of us know why you live life on Usenet. It suits you.

"Live life on Usenet?" Look who's talking

Howard Ferstler

Lionel

February 21st 05, 07:13 PM

In >, dave weil wrote :

> Irony alert!

Agreed.

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 07:22 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> wrote:
> >
> > Howard Ferstler wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
> > > and debate the head con artist?
>
> > Too bad there aren't any formal frauds and plagiarists conventions
for
> > you to attend. Maybe it's because most frauds and plagiarists don't
> > share your painful lack of self-awareness. Get a life.
>
> You seem so sure of this plagiarism thing.

Yep.

Perhaps you
> should contact the authorities, and go beyond just mouthing
> off on RAO.

Why? You were already busted by your own publishers on it and had to
rewrite your profile on Peter Walker as a result. The fact that you
feel no shame over this simply speaks to your complete lack of
dignitiy. That is your problem not mine.

> Think of the awards you would receive from the
> other lunatics if you could clobber Ferstler out in the real
> world.

You've been clobbered dude. No one in audio cares that much. You are a
nobody. Get a life. Gotta laugh a bit at the idea of recieving an award
for clobbering you. I didn't know they had awards for shooting fish in
a barrel.

Scott Wheeler

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 07:28 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> wrote:
> >
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> > > > wrote in message
>
> > You have been the laughing stock of RAO for years. You are too
stupid
> > to answer a simple question. Too bad you won't show up for the
debate.
> > this inability to answer simple questions is something that many of
us
> > would enjoy seeing in the flesh. I'm sure it is one of the many
reasons
> > many people including your pal Ferstler are dreading this debate.
>
> Aside from the fact that the audience will be made up mostly
> of loud-hooting, semi-intelligent clowns like you, I think
> that Arny will massacre Atkinson.

You believe a lot of stupid things.

>
> Why?

Because you are an idiot with no self-awareness.

Because Arny is correct about the DBT protocol and John
> is not correct.

How on earth would someone who publishes fraudulant DBTs in a magazine
know what is correct and incorrect about the subject of DBTs?

>
> > The problem exists in your imagination. Yet another reason you
won't
> > show up for the debate. The debate would happen in the real world.
A
> > world where you have no respect or credibility. A world where you
> > cannot just proclaim victory when everyone is laughing at you.
Arny,
> > most of us know why you live life on Usenet. It suits you.
>
> "Live life on Usenet?" Look who's talking

You and Arny for the most part. Losers like the two of you live for
Usenet where you think you have an audience. But hey, we used to have
traveling freak shows so guys like you could have an audience. Get a
life dude.

Scott Wheeler

February 21st 05, 07:29 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> >Since amplifying music with realistic dynamic range makes
>> occasionally overdriving the amplifier almost inevitable, (unless you
>
>> have 10 kW of amplifier power, and if you did you would have many
>> other problems...) tube amplifiers represent a case of
> cost-effective,
>> simple management of conflicting parameters.
>
>>Tubed audio amplifiers only make sense as audible EFX generators.
>
> If only all those square-wave cooked voice coils could talk....they'd
> call bull****. A good tubed amp does the same things a good solid state
> one does, but its failure and overdrive modes tend to be more benign.
> You could design most of its virtues in a solid state amp, but weight
> and build cost and thermal dissipation will be just as bad. It will
> probably cost more to build in fact. Of course if you love tough-dog
> troubleshooting challenges solid state amps can sure generate them.
> They can occasionally frustrate you into shotgunning
> them....occasionally literally but more often to stripping them to a
> chasssis and power xfmr and starting fresh. And think of the delightful
> hours you can spend matching P and N devices with a curve tracer. I
> suppose solid state is ultimately more fun, since Nelson Pass seems
> like a genuinely bright guy, as do several other solid state
> designers...but tubes are just easier to get going.

Out of curiosity, Cal, are you an experienced designer of vacuum tube
equipment? i.e. were vacuum tubes the standard active devices when your
circuit design career began? I ask because your comments sound like someone
that hasn't done much actual design work with tubes.

Norm Strong

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 08:06 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>
>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>
>>
>> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.
>
> Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
> Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?
>

I am looking for a low class French slut.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 08:08 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...
>
> Dave, I am still waiting for you to spring into action and
> discredit me elsewhere than RAO, where any loudmouth can
> sound like a mainstream operator. Quit playing small time,
> Dave, and move into the big leagues.
>

Oooh, you hunky loudmouth wannabe mainstream operator,
I like it when you talk like that!

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 08:21 PM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Clerkie pours his heart out.
>
>> > Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would be
>> > completely out of character for him to show up.
>>
>> Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
>> and debate the head con artist?
>
> Regardless of your pain and embarassment, Harold, you and Krooger are the
> only ones who try to deny what asses you've made of yourselves. Your cheap
> rationalizations for your unethical and dishonest behavior fool no one.
> Except maybe you're fooling yourself. Is that who you're trying to
> convince?
> Or maybe you believe, as Krooger does, that as long as you continue to
> make
> noise and throw out irrelevant nonsense, you can cling to the wispy shred
> of
> hope that somebody, somewhere still respects you. God knows it's the
> longest
> of long shots, but maybe that's all you have left.
>
>

Mikey!
Lionel!

Wehre are you?

----== 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 =----

dave weil

February 21st 05, 09:47 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:53:20 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> wrote:

>The essay was not that big a deal,

Your frankness is refreshing, Howard.

But, on another note, if it wasn't any big deal, why was it
re-written?

dave weil

February 21st 05, 09:48 PM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:59:25 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> wrote:

>Incidentally, did you receive the attached drafts I
>previously sent to you in an email? You know, the speaker
>review drafts? I sent them to give you an idea of my
>reviewing style, since you apparently have not read many of
>my TSS product reviews.

Yes I did.

Lionel

February 21st 05, 09:54 PM

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:53:20 -0500, Howard Ferstler
> > wrote:
>
>>The essay was not that big a deal,
>
> Your frankness is refreshing, Howard.
>
> But, on another note, if it wasn't any big deal, why was it
> re-written?

Now the congenital failure is playing the justicer...

Lionel

February 21st 05, 09:58 PM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>>
>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.
>>
>> Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
>> Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?
>>
>
> I am looking for a low class French slut.

LOL, a "low class french slut" is still too much high-class for you, crab
louse.

:-D

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 10:09 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>>>
>>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.
>>>
>>> Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
>>> Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?
>>>
>>
>> I am looking for a low class French slut.
>
> LOL, a "low class french slut" is still too much high-class for you, crab
> louse.
>

More French snobbery.
I see it has worked its way down even to the lowest
class of French 'culture'. (an oxymoron)

----== 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 =----

Lionel

February 21st 05, 10:18 PM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

> Mikey!
> Lionel!
>
> Wehre are you?

And you "wehre" are you, eh old pederast ?

