Active Speaker Choices for Audiophiles With 5.1 Ears

[[email protected]]

As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, beileving
that one, two, or three channels were the right number. However 5.1 is
here like it or not. While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
isn't a practical idea. In fact the only practical power solution as I
see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
ohm balanced in.

Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
and Mackie prosumo products?

[Kalman Rubinson]

Take a look at the new NHT XDS system which is on its way very soon.

Kal

On 17 Feb 2005 19:00:26 -0800, wrote:

> As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, beileving
>that one, two, or three channels were the right number. However 5.1 is
>here like it or not. While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
>Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
>isn't a practical idea. In fact the only practical power solution as I
>see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
>and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
>ohm balanced in.
>
> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
>and Mackie prosumo products?

[Mike McKelvy]

As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, beileving
that one, two, or three channels were the right number.

Why would you belive this? Have you ever heard a 5.1 system set up
properly?

However 5.1 is
here like it or not. While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
isn't a practical idea.

Not evern one or two of them are practical in the view of most people,
they have tubes you know. As a great philosopher once said, "Toobs are
for Boobs.

In fact the only practical power solution as I
see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
ohm balanced in.


Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
and Mackie prosumo products?


Why do you feel they are crappy, have you heard them?
Perhaps your ears were damaged listening to those horn speakers. :-)

[Mike McKelvy]

The KRK Expose speakers I mentioned are $1859.00 per pair, self
amplified, with 120 watts for the tweeter and 160 watts for the midbass.

[Joseph Oberlander]

> As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, beileving
> that one, two, or three channels were the right number.

It is very nice for not a lot more money. Of course, you
should always buy a setup meant for stereo music first.
This means full-range speakers in front that don't need
a subwoofer at all, for one(of course, this means a bigger
amplifier as well, but solutions exist liek Outlaw Audio
and at the higher end, Bryston makes a superb multi-channel
amplifier that really is like 5-7 monoblocks in a chassis
No corners cut, twenty year warranty, even on used ones.

> In fact the only practical power solution as I
> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
> ohm balanced in.

Passive works fine if you get the right speakers and enough
power to drive them.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
ups.com

> As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, believing
> that one, two, or three channels were the right number.

I've long preferred 2 channels (personal listening) or 3 channels
(listening with others or in a larger room). That translates into earphones,
headphones or near-field monitors for personal/critical listening, and 3
channels for listening with others.

> However 5.1 is here like it or not.

A lot of prerecorded material is available for this style of listening.

> While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
> Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
> isn't a practical idea.

It's outdated crap, anyhow. Bottles! Yecch!

> In fact the only practical power solution as I
> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
> ohm balanced in.

Iconoclasm, anybody?

> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer and
> Mackie prosumo products?

Those are really pretty good speakers, but they aren't the measure of the
marketplace. Golden Ear Bigotry (as taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of
The Golden Ear, John Atkinson), anybody?

Other providers of active speakers include JBL Pro, NHT Pro, KRK, Blue Sky,
Edirol, Tannoy... Paradigm had some, but they seem to have kinda gone away.
Probably didn't sell because of the well-known Golden Ear bias against
active speakers. After all, it can't be good audio if the speakers and the
amps come from separate vendors. This ignores the extreme synergy that can
be obtained when you deliver a highly-integrated speaker/amp/crossover
package.

[Arny Krueger]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message


Correction:

> Paradigm had some, but they seem to have
> kinda gone away. Probably didn't sell because of the well-known
> Golden Ear bias against active speakers. After all, it can't be good
> audio unless the speakers and the amps come from separate vendors. This
> ignores the extreme synergy that can be obtained when you deliver a
> highly-integrated speaker/amp/crossover package.

[Clyde Slick]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> Those are really pretty good speakers, but they aren't the measure of the
> marketplace. Golden Ear Bigotry (as taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of
> The Golden Ear, John Atkinson), anybody?
>

Now you are equating JA with a KKK leader!
Are you going to do that in the debate, in
JA's face, in front of an audience?



----== 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 =----

[Rui Pedro Mendes Salgueiro]

wrote:
> In fact the only practical power solution as I
> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
> ohm balanced in.

> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
> and Mackie prosumo products?

Meridian Audio:
http://www.meridian-audio.com/welcome.htm
http://www.meridian-audio.com/m_bro_spk.htm

They are expensive.

--
http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/

..pt is Portugal| `Whom the gods love die young'-Menander (342-292 BC)
Europe | Villeneuve 50-82, Toivonen 56-86, Senna 60-94

[dave weil]

On 18 Feb 2005 14:43:40 -0000, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

wrote:
>> In fact the only practical power solution as I
>> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
>> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
>> ohm balanced in.
>
>> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
>> and Mackie prosumo products?
>
>Meridian Audio:
> http://www.meridian-audio.com/welcome.htm
> http://www.meridian-audio.com/m_bro_spk.htm

I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
them.

Also, although I haven't heard the recent iterations of their
products, I WAS impressed when I heard NHT's powered speaker from
about 4 years ago (maybe the A4?), when Chris Byrne auditioned them
for me at the Nashville NAAM show. Even in the open floor area, they
had a great sound.

Here's their current line:

http://www.nhtpro.com/2004/products/product_index.asp?ProductLineID=1&SubjectID=1

[Joseph Oberlander]

Rui Pedro Mendes Salgueiro wrote:

> wrote:
>
>>In fact the only practical power solution as I
>>see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
>>and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
>>ohm balanced in.
>
>
>> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
>>and Mackie prosumo products?
>
>
> Meridian Audio:
> http://www.meridian-audio.com/welcome.htm
> http://www.meridian-audio.com/m_bro_spk.htm
>
> They are expensive.

