Read Stereophile, and destroy your CD collection? [Archive]

John Atkinson

February 26th 05, 09:00 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author
> Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article recommending that readers treat
> their CDs with Armor-All as a tweak.

That is correct, in the early 1990s.

> Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was damaging.

When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the scratches
accidentally introduced by too rough a treatment. These scratches
can be polished out.

In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with ArmorAll.
Every couple of years I get the treated discs out to see if they
still play. They do.

I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors compared
with the untreated CDs for an article to appear in a future issue
of Stereophile.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[email protected]

February 26th 05, 09:30 PM

John "Unctuous" Atkinson wrote:
>
>

>emante
>
and
>
>identiucal
>
>
A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick. Get a spell checker (or an
editor). ;-)

Robert Morein

February 26th 05, 09:34 PM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:
> > There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author
> > Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article recommending that readers treat
> > their CDs with Armor-All as a tweak.
>
> That is correct, in the early 1990s.
>
> > Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was damaging.
>
> When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the scratches
> accidentally introduced by too rough a treatment. These scratches
> can be polished out.
>
> In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with ArmorAll.
> Every couple of years I get the treated discs out to see if they
> still play. They do.
>
> I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors compared
> with the untreated CDs for an article to appear in a future issue
> of Stereophile.
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile
>
>
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile
>
Bob Morein
Mister

Lionel

February 27th 05, 12:09 AM

a écrit :
> John "Unctuous" Atkinson wrote:
>
>>
>
>>emante
>>
>
> and
>
>>identiucal
>>
>>
>
> A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick. Get a spell checker (or an
> editor). ;-)

YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(

Clyde Slick

February 27th 05, 12:45 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> a écrit :
>> John "Unctuous" Atkinson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>emante
>>>
>>
>> and
>>
>>>identiucal
>>>
>>>
>>
>> A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick. Get a spell checker (or an
>> editor). ;-)
>
> YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>

If 'YOu' had half a brain, 'You' would have half a brain.

----== 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 27th 05, 12:51 AM

Clyde Slick a écrit :
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>
a écrit :
>>
>>>John "Unctuous" Atkinson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>emante
>>>>
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>identiucal
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick. Get a spell checker (or an
>>>editor). ;-)
>>
>>YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>
>
>
> If 'YOu' had half a brain, 'You' would have half a brain.

Why haven't you given any answer to my proposal stupid
*coward* asshole ?

Robert Morein

February 27th 05, 02:50 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author Sam
Tellig
> once wrote and article recommending that readers treat their CDs with
> Armor-All as a tweak. Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was
> damaging.
>
> Can anyone confirm or deny this story?
>
The story is false.
It was spread by Kevin Spacey to hide the fact that his hands had slipped
with a green marker.

Clyde Slick

February 27th 05, 03:06 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
a écrit :
>>>
>>>>John "Unctuous" Atkinson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>emante
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>identiucal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick. Get a spell checker (or an
>>>>editor). ;-)
>>>
>>>YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>>
>>
>>
>> If 'YOu' had half a brain, 'You' would have half a brain.
>
> Why haven't you given any answer to my proposal stupid *coward* asshole ?

**** off asshole.
you are a liar and an idiot.

----== 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 =----

Mike McKelvy

February 27th 05, 06:59 AM

John Atkinson Feb 26, 1:00 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: "John Atkinson" >=AD; - Find
messages by this author
Date: 26 Feb 2005 13:00:33 -0800
Local: Sat, Feb 26 2005 1:00 pm
Subject: Re: Read Stereophile, and destroy your CD collection?
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

Arny Krueger wrote:
> There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author
> Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article recommending that readers treat
> their CDs with Armor-All as a tweak.

Atkinson wrote:
That is correct, in the early 1990s.

> Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was damaging.

When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the scratches
accidentally introduced by too rough a treatment. These scratches
can be polished out.

In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with ArmorAll.
Every couple of years I get the treated discs out to see if they
still play. They do.

I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors compared
with the untreated CDs for an article to appear in a future issue
of Stereophile.

John Atkinson

SO I WONDER

Why you can't muster up that much energy to see why anybody recomending
Shakti Stones is probably into substance abuse.

Howard Ferstler

February 27th 05, 09:17 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:

> > There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author
> > Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article recommending that readers treat
> > their CDs with Armor-All as a tweak.

> That is correct, in the early 1990s.
>
> > Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was damaging.
>
> When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the scratches
> accidentally introduced by too rough a treatment. These scratches
> can be polished out.
>
> In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with ArmorAll.
> Every couple of years I get the treated discs out to see if they
> still play. They do.
>
> I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors compared
> with the untreated CDs for an article to appear in a future issue
> of Stereophile.

How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

Howard Ferstler

MINe 109

February 27th 05, 10:26 PM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> John Atkinson wrote:
> >
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> > > There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author
> > > Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article recommending that readers treat
> > > their CDs with Armor-All as a tweak.
>
> > That is correct, in the early 1990s.
> >
> > > Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was damaging.
> >
> > When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the scratches
> > accidentally introduced by too rough a treatment. These scratches
> > can be polished out.
> >
> > In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with ArmorAll.
> > Every couple of years I get the treated discs out to see if they
> > still play. They do.
> >
> > I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors compared
> > with the untreated CDs for an article to appear in a future issue
> > of Stereophile.
>
> How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
> coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
> do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
> up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
> damage the discs.
>
> Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
> Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
> remove Armor All.
>
> What a joke.

Now you get it: a joke. Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
tweak, too?

Stephen

Arny Krueger

February 27th 05, 10:27 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message

>
> How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
> coating their CD recordings with Armor All?

You're asking the right question of the right guy.

>At best it would
> do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
> up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
> damage the discs.

That appears to be how it all worked out in the end.

> Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
> Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
> remove Armor All.
>
> What a joke.

...except to the hapless Stereophile readers who ruined parts of their CD
collection.

Howard Ferstler

February 27th 05, 11:23 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> > How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
> > coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
> > do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
> > up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
> > damage the discs.
> >
> > Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
> > Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
> > remove Armor All.
> >
> > What a joke.

> Now you get it: a joke. Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
> tweak, too?

I think he was being serious, just like so many other
misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
serious, too.

Howard Ferstler

Arny Krueger

February 27th 05, 11:30 PM

"MINe 109" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:

>> How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
>> coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
>> do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
>> up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
>> damage the discs.

>> Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
>> Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
>> remove Armor All.

>> What a joke.

> Now you get it: a joke.

Where's the illustrated guide that helps Stereophile readers separate the
jokes from the real stuff?

>Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
> tweak, too?

That's the basis of an important question - is Stereophile serious about the
RCL or is that yet another joke?

George M. Middius

February 27th 05, 11:58 PM

Harold the Pinhead Tweako Knucklehead Plagiarizer said:

> I think he was being serious, just like so many other
> misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
> journalists are serious.

Clearly you're drawing a correlation between frequency of publication
and degree of misguidedness, maleducatedness, and dumbness. The more
published a person is, the more he has those undesirable traits.

You've done well, Clerkie. Whoever said you can't do statistics was
clearly underrating you. ;-)

MINe 109

February 28th 05, 01:02 AM

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> >> How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
> >> coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
> >> do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
> >> up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
> >> damage the discs.
>
> >> Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
> >> Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
> >> remove Armor All.
>
> >> What a joke.
>
> > Now you get it: a joke.
>
> Where's the illustrated guide that helps Stereophile readers separate the
> jokes from the real stuff?

He-he-he.