PS : it is not necessary to disturb us everytime that Middius has an
aerophagia crisis, don't worry : "Too much gas is not life threatening"

"Although gas may be uncomfortable and embarrassing, it is not
life-threatening. Understanding causes, ways to reduce symptoms, and
treatment will help most people find some relief."

Reassured now ?

Lionel

February 21st 05, 10:27 PM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>>
>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.
>>>>
>>>> Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
>>>> Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am looking for a low class French slut.
>>
>> LOL, a "low class french slut" is still too much high-class for you, crab
>> louse.
>>
>
> More French snobbery.
> I see it has worked its way down even to the lowest
> class of French 'culture'. (an oxymoron)

Ô suprem irony ! This is coming from a guy who even don't know the name of
his religious headgear.

Anyway, better read that than to be blind... :-D

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 10:30 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com

> I think
> Arny will bask in the attention he would get on Usenet for being a no
> show. A loser like Arny knows deep down inside that attention through
> outrageous behavior is the best he will ever do in his quest to feed
> his ego. I think such attention would further feed his fantasies. His
> fantasies are all he really has. I continue to be surprised how you
> and others seem to being ignoring this guy's long history of this
> very sort of behavior.

You know Scott, I was able to play Middius for several months, as he
repeatedly made similar predictions. It appears that now I'm playing you
essentially the same way. Keep up the good work! ;-)

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 10:31 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message

> wrote:
>>
>> John Atkinson wrote:
>
>>> We shall see what happens, Scott.
>
>> Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would be
>> completely out of character for him to show up.
>
> Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
> and debate the head con artist?

Howard, I've done crazier things. ;-)

MINe 109

February 21st 05, 10:35 PM

In article >,
Paul Dormer > wrote:

> "dave weil" emitted :
>
> >>Incidentally, did you receive the attached drafts I
> >>previously sent to you in an email? You know, the speaker
> >>review drafts? I sent them to give you an idea of my
> >>reviewing style, since you apparently have not read many of
> >>my TSS product reviews.
> >
> >Yes I did.
>
> Snub-city-Arizona!

Super!

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 10:40 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message

> dave weil a écrit :
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:13:14 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:

>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>

>>>> dave weil a écrit :

>>>>> Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.

>>>> What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?

>>> That's easy. Not getting published.

>>> Let's review the published works of David Weil:

> Dave Weil is an envious sack of ****, he is so limited and
> inibhited by is inferiority complex.

> Do you remember the grotesque Jupiter Audio speaker review ?

Yecch!

However, I was able to parlay that into Dave's home address, which allowed
me to have a good laugh at his *castle*. Ditto for Scott Wheeler's vanity
lawsuit.

> Once with his usual petty vanity he has proudly given us a
> link pointing to a review of an Elvis costello concert that
> he has written... The most funny is that the guy at the
> publication has forgotten Weil's name so the signature was
> wrong... :-D

The terror, the humanity!

>> I'm as published as you are.

> Dave Weil will soon publish romans about his numerous
> familial tragedies(that he has already exhibited on this
> *audio* NG). I am sure that such litterature would interest
> the basic, bored US housewifes. :-)

Weil has a few articles posted on other people's web sites, I have a few web
sites. ;-)

Does Dave have any articles in print media? I have a few, most recently in
The Audiophile Voice.

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 10:41 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
> > I think
> > Arny will bask in the attention he would get on Usenet for being a
no
> > show. A loser like Arny knows deep down inside that attention
through
> > outrageous behavior is the best he will ever do in his quest to
feed
> > his ego. I think such attention would further feed his fantasies.
His
> > fantasies are all he really has. I continue to be surprised how you
> > and others seem to being ignoring this guy's long history of this
> > very sort of behavior.
>
> You know Scott, I was able to play Middius for several months, as he
> repeatedly made similar predictions. It appears that now I'm playing
you
> essentially the same way. Keep up the good work! ;-)

If I am wrong we all get loads of entertainment at your expense. You've
been played either way. I'm sticking with my prediction. I can only
hope your hatred for me can help persuade you to show up.

Scott Wheeler

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 10:44 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>
>>> I think
>>> Arny will bask in the attention he would get on Usenet for being a
> no
>>> show. A loser like Arny knows deep down inside that attention
> through
>>> outrageous behavior is the best he will ever do in his quest to
> feed
>>> his ego. I think such attention would further feed his fantasies.
> His
>>> fantasies are all he really has. I continue to be surprised how you
>>> and others seem to being ignoring this guy's long history of this
>>> very sort of behavior.

>> You know Scott, I was able to play Middius for several months, as he
>> repeatedly made similar predictions. It appears that now I'm playing
>> you essentially the same way. Keep up the good work! ;-)

> If I am wrong we all get loads of entertainment at your expense.

Scott, I didn't know that you had it in for Atkinson, but I guess I should
have figured that out given the low esteem in which you hold his
intelligence.

> You've been played either way.

Really?

> I'm sticking with my prediction. I can only hope your hatred for me can
> help persuade you to show up.

Scott, my hatred for you wouldn't get me to Detroit Metro airport, let alone
New York.

I guess Scott you haven't figured out that in order to hate someone you have
give them at least a little bit of credibility.

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 10:47 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> Give me a break. Your team could at least set up an initial
>>> DBT series, carefully level matched and proctored by a
>>> prestigious outsider, to get a decent idea about just how
>>> audible differences might be between a group of amps or
>>> group of wires. (This would best be done by comparing cheap
>>> stuff to expensive stuff, to better dramatize the resulting
>>> psychological impact.) Once that was done, I think that your
>>> "reviewers" might settle down a bit when they compare
>>> sighted down the line and thought they heard profound
>>> differences.
>>
>> IMO, this would be a commercially suicidal thing for Stereopile or
>> TAS for example, to do. They raise their reader's interest with
>> elaborate fairy tales about people who hear differences that it is
>> now known can reasonbly be expected to disappear when bias is
>> controlled in the listening tests.
>
> Yes, they have created the Monster and if they stop feeding
> it the creature will turn and devour them.

More likely the monster just falls to sleep and stops producing revenues.

> To be truthful, if the magazines were not so damned
> detrimental to the survival of serious audio the situation
> would be positively funny.

I don't doubt the survival of audio as Stereophle primarily preaches it -
because that market segment is just about dead. When the boomer widows stop
renewing their late husband's SP subscriptions, its all over.

Arny Krueger

February 21st 05, 10:49 PM

> wrote in message

> Out of curiosity, Cal, are you an experienced designer of vacuum tube
> equipment? i.e. were vacuum tubes the standard active devices when
> your circuit design career began?

As out-of-date as Cal's audio knowlege seems to be, the only way that would
be true is if Cal never designed nuttin'.

>I ask because your comments sound
> like someone that hasn't done much actual design work with tubes.

Expand that to electrical circuits of any kind, and I think you are homing
in on the truth.

