Simple question for trotsky

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> For some reason, I keep coming up
> against wannabe writers here on Usenet and show them systematically that
> there's no aspect of the use of words they can best me with.

Just for the sake of informing anybody who doesn't know you, who
exactly is keeping score on these games where you keep besting people?
Is there a panel of judges out in cyberspace who render their opinions
directly unto you? Or do the voices originate from somewhere else?

[Lionel]

George M. Middius a écrit :

>
> trotsky said:
>
>
>>For some reason, I keep coming up
>>against wannabe writers here on Usenet and show them systematically that
>>there's no aspect of the use of words they can best me with.
>
>
> Just for the sake of informing anybody who doesn't know you, who
> exactly is keeping score on these games where you keep besting people?
> Is there a panel of judges out in cyberspace who render their opinions
> directly unto you? Or do the voices originate from somewhere else?
>
>
When Schizo-George writes about *"voices"* he perfectly knows what he
speaks about !
LOL !

--
Lionel J. M. Chapuis
Unemployed Clown

(signed this way because of pending libel suit against Krueger scheduled
to begin on 9/20/03 per Mr. Wheeler - and the need to possibly provide
supportive documentary evidence that Mr. George M. Middius' daily
incitement to hatred, suicide, slandering, insults, murder is the real
guilty of Mr.Wheeler's grievances.)

[trotsky]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> trotsky said:
>
>
> >For some reason, I keep coming up
> >against wannabe writers here on Usenet and show them systematically that
> >there's no aspect of the use of words they can best me with.
>
>
> Just for the sake of informing anybody who doesn't know you, who
> exactly is keeping score on these games where you keep besting people?
> Is there a panel of judges out in cyberspace who render their opinions
> directly unto you? Or do the voices originate from somewhere else?
>
>


That looks like three questions. Which was the question you were trying
to ask?

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> > Just for the sake of informing anybody who doesn't know you, who
> > exactly is keeping score on these games where you keep besting people?
> > Is there a panel of judges out in cyberspace who render their opinions
> > directly unto you? Or do the voices originate from somewhere else?

> That looks like three questions. Which was the question you were trying
> to ask?

Why haven't you been diagnosed and treated yet?

[Bob Morein]

"Lionel" <lionel{dot}chapuis{at}free{dot}fr> wrote in message
...
> trotsky a écrit :
> > Bob Morein wrote:
> >
> >> "trotsky" wrote in message
> >> nk.net...
> >>
> >> >George M. Middius wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>trotsky said:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>For some reason, I keep coming up
> >> >>>against wannabe writers here on Usenet and show them systematically
> >>
> >> that
> >>
> >> >>>there's no aspect of the use of words they can best me with.
> >>
> >>
> >> Clumsy. Let's improve it a little.
> >> "I am frequently challenged by aspiring writers on Usenet, but I
> >> systematically demonstrate my verbal superiority."
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>Just for the sake of informing anybody who doesn't know you, who
> >> >>exactly is keeping score on these games where you keep besting
people?
> >> >>Is there a panel of judges out in cyberspace who render their
opinions
> >> >>directly unto you? Or do the voices originate from somewhere else?
> >> >
> >> >That looks like three questions. Which was the question you were
trying
> >> >to ask?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Roadkill needs a little help with the keyboard again. Correctly
> >> phrased, it
> >> would be
> >> "Your text asks three questions. Which question did you intend?"
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob Morion, your brain needs a tune-up. I build speakers because I know
> > what sounds good.

No, you don't. You are TRYING because you need the money, and you are
failing because of a lack of skill, a sense of responsibility, and a
generally overinflated opinion of yourself.

You write screenplays for what reason? I seem to run
> > into various fellows who want to be writers, and yet have rhetoric that
> > is slightly less interesting than watching paint dry. Why is this?
> >
Trotsky, it's always interesting to watch the way a fool walks, the way a
fool talks, and the things a fool hawks. These are the things I find
interesting about you.