> >Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
> > tweak, too?
>
> That's the basis of an important question - is Stereophile serious about the
> RCL or is that yet another joke?

No, it's a handy marketing tool, like a car magazine's annual picks.

Stephen

MINe 109

February 28th 05, 01:03 AM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> > > How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
> > > coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
> > > do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
> > > up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
> > > damage the discs.
> > >
> > > Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
> > > Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
> > > remove Armor All.
> > >
> > > What a joke.
>
> > Now you get it: a joke. Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
> > tweak, too?
>
> I think he was being serious, just like so many other
> misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
> journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
> of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
> remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
> described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
> serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
> serious, too.

You think the $1.25 tweak was "dead serious"?

Stephen

Tom

February 28th 05, 04:01 AM

"Lionel" > wrote
>
> YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>

Why are you insulting the man?

George M. Middius

February 28th 05, 04:36 AM

Tom said to Lionella:

> Why are you insulting the man?

Because Slut is afraid of Krooger.

Lionel

February 28th 05, 09:16 AM

Tom a écrit :
> "Lionel" > wrote
>
>>YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>
>
>
> Why are you insulting the man?

Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt
of our last exchange :

-------------------------------------------------------------

He said :

"I'm not even a Francophobe, because I'm not really scared
of your ilk, just annoyed and disgusted by them."

I answered :

I understand and I share your point of view.
In fact Hitler wasn't really anti-semitic you know, he was
just "annoyed" and "disgusted" by Jewish people...

-------------------------------------------------------------

Just to give you an idea of the respectability of his point
of views.
Between you and me compared to Sackman's statements, what
you/they call the "Krueger's audio heresies" are childish
arguments. :-(

Lionel_Chapuis

February 28th 05, 09:53 AM

George M. Middius wrote:

>
>
> Tom said to Lionella:
>
> > Why are you insulting the man?
>
> Because Slut is afraid of Krooger.

Please George, don't transfert on me your own nightmares.
I am insulting Sack'Ô'**** because he is disgusting, that's all.

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

Lionel_Chapuis

February 28th 05, 09:53 AM

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

Clyde Slick

February 28th 05, 01:59 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Tom a écrit :
>> "Lionel" > wrote
>>
>>>YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>>
>>
>>
>> Why are you insulting the man?
>
> Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
> He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt of our last
> exchange :
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> He said :
>
> "I'm not even a Francophobe, because I'm not really scared of your ilk,
> just annoyed and disgusted by them."
>
>
> I answered :
>
> I understand and I share your point of view.
> In fact Hitler wasn't really anti-semitic you know, he was just "annoyed"
> and "disgusted" by Jewish people...
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Just to give you an idea of the respectability of his point of views.
> Between you and me compared to Sackman's statements, what you/they call
> the "Krueger's audio heresies" are childish arguments. :-(

There is nothing that requires that everybody like else.
My distaste for the French is based upon their arrogance and their
own abhorrent behavior.

----== 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 28th 05, 02:07 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message

> Tom a écrit :
>> "Lionel" > wrote
>>
>>> YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>>
>>
>>
>> Why are you insulting the man?
>
> Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
> He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward.

A true disciple of Middius, of course.

>Hereafter an excerpt
> of our last exchange :
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> He said :
>
> "I'm not even a Francophobe, because I'm not really scared
> of your ilk, just annoyed and disgusted by them."

Yecch - he's basically saying that all french people are the same. It's a
kind of racism.

> I answered :

> I understand and I share your point of view.
> In fact Hitler wasn't really anti-semitic you know, he was
> just "annoyed" and "disgusted" by Jewish people...

Nice liquid sarcasm.

> -------------------------------------------------------------

> Just to give you an idea of the respectability of his point
> of views.

There ain't none.

> Between you and me compared to Sackman's statements, what
> you/they call the "Krueger's audio heresies" are childish
> arguments. :-(

Agreed. It's clear that Sackman's simplistic, black-and-white views on audio
characterize his whole approach to life.

Tom

February 28th 05, 02:18 PM

I asked WRT John Atkinson:

>> Why are you insulting the man?

"LeeOnell answers WRT Art Sackman >>
>>
> Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
> He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt of our last
> exchange :

Did you think you were insulting
Art or did you know you were insulting John?
If John, why?

Lionel

February 28th 05, 04:38 PM

Clyde Slick a écrit :
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Tom a écrit :
>>
>>>"Lionel" > wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>>YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Why are you insulting the man?
>>
>>Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
>>He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt of our last
>>exchange :
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>He said :
>>
>>"I'm not even a Francophobe, because I'm not really scared of your ilk,
>>just annoyed and disgusted by them."
>>
>>
>>I answered :
>>
>>I understand and I share your point of view.
>>In fact Hitler wasn't really anti-semitic you know, he was just "annoyed"
>>and "disgusted" by Jewish people...
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Just to give you an idea of the respectability of his point of views.
>>Between you and me compared to Sackman's statements, what you/they call
>>the "Krueger's audio heresies" are childish arguments. :-(
>
>
>
> There is nothing that requires that everybody like else.
> My distaste for the French is based upon their arrogance and their
> own abhorrent behavior.

The nazis from all countries were saying nearly the same
thing about Jewishs. Everybody remembers these horrible
posters :
- http://www.pzg.biz/vhs10.gif
- http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/images/hitler/thejew.jpg
- http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/photos/p00/p5/p00505.gif.
In what your discourse is different, eh Sackman ?

Lionel

February 28th 05, 04:46 PM

Tom a écrit :
> I asked WRT John Atkinson:
>
>
>>>Why are you insulting the man?
>
>
>
> "LeeOnell answers WRT Art Sackman >>
>
>>Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
>>He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt of our last
>>exchange :
>
>
>
> Did you think you were insulting
> Art or did you know you were insulting John?
> If John, why?

I think there's a misunderstanding here Tom.
I thought that Tor was answering to Sackman. He wrote :
"A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick."
"Slick" is the nickname of Sackman...

I haven't any reason to insult John Atkinson and I sincerely
apologize for my mistake.

dave weil

February 28th 05, 05:06 PM

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 17:46:12 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>Tom a écrit :
>> I asked WRT John Atkinson:
>>
>>
>>>>Why are you insulting the man?
>>
>>
>>
>> "LeeOnell answers WRT Art Sackman >>
>>
>>>Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
>>>He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt of our last
>>>exchange :
>>
>>
>>
>> Did you think you were insulting
>> Art or did you know you were insulting John?
>> If John, why?
>
>I think there's a misunderstanding here Tom.
>I thought that Tor was answering to Sackman. He wrote :
>"A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick."
>"Slick" is the nickname of Sackman...
>
>I haven't any reason to insult John Atkinson and I sincerely
>apologize for my mistake.

Nice apology, Lionel.

Clyde Slick

February 28th 05, 05:15 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>
>> Tom a écrit :
>>> "Lionel" > wrote
>>>
>>>> YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why are you insulting the man?
>>
>> Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
>> He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward.
>
> A true disciple of Middius, of course.
>
>>Hereafter an excerpt
>> of our last exchange :
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> He said :
>>
>> "I'm not even a Francophobe, because I'm not really scared
>> of your ilk, just annoyed and disgusted by them."
>
> Yecch - he's basically saying that all french people are the same. It's a
> kind of racism.
>
>> I answered :
>
>> I understand and I share your point of view.
>> In fact Hitler wasn't really anti-semitic you know, he was
>> just "annoyed" and "disgusted" by Jewish people...
>
> Nice liquid sarcasm.
>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>> Just to give you an idea of the respectability of his point
>> of views.
>
> There ain't none.
>
>> Between you and me compared to Sackman's statements, what
>> you/they call the "Krueger's audio heresies" are childish
>> arguments. :-(
>
> Agreed. It's clear that Sackman's simplistic, black-and-white views on
> audio
> characterize his whole approach to life.
>
Really, you used to tell me I like colorizations!