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 10:52 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>> Mikey!
>> Lionel!
>>
>> Wehre are you?
>
> And you "wehre" are you, eh old pederast ?
>
> PS : it is not necessary to disturb us everytime that Middius has an
> aerophagia crisis, don't worry : "Too much gas is not life threatening"
>
> "Although gas may be uncomfortable and embarrassing, it is not
> life-threatening. Understanding causes, ways to reduce symptoms, and
> treatment will help most people find some relief."
>
> Reassured now ?
>

Are you talking about sewer gas?
Didn't they teach you not to light up down there?

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 10:53 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>>>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
>>>>> Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am looking for a low class French slut.
>>>
>>> LOL, a "low class french slut" is still too much high-class for you,
>>> crab
>>> louse.
>>>
>>
>> More French snobbery.
>> I see it has worked its way down even to the lowest
>> class of French 'culture'. (an oxymoron)
>
> Ô suprem irony ! This is coming from a guy who even don't know the name of
> his religious headgear.
>
> Anyway, better read that than to be blind... :-D

Better to be sighted than to hear blind.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 21st 05, 10:55 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> John Atkinson wrote:
>>
>>>> We shall see what happens, Scott.
>>
>>> Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would be
>>> completely out of character for him to show up.
>>
>> Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
>> and debate the head con artist?
>
> Howard, I've done crazier things. ;-)

Such as spending $20,000 on obsolete sound cards and
wasting countless weeks and months 'designing' (hehehe)
and stocking the pcabx website

----== 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 =----

[email protected]

February 21st 05, 11:04 PM

Clyde Slick wrote:

>
> Better to be sighted than to hear blind.
>
>
>

Why do you continue to embarrass yourself by posting these lame, lame,
lame replies? :-((

Lionel

February 21st 05, 11:04 PM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>> Mikey!
>>> Lionel!
>>>
>>> Wehre are you?
>>
>> And you "wehre" are you, eh old pederast ?
>>
>> PS : it is not necessary to disturb us everytime that Middius has an
>> aerophagia crisis, don't worry : "Too much gas is not life threatening"
>>
>> "Although gas may be uncomfortable and embarrassing, it is not
>> life-threatening. Understanding causes, ways to reduce symptoms, and
>> treatment will help most people find some relief."
>>
>> Reassured now ?
>>
>
> Are you talking about sewer gas?
> Didn't they teach you not to light up down there?

Yes for example, you get it now.
So I recommend you to apply exactly the same safety instructions when you
lick Middius' ass.

:-D

Lionel

February 21st 05, 11:06 PM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>>
>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>>>>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
>>>>>> Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am looking for a low class French slut.
>>>>
>>>> LOL, a "low class french slut" is still too much high-class for you,
>>>> crab
>>>> louse.
>>>>
>>>
>>> More French snobbery.
>>> I see it has worked its way down even to the lowest
>>> class of French 'culture'. (an oxymoron)
>>
>> Ô suprem irony ! This is coming from a guy who even don't know the name
>> of his religious headgear.
>>
>> Anyway, better read that than to be blind... :-D
>
> Better to be sighted than to hear blind.

I don't hear you because I wear my YalMake (lol) on the ears.

John Atkinson

February 21st 05, 11:58 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> John Atkinson
> > 4) Your fabrication of ficitious material in a supposedly factual
> > published article is also documented fact.
>
> What are you talking about? You are starting to repeat
> yourself.

Either your memory is failing, Mr. Ferstler, or like your hero Peter
Aczel you believe there is a statute of limitations on your dishonest
behavior. I am talking about the article you had published in the The
Audiophile Voice, where you ultimately were forced to admit that you
fabricated apparently factual passages and were forced to apologise to
those you had libeled. (Though you later withdrew that apology.)

> the fact of your writing so much on RAO tells me that you are either
> desperate to defend your turf...

No, that's not it.

> or else there is not much going on at Stereophile headquarters these
> days in the way of work.

No that's not it, either. I am merely tired of the envious yapping of
a proven plagiarist and hypocrite on the subject of the supposed
dishonesty of his journalist colleagues.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Lionel

February 22nd 05, 12:06 AM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

> The one he started himself.

In other words this is what I answered to Dave Weil when he has done
unrequested, impromptu, amiss and crude confidences about his familial
tragedies.
I am sure that you will agree that RAO is not the place for that, right ?

[email protected]

February 22nd 05, 12:52 AM

I've cobbled up a few things but honestly only on a cookbook basis.
I'm part of the electronic generation which if I hadn't worked in music
stores-guitars, guitar amps, Stroboconns and a few tube organs-would
have probably been a tube hater. I'm not an engineer, I don't need to
be to make the comments I have. As a good friend of mine loves to say,
"You don't have to be Frank Perdue to know chicken salad from chicken
****.".

Well designed solid state gear-designed for maintainability-is not a
bad thing. Most of the solid state gear out there today is not. A lot
of the tube gear wasn't either and most of that stuff is dead now, only
the simple and strong have survived in any quantity. So it isn't a
wholly fair comparison.

If you like to build, build whatever you're comfortable with. I'm not
against solid state at all, per se. And in fact if people like Arny
have their way, there aren't going to be any tubes left well within my
lifetime-it takes a certain critical mass of people who want a product
such as mag tape, film, or vacuum tubes to keep anyone in the business.
But Arny's wrong when he makes the flip, snotty comments he does that
the old tech is so bad. It has advantages to go along with the
disadvantages and if he were a listener instead of a geek he'd know it.

[email protected]

February 22nd 05, 01:23 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> > wrote in message
> >> oups.com
> >>
> >>> I think
> >>> Arny will bask in the attention he would get on Usenet for being
a
> > no
> >>> show. A loser like Arny knows deep down inside that attention
> > through
> >>> outrageous behavior is the best he will ever do in his quest to
> > feed
> >>> his ego. I think such attention would further feed his fantasies.
> > His
> >>> fantasies are all he really has. I continue to be surprised how
you
> >>> and others seem to being ignoring this guy's long history of this
> >>> very sort of behavior.
>
> >> You know Scott, I was able to play Middius for several months, as
he
> >> repeatedly made similar predictions. It appears that now I'm
playing
> >> you essentially the same way. Keep up the good work! ;-)
>
> > If I am wrong we all get loads of entertainment at your expense.
>
> Scott, I didn't know that you had it in for Atkinson, but I guess I
should
> have figured that out given the low esteem in which you hold his
> intelligence.

You aren't even making sense Arny.

>
> > You've been played either way.
>
> Really?

Really.

>
> > I'm sticking with my prediction. I can only hope your hatred for
me can
> > help persuade you to show up.
>
> Scott, my hatred for you wouldn't get me to Detroit Metro airport,
let alone
> New York.

That's why I'm sticking with my prediction. I am confident you'd rather
stick Stereophile with the cost of Airfare and hotel and be a no show
than try to prove my prediction wrong.

>
> I guess Scott you haven't figured out that in order to hate someone
you have
> give them at least a little bit of credibility.

Um...no you don't. Every time you try to look smart you end up looking
dumb Arny.