JBL Pro, Tannoy, and many others also exist. I do find it odd,
though, since you could easily buy a superb amplifier to
drive them and save a lot of money as well.

[Mike McKelvy]

http://www.earthshakingmusic.com/krk.lasso?-database=em_products.fp3&-sortField=item%20name&-sortOrder=ascending&-op=bw&brand=KRK&-op=bw&active=yes&-search&-layout=web&-Response=itemDetail.lasso&-MaxRecords=1&-SkipRecords=0

The above will take you to a description of the KRK Expose E8T powered
speaker. This puppy has 120 watt amp on the tweeter and 160 watts for
the woofer using Focal/JRM drivers. You could do a lot worse.

[Powell]

"Clyde Slick" wrote

> > Those are really pretty good speakers, but they aren't
> > the measure of the marketplace. Golden Ear Bigotry
> > (as taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of The Golden
> > Ear, John Atkinson), anybody?
> >
>
> Now you are equating JA with a KKK leader!
> Are you going to do that in the debate, in
> JA's face, in front of an audience?
>
How do you think Arny got the expense paid trip in the
first place... by adhering to the norms of polite social
intercourse :)?

[Mike McKelvy]

How about some Dynaudio pro speakers?

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, beileving
> that one, two, or three channels were the right number. However 5.1 is
> here like it or not. While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
> Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
> isn't a practical idea. In fact the only practical power solution as I
> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
> ohm balanced in.

I find your comments surprising. The idea that active speakers become more
practical as the number of channels grows seems to me counterintuitive.
Every active speaker has to have its own power supply, not to mention wall
outlet. Whereas large numbers of passive speakers can be driven from
multiple amplifiers sharing the same power supply and only a single power
outlet.

It's true that there are advantages in tailoring the amplifier design
specifically to the speaker, but these advantages are there regardless of
the number of channels.

Norm Strong

[Mike McKelvy]

Dynaudio's Air 6 would do the trick dontcha think?

Best price I've seen is 1595.00 per pair.

[Mike McKelvy]

Dynaudio's Air 6 would do the trick dontcha think?


Best price I've seen is 1595.00 per pair.
OOPS! make that per speaker.

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :

> I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
> them.

Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.
Google is free access, you know. ;-)

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
<snipped>
>

> Golden Ear Bigotry (as taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of
> The Golden Ear, John Atkinson), anybody?
>
>


That's quite an image you conjured up there, Arny. I have visions of
Atkinson in a wizard's hat (think Mickey Mouse in "Fantasia"), holding
forth before the grateful masses.

[Arny Krueger]

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


>> Golden Ear Bigotry (as taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of
>> The Golden Ear, John Atkinson), anybody?

> That's quite an image you conjured up there, Arny.

The pointy shoes seem to fit.

>I have visions of Atkinson in a wizard's hat (think Mickey Mouse in
>"Fantasia"), holding
> forth before the grateful masses.

See it live at HE 2005!

[Robert Morein]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, beileving
> that one, two, or three channels were the right number. However 5.1 is
> here like it or not. While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
> Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
> isn't a practical idea. In fact the only practical power solution as I
> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
> ohm balanced in.
>
> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
> and Mackie prosumo products?
>
http://www.hafler.com

A highly respected company, the chief engineer of which is Jim Strickland,
creator of the Acoustat electrostat speakers and Transnova amplifiers.

The founder was David Hafler (dec), who invented the Ultralinear tube
circuit.

[Mike McKelvy]

Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and been
made aware of several others, what do you have to say for yourself.
OOPS would be a good start.

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and been
> made aware of several others, what do you have to say for yourself.
> OOPS would be a good start.

Cal is like Atkinson - he never admits that he ever made a mistake.

[Margaret von B.]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, beileving
> that one, two, or three channels were the right number. However 5.1 is
> here like it or not. While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
> Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
> isn't a practical idea. In fact the only practical power solution as I
> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
> ohm balanced in.
>
> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer
> and Mackie prosumo products?
>
You are an idiot.

Cheers,

Margaret

[dave weil]

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 20:16:37 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>
>> I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
>> them.
>
>Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.
>Google is free access, you know. ;-)

Actually, I know that I've heard that they are good, directly from
someone who has heard them, so I thought I'd pass it along.

Sorry if it bothered you.

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 20:16:37 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
>>>them.
>>
>>Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.
>>Google is free access, you know. ;-)
>
>
> Actually, I know that I've heard that they are good, directly from
> someone who has heard them, so I thought I'd pass it along.

Yeah the friend of the friend of your best friend...
This always provide interesting opinions.

This is the way that Middius use to tastes the wine. Note
that he is a real wine connoisseur... via proxies !

:-D

> Sorry if it bothered you.

Don't be sorry, but worry... Seems that you bothered
everybody since nobody but me answers you anymore. :-(

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 20:16:37 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
>>>them.
>>
>>Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.
>>Google is free access, you know. ;-)
>
>
> Actually, I know that I've heard that they are good, directly from
> someone who has heard them, so I thought I'd pass it along.

Yeah the friend of the friend of your best friend...
....This always provides interesting opinions.

This is the way that Middius uses to taste the wines. Note
that he is a real wine connoisseur... via proxies !


> Sorry if it bothered you.