----== 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 28th 05, 05:23 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>Tom a écrit :
>>>
>>>>"Lionel" > wrote
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>YOu should propose him to get a brain first. :-(
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Why are you insulting the man?
>>>
>>>Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
>>>He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt of our last
>>>exchange :
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>He said :
>>>
>>>"I'm not even a Francophobe, because I'm not really scared of your ilk,
>>>just annoyed and disgusted by them."
>>>
>>>
>>>I answered :
>>>
>>>I understand and I share your point of view.
>>>In fact Hitler wasn't really anti-semitic you know, he was just "annoyed"
>>>and "disgusted" by Jewish people...
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>Just to give you an idea of the respectability of his point of views.
>>>Between you and me compared to Sackman's statements, what you/they call
>>>the "Krueger's audio heresies" are childish arguments. :-(
>>
>>
>>
>> There is nothing that requires that everybody like else.
>> My distaste for the French is based upon their arrogance and their
>> own abhorrent behavior.
>
> The nazis from all countries were saying nearly the same thing about
> Jewishs. Everybody remembers these horrible posters :
> - http://www.pzg.biz/vhs10.gif
> - http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/images/hitler/thejew.jpg
> - http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/photos/p00/p5/p00505.gif.
> In what your discourse is different, eh Sackman ?

We've been through this many times. It's based upon the
actions of your nation and its leaders. Its also based on your country's
legendary reputation among Americans who have visited your nation.
Rudeness and arrogance.You would be better served to present
a more accomodating facade to your visitors, and not to be
so rude, arrogant, price gouging and cheating to them.
I am going through CDG in a couple of weeks. This time, I hope that
when I spend my 18 Euros on a samll salad, a small cup of yoghurt
and a bottle of water, the vending stall man will 'at least' not cheat me
out of my change this time.

----== 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 =----

Alex Rodriguez

February 28th 05, 06:41 PM

In article >, says...
>There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author Sam Tellig
>once wrote and article recommending that readers treat their CDs with
>Armor-All as a tweak. Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was
>damaging.
>Can anyone confirm or deny this story?

I'm pretty sure I recall reading that article in Stereophile. I never did it
as I don't believe that any treatment to an unscratched CD is going to provide
any improvement.
---------------
Alex

Lionel

February 28th 05, 07:03 PM

Clyde "Sack'Ô'****" Slick a écrit :

>>The nazis from all countries were saying nearly the same thing about
>>Jewishs. Everybody remembers these horrible posters :
>>- http://www.pzg.biz/vhs10.gif
>>- http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/images/hitler/thejew.jpg
>>- http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/photos/p00/p5/p00505.gif.
>>In what your discourse is different, eh Sackman ?
>
>
> We've been through this many times. It's based upon the
> actions of your nation and its leaders. Its also based on your country's
> legendary reputation among Americans who have visited your nation.
> Rudeness and arrogance.

You can go through this all time you want.

Speaking of the people of France you have written
"I'm...disgusted by them".
This is typically the terminology that the nazis used to
speak about Jewishs in their propaganda.

Now when you will see your face in a mirror you will know
what was looking the French collaborators who have denounced
the Jewishs family during the WWII.
They were "disgusted" by Jewishs in the same way *you* are
disgusted by Frenchs.

Lionel

February 28th 05, 08:05 PM

dave weil a écrit :
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 17:46:12 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>Tom a écrit :
>>
>>>I asked WRT John Atkinson:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Why are you insulting the man?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"LeeOnell answers WRT Art Sackman >>
>>>
>>>>Why ? Just because Sackman is detestable.
>>>>He is a kind of fascist pitiful coward. Hereafter an excerpt of our last
>>>>exchange :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Did you think you were insulting
>>>Art or did you know you were insulting John?
>>>If John, why?
>>
>>I think there's a misunderstanding here Tom.
>>I thought that Tor was answering to Sackman. He wrote :
>>"A lot of typos in your posts lately, Slick."
>>"Slick" is the nickname of Sackman...
>>
>>I haven't any reason to insult John Atkinson and I sincerely
>>apologize for my mistake.
>
>
> Nice apology, Lionel.

Apology is too easy since I am sure that Mr Atkinson will
forgive me easily.

George M. Middius

February 28th 05, 08:08 PM

Alex Rodriguez said:

> I'm pretty sure I recall reading that article in Stereophile. I never did it
> as I don't believe that any treatment to an unscratched CD is going to provide
> any improvement.

Bear in mind that Krooger believes $1000 checks are superior to actual
toilet paper. Perhaps he has cast-iron ears to go with his cast-iron butt.

Clyde Slick

February 28th 05, 08:21 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde "Sack'Ô'****" Slick a écrit :
>
>>>The nazis from all countries were saying nearly the same thing about
>>>Jewishs. Everybody remembers these horrible posters :
>>>- http://www.pzg.biz/vhs10.gif
>>>- http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/images/hitler/thejew.jpg
>>>- http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/photos/p00/p5/p00505.gif.
>>>In what your discourse is different, eh Sackman ?
>>
>>
>> We've been through this many times. It's based upon the
>> actions of your nation and its leaders. Its also based on your country's
>> legendary reputation among Americans who have visited your nation.
>> Rudeness and arrogance.
>
> You can go through this all time you want.
>
> Speaking of the people of France you have written "I'm...disgusted by
> them".
> This is typically the terminology that the nazis used to speak about
> Jewishs in their propaganda.
>
> Now when you will see your face in a mirror you will know what was looking
> the French collaborators who have denounced the Jewishs family during the
> WWII.
> They were "disgusted" by Jewishs in the same way *you* are disgusted by
> Frenchs.

Stop being so arrogant and rude, you are doing nothing
to dispel your stereotype.

----== 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 28th 05, 08:21 PM

Clyde Slick

February 28th 05, 08:21 PM

Clyde Slick

February 28th 05, 08:21 PM

George M. Middius

February 28th 05, 10:30 PM

Clyde Slick said:

> > They were "disgusted" by Jewishs[sic] in the same way *you* are disgusted by
> > Frenchs[sic].

> Stop being so arrogant and rude, you are doing nothing
> to dispel your stereotype.

I think Slut might need to re-order her fave Hungarian plonk.

Tom

March 1st 05, 12:46 AM

"Lionel" > wrote
>>>
>>>I haven't any reason to insult John Atkinson and I sincerely apologize
>>>for my mistake.
>>
>>
>> Nice apology, Lionel.
>
> Apology is too easy since I am sure that Mr Atkinson will forgive me
> easily.

I was glad to see it also.

Howard Ferstler

March 1st 05, 05:36 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> > I think he was being serious, just like so many other
> > misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
> > journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
> > of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
> > remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
> > described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
> > serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
> > serious, too.

> You think the $1.25 tweak was "dead serious"?

It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
recordings ruined.

The article basically stated that Armor All made the discs
sound better. That in itself was preposterous enough. But
then it was discovered that the substance could damage the
label side of some discs.