Scott Wheeler

Glenn Zelniker

February 22nd 05, 01:46 AM

Howard Ferstler wrote:

> To be truthful, if the magazines were not so damned
> detrimental to the survival of serious audio the situation
> would be positively funny.

Don't worry about serious audio, Howard. It'll be fine,
tweako-freakos (TM) or not. Serious audio is everywhere and
it's _orders_ of magnitude bigger than your "enemy."

GZ

Clyde Slick

February 22nd 05, 02:19 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>
>>>> Mikey!
>>>> Lionel!
>>>>
>>>> Wehre are you?
>>>
>>> And you "wehre" are you, eh old pederast ?
>>>
>>> PS : it is not necessary to disturb us everytime that Middius has an
>>> aerophagia crisis, don't worry : "Too much gas is not life threatening"
>>>
>>> "Although gas may be uncomfortable and embarrassing, it is not
>>> life-threatening. Understanding causes, ways to reduce symptoms, and
>>> treatment will help most people find some relief."
>>>
>>> Reassured now ?
>>>
>>
>> Are you talking about sewer gas?
>> Didn't they teach you not to light up down there?
>
> Yes for example, you get it now.
> So I recommend you to apply exactly the same safety instructions when you
> lick Middius' ass.
>

I am now taking advice from a pro.
And its free.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 22nd 05, 02:21 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>>>>>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Well, for a writer, there isn't a worse crime than plagiarism.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>What is the worst crime for a third class waiter ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Being polite to a fourth class Frenchie.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Seems that you are tired to run after Middius' ass.
>>>>>>> Do you think you will have more chance with Weil's one ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am looking for a low class French slut.
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL, a "low class french slut" is still too much high-class for you,
>>>>> crab
>>>>> louse.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> More French snobbery.
>>>> I see it has worked its way down even to the lowest
>>>> class of French 'culture'. (an oxymoron)
>>>
>>> Ô suprem irony ! This is coming from a guy who even don't know the name
>>> of his religious headgear.
>>>
>>> Anyway, better read that than to be blind... :-D
>>
>> Better to be sighted than to hear blind.
>
> I don't hear you because I wear my YalMake (lol) on the ears.
>

It must be the latest Lyon sewer attire.

----== 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 =----

Clyde Slick

February 22nd 05, 02:23 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>> The one he started himself.
>
> In other words this is what I answered to Dave Weil when he has done
> unrequested, impromptu, amiss and crude confidences about his familial
> tragedies.
> I am sure that you will agree that RAO is not the place for that, right ?

I do my best to keep my
private affairs off of 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

February 22nd 05, 02:26 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > John Atkinson
> > > 4) Your fabrication of ficitious material in a supposedly factual
> > > published article is also documented fact.
> >
> > What are you talking about? You are starting to repeat
> > yourself.

> Either your memory is failing, Mr. Ferstler, or like your hero Peter
> Aczel you believe there is a statute of limitations on your dishonest
> behavior. I am talking about the article you had published in the The
> Audiophile Voice, where you ultimately were forced to admit that you
> fabricated apparently factual passages and were forced to apologise to
> those you had libeled. (Though you later withdrew that apology.)

Your world apparently revolves around me, John.

Hey, a short while ago I emailed Floyd Toole and Sean Olive.
They will be expecting you there at Harman and I told them
you would have nasty tales to tell about Ferstler. I also
mentioned my ribbing you about doing a serious DBT series
instead of wasting everyone's time with the "debate" at your
little HE2005 party. To my complete surprise, Sean seemed
interested in doing some kind of monumental DBT series in
the future with assorted golden ears taking part. He is well
aware of the big-time political pitfalls, of course.

I suggested he take up the issue with you (I also mentioned
that maybe Nousaine and Arny might be interested in helping
out, and it would be cool if someone like David Ranada could
also be involved), and I also suggested that while you might
publish the results in Stereophile, Sean or Dr. Toole might
draft a version to be published in Sound & Vision. The
bigger this project gets, the better. Might as well get this
DBT issue resolved. Right?

Heck, John, these DBT and golden-ear confrontations and
debates have been going on for years. Now we have a chance
to get some definitive input from real comparisons.

I suggested to Sean that they compare the amp section of a
cheap receiver, with lamp cord connections, to an upscale
amp preferred by knowledgeable types such as yourself,
connected with some really exotic wires. That way, the
supposed differences ought to jump right out at the
participants. Of course, I also suggested that all
components be bench checked prior to the comparison series,
to make sure that all the stuff was up to spec.

I finally suggested that they employ top-tier Revel
speakers, just to make the revelations as detailed as
possible. That way, Harman might just bankroll the party.

Hey, John, thanks for helping to get the ball rolling. I was
only joking when I made my initial "suggestion" about a
super DBT faceoff, but your comments about visiting Toole
and Olive have maybe caused the joke to turn into reality.

> > the fact of your writing so much on RAO tells me that you are either
> > desperate to defend your turf...

> No, that's not it.

Sure. Your turf is a fortress that will never be in need of
defense.

> > or else there is not much going on at Stereophile headquarters these
> > days in the way of work.

> No that's not it, either. I am merely tired of the envious yapping of
> a proven plagiarist and hypocrite on the subject of the supposed
> dishonesty of his journalist colleagues.

Good luck to you, John. You are going to need it.

PS: you and your kind are no "colleagues" of mine.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 22nd 05, 02:32 AM

Arny Krueger

February 22nd 05, 02:34 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> oups.com
>>>>
>>>>> I think
>>>>> Arny will bask in the attention he would get on Usenet for being
>>>>> a no show. A loser like Arny knows deep down inside that
>>>>> attention through outrageous behavior is the best he will ever do
>>>>> in his quest to feed his ego. I think such attention would
>>>>> further feed his fantasies. His fantasies are all he really has.
>>>>> I continue to be surprised how
> you
>>>>> and others seem to being ignoring this guy's long history of this
>>>>> very sort of behavior.
>>
>>>> You know Scott, I was able to play Middius for several months, as
> he
>>>> repeatedly made similar predictions. It appears that now I'm
> playing
>>>> you essentially the same way. Keep up the good work! ;-)
>>
>>> If I am wrong we all get loads of entertainment at your expense.
>>
>> Scott, I didn't know that you had it in for Atkinson, but I guess I
>> should have figured that out given the low esteem in which you hold
>> his intelligence.
>
>
>
> You aren't even making sense Arny.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>> You've been played either way.
>>
>> Really?
>
>
>
> Really.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>> I'm sticking with my prediction. I can only hope your hatred for
> me can
>>> help persuade you to show up.
>>
>> Scott, my hatred for you wouldn't get me to Detroit Metro airport,
>> let alone New York.

> That's why I'm sticking with my prediction.

No logical foundation has been laid for this comment.

> I am confident you'd
> rather stick Stereophile with the cost of Airfare and hotel and be a
> no show than try to prove my prediction wrong.

Being a no show at the Stereophile 2005 gig is right up there with catching
a nasty influenza bug on my list of things I don't want to do.