Don't be sorry, but worry... Seems that you bothered
everybody since nobody but me answers you anymore. :-(

[Arny Krueger]

"Lionel" > wrote in message

> dave weil a écrit :

>> I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
>> them.

Nousaine has a collection of Active 20s and 40s that I've listened to for
hours and hours. He uses them over his house-devouring monster subwoofer.
Yes, they sound GOOD! I don't know if Atkinson can even understand what this
system is about.

IME, if its made by Paradigm, its probabaly pretty good. I have an old pair
of Phantoms that still sound very good. I should listen to them more often!

> Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.

Yes, I laugh about Weil's comments about NHTPro A4s. Search google, there
is no such thing. There are such things as NHTPro M00, which have 4"
woofers. Dave should know which NHT Pro speakers I have. Hint: they don't
have mere 4" woofers. ;-)

> Google is free access, you know. ;-)

Ironic how vocal George and Art are about my alleged class envy when we see
them giving a pass to Weil. Weil bought his pass with them by giving them
the RAO anti-audio online figurative fellatio that they crave.

[Lionel]

Arny Krueger a écrit :

> Yes, I laugh about Weil's comments about NHTPro A4s. Search google, there
> is no such thing. There are such things as NHTPro M00, which have 4"
> woofers. Dave should know which NHT Pro speakers I have. Hint: they don't
> have mere 4" woofers. ;-)

Just an other Weil's pathetic attempt to come back in the
circus...

Dave is this kind of guy who always knows somebody who knows
a man who has the answer to the question.
He belongs to the famous intellectual and cultural third
circle... "Has been" who have never been. :-(

[Arny Krueger]

"Lionel" > wrote in message


> Arny Krueger a écrit :

>> Yes, I laugh about Weil's comments about NHTPro A4s. Search google,
>> there is no such thing. There are such things as the NHTPro M00, which
>> have 4" woofers. Dave should know which NHT Pro speakers I have.
>> Hint: they don't have mere 4" woofers. ;-)

> Just an other Weil's pathetic attempt to come back in the
> circus...

Dave never came back when I showed that he was posting delusionally when he
claimed that he had responded to only about 1% of my posts here. The real
number was more like 40%. If it wasn't for Ferstler and I, Dave would have
no online audio life at all. He'd be stuck in that rose garden forum he
likes so well.

> Dave is this kind of guy who always knows somebody who knows
> a man who has the answer to the question.

Well sorta. it turns out that the key guy in his life who *knows the answer*
is George Middius. ;-)

> He belongs to the famous intellectual and cultural third
> circle... "Has been" who have never been. :-(

Right, but he does pompous waiter in a mid-priced dive so well.

[Arny Krueger]

"Powell" > wrote in message

> "Clyde Slick" wrote
>
>>> Those are really pretty good speakers, but they aren't
>>> the measure of the marketplace. Golden Ear Bigotry
>>> (as taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of The Golden
>>> Ear, John Atkinson), anybody?

>> Now you are equating JA with a KKK leader!

Well, I couldn't do the FAS schtick again, could I? However if you remember
that one, you've got the measure of how long it took Atkinson to finall get
what I was saying way back then. We're talking years here, folks.

>> Are you going to do that in the debate, in
>> JA's face, in front of an audience?

Only if he asks for it.

> How do you think Arny got the expense paid trip in the
> first place... by adhering to the norms of polite social
> intercourse :)?

You know, after seemingly thousands of false starts, Powell finally made a
post that shows some sign of actual insight!

Good job, Powell! Now see if you can do it again, little man.

[Lionel]

Arny Krueger a écrit :

>>He belongs to the famous intellectual and cultural third
>>circle... "Has been" who have never been. :-(
>
>
> Right, but he does pompous waiter in a mid-priced dive so well.

The most difficult for the client is to keep Dave shut up
during the service. :-D

[dave weil]

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 09:37:20 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 20:16:37 +0100, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>>I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
>>>>them.
>>>
>>>Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.
>>>Google is free access, you know. ;-)
>>
>>
>> Actually, I know that I've heard that they are good, directly from
>> someone who has heard them, so I thought I'd pass it along.
>
>Yeah the friend of the friend of your best friend...
>This always provide interesting opinions.

Not always.

>This is the way that Middius use to tastes the wine. Note
>that he is a real wine connoisseur... via proxies !

Liar.

>Don't be sorry, but worry... Seems that you bothered
>everybody since nobody but me answers you anymore. :-(

At least I weighed in. I didn't post it to get an answer - I posted to
give information that someone might want to check up on. Of course,
you're not interested in audio here anyway.

[dave weil]

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 05:47:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Lionel" > wrote in message

>> dave weil a écrit :
>
>>> I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
>>> them.
>
>Nousaine has a collection of Active 20s and 40s that I've listened to for
>hours and hours. He uses them over his house-devouring monster subwoofer.
>Yes, they sound GOOD! I don't know if Atkinson can even understand what this
>system is about.

Well, there's confirmation that my friend might have been correct.

I love the fact that Lionel acts as Arnold's conduit to address
anything that I say but yet pretends not to "answer me anymore".

>IME, if its made by Paradigm, its probabaly pretty good. I have an old pair
>of Phantoms that still sound very good. I should listen to them more often!

Hmmmm, maybe I shouldn't have mentioned them so that the OP couldn't
check them out. Then Lionel would have been really happy.

>> Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.
>
>Yes, I laugh about Weil's comments about NHTPro A4s. Search google, there
>is no such thing. There are such things as NHTPro M00, which have 4"
>woofers. Dave should know which NHT Pro speakers I have. Hint: they don't
>have mere 4" woofers. ;-)

After using Google to check, turns out it was the A-20. I DID put a
question mark there because I couldn't remember the name of the
speaker that I auditioned 4 years ago. Of course, the A-20 doesn't
have a 4-inch speaker.

No, I don't know which NHT speakers you own, Arnold. I don't think
that they're powered speakers though.

>> Google is free access, you know. ;-)
>
>Ironic how vocal George and Art are about my alleged class envy when we see
>them giving a pass to Weil. Weil bought his pass with them by giving them
>the RAO anti-audio online figurative fellatio that they crave.

Oral sex fixation noted.

[dave weil]

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 06:40:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Lionel" > wrote in message

>
>> Arny Krueger a écrit :
>
>>> Yes, I laugh about Weil's comments about NHTPro A4s. Search google,
>>> there is no such thing. There are such things as the NHTPro M00, which
>>> have 4" woofers. Dave should know which NHT Pro speakers I have.
>>> Hint: they don't have mere 4" woofers. ;-)
>
>> Just an other Weil's pathetic attempt to come back in the
>> circus...
>
>Dave never came back when I showed that he was posting delusionally when he
>claimed that he had responded to only about 1% of my posts here. The real
>number was more like 40%. If it wasn't for Ferstler and I, Dave would have
>no online audio life at all. He'd be stuck in that rose garden forum he
>likes so well.

Sure I did. I called you a liar. You are notorious about not knowing
how to use Google.

Also, this is curious logic coming from someone who claims not to
respond to my posts. I guess this means that I'm always right when you
ignore one of my comments about something you wrote.

>> Dave is this kind of guy who always knows somebody who knows
>> a man who has the answer to the question.
>
>Well sorta. it turns out that the key guy in his life who *knows the answer*
>is George Middius. ;-)

I don't know why you say that, since George wasn't the person to
mentioned the Paradigms to me.

>> He belongs to the famous intellectual and cultural third
>> circle... "Has been" who have never been. :-(
>
>Right, but he does pompous waiter in a mid-priced dive so well.

At least I don't "work" in my underwear.

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> dave weil a écrit :
>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 20:16:37 +0100, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>>I've heard that Paradigm's Active/40s sound good, but I haven't heard
>>>>them.
>>>
>>>Once again you are speaking of something that you don't know.
>>>Google is free access, you know. ;-)
>>
>>
>> Actually, I know that I've heard that they are good, directly from
>> someone who has heard them, so I thought I'd pass it along.
>
> Yeah the friend of the friend of your best friend...
> ...This always provides interesting opinions.
>
> This is the way that Middius uses to taste the wines. Note that he is a
> real wine connoisseur... via proxies !
>
>
>> Sorry if it bothered you.
>
> Don't be sorry, but worry... Seems that you bothered everybody since
> nobody but me answers you anymore. :-(
>

I know the sewers of Lyon stink, though
I haven't been there. Someone I know told me.



----== 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]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> Ironic how vocal George and Art are about my alleged class envy when we
> see them giving a pass to Weil. Weil bought his pass with them by giving
> them the RAO anti-audio online figurative fellatio that they crave.
>

Dave appears to be very comfortable with his circumstances.



----== 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 =----

[Joseph Oberlander]

>>>Yes, I laugh about Weil's comments about NHTPro A4s. Search google,
>>>there is no such thing. There are such things as the NHTPro M00, which
>>>have 4" woofers. Dave should know which NHT Pro speakers I have.
>>>Hint: they don't have mere 4" woofers. ;-)

Q: how much of a woofer is a 4 inch speaker? Didn't we call
them midranges a decade or two ago?

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
k.net

>>>> Yes, I laugh about Weil's comments about NHTPro A4s. Search
>>>> google, there is no such thing. There are such things as the
>>>> NHTPro M00, which have 4" woofers.

> Q: how much of a woofer is a 4 inch speaker?

Not a heck of a lot. The problem is that maximum possible Xmax tends to
scale down with the diameter of the driver. Since high Xmax is the way to
offset small cone area, its a double-whammy against bass.

> Didn't we call them midranges a decade or two ago?

I remember when speakers with 4" tweeters weren't that uncommon.

[Lionel]

Clyde Slick a écrit :


> I haven't been there. Someone I know told me.

This is the story of your life, Sackman...

:-D

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :

> After using Google to check, turns out it was the A-20. I DID put a
> question mark there because...

....You think that this will give few credibility to your
google search !

In fact you never assisted to a demonstration of these
speakers except in you imagination.

Sad.

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :

> At least I weighed in.

I believe you on this one fat boy...

http://www.emailjoke.com/friends.jpg

It was before or after Elvis Costello's concert ?

[Margaret von B.]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> > wrote in message
> ups.com
>
>> As you know I have never believed very much in 5.1 audio, believing
>> that one, two, or three channels were the right number.
>
> I've long preferred 2 channels (personal listening) or 3 channels
> (listening with others or in a larger room). That translates into
> earphones, headphones or near-field monitors for personal/critical
> listening, and 3 channels for listening with others.
>
>> However 5.1 is here like it or not.
>
> A lot of prerecorded material is available for this style of listening.
>
>> While a rack of McIntosh Industrial, Manley, or
>> Fairchild tube monoblocs would be attractive to look at, it really
>> isn't a practical idea.
>
> It's outdated crap, anyhow. Bottles! Yecch!
>
>> In fact the only practical power solution as I
>> see it for 5.1 is the active speaker, having its own active crossover
>> and multiple amps, and a professional input-AES/EBU digital or +4, 600
>> ohm balanced in.
>
> Iconoclasm, anybody?
>
>> Other than the Genelecs, what is out there, besides crappy Behringer and
>> Mackie prosumo products?
>
> Those are really pretty good speakers,

I agree. I don't know a better value in loudspeaker/amplifier combination
than Mackie HR824. Excellent sound, "almost" full-range extension with real
recorded material. Not particularly difficult to place for good results. 6
of these with a Talon sub make up one of the better multichannel/theaters
I've ever heard. Have a pair in the bedroom.