Howard Ferstler

MINe 109

March 1st 05, 05:46 PM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> > > I think he was being serious, just like so many other
> > > misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
> > > journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
> > > of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
> > > remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
> > > described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
> > > serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
> > > serious, too.
>
> > You think the $1.25 tweak was "dead serious"?
>
> It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
> have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
> recordings ruined.

LOL! You don't know what the "$1.25 tweak" is, do you?

> The article basically stated that Armor All made the discs
> sound better. That in itself was preposterous enough. But
> then it was discovered that the substance could damage the
> label side of some discs.

Joke gone bad.

Stephen

Howard Ferstler

March 1st 05, 05:47 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> LOL! You don't know what the "$1.25 tweak" is, do you?

And I do not care, either.

> > The article basically stated that Armor All made the discs
> > sound better. That in itself was preposterous enough. But
> > then it was discovered that the substance could damage the
> > label side of some discs.

> Joke gone bad.

You responded to my post in two minutes.

Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
keyboard.

Howard Ferstler

MINe 109

March 1st 05, 05:56 PM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> > LOL! You don't know what the "$1.25 tweak" is, do you?
>
> And I do not care, either.

You should if you're condemning it.

> > > The article basically stated that Armor All made the discs
> > > sound better. That in itself was preposterous enough. But
> > > then it was discovered that the substance could damage the
> > > label side of some discs.
>
> > Joke gone bad.
>
> You responded to my post in two minutes.
>
> Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
> keyboard.

Free-lance. Speaking of too much time on your hands, are you waiting
with your stopwatch?

Stephen

Howard Ferstler

March 1st 05, 06:07 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> > You responded to my post in two minutes.
> >
> > Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
> > keyboard.

> Free-lance. Speaking of too much time on your hands, are you waiting
> with your stopwatch?

It is easy to see the post timings on the thread list.

Hopefully, you are not sitting in some office somewhere
wasting your boss's time.

Howard Ferstler

MINe 109

March 1st 05, 06:32 PM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> > > You responded to my post in two minutes.
> > >
> > > Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
> > > keyboard.
>
> > Free-lance. Speaking of too much time on your hands, are you waiting
> > with your stopwatch?
>
> It is easy to see the post timings on the thread list.
>
> Hopefully, you are not sitting in some office somewhere
> wasting your boss's time.

You've forgotten my profession. See my other comment about the
importance of being informed when ridiculing something.

Stephen

Howard Ferstler

March 1st 05, 07:54 PM

MINe 109 wrote:

> You've forgotten my profession. See my other comment about the
> importance of being informed when ridiculing something.

God knows what your profession is. Certainly, there is no
way to tell for sure from reading the stuff posted here.

But, yes, I have forgotten whatever you said previously
about your supposed "profession." Unlike the way some of you
obsess about me (remembering every nuance and pouring over
my past posts looking for inconsistencies), I do not care
enough about any of you to become involved in doing research
on your jobs or much of anything else to do with you.

Basically, in addition to posting materials that will help
to keep newcomers from being suckered in by members of the
lunatic fringe, I show up here to slam a mentally confused
group and undermine that group's belief systems, or, at
least in some cases, put tweako-audio manufacturing and
journalism jobs at risk. Because most of you have cockeyed
belief systems about audio, you deserve every little bit of
opprobrium that I can come up with.

Yeah, I do not like you people.

Howard Ferstler

Sander deWaal

March 1st 05, 08:22 PM

Howard Ferstler > said:

>It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
>have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
>recordings ruined.

How many people would have done this?
Personally, I know of no one in my direct surroundings who ever tried
to color or polish their CDs with anything.

That CD jewel case is bad enough as it is, though.
Why haven't they found something better in those 20+ years that CD is
around?

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

George M. Middius

March 1st 05, 08:42 PM

Sander deWaal said:

> That CD jewel case is bad enough as it is, though.
> Why haven't they found something better in those 20+ years that CD is
> around?

Cheaper is better!

MINe 109

March 1st 05, 08:46 PM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
>
> > You've forgotten my profession. See my other comment about the
> > importance of being informed when ridiculing something.
>
> God knows what your profession is. Certainly, there is no
> way to tell for sure from reading the stuff posted here.
>
> But, yes, I have forgotten whatever you said previously
> about your supposed "profession." Unlike the way some of you
> obsess about me (remembering every nuance and pouring over
> my past posts looking for inconsistencies), I do not care
> enough about any of you to become involved in doing research
> on your jobs or much of anything else to do with you.

You've been beaten over the head with my profession for five years! You
consulted a lawyer and begged not to be sued because of my profession!

You have a consistent pattern of accusing people of being phonies but
refusing to examine evidence to the contrary. You even published your
infamous list without investigating anything more than your
preconceptions.

And no one has to pore over your past posts: you repeat yourself ad
nauseam.

> Basically, in addition to posting materials that will help
> to keep newcomers from being suckered in by members of the
> lunatic fringe, I show up here to slam a mentally confused
> group and undermine that group's belief systems, or, at
> least in some cases, put tweako-audio manufacturing and
> journalism jobs at risk. Because most of you have cockeyed
> belief systems about audio, you deserve every little bit of
> opprobrium that I can come up with.
>
> Yeah, I do not like you people.

There's no lunatic fringe here, just an army of strawmen you've
constructed.

Hey newcomers! Go buy stuff to irritate Howard!

Stephen

Clyde Slick

March 1st 05, 09:14 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...
> MINe 109 wrote:
>>
>
>> Joke gone bad.
>
> You responded to my post in two minutes.
>
> Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
> keyboard.
>

Congrats Howard!
Your quick response beat his! It took you
only one minute to respond.

If irony were made of green cheese.

----== 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

March 1st 05, 09:22 PM

Clyde Slick a écrit :
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>MINe 109 wrote:
>>
>>>Joke gone bad.
>>
>>You responded to my post in two minutes.
>>
>>Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
>>keyboard.
>>
>
>
>
> Congrats Howard!
> Your quick response beat his! It took you
> only one minute to respond.
>
> If irony were made of green cheese.

You would wear one on the skyll instead of a yellow "YalMake".

Clyde Slick

March 1st 05, 09:52 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick a écrit :
>> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>MINe 109 wrote:
>>>
>>>>Joke gone bad.
>>>
>>>You responded to my post in two minutes.
>>>
>>>Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
>>>keyboard.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Congrats Howard!
>> Your quick response beat his! It took you
>> only one minute to respond.
>>
>> If irony were made of green cheese.
>
> You would wear one on the skyll instead of a yellow "YalMake".

**** off asshole.
You are a liar and an idiot.

----== 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

March 1st 05, 10:43 PM

"François Yves Le Gal" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:54:52 -0500, Howard Ferstler >
> wrote:
>
> >Yeah, I do not like you people.
>
> Bye, bye, Howard. We'll miss you. Not.

You misunderstand. I am not going anywhere for a while yet.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

March 1st 05, 10:52 PM

Sander deWaal wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler > said:
>
> >It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
> >have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
> >recordings ruined.

> How many people would have done this?

I have no idea. However, as best I can remember Tellig did
write a column that tried to undo the damage. If the problem
was minimal, why would he go to the trouble to try to fix
things with a follow-up column? Stereophile magazine has
never been in the habit of publishing "retraction" columns,
so I assume that there was quite a stink.

> Personally, I know of no one in my direct surroundings who ever tried
> to color or polish their CDs with anything.

You obviously hang out with a saner bunch than the group who
reacted to Tellig's column.

> That CD jewel case is bad enough as it is, though.
> Why haven't they found something better in those 20+ years that CD is
> around?