I'd do it just for the satisfaction of showing certain stupid people that
the Devil's alleged recording of my voice was a lot less than facsimile
reproduction of my normal speaking voice.

>> I guess Scott you haven't figured out that in order to hate someone
>> you have give them at least a little bit of credibility.

> Um...no you don't.

No logical foundation has been laid for this comment.

>Every time you try to look smart you end up looking dumb Arny.

No logical foundation has been laid for this comment, either.

Howard Ferstler

February 22nd 05, 02:39 AM

wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:

> > You seem so sure of this plagiarism thing.

> Yep.

Then grow some gonads and do something about it that
matters, tweako.

> Perhaps you
> > should contact the authorities, and go beyond just mouthing
> > off on RAO.

> Why? You were already busted by your own publishers on it and had to
> rewrite your profile on Peter Walker as a result.

Well, all we have here is my word on the subject, but my
publishers could not have cared less about that little
article situation. It was I who told them about it and they
basically said "So what?"

Incidentally, you need to learn to read. I did not do an
article on Peter Walker, because I could not come up with
the required information (though, lord knows I tried). The
article was a short history of Quad speakers.

> The fact that you
> feel no shame over this simply speaks to your complete lack of
> dignitiy. That is your problem not mine.

It is not mine, either, buddy. It is your little tweako
world that is in trouble. Trust me, it is in trouble.

> > Think of the awards you would receive from the
> > other lunatics if you could clobber Ferstler out in the real
> > world.

> You've been clobbered dude. No one in audio cares that much.

Keep dreaming. I can post something half-way controversial
here and it will be followed in a few days by a dozen
commentaries that will lead to a small multitude of posts
where you and other tweakos rant on and on. I can create a
thread that lasts for weeks. You tell me who does not care
about what I think?

> You are a
> nobody.

Keep dreaming, tweako.

> Get a life.

Check out my four books, the editing work I did on The
Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound, and my 150+ magazine
articles. It may not be Indiana Jones, but it is more of a
life than you have, tweako.

> Gotta laugh a bit at the idea of recieving an award
> for clobbering you. I didn't know they had awards for shooting fish in
> a barrel.

Shooting fish in a barrel requires hitting a target. So far,
all we have from you is keyboard claptrap on RAO. That is
bunk, tweako.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 22nd 05, 02:52 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> John Atkinson wrote:
> >
> >>> We shall see what happens, Scott.
> >
> >> Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would be
> >> completely out of character for him to show up.
> >
> > Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
> > and debate the head con artist?

> Howard, I've done crazier things. ;-)

Give them hell, Arny.

Incidentally, after Atkinson said that he was going to visit
Harman in a month and tell Floyd Toole and Sean Olive some
nasty tales about Ferstler the plagiarist and liar, I
contacted those two gentlemen about maybe setting up a super
DBT series with a really prestigious person doing the
proctoring. (Hell, who has more prestige than Dr. Toole!) I
also prepped them for John's future tirade against me.

To my surprise, Sean indicated that he might want to arrange
a serious DBT series, and could possibly discuss it with
Atkinson when he gets there. (I am assuming that they will
be able to get him to shut up for a while about me.) I then
suggested that while John might publish the results in
Stereophile (no doubt, they would be edited in the extreme),
it would be REALLY cool if he or Dr. Toole roughed together
an article of their own to put into maybe Sound and Vision
magazine.

I indicated that maybe you or Nousaine might also become
involved, although you two would have to not get too close
to the operation or the tweakos would either be scared off
or rant about prejudice and/or anxiety problems when they
could not hear differences. The main thing would be to get
top-tier outsiders involved, so the tweakos could not claim
that the rationalists were setting them up for a fall.

I finally suggested that the most dramatic kind of DBT would
involve a cheap amp vs an expensive amp, with the former
hooked up with cheap wire and the latter hooked up with some
expensive stuff. It would be neat to compare a modest Harman
receiver to a top-line amp/preamp combo of any kind, for
example. I also suggested that they use top-line Revel
speakers to maximize the possibility of hearing differences,
and my hope is that this might trigger Harman into
bankrolling the affair.

No telling where this will go, but it would be very nice
indeed if it went all the way.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

February 22nd 05, 03:02 AM

wrote:

> You and Arny for the most part. Losers like the two of you live for
> Usenet where you think you have an audience. But hey, we used to have
> traveling freak shows so guys like you could have an audience. Get a
> life dude.
>
> Scott Wheeler

Scott, I am retired and have time to spare. I can sit here
all day long if I care to and post hundreds of times.
However, except for the past two days I ordinarily hit RAO
only every three or four days, or sometimes even at longer
intervals. This is because I have other things to do, like
write audio product-review articles or review recordings, or
just go for a nice walk outdoors.

You, on the other hand, may be a young man and I am curious
about how someone who should be gainfully employed can spend
so much time posting on RAO. There are only a few
possibilities:

1) You are posting from your work desk. Not good.

2) You are a kid who skips a lot of school. Also not good.

3) You are in prison, and spend a lot of time at one of the
computer stations that the state education department has
paid for. This at least keeps you out of the shower, where
you would probably be sodomized or murdered by some giant
named Otto.

4) You are in a mental institution, and it also has state
funded computer stations. This at least keeps you from
thumping your head against the padded walls in your room
during the day. At night, however, all bets are off.

5) You are an unemployed jerk.

Howard Ferstler

Tom

February 22nd 05, 03:02 AM

"Lionel" > wrote
> Tom a écrit :
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>>
>>>Just shows how ignorant you are Cal. Good tubed amps make pretty nice
>>>square waves when they clip, almost as well as SS amps.
>>
>>
>>
>> Were you ignorant when you accused me of calling your wife
>> "Kroobitch" three times or were you lying? Which was it, Arny?
>
> As you seem to be a proud and courageous guy can you confirm us solemnly
> that you never participated to the pedophile cabale against Arnold Krueger
> ?

yes.

Your problem Lionel is that you have chosen to believe Arny
and the pony-tail coward from NWA.

I guess you have chosen your team............

Howard Ferstler

February 22nd 05, 03:07 AM

Glenn Zelniker wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
>
> > To be truthful, if the magazines were not so damned
> > detrimental to the survival of serious audio the situation
> > would be positively funny.
>
> Don't worry about serious audio, Howard. It'll be fine,
> tweako-freakos (TM) or not. Serious audio is everywhere and
> it's _orders_ of magnitude bigger than your "enemy."
>
> GZ

Hey, Glenn. I forgot to say hello with my initial response.

How is it going? I am fully retired now (kicked out of the
library, finally, even part time), and have spent the last
few months upgrading the house: new flooring, expanded
middle-system AV room, new paint, some new furniture, new
interior and exterior doors, and even an expanded
woodworking shop out back. All I need now is for a hurricane
to come along and topple ten trees onto the roof.

Nice being retired. It gives me time to smell the roses and
kick a few heads here on RAO.