> but they aren't the measure of the marketplace. Golden Ear Bigotry (as
> taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of The Golden Ear, John Atkinson),
> anybody?
>

This, OTOH, is idiotically paranoid. I would primarily blame the nonexistent
marketing effort to consumers.

> Other providers of active speakers include JBL Pro, NHT Pro, KRK, Blue
> Sky, Edirol, Tannoy... Paradigm had some, but they seem to have kinda
> gone away. Probably didn't sell because of the well-known Golden Ear bias
> against active speakers. After all, it can't be good audio if the speakers
> and the amps come from separate vendors. This ignores the extreme synergy
> that can be obtained when you deliver a highly-integrated
> speaker/amp/crossover package.

Adam makes excellent monitors, but they are fairly expensive.

Cheers,

Margaret

[dave weil]

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 20:27:24 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>
>> After using Google to check, turns out it was the A-20. I DID put a
>> question mark there because...
>
>...You think that this will give few credibility to your
>google search !
>
>In fact you never assisted to a demonstration of these
>speakers except in you imagination.

This is false. I definitely had a one-on-one audition of these
speakers performed by Chris Byrne himself.

So, you have lied again.

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 20:27:24 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>> After using Google to check, turns out it was the A-20. I DID put a
>>> question mark there because...
>>
>>...You think that this will give few credibility to your
>>google search !
>>
>>In fact you never assisted to a demonstration of these
>>speakers except in you imagination.
>
> This is false. I definitely had a one-on-one audition of these
> speakers performed by Chris Byrne himself.
>
> So, you have lied again.

Prove it. :-)

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :


>>This is the way that Middius use to tastes the wine. Note
>>that he is a real wine connoisseur... via proxies !
>
> Liar.


Did you already drink some wine with George M. Middius ?

[[email protected]]

Mike McKelvy wrote:
> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and been
> made aware of several others, what do you have to say for yourself.
> OOPS would be a good start.

Mackie and Behringer are pretty rough. What do you want me to say,
they aren't? They are low cost prosumo products for project studios.
The others you've mentioned may be very fine, they aren't cheap. I
asked what was out there, people mentioned a few things. Where did i go
wrong?

[[email protected]]

You are in need of vinegar and water, the smell is killing me.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
oups.com

> Mike McKelvy wrote:
>> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and been
>> made aware of several others, what do you have to say for yourself.
>> OOPS would be a good start.

> Mackie and Behringer are pretty rough.

Actually, they are both pretty smooth. However, being near field monitors
they have a certain slightly forward balance that some audiophiles might
confuse with roughness.

> What do you want me to say, they aren't?

Indict yourself as you wish, Cal.

>They are low cost prosumo products for project studios.

The Behringers are low cost. The Mackies are mid-priced. Since Cal can't
distinguish the markets they adress, perhaps he's suffering from low
resoluation perceptions. Besides, nowhere is it written in stone that low
cost or mid priced products have have sonic problems.

> The others you've mentioned may be very fine, they aren't cheap.

Some are no more expensive than the Mackies. Some are quite clearly targeted
at the prosumer market.

> I asked what was out there, people mentioned a few things. Where did I go
> wrong?

Bad attitude and inability to recognize widely-resepected products like the
HR 824s

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
> > Mike McKelvy wrote:
> >> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and been
> >> made aware of several others, what do you have to say for yourself.
> >> OOPS would be a good start.
>
> > Mackie and Behringer are pretty rough.
>
> Actually, they are both pretty smooth. However, being near field monitors
> they have a certain slightly forward balance that some audiophiles might
> confuse with roughness.

Makes me think of the NHT Pro amp that can switch from nearfield to
midfield settings. It kinda takes the edge off if one is more than a
couple of feet away from the speakers.

Stephen

[Margaret von B.]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> You are in need of vinegar and water, the smell is killing me.
>

But you are still an idiot.

Cheers,

Margaret

[Mike McKelvy]

Mackie and Behringer are pretty rough. What do you want me to say,
they aren't? They are low cost prosumo products for project studios.
The others you've mentioned may be very fine, they aren't cheap. I
asked what was out there, people mentioned a few things. Where did i go

wrong?

By calling them rough for one thing.
By calling them crap fo another.

I don't know for sure, but aren't 5.1 speakers similar to 2.0 speakers,
insofar as they are badwidth limited?

In any case You have to go with what's available and those are clearly
among the better speakers of that type. Not in league with the
Dynaudio Air series but then few are.

The KRK's are also good speakers and you should give a listen.

Mostly you should abandon the idea of powered speakers for this
application and just get a multichannel amp.
Most of the time the surround spekaers aren't going to be using much
power anyway.

There are plenty of more affordable solutions.

[Mike McKelvy]

Have you looked at the new midbass drivers from Adire? Huge Xmax for
their size, would make a great car subwoofer for a normal human.