I get lots of CDs to review, and some of them come in padded
envelopes instead of boxes. However, even with box shipping
I find cases that have the hinge tabs broken. Fortunately, I
keep a stock of spare empty boxes on hand. One big problem
with some jewel boxes is that the center gripper will often
not let go of the damned disc without applying way more pull
to the removal than I care to apply. Once I remove the disc,
I may have to file the tabs down a bit to make future
removals less traumatic.

The main thing that bugs me these days are the edge tapes we
find on the jewel cases containing the discs. Not every
company has such things, however (some of the smaller
outfits do not do this, to their credit), and I mainly find
them on DVD movies. Sometimes, all three non-hinge edges of
the DVD case will be taped over.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

March 1st 05, 11:02 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> > MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > > You've forgotten my profession. See my other comment about the
> > > importance of being informed when ridiculing something.
> >
> > God knows what your profession is. Certainly, there is no
> > way to tell for sure from reading the stuff posted here.
> >
> > But, yes, I have forgotten whatever you said previously
> > about your supposed "profession." Unlike the way some of you
> > obsess about me (remembering every nuance and pouring over
> > my past posts looking for inconsistencies), I do not care
> > enough about any of you to become involved in doing research
> > on your jobs or much of anything else to do with you.

> You've been beaten over the head with my profession for five years! You
> consulted a lawyer and begged not to be sued because of my profession!

Oh, now I remember. Hey, I fibbed: I did not consult with a
lawyer and do not retract what I wrote in that article, and
so you can go on ahead and sue, tweako. Step up to the plate
and take a swing at the ball.

> You have a consistent pattern of accusing people of being phonies

For good reason.

> but
> refusing to examine evidence to the contrary. You even published your
> infamous list without investigating anything more than your
> preconceptions.

What list? Are you referring to my article in The Audiophile
Voice where I did an expose of the goofballs on RAO?

> And no one has to pore over your past posts: you repeat yourself ad
> nauseam.

I do work to make life easier for you nitwits.

> > Basically, in addition to posting materials that will help
> > to keep newcomers from being suckered in by members of the
> > lunatic fringe, I show up here to slam a mentally confused
> > group and undermine that group's belief systems, or, at
> > least in some cases, put tweako-audio manufacturing and
> > journalism jobs at risk. Because most of you have cockeyed
> > belief systems about audio, you deserve every little bit of
> > opprobrium that I can come up with.
> >
> > Yeah, I do not like you people.

> There's no lunatic fringe here, just an army of strawmen you've
> constructed.

Hey, pal, ALL of you guys are members of the lunatic fringe.
Heck, even so-called "rational" audio buffs are a bit on the
shaky side of the mental-stability road, and of course you
true believers are two bricks short of a load and then some.

> Hey newcomers! Go buy stuff to irritate Howard!

They will not irritate me in the least if they spend wisely.

Actually, it is not those saps who purchase overkill and
overpriced gear who irritate me all that much. What really
irritates me are the journalistic, sales-clerk, and
manufacturing con artists who make a living by suckering
such people.

Don't worry, I know that the above trio does not include
you. On the contrary, you are one of the suckers.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

March 1st 05, 11:04 PM

Clyde Slick wrote:
>
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
> ...
> > MINe 109 wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> Joke gone bad.
> >
> > You responded to my post in two minutes.
> >
> > Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
> > keyboard.

> Congrats Howard!
> Your quick response beat his! It took you
> only one minute to respond.

I am retired and have time to spare. Unlike you clowns, I am
not sitting in an office wasting my boss's time by sneaking
onto RAO and debating people. And don't you guys give me any
more crap about being freelancers working out of your homes.
Bunk.

Actually, I need to get another batch of SACD recording
reviews ready for a future magazine report. Arranging to
have some additional speakers sent to me to review, too.

Howard Ferstler

George M. Middius

March 1st 05, 11:13 PM

Brother Horace the Fearful said:

> > You have a consistent pattern of accusing people of being phonies

> For good reason.

Paranoia is not a good reason.

George M. Middius

March 1st 05, 11:15 PM

Brother Horace the Sneaky said:

> Unlike you clowns, I am
> not sitting in an office wasting my boss's time by sneaking
> onto RAO and debating people.

You're wasting your golden years by "sneaking onto RAO" and calling people
names like a frustrated 8-year-old.

[email protected]

March 1st 05, 11:27 PM

Sander deWaal wrote:
> Howard Ferstler > said:
>
<snipped>
>
> >It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
> >have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
> >recordings ruined [by treating them wirh Armor All].
>
>
> How many people would have done this?
>
>
Sadly, probably as many as "treated" their CDs with green pens. Both
ideas are equally absurd. Some folks probably "treated" their discs
with both a green pen *and* Armor All, just to be sure. And then, the
truly gullible will use a Bedini Clarifier just before playback. :-(

MINe 109

March 2nd 05, 12:08 AM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
> >
> > > MINe 109 wrote:
> > >
> > > > You've forgotten my profession. See my other comment about the
> > > > importance of being informed when ridiculing something.
> > >
> > > God knows what your profession is. Certainly, there is no
> > > way to tell for sure from reading the stuff posted here.
> > >
> > > But, yes, I have forgotten whatever you said previously
> > > about your supposed "profession." Unlike the way some of you
> > > obsess about me (remembering every nuance and pouring over
> > > my past posts looking for inconsistencies), I do not care
> > > enough about any of you to become involved in doing research
> > > on your jobs or much of anything else to do with you.
>
> > You've been beaten over the head with my profession for five years! You
> > consulted a lawyer and begged not to be sued because of my profession!
>
> Oh, now I remember. Hey, I fibbed: I did not consult with a
> lawyer and do not retract what I wrote in that article, and
> so you can go on ahead and sue, tweako. Step up to the plate
> and take a swing at the ball.

You have no reputation to defend.

> > You have a consistent pattern of accusing people of being phonies
>
> For good reason.

No, you pull it out of thin air.

> > but
> > refusing to examine evidence to the contrary. You even published your
> > infamous list without investigating anything more than your
> > preconceptions.
>
> What list? Are you referring to my article in The Audiophile
> Voice where I did an expose of the goofballs on RAO?

You were wrong then and you are wrong now.

> > And no one has to pore over your past posts: you repeat yourself ad
> > nauseam.
>
> I do work to make life easier for you nitwits.

Don't bother.

> > > Basically, in addition to posting materials that will help
> > > to keep newcomers from being suckered in by members of the
> > > lunatic fringe, I show up here to slam a mentally confused
> > > group and undermine that group's belief systems, or, at
> > > least in some cases, put tweako-audio manufacturing and
> > > journalism jobs at risk. Because most of you have cockeyed
> > > belief systems about audio, you deserve every little bit of
> > > opprobrium that I can come up with.
> > >
> > > Yeah, I do not like you people.
>
> > There's no lunatic fringe here, just an army of strawmen you've
> > constructed.
>
> Hey, pal, ALL of you guys are members of the lunatic fringe.
> Heck, even so-called "rational" audio buffs are a bit on the
> shaky side of the mental-stability road, and of course you
> true believers are two bricks short of a load and then some.

Commodity or death, eh?

> > Hey newcomers! Go buy stuff to irritate Howard!
>
> They will not irritate me in the least if they spend wisely.
>
> Actually, it is not those saps who purchase overkill and
> overpriced gear who irritate me all that much. What really
> irritates me are the journalistic, sales-clerk, and
> manufacturing con artists who make a living by suckering
> such people.
>
> Don't worry, I know that the above trio does not include
> you. On the contrary, you are one of the suckers.