Howard

[email protected]

February 22nd 05, 03:09 AM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> wrote:
> >
> > Howard Ferstler wrote:
>
> > > You seem so sure of this plagiarism thing.
>
> > Yep.
>
> Then grow some gonads and do something about it that
> matters, tweako.

It has already been dealt with. You were disgraced and forced by your
publisher remedy the situation by writing the article yourself. You
have been publicly embarrassed here on RAO. Why would I want to do
anything more? Who would care that you are a plagiarist? It might mean
something more if you were somebody in journalism but you're not.
Bottom line is you're not worth the effort.

>
> > Perhaps you
> > > should contact the authorities, and go beyond just mouthing
> > > off on RAO.
>
> > Why? You were already busted by your own publishers on it and had
to
> > rewrite your profile on Peter Walker as a result.
>
> Well, all we have here is my word on the subject, but my
> publishers could not have cared less about that little
> article situation.

That's right, all we have is the word of a fraud and plagiarist. You
have no credibility. They obviously cared enough to hold the presses
and ask you to rewrite the article. I'll bet they cared plenty.

>It was I who told them about it and they
> basically said "So what?"

Liar, You had to rewrite the article. That is hardly a so what. Did I
say rewrite? I mean you had to write the article yourself.

>
> Incidentally, you need to learn to read. I did not do an
> article on Peter Walker, because I could not come up with
> the required information (though, lord knows I tried). The
> article was a short history of Quad speakers.

The article you plagiarized was on Quad speakers, OK.

>
> > The fact that you
> > feel no shame over this simply speaks to your complete lack of
> > dignitiy. That is your problem not mine.
>
> It is not mine, either, buddy.

Sure it is, whether you know it or not.

It is your little tweako
> world that is in trouble.

My world is doing just fine. The system is sounding great. I have a
terrific music coollection. If I choose to upgrade there are more high
end options than ever before and there are more great sounding LPs and
CDs than ever before available at any number of outlets. My world as an
audiophile is pretty terrific and will be for many years to come. How
is that drill press working out for you?

Trust me, it is in trouble.

Trust you? LOL.

>
> > > Think of the awards you would receive from the
> > > other lunatics if you could clobber Ferstler out in the real
> > > world.
>
> > You've been clobbered dude. No one in audio cares that much.
>
> Keep dreaming. I can post something half-way controversial
> here and it will be followed in a few days by a dozen
> commentaries that will lead to a small multitude of posts
> where you and other tweakos rant on and on. I can create a
> thread that lasts for weeks.

So can I. BFD. You are insiginificant in audio and an on going joke on
RAO. You're all that and a plagiarist and fraud too. Can you get any
lower without becoming a criminal?

You tell me who does not care
> about what I think?

About 6 billion people here on earth.

>
> > You are a
> > nobody.
>
> Keep dreaming, tweako.

Well tell us Dimbulb, were you profiled in that book you've been
pimping?

>
> > Get a life.
>
> Check out my four books, the editing work I did on The
> Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound, and my 150+ magazine
> articles. It may not be Indiana Jones, but it is more of a
> life than you have, tweako.

Dream on Loser. Your work is insignificant and pathetic. Guys like you
dream of living the life I lead.

>
> > Gotta laugh a bit at the idea of recieving an award
> > for clobbering you. I didn't know they had awards for shooting fish
in
> > a barrel.
>
> Shooting fish in a barrel requires hitting a target. So far,
> all we have from you is keyboard claptrap on RAO. That is
> bunk, tweako.

Dream on loser. You've been exposed. Keep us informed on the sales of
your books. Let us know if you are in the runnuing for a pulitzer prize
or something else of note.

Scott Wheeler

[email protected]

February 22nd 05, 03:16 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> > wrote in message
> >> oups.com
> >>> Arny Krueger wrote:
> >>>> > wrote in message
> >>>> oups.com
> >>>>
> >>>>> I think
> >>>>> Arny will bask in the attention he would get on Usenet for
being
> >>>>> a no show. A loser like Arny knows deep down inside that
> >>>>> attention through outrageous behavior is the best he will ever
do
> >>>>> in his quest to feed his ego. I think such attention would
> >>>>> further feed his fantasies. His fantasies are all he really
has.
> >>>>> I continue to be surprised how
> > you
> >>>>> and others seem to being ignoring this guy's long history of
this
> >>>>> very sort of behavior.
> >>
> >>>> You know Scott, I was able to play Middius for several months,
as
> > he
> >>>> repeatedly made similar predictions. It appears that now I'm
> > playing
> >>>> you essentially the same way. Keep up the good work! ;-)
> >>
> >>> If I am wrong we all get loads of entertainment at your expense.
> >>
> >> Scott, I didn't know that you had it in for Atkinson, but I guess
I
> >> should have figured that out given the low esteem in which you
hold
> >> his intelligence.
> >
> >
> >
> > You aren't even making sense Arny.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> You've been played either way.
> >>
> >> Really?
> >
> >
> >
> > Really.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> I'm sticking with my prediction. I can only hope your hatred for
> > me can
> >>> help persuade you to show up.
> >>
> >> Scott, my hatred for you wouldn't get me to Detroit Metro airport,
> >> let alone New York.
>
> > That's why I'm sticking with my prediction.
>
> No logical foundation has been laid for this comment.

Thanks for showing once again your inability to follow a simple line of
logic.

>
> > I am confident you'd
> > rather stick Stereophile with the cost of Airfare and hotel and be
a
> > no show than try to prove my prediction wrong.
>
> Being a no show at the Stereophile 2005 gig is right up there with
catching
> a nasty influenza bug on my list of things I don't want to do.

You have a gig there?

>
> I'd do it just for the satisfaction of showing certain stupid people
that
> the Devil's alleged recording of my voice was a lot less than
facsimile
> reproduction of my normal speaking voice.

So he has that much power over you? And you think you aren't being
played?

>
> >> I guess Scott you haven't figured out that in order to hate
someone
> >> you have give them at least a little bit of credibility.
>
> > Um...no you don't.
>
> No logical foundation has been laid for this comment.

You are amazingly stupid. I suppose all of us who hate terrorists have
to "give them at least a little bit of credibility" to hate them in
your wierd world. Like I said, every time you try to look smart you
just look dumb.

>
> >Every time you try to look smart you end up looking dumb Arny.
>
> No logical foundation has been laid for this comment, either.

Arny is on auto-repeat. Melt down noted.

Scott Wheeler

Howard Ferstler

February 22nd 05, 03:22 AM

wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Howard Ferstler wrote:

> > > > You seem so sure of this plagiarism thing.

> > > Yep.

> > Then grow some gonads and do something about it that
> > matters, tweako.

> It has already been dealt with. You were disgraced and forced by your
> publisher remedy the situation by writing the article yourself.

Not quite, tweako.

> You
> have been publicly embarrassed here on RAO.

You highly overrate RAO, tweako, just like you overrate
yourself.