[Arny Krueger]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>
>>> Mike McKelvy wrote:
>>>> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and
>>>> been made aware of several others, what do you have to say for
>>>> yourself. OOPS would be a good start.
>>
>>> Mackie and Behringer are pretty rough.
>>
>> Actually, they are both pretty smooth. However, being near field
>> monitors they have a certain slightly forward balance that some
>> audiophiles might confuse with roughness.

> Makes me think of the NHT Pro amp that can switch from nearfield to
> midfield settings. It kinda takes the edge off if one is more than a
> couple of feet away from the speakers.

Equalization switches are a common feature in near field monitors, including
NHTPro A10 and A20 as well as both of the models that Cal trashed:

http://www.mackie.com/home/showimage.html?u=/products/hr824/images/HR824Rear.JPG

http://www.behringer-download.com/B2030A_B2031A/B2031A_B2030A_ENG_Rev_A.pdf
page labelled 6 in the PDF

This is a strong advantage of tailoring the electronics to match the
speaker, whether as a separate amplifier or an electronics package built
into the speaker. The Berhinger and Mackie speakers that Cal trashed also
have active crossovers.

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Have you looked at the new midbass drivers from Adire?

I just did.

> Huge Xmax for their size, would make a great car subwoofer for a normal
> human.

Agreed. If the curves are accurate, the cone holds together up to fairly
high frequencies for a driver of its size and Xmax. Not cheap, but not
totally unreasonable.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>
> > In article >,
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >
> >> > wrote in message
> >> oups.com
> >>
> >>> Mike McKelvy wrote:
> >>>> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and
> >>>> been made aware of several others, what do you have to say for
> >>>> yourself. OOPS would be a good start.
> >>
> >>> Mackie and Behringer are pretty rough.
> >>
> >> Actually, they are both pretty smooth. However, being near field
> >> monitors they have a certain slightly forward balance that some
> >> audiophiles might confuse with roughness.
>
> > Makes me think of the NHT Pro amp that can switch from nearfield to
> > midfield settings. It kinda takes the edge off if one is more than a
> > couple of feet away from the speakers.
>
> Equalization switches are a common feature in near field monitors, including
> NHTPro A10 and A20 as well as both of the models that Cal trashed:

> http://www.mackie.com/home/showimage.html?u=/products/hr824/images/HR824Rear.J
> PG
>
> http://www.behringer-download.com/B2030A_B2031A/B2031A_B2030A_ENG_Rev_A.pdf
> page labelled 6 in the PDF
>
> This is a strong advantage of tailoring the electronics to match the
> speaker, whether as a separate amplifier or an electronics package built
> into the speaker. The Berhinger and Mackie speakers that Cal trashed also
> have active crossovers.

Does the NF/MF switch have a phase component, too? The soundstage seems
to contract slightly when the switch is thrown.

And re pro amps, if the fan is louder than my computer fan, you probably
would want to do something about it.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> oups.com
>>>>
>>>>> Mike McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and
>>>>>> been made aware of several others, what do you have to say for
>>>>>> yourself. OOPS would be a good start.
>>>>
>>>>> Mackie and Behringer are pretty rough.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, they are both pretty smooth. However, being near field
>>>> monitors they have a certain slightly forward balance that some
>>>> audiophiles might confuse with roughness.
>>
>>> Makes me think of the NHT Pro amp that can switch from nearfield to
>>> midfield settings. It kinda takes the edge off if one is more than a
>>> couple of feet away from the speakers.
>>
>> Equalization switches are a common feature in near field monitors,
>> including NHTPro A10 and A20 as well as both of the models that Cal
>> trashed:
>
>> http://www.mackie.com/home/showimage.html?u=/products/hr824/images/HR824Rear.J
>> PG
>>
>> http://www.behringer-download.com/B2030A_B2031A/B2031A_B2030A_ENG_Rev_A.pdf
>> page labelled 6 in the PDF
>>
>> This is a strong advantage of tailoring the electronics to match the
>> speaker, whether as a separate amplifier or an electronics package
>> built into the speaker. The Berhinger and Mackie speakers that Cal
>> trashed also have active crossovers.

> Does the NF/MF switch have a phase component, too?

Nothing other than that implied by the frequency response changes.

> The soundstage
> seems to contract slightly when the switch is thrown.

Equalization can provide that effect, even equalization with none of the
usual associated phase shift.

> And re pro amps, if the fan is louder than my computer fan, you
> probably would want to do something about it.

Cooling fan noise can be all over the map. I'm sitting here with my right
ear about 20" from a system unit and I clearly hear a cooling fan - in the
system across the room.

Power amp fans are the same way, some are very noisy some are very quiet.
Furthermore, cooling fans are not the exclusive domain of pro audio - I've
seen receivers with cooling fans.

[[email protected]]

Actually I have auditioned both the Mackies and the Behringers. The
Behringers are as bad or worse than the Yamaha NS-10s. The Mackies
seemed a little better, and probably represent good value for their
market, but they are a long way from good serious sound in a proper
room. Nearfields in general are appropriate for what they are designed
for, and that is not full field listening. I find nearfield listening
awkward and I think the popularity of bridge mounted nearfield
monitors, nearly universal in home/project studios and disappointingly
so in "real" facilities, to be a fundamental problem in the pursuit of
making good records. That's another story.

Pro products designed for mastering and mixdown purposes specifically,
tube or otherwise, are a different line of product (and a much rarer
one) than pro products designed for sound reinforcement, MI, stage
monitoring, project studio, or contractor install work. Products
designed for the latter uses are not necessarily to be barred from
consideration for serious home use-indeed they may work better than
pure-consumer products-but they always involve different tradeoffs and
so are not that likely to be competitive.