[Lionel]

Bob Morein a écrit :

> Trotsky, it's always interesting to watch the way a fool walks, the way a
> fool talks, and the things a fool hawks. These are the things I find
> interesting about you.
>
>
>
From you to me Bob, if the guy that we can see working on the web site
pictures is Mr. Trotsky I would say that his opinion is not the only
thing which is overinflated !

--
Lionel J. M. Chapuis
Unemployed Clown

(signed this way because of pending libel suit against Krueger scheduled
to begin on 9/20/03 per Mr. Wheeler - and the need to possibly provide
supportive documentary evidence that Mr. George M. Middius' daily
incitement to hatred, suicide, slandering, insults, murder is the real
guilty of Mr.Wheeler's grievances.)

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "Lionel" wrote in message
> ...
>
> >trotsky a écrit :
> >
> >>Bob Morein wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>George M. Middius wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>trotsky said:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>For some reason, I keep coming up
> >>>>>>against wannabe writers here on Usenet and show them systematically
> >>>
> >>>that
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>there's no aspect of the use of words they can best me with.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Clumsy. Let's improve it a little.
> >>>"I am frequently challenged by aspiring writers on Usenet, but I
> >>>systematically demonstrate my verbal superiority."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>Just for the sake of informing anybody who doesn't know you, who
> >>>>>exactly is keeping score on these games where you keep besting
>
> people?
>
> >>>>>Is there a panel of judges out in cyberspace who render their
>
> opinions
>
> >>>>>directly unto you? Or do the voices originate from somewhere else?
> >>>>
> >>>>That looks like three questions. Which was the question you were
>
> trying
>
> >>>>to ask?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Roadkill needs a little help with the keyboard again. Correctly
> >>>phrased, it
> >>>would be
> >>>"Your text asks three questions. Which question did you intend?"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Bob Morion, your brain needs a tune-up. I build speakers because I know
> >>what sounds good.
>
>
> No, you don't. You are TRYING because you need the money, and you are
> failing because of a lack of skill, a sense of responsibility, and a
> generally overinflated opinion of yourself.
>
> You write screenplays for what reason? I seem to run
>
> >>into various fellows who want to be writers, and yet have rhetoric that
> >>is slightly less interesting than watching paint dry. Why is this?
> >>
>
> Trotsky, it's always interesting to watch the way a fool walks, the way a
> fool talks, and the things a fool hawks. These are the things I find
> interesting about you.


Bob, you're like a broken record--you can discuss me and my work, but
you lack the balls and self awareness to discuss what you do. Come back
when you grow up, okay?

[Bob Morein]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
.net...
> Bob Morein wrote:
>
> > "Lionel" wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > >trotsky a écrit :
> > >
> > >>Bob Morein wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>"trotsky" wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>George M. Middius wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>trotsky said:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>For some reason, I keep coming up
> > >>>>>>against wannabe writers here on Usenet and show them
systematically
> > >>>
> > >>>that
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>there's no aspect of the use of words they can best me with.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Clumsy. Let's improve it a little.
> > >>>"I am frequently challenged by aspiring writers on Usenet, but I
> > >>>systematically demonstrate my verbal superiority."
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>Just for the sake of informing anybody who doesn't know you, who
> > >>>>>exactly is keeping score on these games where you keep besting
> >
> > people?
> >
> > >>>>>Is there a panel of judges out in cyberspace who render their
> >
> > opinions
> >
> > >>>>>directly unto you? Or do the voices originate from somewhere else?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>That looks like three questions. Which was the question you were
> >
> > trying
> >
> > >>>>to ask?
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Roadkill needs a little help with the keyboard again. Correctly
> > >>>phrased, it
> > >>>would be
> > >>>"Your text asks three questions. Which question did you intend?"
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Bob Morion, your brain needs a tune-up. I build speakers because I
know
> > >>what sounds good.
> >
> >
> > No, you don't. You are TRYING because you need the money, and you are
> > failing because of a lack of skill, a sense of responsibility, and a
> > generally overinflated opinion of yourself.
> >
> > You write screenplays for what reason? I seem to run
> >
> > >>into various fellows who want to be writers, and yet have rhetoric
that
> > >>is slightly less interesting than watching paint dry. Why is this?
> > >>
> >
> > Trotsky, it's always interesting to watch the way a fool walks, the way
a
> > fool talks, and the things a fool hawks. These are the things I find
> > interesting about you.
>
>
> Bob, you're like a broken record--you can discuss me and my work, but
> you lack the balls and self awareness to discuss what you do. Come back
> when you grow up, okay?
>
Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the great
audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

>Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
>It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the great
>audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
>You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.

Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made. They are
different than 99% of all speakers made.

The question of course is how they stand up to the remaining 5% and
whether or not it matters whether his speakers are different than the
other 99%.

Bob, you need to take deep breath and get out of the apartment...

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>
> >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
> >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the
great
> >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
> >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.
>
> Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
> sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made.

They are? Are you serious? What is the universe of discourse here? Are you
including transistor radio speakers driven by 100mw? Dashboard enunciators?
The ubiquitous Panasonic answering machine?

If Best Buy shelf systems are included, we still have to be careful. We
don't know whether Greg's speakers have a horrendous respons anomaly which
deprives them of the benefit that should accrue from better drivers. A bad
cook can spoil any food.
Beware of Radio Shack Linaeums, as well. The Linaeum was one helluva good
tweeter. Greg's woofers are probably better than Radio Shack's, but he's
flying blind. Misalignment of a bass reflex system is devastating to the
sound, regardless of who/what drivers are used.

In the particular quality which results from proper tuning, Greg is very
much at a disadvantage. By his own admission, he made exactly one box, and
tried exactly one crossover, and played only with the stuffing. This is a
highly atypical design path, perhaps unique, in the annals of speakers
marketed to audiophiles.

We can't assume that Greg's speakers are better than some of the cheap stuff
available -- the new little Kefs, the NHT Super Zeros, or whatever
represents that class today. While it's true that the large volume makers
count every scrap of wire, they usually have the benefit of Harmon
International's speaker lab, with turntable and MLSSA, and the Canadians
have their counterpart. Other small makers have their own woodshops and
spend months turning out cabinets with minor variations. This, the tuning
procedure, has been ridiculed by Greg as unnecessary to a person as "lucky"
as him.

Even a Strad out of tune can't play.



They are
> different than 99% of all speakers made.
>
> The question of course is how they stand up to the remaining 5% and
> whether or not it matters whether his speakers are different than the
> other 99%.
>
> Bob, you need to take deep breath and get out of the apartment...
>
Just jogged 4 miles, and I'm comfortably back in my 3000 sq ft digs.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>
> >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
> >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the
great
> >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
> >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.
>
> Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
> sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made. They are
> different than 99% of all speakers made.
>
> The question of course is how they stand up to the remaining 5% and
> whether or not it matters whether his speakers are different than the
> other 99%.
>
> Bob, you need to take deep breath and get out of the apartment...
> \
Actually, what he needs is to listen to a pair of Jupiters before he
pronounces judgement.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Bob Morein]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
...
>
> "dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> >
> > >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
> > >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the
> great
> > >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
> > >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.
> >
> > Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
> > sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made. They are
> > different than 99% of all speakers made.
> >
> > The question of course is how they stand up to the remaining 5% and
> > whether or not it matters whether his speakers are different than the
> > other 99%.
> >
> > Bob, you need to take deep breath and get out of the apartment...
> > \
> Actually, what he needs is to listen to a pair of Jupiters before he
> pronounces judgement.
>
I doubt that Trotsky would ship them to me.
However, if he gets them to any dealer in Manhattan, I'll go listen.
It's 99 miles from my residence, but I'll make the trip.
The rest is up to Trotsky.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:03:04 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> >>
> >> >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
> >> >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the
> >great
> >> >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
> >> >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.
> >>
> >> Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
> >> sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made.
> >
> >They are? Are you serious? What is the universe of discourse here? Are
you
> >including transistor radio speakers driven by 100mw? Dashboard
enunciators?
> >The ubiquitous Panasonic answering machine?
>
> Why, yes I am.
>
> What part of "all speakers made" do you not understand?
>
> >If Best Buy shelf systems are included, we still have to be careful.
>
> No we don't. Well, at least *I* don't.