> Why would I want to do
> anything more?

Because it would prove to the people here that you are more
than just an RAO keyboard claptrapper.

> Who would care that you are a plagiarist? It might mean
> something more if you were somebody in journalism but you're not.
> Bottom line is you're not worth the effort.

This reads like a copout to me, tweako.

> > > Perhaps you
> > > > should contact the authorities, and go beyond just mouthing
> > > > off on RAO.

> > > Why? You were already busted by your own publishers on it and had
> to
> > > rewrite your profile on Peter Walker as a result.

> > Well, all we have here is my word on the subject, but my
> > publishers could not have cared less about that little
> > article situation.

> That's right, all we have is the word of a fraud and plagiarist. You
> have no credibility. They obviously cared enough to hold the presses
> and ask you to rewrite the article. I'll bet they cared plenty.

You need to get out more, tweako. Check the title page: they
have me listed as the technical editor.

> >It was I who told them about it and they
> > basically said "So what?"

> Liar, You had to rewrite the article. That is hardly a so what.

I volunteered to rewrite it. They were indifferent. Say, if
I was such a problem for them why did they put my name on
the title page, under the main editor's name, listed as
"technical editor?" That does not sound like they were
having second thoughts, tweako.

> Did I
> say rewrite? I mean you had to write the article yourself.

I wrote nearly 200 articles, tweako.

> > Incidentally, you need to learn to read. I did not do an
> > article on Peter Walker, because I could not come up with
> > the required information (though, lord knows I tried). The
> > article was a short history of Quad speakers.

> The article you plagiarized was on Quad speakers, OK.

How many articles have you had published, tweako? How many
books?

> > > The fact that you
> > > feel no shame over this simply speaks to your complete lack of
> > > dignitiy. That is your problem not mine.

> > It is not mine, either, buddy.

> Sure it is, whether you know it or not.

Only in your mind, tweako.

> It is your little tweako
> > world that is in trouble.

> My world is doing just fine. The system is sounding great.

Delusions of grandeur.

> I have a
> terrific music coollection.

Learn to type, or spell, tweako.

> If I choose to upgrade there are more high
> end options than ever before and there are more great sounding LPs and
> CDs than ever before available at any number of outlets.

I have not paid for a CD, SACD, or DVD-A release in over
five years. One of the perks of being a writer and reviewer,
tweako. Oops, I did actually purchase a Channel Classics
recording of some Telemann concertos a week or two ago.
Could not get hold of that one through my regular contacts.
Well, my wife paid for it.

> My world as an
> audiophile is pretty terrific and will be for many years to come. How
> is that drill press working out for you?

Fine, tweako. At least I can do some creative woodworking
with it and the other tools at my disposal. Just drilled,
routed, sanded, primed, painted, and installed nine new
solid-wood doors inside of my house. The best you can do is
scratch your head when you want to do woodworking.

> > > You've been clobbered dude. No one in audio cares that much.

> > Keep dreaming. I can post something half-way controversial
> > here and it will be followed in a few days by a dozen
> > commentaries that will lead to a small multitude of posts
> > where you and other tweakos rant on and on. I can create a
> > thread that lasts for weeks.

> So can I. BFD.

Dream on, tweako.

> > > You are a
> > > nobody.

> > Keep dreaming, tweako.

> Well tell us Dimbulb, were you profiled in that book you've been
> pimping?

Nope. I was too modest. However, there is a good vita of me
and the other board members on page VII.

> > > Get a life.

> > Check out my four books, the editing work I did on The
> > Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound, and my 150+ magazine
> > articles. It may not be Indiana Jones, but it is more of a
> > life than you have, tweako.

> Dream on Loser. Your work is insignificant and pathetic. Guys like you
> dream of living the life I lead.

Haw, haw, hawwww.

> > > Gotta laugh a bit at the idea of recieving an award
> > > for clobbering you. I didn't know they had awards for shooting fish
> in
> > > a barrel.

> > Shooting fish in a barrel requires hitting a target. So far,
> > all we have from you is keyboard claptrap on RAO. That is
> > bunk, tweako.

> Dream on loser. You've been exposed. Keep us informed on the sales of
> your books. Let us know if you are in the runnuing [sic] for a pulitzer prize
> or something else of note.

Learn to spell and write, tweako. Give thinking a try, too.

Howard Ferstler

[email protected]

February 22nd 05, 03:23 AM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> wrote:
>
> > You and Arny for the most part. Losers like the two of you live for
> > Usenet where you think you have an audience. But hey, we used to
have
> > traveling freak shows so guys like you could have an audience. Get
a
> > life dude.
> >
> > Scott Wheeler
>
> Scott, I am retired and have time to spare.

IOW you are a has-been who never was anything of note and you have
nothing worth while to do. Sad.

>I can sit here
> all day long if I care to and post hundreds of times.

Like Arny. You can also go in the garage and drill holes. you have
quite the life, not.

> However, except for the past two days I ordinarily hit RAO
> only every three or four days, or sometimes even at longer
> intervals.

Since you were exposed as a plagiarist you have been posting far less
than you used to. But now you are coming back full time even after
being totally disgraced. Dude you must have nothing else in your life
to come back here. Sad.

This is because I have other things to do, like
> write audio product-review articles or review recordings, or
> just go for a nice walk outdoors.

Wow you go on walks. Maybe I have underestimated you. Don't forget that
drill press. You also drill holes. Your plate is truly full.

>
> You, on the other hand, may be a young man and I am curious
> about how someone who should be gainfully employed can spend
> so much time posting on RAO. There are only a few
> possibilities:
>
> 1) You are posting from your work desk. Not good.
>
> 2) You are a kid who skips a lot of school. Also not good.
>
> 3) You are in prison, and spend a lot of time at one of the
> computer stations that the state education department has
> paid for. This at least keeps you out of the shower, where
> you would probably be sodomized or murdered by some giant
> named Otto.
>
> 4) You are in a mental institution, and it also has state
> funded computer stations. This at least keeps you from
> thumping your head against the padded walls in your room
> during the day. At night, however, all bets are off.
>
> 5) You are an unemployed jerk.

You are a quite the limited thinker. Consider this for a moment. I do
much of my work at home and my work involves numerous short periods of
down time.

Scott Wheeler

Howard Ferstler

February 22nd 05, 03:25 AM

wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:

> > You, on the other hand, may be a young man and I am curious
> > about how someone who should be gainfully employed can spend
> > so much time posting on RAO. There are only a few
> > possibilities:
> >
> > 1) You are posting from your work desk. Not good.
> >
> > 2) You are a kid who skips a lot of school. Also not good.
> >
> > 3) You are in prison, and spend a lot of time at one of the
> > computer stations that the state education department has
> > paid for. This at least keeps you out of the shower, where
> > you would probably be sodomized or murdered by some giant
> > named Otto.
> >
> > 4) You are in a mental institution, and it also has state
> > funded computer stations. This at least keeps you from
> > thumping your head against the padded walls in your room
> > during the day. At night, however, all bets are off.
> >
> > 5) You are an unemployed jerk.