A good example would be a power amp. Maybe you build power amps and
have a pet design with some patents or a McGuffin like Power Guard.
Perhaps you build a 2x300 watt stereo power amp for touring sound use.
Since it goes in a rack and gets hauled around, it's mechanically
toughened, compact, and has a powerful fan to keep it cool even if only
the front of the rack is exposed. That fan makes it too loud for my
living room, I absolutely guarantee. I spent a lot of effort dropping
the noise floor. That same electrical design might work great for me if
you made a variant with huge finned heatsinks facing outward and no
fan. It would weigh more, it wouldn't be as amenable to getting hauled
around and bumped and dropped, Perhaps you designed a quieter fan in
attempt to "cross over', but what you got was an amp that runs hotter
on the road and fails more often.

[[email protected]]

They are rough. For serious audio, they are relatively crude. The
Mackie is better than the Behringer but they are not like real
speakers. Even high end products I dislike such as Thiel's are much
more realistic and coherent sounding. They might be good for their
intended use but not for mine.

The Dynaudio and KRK may well be fine products. They have to be a lot
better than the Behringer. I have heard the expensive big Genelecs and
I thought they sounded pretty good-but that's a lot of money for pretty
good. A good pair of horns can do so much more dynamically, even with
the limitation of a passive crossover with its insertion losses and
total loss of cone control.

[[email protected]]

Your issue, no pun intended, has destroyed a lot of relationships.
It's a well known fact that's why Sinatra never married Monroe. However
the solution is obvious, commercial preparations are readily available
to flush out the problem or even Coca-Cola will work if necessary.
Continued sitting on this problem will not fix it, however. Life is too
short to go around reminding everyone of the kid that put the dead
halibut in the box...

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
oups.com

> Actually I have auditioned both the Mackies and the Behringers.

Auditions are only as good as the environment and the person doing the
listening.

>The Behringers are as bad or worse than the Yamaha NS-10s.

Tacit admission that Cal's either talking out of the back of his neck, or
that his ears are shot above 5 KHz.

> The Mackies
> seemed a little better, and probably represent good value for their
> market, but they are a long way from good serious sound in a proper
> room.

It's true that both the Mackies and the Behrs lack the bottles that are part
of Cal's prerequisite for what he thinks is good sound.

> Nearfields in general are appropriate for what they are designed
> for, and that is not full field listening.

Tacit admission that Cal has never been allowed to use the facilities of
these speakers for tailoring their response to various listening situations.

>I find nearfield listening
> awkward and I think the popularity of bridge mounted nearfield
> monitors, nearly universal in home/project studios and
> disappointingly so in "real" facilities, to be a fundamental problem
> in the pursuit of making good records. That's another story.

Suggests that Cal doesn't appreciate the difference between tracking, mixing
and mastering.

> Pro products designed for mastering and mixdown purposes specifically,
> tube or otherwise, are a different line of product

They can be, but they don't have to be. For example using Magnepans for
mastering is thinkable, but far less so for tracking.

> (and a much rarer
> one) than pro products designed for sound reinforcement, MI, stage
> monitoring, project studio, or contractor install work.

Including studio speakers in a list with SR speakers shows how out-to-lunch
Cal is.

> Products
> designed for the latter uses are not necessarily to be barred from
> consideration for serious home use-indeed they may work better than
> pure-consumer products-but they always involve different tradeoffs and
> so are not that likely to be competitive.

Cal's one of the few people I know who could say something this odd with a
straight face.

>
> A good example would be a power amp. Maybe you build power amps and
> have a pet design with some patents or a McGuffin like Power Guard.
> Perhaps you build a 2x300 watt stereo power amp for touring sound use.
> Since it goes in a rack and gets hauled around, it's mechanically
> toughened, compact, and has a powerful fan to keep it cool even if
> only the front of the rack is exposed. That fan makes it too loud for
> my living room, I absolutely guarantee.

in Cal's world all cooling fans sound the same - loud.

>I spent a lot of effort
> dropping the noise floor. That same electrical design might work
> great for me if you made a variant with huge finned heatsinks facing
> outward and no fan. It would weigh more, it wouldn't be as amenable
> to getting hauled around and bumped and dropped, Perhaps you designed
> a quieter fan in attempt to "cross over', but what you got was an amp
> that runs hotter on the road and fails more often.

It takes a real bozo to confuse the design of SR amps with the design of
amps for studio monitoring

[[email protected]]

The lack of tubes is not the fundamental problem with the active
speakers inexpensively available for project studio use, and you know
that I never said any such thing. I don't deny there are perfectly good
solid state studio monitoring amplifier solutions, however, it's also
interesting to note that the most well known examples in this product
category-the EAR 509 and 549, various Manley units-are in fact tubed.
Some facilities use Cello, Krell or Jeff Rowland ("tweako" solid state)
units also.

I can't think of any solid state amplifiers expressly designed and
marketed for studio monitoring, in fact, although they well may exist.
Hot House, perhaps, but I have no idea how good they are.

As for cooling fans, I've never heard a really quiet one! (No pun
intended...) Such a device would be a slow turning, extremely well
balanced, custom built affair and I guess most people just figure
bigger heat sink fins are cheaper and less bother. Such a fan would
also be a relatively low-differential system and therefore easily
impacted by dirt, smoke, dust bunnies,et al. Since most High End buyers
lack convenient compressed air or DI water hosedown facilities, and
their houses aren't exactly clean rooms, this would be a design concern.