Of course not. You don't have to be careful. I'm impressed.

>
> >We don't know whether Greg's speakers have a horrendous respons anomaly
which
> >deprives them of the benefit that should accrue from better drivers.
>
> "We" might not, but "I* do. They are sitting in my living room as we
> speak. If you'llgo back and reread what I said, you'llrealize that I'm
> saying that there is no "horrendous response anomaly" present in his
> speakers.
>
I won't assume you're prejudiced, but you are just one person.
You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his
speakers.
Unfortunately, I know nothing about your reputation as a reliable observer
or reporter.
If you report that the speakers are good, I will not discount your
observation, but neither will I take it as settled that your observations
are correct, unless they are confirmed multiple times by independent
observers.


> >A bad cook can spoil any food.
> >Beware of Radio Shack Linaeums, as well. The Linaeum was one helluva good
> >tweeter. Greg's woofers are probably better than Radio Shack's, but he's
> >flying blind. Misalignment of a bass reflex system is devastating to the
> >sound, regardless of who/what drivers are used.
>
> Well, you can fly blind all you want to. I've got his speakers in
> house.

I won't assume you're prejudiced, but you are just one person.
You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his
speakers.
Unfortunately, I know nothing about your reputation as a reliable observer
or reporter.
If you report that the speakers are good, I will not discount your
observation, but neither will I take it as settled that your observations
are correct, unless they are confirmed multiple times by independent
observers.

>
> Make up whatever scenarios make you feel comfortable, Bob.
>
> >In the particular quality which results from proper tuning, Greg is very
> >much at a disadvantage. By his own admission, he made exactly one box,
and
> >tried exactly one crossover, and played only with the stuffing. This is a
> >highly atypical design path, perhaps unique, in the annals of speakers
> >marketed to audiophiles.
>
> I'll have something to say about the stufing later. In the meantime,
> you can continue to play games all you want. But that's all they are
> and I think it undermines the razor-thin credibility that you attempt
> to maintain here with your pseudo-engineer crap. Me? I'll talk about
> things I've actually heard.
>
That's fine with me. I can't accept your opinion as definitive, but I
definitely will consider it in combination with the opinions of others.



> >We can't assume that Greg's speakers are better than some of the cheap
stuff
> >available --
>
> You're right, "we" ca'nt. That's because you haven't heard them. *I*
> on the other hand, *can* make some "assumptions" because I have them
> in house.
>
> > the new little Kefs, the NHT Super Zeros, or whatever
> >represents that class today.
>
> When I hear those speakers, I'll comment on them as well.
>
> >While it's true that the large volume makers
> >count every scrap of wire, they usually have the benefit of Harmon
> >International's speaker lab, with turntable and MLSSA, and the Canadians
> >have their counterpart. Other small makers have their own woodshops and
> >spend months turning out cabinets with minor variations. This, the tuning
> >procedure, has been ridiculed by Greg as unnecessary to a person as
"lucky"
> >as him.
>
> It doesn't matter about the process, only the result.
What do you think the odds are? Do you feel that Trotsky's random approach
has a reasonable chance of bearing succulent fruit?

>
> >Even a Strad out of tune can't play.
>
> Oh, but you're wrong. An accomplished violinist can compensate. They
> do it all the time with intonation variations.

Minor variations, yes. Not Trotskyvarius out-of-tone.
>
> You lose.
>
> Again.
>
> > They are
> >> different than 99% of all speakers made.
> >>
> >> The question of course is how they stand up to the remaining 5% and
> >> whether or not it matters whether his speakers are different than the
> >> other 99%.
> >>
> >> Bob, you need to take deep breath and get out of the apartment...
> >>
> >Just jogged 4 miles, and I'm comfortably back in my 3000 sq ft digs.
>
> And you didn't get mugged?