The expensive item in my main system was designed by Peter Walker, who
suckered nobody. Remember him?

Stephen

Howard Ferstler

March 2nd 05, 01:39 AM

MINe 109 wrote:

> You have no reputation to defend.

Say, speaking of fame, fortune, and reputation, I just did a
Google search of my name.

Got take a look at it yourself, to see how inconsequential
old-man Ferstler has become.

Howard (2700+ hits on Amazon) Ferstler

MINe 109

March 2nd 05, 02:45 AM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
>
> > You have no reputation to defend.
>
> Say, speaking of fame, fortune, and reputation, I just did a
> Google search of my name.
>
> Got take a look at it yourself, to see how inconsequential
> old-man Ferstler has become.
>
> Howard (2700+ hits on Amazon) Ferstler

Amazon shows 6.

Stephen

Lionel

March 2nd 05, 03:57 AM

Clyde "Sack'Ô'****" Slick wrote :

> **** off asshole.
> You are a liar and an idiot.

Better than to be a coward moronic xenophobe, cretin.

Clyde Slick

March 2nd 05, 04:07 AM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde "Sack'Ô'****" Slick wrote :
>
>> **** off asshole.
>> You are a liar and an idiot.
>
> Better than to be a coward moronic xenophobe, cretin.

**** off asshole, you are a liar and an idiot.

----== 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

March 2nd 05, 07:13 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:
> > Say, speaking of fame, fortune, and reputation, I just
> > did a Google search of my name.
> >
> > Got take a look at it yourself, to see how inconsequential
> > old-man Ferstler has become.
> >
> > Howard (2700+ hits on Amazon) Ferstler
>
> Amazon shows 6.

Google does show 2700+ hits for a search on "Howard
Ferstler" so I guess he got confused between Google
and Amazon. But at least he's now remembered who you
are, Stephen. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

MINe 109

March 2nd 05, 07:17 PM

In article . com>,
"John Atkinson" > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
> > > Say, speaking of fame, fortune, and reputation, I just
> > > did a Google search of my name.
> > >
> > > Got take a look at it yourself, to see how inconsequential
> > > old-man Ferstler has become.
> > >
> > > Howard (2700+ hits on Amazon) Ferstler
> >
> > Amazon shows 6.
>
> Google does show 2700+ hits for a search on "Howard
> Ferstler" so I guess he got confused between Google
> and Amazon. But at least he's now remembered who you
> are, Stephen. :-)

No wonder my number was smaller: I searched for "Howard Ferstla"!

Stephen

PS Howard, I'm joking.

John Atkinson

March 2nd 05, 07:32 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
> In article . com>,
> "John Atkinson" > wrote:
> No wonder my number was smaller: I searched for "Howard
> Ferstla"!

Word up, Dogg. Gotta get that spellizzle _down_.

Notorious J
Da big dog at Stereoizzle

Howard Ferstler

March 3rd 05, 05:47 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> > MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > > You have no reputation to defend.
> >
> > Say, speaking of fame, fortune, and reputation, I just did a
> > Google search of my name.
> >
> > Got take a look at it yourself, to see how inconsequential
> > old-man Ferstler has become.
> >
> > Howard (2700+ hits on Amazon) Ferstler
>
> Amazon shows 6.
>
> Stephen

Oops, I meant Google. In any case, the point is that
whatever you pinheads may think of me, I am anything but the
inconsequential individual you claim.

Of course, Amazon does have some useful data about my books.

Howard Ferstler

George M. Middius

March 3rd 05, 05:54 PM

Brother Horace the Inconsequential said:

> I am anything but the
> inconsequential individual you claim.

I agree. You border on the undetectable.

MINe 109

March 3rd 05, 06:20 PM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
> >
> > > MINe 109 wrote:
> > >
> > > > You have no reputation to defend.
> > >
> > > Say, speaking of fame, fortune, and reputation, I just did a
> > > Google search of my name.
> > >
> > > Got take a look at it yourself, to see how inconsequential
> > > old-man Ferstler has become.
> > >
> > > Howard (2700+ hits on Amazon) Ferstler
> >
> > Amazon shows 6.
> >
> > Stephen
>
> Oops, I meant Google. In any case, the point is that
> whatever you pinheads may think of me, I am anything but the
> inconsequential individual you claim.

Why would you risk all that "consequence" by publishing stuff you know
isn't true? Doesn't that make you the worst kind of partisan hack?

Stephen

Howard Ferstler

March 3rd 05, 06:48 PM

"George M. Middius" wrote:
>
> Brother Horace the Inconsequential said:
>
> > I am anything but the
> > inconsequential individual you claim.
>
> I agree. You border on the undetectable.

You responded 7 minutes after I posted my comments. Do you
have a job?

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

March 3rd 05, 06:53 PM

MINe 109 wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Howard Ferstler > wrote:
>
> > MINe 109 wrote:
> > >
> > > In article >,
> > > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
> > >
> > > > MINe 109 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > You have no reputation to defend.
> > > >
> > > > Say, speaking of fame, fortune, and reputation, I just did a
> > > > Google search of my name.
> > > >
> > > > Got take a look at it yourself, to see how inconsequential
> > > > old-man Ferstler has become.
> > > >
> > > > Howard (2700+ hits on Amazon) Ferstler
> > >
> > > Amazon shows 6.
> > >
> > > Stephen
> >
> > Oops, I meant Google. In any case, the point is that
> > whatever you pinheads may think of me, I am anything but the
> > inconsequential individual you claim.
>
> Why would you risk all that "consequence" by publishing stuff you know
> isn't true? Doesn't that make you the worst kind of partisan hack?
>
> Stephen

It took you a half hour to respond to my post. That is not
almost immediate, like what Middius achieved with his
response, but I still wonder if you have a job. Him, too.

PS: do not try to feed me that baloney about you working out
of your house. You are probably screwing off at work.

Howard Ferstler

George M. Middius

March 3rd 05, 07:12 PM

Brother Horace the Defenseless smarmed:

> > Brother Horace the Inconsequential said:
> >
> > > I am anything but the
> > > inconsequential individual you claim.
> >
> > I agree. You border on the undetectable.
>
> You responded 7 minutes after I posted my comments. Do you
> have a job?

Like you, I get paid by the word. ;-)

Howard Ferstler

March 3rd 05, 07:26 PM

"George M. Middius" wrote:
>
> Brother Horace the Defenseless smarmed:

> > You responded 7 minutes after I posted my comments. Do you
> > have a job?

> Like you, I get paid by the word. ;-)

This time it took you all of 24 minutes. I believe that you
are goofing off at work.

Howard Ferstler

George M. Middius

March 3rd 05, 07:35 PM

Brother Horace the Unreflective whined:

> > Brother Horace the Defenseless smarmed:
>
> > > You responded 7 minutes after I posted my comments. Do you
> > > have a job?
>
> > Like you, I get paid by the word. ;-)
>
> This time it took you all of 24 minutes.

According to my server, your reply appeared after a mere 14 minutes. Looks
to me like you are desperately clinging to the only audio forum you can't
get kicked out of.

> I believe that you are goofing off at work.

Jeez, Harold, is there *nothing* that doesn't spark your envy?

Howard Ferstler

March 3rd 05, 07:36 PM

"George M. Middius" wrote:
>
> Brother Horace the Unreflective whined:

> > This time it took you all of 24 minutes.

> According to my server, your reply appeared after a mere 14 minutes. Looks
> to me like you are desperately clinging to the only audio forum you can't
> get kicked out of.