> You are a quite the limited thinker. Consider this for a moment. I do
> much of my work at home and my work involves numerous short periods of
> down time.

The best you can do is a part-time job, tweako? Now I see
it. Your wife works, and you are the house husband.

Howard Ferstler

Clyde Slick

February 22nd 05, 03:48 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> I'd do it just for the satisfaction of showing certain stupid people that
> the Devil's alleged recording of my voice was a lot less than facsimile
> reproduction of my normal speaking voice.
>

What recording?

----== 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 =----

Glenn Zelniker

February 22nd 05, 04:57 AM

Howard Ferstler wrote:

> Hey, Glenn. I forgot to say hello with my initial response.
>
> How is it going? I am fully retired now (kicked out of the
> library, finally, even part time), and have spent the last
> few months upgrading the house: new flooring, expanded
> middle-system AV room, new paint, some new furniture, new
> interior and exterior doors, and even an expanded
> woodworking shop out back. All I need now is for a hurricane
> to come along and topple ten trees onto the roof.

.... which is more or less what happened to our house. We got
wallopped by two of the three hurricanes that touched
Gainesville. The house is just now inhabitable, after months
of replacing walls, floors, huge sections of roof, and a
very expensive three weeks with a mold remediation
specialist. At least we don't have hills in Florida -- then
we'd get mud slides like those poor SoCal'ers!

> Nice being retired.

Enjoy it.

> It gives me time to smell the roses and
> kick a few heads here on RAO.

Roses smell nice, but heads are attached to feet that kick
back. It's a big, nasty world and there are far more
important battles to be fought. Take care.

GZ

dave weil

February 22nd 05, 06:56 AM

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:27:27 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>Ô suprem irony ! This is coming from a guy who even don't know the name of
>his religious headgear.

Maybe if you could spell it properly...

Lionel

February 22nd 05, 08:52 AM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>>
>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>>
>>>>> Mikey!
>>>>> Lionel!
>>>>>
>>>>> Wehre are you?
>>>>
>>>> And you "wehre" are you, eh old pederast ?
>>>>
>>>> PS : it is not necessary to disturb us everytime that Middius has an
>>>> aerophagia crisis, don't worry : "Too much gas is not life threatening"
>>>>
>>>> "Although gas may be uncomfortable and embarrassing, it is not
>>>> life-threatening. Understanding causes, ways to reduce symptoms, and
>>>> treatment will help most people find some relief."
>>>>
>>>> Reassured now ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Are you talking about sewer gas?
>>> Didn't they teach you not to light up down there?
>>
>> Yes for example, you get it now.
>> So I recommend you to apply exactly the same safety instructions when you
>> lick Middius' ass.
>>
>
> I am now taking advice from a pro.

Yes exactly it's an advice from the French Catholic sewer worker to the
American Jewish ass licker...
An other admirable example of international collaboration... ;-)

Lionel

February 22nd 05, 08:55 AM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>> I don't hear you because I wear my YalMake (lol) on the ears.
>>
>
> It must be the latest Lyon sewer attire.

How do you know that ?
Yes yellow like your one !

Lionel

February 22nd 05, 08:56 AM

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>> The one he started himself.
>>
>> In other words this is what I answered to Dave Weil when he has done
>> unrequested, impromptu, amiss and crude confidences about his familial
>> tragedies.
>> I am sure that you will agree that RAO is not the place for that, right ?
>
> I do my best to keep my
> private affairs off of RAO.

Good, you are an idiot with honorable intentions.

Lionel

February 22nd 05, 09:00 AM

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:27:27 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>>Ô suprem irony ! This is coming from a guy who even don't know the name of
>>his religious headgear.
>
> Maybe if you could spell it properly...

I spell it the way *he* spells it, you miserable little sack of servile
****. ;-)

Arny Krueger

February 22nd 05, 12:01 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> John Atkinson wrote:
>>>
>>>>> We shall see what happens, Scott.
>>>
>>>> Yes, and I hope he shows up. I just don't think he will. It would
>>>> be completely out of character for him to show up.
>>>
>>> Yeah, who would want to show up at a lunatics' convention
>>> and debate the head con artist?
>
>> Howard, I've done crazier things. ;-)
>
> Give them hell, Arny.

They probably won't see it coming or passing. ;-)

> Incidentally, after Atkinson said that he was going to visit
> Harman in a month and tell Floyd Toole and Sean Olive some
> nasty tales about Ferstler the plagiarist and liar, I
> contacted those two gentlemen about maybe setting up a super
> DBT series with a really prestigious person doing the
> proctoring. (Hell, who has more prestige than Dr. Toole!) I
> also prepped them for John's future tirade against me.

The truth is the best weapon.

> To my surprise, Sean indicated that he might want to arrange
> a serious DBT series, and could possibly discuss it with
> Atkinson when he gets there. (I am assuming that they will
> be able to get him to shut up for a while about me.) I then
> suggested that while John might publish the results in
> Stereophile (no doubt, they would be edited in the extreme),
> it would be REALLY cool if he or Dr. Toole roughed together
> an article of their own to put into maybe Sound and Vision
> magazine.

I'd like to see a series of DBTs that properly disemboweled the letter
ratings for say amplifiers and CD players in the Stereophile RCL.

Sterephile's not-so-secret weapon is the expense of these items which no
properly-informed person would pay. People like Nousaine or I are unlikely
to run right out and buy a $25,000 or $250,000 power amp just to run a DBT.

> I indicated that maybe you or Nousaine might also become
> involved, although you two would have to not get too close
> to the operation or the tweakos would either be scared off
> or rant about prejudice and/or anxiety problems when they
> could not hear differences.

The T-F contingent are free to work off their anxienties with private DBTs
base on the files at www.pcabx.com . Trouble is, if they run the ABX course,
they are likely to come out with a slightly different attitude.

> The main thing would be to get
> top-tier outsiders involved, so the tweakos could not claim
> that the rationalists were setting them up for a fall.

But we are - no matter what reasonable advantages we give them, as long as
the tests are properly bias-controlled, level-matched and time-synched, they
are headed for a fall.

> I finally suggested that the most dramatic kind of DBT would
> involve a cheap amp vs an expensive amp, with the former
> hooked up with cheap wire and the latter hooked up with some
> expensive stuff. It would be neat to compare a modest Harman
> receiver to a top-line amp/preamp combo of any kind, for
> example. I also suggested that they use top-line Revel
> speakers to maximize the possibility of hearing differences,
> and my hope is that this might trigger Harman into
> bankrolling the affair.

Revel speakers do get pretty good reviews in some of the high end ragazines.

> No telling where this will go, but it would be very nice
> indeed if it went all the way.

I think that all the marks are too smart these days. It is no longer easy to
find the kind of ignorant arrogant golden-eared fool that abounded 5-8 years
ago.