Not in Dresher. Crimes are almost unheard of.

>
> PS, that's a prety small warehouse you live in.

I suggest you check out the following neighborhood/address:
1570 Arran Way
Dresher, PA
19025
and you'll understand why I have four main systems in my 3000 square foot
house.
A relief map will give you an idea of my jogging course; 2 miles per lap of
rolling terrain, with two steep hills.

I'm sorry I've lost, but I'm very comfortable :).

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

>
> We can't assume that Greg's speakers are better than some of the cheap
> stuff
> available -- the new little Kefs, the NHT Super Zeros, or whatever
> represents that class today. While it's true that the large volume makers
> count every scrap of wire, they usually have the benefit of Harmon
> International's speaker lab, with turntable and MLSSA, and the Canadians
> have their counterpart. Other small makers have their own woodshops and
> spend months turning out cabinets with minor variations. This, the tuning
> procedure, has been ridiculed by Greg as unnecessary to a person as
> "lucky"
> as him.



Your audio history is a little weak, Bob Morion. Paradigm used to brag
about the use of DBTs at the National Research Center of Canada, but for
some reason they don't do that anymore. In fact, all they do is rely on
one guy, Scott Bagby, who really is a good desiger. Except Paradigm
cuts all the usual corners that one has to do to mass produce a speaker,
and the result is what it is.

The truth is, common sense goes a long way in making a good sounding
speaker. I see a lot of gimmicks and bad ideas in speaker manufacture,
but not a lot of common sense. Regardless, this is all neither here nor
there, because if you can't broach my Quentin Tarantino analogy, Bob
Morion, your opinion in this matter is useless.

You remind me of a bit in Bukowski's first novel, "Post Office", where a
coworker is needling him about wanting to write a novel, as if there was
some special process involved. "GO TO A SMALL ROOM AND WRITE," he tells
him. Some people were just put on this earth to be lame, I guess. Am I
getting warm, Bob?

[George M. Middius]

Bobo tries his own version of the "debating trade".

> > I've got his speakers in house.

> I won't assume you're prejudiced, but you are just one person.
> You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his speakers.
> Unfortunately, I know nothing about your reputation as a reliable observer
> or reporter.
> If you report that the speakers are good, I will not discount your
> observation, but neither will I take it as settled that your observations
> are correct, unless they are confirmed multiple times by independent
> observers.

Too bad you know so little about the backgrounds of the people you
choose to argue with.

One thing I can guarantee, as would anybody else who knows dave's
history with trots: If the speakers suck, we'll hear about it. And if
they don't suck, doesn't that mean that your mighty winding about
"ripoffs" and "fraud" and all that is just you transferring your
dislike for Gregipus to his enterprise?

As an aside, I'll grant that certain of trotsky's comments in the past
couple weeks have indicated he may be experiencing a fusion of his
persona with the Jupiter business. By that I mean he seems to believe
any criticism of his online behavior is a criticism of his speaker
enterprise. Of course, one can't be sure about such a conclusion given
the tenuousness of his overall grip on reality.

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> Paradigm cuts all the usual corners that one has to do

> if you can't broach my Quentin Tarantino analogy

Letter-perfect! Letter-mother****ing-stainless-steel-perfect!

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Bobo tries his own version of the "debating trade".
>
> > > I've got his speakers in house.
>
> > I won't assume you're prejudiced, but you are just one person.
> > You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his
speakers.
> > Unfortunately, I know nothing about your reputation as a reliable
observer
> > or reporter.
> > If you report that the speakers are good, I will not discount your
> > observation, but neither will I take it as settled that your
observations
> > are correct, unless they are confirmed multiple times by independent
> > observers.
>
> Too bad you know so little about the backgrounds of the people you
> choose to argue with.
>
> One thing I can guarantee, as would anybody else who knows dave's
> history with trots: If the speakers suck, we'll hear about it.

That's good news. It enhances Dave's credibility.