It took you only 9 minutes, flat, this time.

In any case, this is where most of the troublemakers are. I
mean, even John Atkinson posts here, and it is likely that
many of his fellow tweako journalists, using phony names,
post here, too.

PS: unlike you I am retired. I can work my computer without
cheating my boss out of required work time for what I am
paid.

Howard Ferstler

George M. Middius

March 3rd 05, 07:55 PM

Brother Horace the Egregiously Witless whined:

> > According to my server, your reply appeared after a mere 14 minutes. Looks
> > to me like you are desperately clinging to the only audio forum you can't
> > get kicked out of.

> In any case, this is where most of the troublemakers are.

Indeed. Congratulations on arriving at another long-overdue realization.

MINe 109

March 3rd 05, 08:58 PM

In article >,
Howard Ferstler > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
> >
> > > MINe 109 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article >,
> > > > Howard Ferstler > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > MINe 109 wrote:

> > Why would you risk all that "consequence" by publishing stuff you know
> > isn't true? Doesn't that make you the worst kind of partisan hack?

> It took you a half hour to respond to my post. That is not
> almost immediate, like what Middius achieved with his
> response, but I still wonder if you have a job. Him, too.

How's that new way of not answering questions working for you?

> PS: do not try to feed me that baloney about you working out
> of your house. You are probably screwing off at work.

Say, what's that big black thing with keys?

Stephen

George M. Middius

March 3rd 05, 09:05 PM

MINe 109 said:

> > PS: do not try to feed me that baloney about you working out
> > of your house. You are probably screwing off at work.
>
> Say, what's that big black thing with keys?

Stop teasing poor Clerkie. If you're really working (not that we believe it,
of course), where's your boss? Who's cracking the whip, keeping your feet
moving, making you miserable? If Harold can't do what he always wanted to do,
neither can you. Or anybody.

John Atkinson

March 3rd 05, 11:30 PM

Howard Ferstler wrote:
> even John Atkinson posts here, and it is likely that
> many of his fellow tweako journalists, using phony names,
> post here, too.

You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
so under their real names. Do you not pay attention? Or are
you merely forgetful?

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Arny Krueger

March 4th 05, 02:04 AM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com

> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
> so under their real names.

How do you know for sure that this is true?

Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on their
mother-in-law's soul.+

Howard Ferstler

March 4th 05, 02:28 AM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler wrote:
> > even John Atkinson posts here, and it is likely that
> > many of his fellow tweako journalists, using phony names,
> > post here, too.
>
> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
> so under their real names. Do you not pay attention? Or are
> you merely forgetful?

If what you are saying is true, then the tweakos who post
here are not con artists; rather, they are merely deluded.
Oops, they might just be writers who work for other tweako
magazines.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

March 4th 05, 02:51 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
> > You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
> > I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
> > so under their real names.
>
> How do you know for sure that this is true?
>
> Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on their
> mother-in-law's soul.+

Yeah. They could even be suckering John. Remember how he
supplied one guy (I have no idea who it was) with a copy of
my "edited" article on audio tweakos (an article that I
forbade him to have posted on RAO) and then this guy slipped
behind him and posted it anyway?

John (says John) was fooled by the guy (who apparently
forwarded the "edited" article to still another guy, who had
no obligation to John, or whatever), and I would imagine
that some of his writers are fooling him the same way these
days.

Yeah, not only does John have to deal with the magazine's
lunatic-fringe readers, but he also has to deal with the
magazine's lunatic-fringe writers.

Hey, I feel sorry for him. Well, not always, but sometimes.

Howard Ferstler

Clyde Slick

March 4th 05, 05:58 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> oups.com
>
>
>> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
>> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
>> so under their real names.
>
> How do you know for sure that this is true?
>
> Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on their
> mother-in-law's soul.+
>
>

Like your promise to your publishers not to plagiarize?

----== 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

March 4th 05, 06:01 AM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>
>>
>>> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
>>> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
>>> so under their real names.
>>
>> How do you know for sure that this is true?
>>
>> Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on their
>> mother-in-law's soul.+
>>
>>
>
> Like your promise to your publishers not to plagiarize?

My apology, Arny, I mistakenly thought I
was answering Howard. You didn't plagiarize anything,
oh, wait a minute, wasn't there some talk about
the pcabx program not being original,

----== 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

March 4th 05, 04:42 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> oups.com
>>
>>> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
>>> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
>>> so under their real names.
>>
>> How do you know for sure that this is true?
>>
>> Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on
>> their mother-in-law's soul.+
>
> Yeah. They could even be suckering John. Remember how he
> supplied one guy (I have no idea who it was) with a copy of
> my "edited" article on audio tweakos (an article that I
> forbade him to have posted on RAO) and then this guy slipped
> behind him and posted it anyway?

I remember that. It seems to me like a very convenient story.

> John (says John) was fooled by the guy (who apparently
> forwarded the "edited" article to still another guy, who had
> no obligation to John, or whatever), and I would imagine
> that some of his writers are fooling him the same way these
> days.

Either that or John believes that he is omniscient and knows *everything*
his staff does.

> Yeah, not only does John have to deal with the magazine's
> lunatic-fringe readers, but he also has to deal with the
> magazine's lunatic-fringe writers.

Particularly those of the reviewer persuasion.

> Hey, I feel sorry for him. Well, not always, but sometimes.

Well, he's got all that money to comfort himself with. Some people can have
lots of money and lots of integrity, but it appears that John is not among
them.

John Atkinson

March 4th 05, 07:46 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>
> > I would imagine that some of his writers are fooling him the
> > same way these days.
>
> Either that or John believes that he is omniscient and knows
> *everything* his staff does.

Neither is the case. My writers tell me that they do not
post as sockpuppets and I pay them the respect of taking them
at their word. If you doubt them, Mr. Krueger, then you will
be able to confront them with your suspicions in person at
HE2005, of course.

> > Hey, I feel sorry for him. Well, not always, but sometimes.
>
> Well, he's got all that money to comfort himself with.

What money would that be, Mr. Krueger, and why is what I earn
any of your concern?

> Some people can have lots of money and lots of integrity, but
> it appears that John is not among them.

In the end, it all comes down to money with you, Mr. Krueger.
Perhaps you should look up the meaning of the word "envy."

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

PS: I'm taking a late lunch break, Mr. Ferstler, so please spare
me your complaints that I should not be posting other than
outside regular business hours.

Howard Ferstler

March 5th 05, 04:08 PM

John Atkinson wrote:
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:

> > Either that or John believes that he is omniscient and knows
> > *everything* his staff does.

> Neither is the case. My writers tell me that they do not
> post as sockpuppets and I pay them the respect of taking them
> at their word. If you doubt them, Mr. Krueger, then you will
> be able to confront them with your suspicions in person at
> HE2005, of course.

They do not post as sockpuppets? Hey, what is the matter
with those guys?

(snips)

> PS: I'm taking a late lunch break, Mr. Ferstler, so please spare
> me your complaints that I should not be posting other than
> outside regular business hours.

John, you need to take a break. When eating, eat, and do not
do so in front of your computer and read materials that will
cause indigestion.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler

March 5th 05, 04:09 PM

Clyde Slick wrote:
>
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
> > oups.com
> >
> >
> >> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
> >> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
> >> so under their real names.
> >
> > How do you know for sure that this is true?
> >
> > Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on their
> > mother-in-law's soul.+
> >
> >
>
> Like your promise to your publishers not to plagiarize?