[[email protected]]

Brystons are primarily sold for home audio, Crowns for sound
reinforcement, also QSC. Alesis and Behringer are budget lines.

[Margaret von B.]

Did I ever tell you that you are an idiot?

Cheers,

Margaret


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Actually I have auditioned both the Mackies and the Behringers. The
> Behringers are as bad or worse than the Yamaha NS-10s. The Mackies
> seemed a little better, and probably represent good value for their
> market, but they are a long way from good serious sound in a proper
> room. Nearfields in general are appropriate for what they are designed
> for, and that is not full field listening. I find nearfield listening
> awkward and I think the popularity of bridge mounted nearfield
> monitors, nearly universal in home/project studios and disappointingly
> so in "real" facilities, to be a fundamental problem in the pursuit of
> making good records. That's another story.
>
> Pro products designed for mastering and mixdown purposes specifically,
> tube or otherwise, are a different line of product (and a much rarer
> one) than pro products designed for sound reinforcement, MI, stage
> monitoring, project studio, or contractor install work. Products
> designed for the latter uses are not necessarily to be barred from
> consideration for serious home use-indeed they may work better than
> pure-consumer products-but they always involve different tradeoffs and
> so are not that likely to be competitive.
>
> A good example would be a power amp. Maybe you build power amps and
> have a pet design with some patents or a McGuffin like Power Guard.
> Perhaps you build a 2x300 watt stereo power amp for touring sound use.
> Since it goes in a rack and gets hauled around, it's mechanically
> toughened, compact, and has a powerful fan to keep it cool even if only
> the front of the rack is exposed. That fan makes it too loud for my
> living room, I absolutely guarantee. I spent a lot of effort dropping
> the noise floor. That same electrical design might work great for me if
> you made a variant with huge finned heatsinks facing outward and no
> fan. It would weigh more, it wouldn't be as amenable to getting hauled
> around and bumped and dropped, Perhaps you designed a quieter fan in
> attempt to "cross over', but what you got was an amp that runs hotter
> on the road and fails more often.
>

[[email protected]]

Paging Dr. Massengill........

[Margaret von B.]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Brystons are primarily sold for home audio, Crowns for sound
> reinforcement, also QSC. Alesis and Behringer are budget lines.
>

Wrong on all counts as usual.

[[email protected]]

Whooooo put the halibuuuut on the _pooooop_ deck?

[[email protected]]

But who am I, monsieur, to -how do you say-argue, with someone whose
nom de merde reminds me of Yves Montand's cartoon-poodle crooning in
the cinematic mastairpeece, 'Let's Make Love"?

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
oups.com

> The lack of tubes is not the fundamental problem with the active
> speakers inexpensively available for project studio use, and you know
> that I never said any such thing.

Not only did you imply it, you say it again.

>I don't deny there are perfectly
> good solid state studio monitoring amplifier solutions, however, it's
> also interesting to note that the most well known examples in this
> product category-the EAR 509 and 549, various Manley units-are in
> fact tubed.

Thanks for being so predictable, Cal.

>Some facilities use Cello, Krell or Jeff Rowland
> ("tweako" solid state) units also.

Overpriced.

> I can't think of any solid state amplifiers expressly designed and
> marketed for studio monitoring, in fact, although they well may exist.

The concept of a solid state amplifier that is that narrowly purpose-built
is pretty weird.

> Hot House, perhaps, but I have no idea how good they are.

Overpriced. Overbuilt. Underengineered.

> As for cooling fans, I've never heard a really quiet one! (No pun
> intended...) Such a device would be a slow turning, extremely well
> balanced, custom built affair and I guess most people just figure
> bigger heat sink fins are cheaper and less bother.

Actually, very quiet production cooling fans exist. You're right about
slow-moving but you forgot the large diameter part.

> Such a fan would
> also be a relatively low-differential system and therefore easily
> impacted by dirt, smoke, dust bunnies,et al.

If you have a dirty, smokey, dust-bunny ridden room Cal, you might try
practicing a little cleanliness instead of blaming technology for your lack
of hygiene.

> Since most High End
> buyers lack convenient compressed air or DI water hosedown
> facilities, and their houses aren't exactly clean rooms, this would
> be a design concern.

Most of the high ender's homes I've been in were quite fastidious, even umm,
anal.

[[email protected]]

Large diameter indeed-it would look like one of those really techno car
trunk amps with a Lycoming helo cooling fan on the top. On really quiet
bearings.

[Clyde Slick]

>
> Most of the high ender's homes I've been in were quite fastidious, even
> umm, anal.

You don't feel comfortable unless a house has "at least" four
bathrooms.



----== 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 =----

[Tom]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote
>
> Those are really pretty good speakers, but they aren't the measure of the
> marketplace. Golden Ear Bigotry (as taught by Grand Dragon of the Klan Of
> The Golden Ear, John Atkinson), anybody?
>

Gotta hand it to you Arny..... snotty right up to the last minute. I have
no
doubt that you'll be snotty in person...... and proud of it. This behavior
won't get your butt kicked, but it doesn't seem very Christian. Don't you
want to represent your faith at a higher standard?

[Tom]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote
> "Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
> oups.com
>> Now that you've trashed perfectly fine sounding pro speakers and been
>> made aware of several others, what do you have to say for yourself.
>> OOPS would be a good start.
>
> Cal is like Atkinson - he never admits that he ever made a mistake.


now that was funny