And if
> they don't suck, doesn't that mean that your mighty winding about
> "ripoffs" and "fraud" and all that is just you transferring your
> dislike for Gregipus to his enterprise?
>
There is no question that by prejudging Greg's speakers, I am playing the
odds, which I believe to be very long against Trotsky. That said, Dave is
only one observer. It is somewhat characteristic of hifi aficionados to be
fond of novelty. If Dave likes the speakers, one cannot know for sure how
much of that is from surprise that they are listenable.

Consider the hypothetical outcome: The speakers are listenable, but are
surpassed by all or the the vast majority of speakers which sell for half
the price of the Jupiters, or more.

I don't believe that such an outcome would validate Trotsky's enterprise.
Nor do I believe that a superior cabinet finish should compensate for sonic
deficiency. The decision of the buyer is binary: buy Trotsky's speakers, or
buy something else. If Trotsky's speakers do not equal or surpass, they
should not be considered for purchase. In that case, my criticism of Trotsky
would stand.

If some multiple number of observers were to report listening experiences of
a nature that suggest that the speakers do surpass, and the majority of the
listeners were credible, then I would have to recant.

How do I judge credibility? There are three characteristics: a good ear, the
ability to encompass tastes other than one's own, and amiability. It is
highly unlikely that anyone familiar with this debate would trust my
judgement, because I am known in this group to be a contentious person. You,
Dave, I, and many other people share this characteristic, which robs us of
credibility. There are other individuals, who by their very lack of
contentiousness, rarely or never appear in this group. If they also possess
excellent listening skills, they are prospectively excellent judges.


> As an aside, I'll grant that certain of trotsky's comments in the past
> couple weeks have indicated he may be experiencing a fusion of his
> persona with the Jupiter business. By that I mean he seems to believe
> any criticism of his online behavior is a criticism of his speaker
> enterprise. Of course, one can't be sure about such a conclusion given
> the tenuousness of his overall grip on reality.
>
Trotsky is, by the very nature of his personality, a poor critic. He is
highly prejudicial in his own favor, believes that his listening skills
excel, and is not amiable. Many famous personalities in the speaker business
share this characteristic. However, they tend to have developed skills of
judgment that are less centric to their personalities in their previous
employment. For example, a recording engineer may be very prideful of his
listening ability, but from the perspective of what OTHER people will hear
in a recording. Thus, he has developed an objective sense of the anticipated
subjective experiences of others. Trotsky has never had the rigor of this
training, and he does not natively possess the ability.

As for the debating trade, I don't like it. You may consider the above to be
a backpeddle from my rant. I've already indicated the exquisiste pleasure
of humiliating Greg, and naturally, I hope the opportunity will continue to
present itself. But in the end, particularly if Greg manages to get a pair
into Manhattan, and Greg's speakers measure up, I will publicly make note of
the fact. Would I further be forced to rate Greg's speakers a "buy"? I
highly doubt it, but I value intellectual honesty more than winning an
argument.

And even if it this were the case, we'd have a fine French Farce for Google.
That's Entertainment!

[Bob Morein]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Bob Morein wrote:
>
> >
> > We can't assume that Greg's speakers are better than some of the cheap
> > stuff
> > available -- the new little Kefs, the NHT Super Zeros, or whatever
> > represents that class today. While it's true that the large volume
makers
> > count every scrap of wire, they usually have the benefit of Harmon
> > International's speaker lab, with turntable and MLSSA, and the Canadians
> > have their counterpart. Other small makers have their own woodshops and
> > spend months turning out cabinets with minor variations. This, the
tuning
> > procedure, has been ridiculed by Greg as unnecessary to a person as
> > "lucky"
> > as him.
>
>
>
> Your audio history is a little weak, Bob Morion. Paradigm used to brag
> about the use of DBTs at the National Research Center of Canada, but for
> some reason they don't do that anymore.

I haven't mentioned DBTs once in regard to your speakers. It's not an issue
for me.

In fact, all they do is rely on
> one guy, Scott Bagby, who really is a good desiger.