Learn to read.

Howard Ferstler

Clyde Slick

March 5th 05, 08:43 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick wrote:
>>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "John Atkinson" > wrote in message
>> > oups.com
>> >
>> >
>> >> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
>> >> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
>> >> so under their real names.
>> >
>> > How do you know for sure that this is true?
>> >
>> > Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on their
>> > mother-in-law's soul.+
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Like your promise to your publishers not to plagiarize?
>
> Learn to read.
>
Learn to wrtite, rather than copy

----== 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

March 6th 05, 03:03 AM

Clyde Slick wrote:
>
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Clyde Slick wrote:

> >> Like your promise to your publishers not to plagiarize?

> > Learn to read.

> Learn to wrtite, rather than copy

Learn to type, too.

Howard Ferstler

Arny Krueger

March 6th 05, 11:38 AM

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>>
>>> I would imagine that some of his writers are fooling him the
>>> same way these days.
>>
>> Either that or John believes that he is omniscient and knows
>> *everything* his staff does.
>
> Neither is the case. My writers tell me that they do not
> post as sockpuppets and I pay them the respect of taking them
> at their word.

However John, many of us know that some of your writers report the audio
equivalent of speaking with space aliens. Shakti stones, anyone?

>If you doubt them, Mr. Krueger, then you will
> be able to confront them with your suspicions in person at
> HE2005, of course.

I don't know why we would waste time with such triva at such an event. But,
its your money, John.

>>> Hey, I feel sorry for him. Well, not always, but sometimes.
>>
>> Well, he's got all that money to comfort himself with.

> What money would that be, Mr. Krueger, and why is what I earn
> any of your concern?

I wouldn't exactly call it a concern. I think of it as an observation. ;-)

>> Some people can have lots of money and lots of integrity, but
>> it appears that John is not among them.

> In the end, it all comes down to money with you, Mr. Krueger.

Where did I say that?

But since you seem to be so concerned with money and integrity John, let me
observe that I do know some people who have managed to amass large amounts
of both.

> Perhaps you should look up the meaning of the word "envy."

I understand why you would envy people who have both money and integrity,
John.

Arny Krueger

March 6th 05, 12:44 PM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Clyde Slick wrote:
>>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
>>>> message oups.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You have claimed this before, Mr. Ferstler, and at that time
>>>>> I assured you that Stereophile writers who post to r.a.o. do
>>>>> so under their real names.
>>>>
>>>> How do you know for sure that this is true?
>>>>
>>>> Let me guess John, they gave you their word of honor and swore on
>>>> their mother-in-law's soul.+
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Like your promise to your publishers not to plagiarize?
>>
>> Learn to read.
>>
> Learn to wrtite, rather than copy

I don't think we want that many people to learn to wrtite.

Sander deWaal

March 6th 05, 02:34 PM

"Arny Krueger" > said:

>But since you seem to be so concerned with money and integrity John, let me
>observe that I do know some people who have managed to amass large amounts
>of both.

Are those the same people that have boats? ;-)

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

George M. Middius

March 6th 05, 03:37 PM

Sander deWaal said:

> >But since you seem to be so concerned with money and integrity John, let me
> >observe that I do know some people who have managed to amass large amounts
> >of both.

> Are those the same people that have boats? ;-)

Zing!

They're also the people who call Arnii to collect old computers for "church
donations". That's Turdy's little scam business, you see.... he doesn't
really donate them to churches. He sells them to unsuspecting congregants as
"refurbished", and he soaks his victims for an "extended warranty". Still,
it's better for Arnii to scrape up a few bucks this way rather than whoring
out the Kroobitch like he used to.

Arny Krueger

March 6th 05, 04:08 PM

"Sander deWaal" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > said:
>
>> But since you seem to be so concerned with money and integrity John,
>> let me observe that I do know some people who have managed to amass
>> large amounts of both.
>
>
> Are those the same people that have boats? ;-)

Please explain.

George M. Middius

March 6th 05, 04:20 PM

The Krooborg whined:

> > Are those the same people that have boats? ;-)

> Please explain.

Translated into the vernacular, Sander just made you his bitch.

Sander deWaal

March 6th 05, 05:02 PM

"Arny Krueger" > said:

>>> But since you seem to be so concerned with money and integrity John,
>>> let me observe that I do know some people who have managed to amass
>>> large amounts of both.

>> Are those the same people that have boats? ;-)

>Please explain.

Never mind. Enjoy your trip to NY!

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

Arny Krueger

March 6th 05, 05:41 PM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

> The Krooborg whined:
>
>>> Are those the same people that have boats? ;-)
>
>> Please explain.
>
> Translated into the vernacular, Sander just made you his bitch.

How many bitches does Sander have?

How many do you have, George?

George M. Middius

March 6th 05, 05:49 PM

It's "Sensitive Tank" time again. ;-) Gather round, all who would take
pleasure in Krooger stepping on his dick again.

> > The Krooborg whined:
> >
> >>> Are those the same people that have boats? ;-)
> >
> >> Please explain.
> >
> > Translated into the vernacular, Sander just made you his bitch.
>
> How many bitches does Sander have?
> How many do you have, George?

It's really Sander who made you cry this time, Arnii. Go have a ham sandwich
and peruse your porn collection.

Sander deWaal

March 6th 05, 06:18 PM

"Arny Krueger" > said:

>How many bitches does Sander have?

3, at the moment.
Though I fear the consequences when Wilma reads this...

>How many do you have, George?

On RAO? At least 1. ;-)

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

George M. Middius

March 6th 05, 06:24 PM

Sander deWaal said:

> >How many [bitches] do you have, George?

> On RAO? At least 1. ;-)

Tom A. is the proud owner of Richie Bitch. That's one fewer bitch in my
menagerie. ;-)

Tom

March 6th 05, 06:29 PM

Sander deWaal wrote:

> "Arny Krueger" > said:
>
> >How many do you have, George?
>
> On RAO? At least 1. ;-)

LOL!

Howard Ferstler

March 16th 05, 08:57 PM

fathom wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler > wrote in
> :
>
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >>
> >> Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> >> > There's a story going around that Stereophile
> >> > pseudonomous author Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article
> >> > recommending that readers treat their CDs with Armor-All
> >> > as a tweak.
> >
> >> That is correct, in the early 1990s.
> >>
> >> > Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was
> >> > damaging.
> >>
> >> When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the
> >> scratches accidentally introduced by too rough a
> >> treatment. These scratches can be polished out.
> >>
> >> In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with
> >> ArmorAll. Every couple of years I get the treated discs
> >> out to see if they still play. They do.
> >>
> >> I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors
> >> compared with the untreated CDs for an article to appear
> >> in a future issue of Stereophile.
> >
> > How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
> > coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it
> > would do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it
> > would eat up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst
> > it could damage the discs.
> >
> > Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
> > Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how
> > to remove Armor All.
> >
> > What a joke.
> >
> > Howard Ferstler
>
> I experimented with Armor-All and Rain-X back in the early
> 90s. I got better results with Rain-X. Deeper bass, better
> clarity, all that ****.

This is preposterous. You obviously have no clue whatsoever
about how a digital recording works.

> I still have a bunch of treated CDs; they still all play fine.
> What I don't have is a brother living nearby so I can A-B the
> treated CDs with other copies of non-treated CDs.

Go get some clean discs and compare. Yes, this will cost a
few bucks, but the result will be a lesson in how wishful
thinking can cloud the intellect.

PS: Rain-X is designed for use on glass and not plastic.

Howard Ferstler