Yes, he actually designs speakers.
You do not.
You threw a couple Chinese drivers in a box, and pronounced yourself lucky.

Except Paradigm
> cuts all the usual corners that one has to do to mass produce a speaker,
> and the result is what it is.
>
> The truth is, common sense goes a long way in making a good sounding
> speaker.

Well sure it does, Greg. Except you didn't design the speakers. You just
threw the drivers in a box.
Scott designs speakers. He tries many variations of cabinet, crossover
components, drivers, etc.
He MODIFIES drivers per need of the design.
You picked parts out of a catalog and screwed them together with a power
screwdriver.
But in reality, you're screwing the customer.

I see a lot of gimmicks and bad ideas in speaker manufacture,
> but not a lot of common sense.
But how would you know, Greg? You've never designed a speaker.
You did what a hobbyist would do on a rainy afternoon, nothing more.

[snip Quentin Tarantino]

Greg, speakers are not designed by analogy.
They can be tuned by analogy.
You didn't do the work. You claim you were lucky, and you're out to screw
the customer.

I don't think I'm going to allow that to happen.

(slight satiric modification of the below text should be noted)
> You remind me of a bit in Bukowski's first novel, "Post Office", where a
> coworker is needling him about wanting to write a novel, as if there was
> some special process involved. "GO TO A SMALL ROOM AND SCREW TOGETHER
SPEAKERS," he tells
> him. Some people were just put on this earth to be lame, I guess. Am I
> getting warm, Bob?
>
From this distance, I cannot see if your air conditioning is working or not.

However, I observe that you screw your speakers together in a small room.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:35:51 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >You didn't do the work. You claim you were lucky, and you're out to screw
> >the customer.
> >
> >I don't think I'm going to allow that to happen.
>
> You talked about *my* credibility in another post.
As Lionel points out, you are passionate about the wrongness of my criticism
of Trotsky. Generally, this kind of involvment is cause for someone to
recuse himself from judgeship. I'm not asking you to do that; but I do
consider a kind of conflict that could cloud your judgement a little.

>
> Do you think that *your* credibility is particularly high in this
> forum?
No.

Don't you think you've shot your credibility when it comes to
> the issue of Trotsky's speakers?
I think that only fence-sitters would be convinced by my argument, or by
Trotsky's. However, as a result of my challenges, and the ensuing
discussion, we came to know how Greg bypassed the design step. This fact,
not my credibility, negatively influences the perception of Greg Singh,
a.k.a. "Trotsky."

Do you *really* think that you've got
> the power to prevent Trotsky from "screwing the customer"?

No, because there aren't going to be any customers.
Even IF his speakers represented some kind of remarkable value, he has no
capital with the powers that be in audio distribution and retail.
On the other hand, if he had, or were to become involved with a powerful
marketing organization that forced his speakers into distribution, my
opinion would have little effect.

My posts may have a negative impact in one way. Lurkers read this group;
they are now aware that if there was any design work at all, Trotsky didn't
do it. They are also aware that the design is his first and only one; there
were no iterations in the design process. Should these speakers be accepted
for review by one of the magazines, there is considerable chance that a
reviewer would become aware of this. There is also considerable chance it
would affect the outcome of the review in a negative way. Reviewers and
magazines like to nuture original talents, but Trotsky has not applied
personal talent to his product.

Trotsky is on a dusty trail, littered with the bleached bones of people who
thought it would be a neat idea to make audiophile loudspeakers, and
failed -- even if their products were decent.

And I don't think his product is decent.
If he wants to convince me otherwise, let him deliver a set for a very
limited period of time, to any dealer in Manhattan, or to Soundex of Willow
Grove, Pa. , or Audio Trading Outlet of Jenkintown, Pa.

Otherwise, it will be my duty to warn prospective purchasers away from the
product, based upon what I know of the omissions in the design process, and
the character of the designer.

I would imagine that this is a bit of a conflict for you. If you were to
report that Trotsky's speakers are deficient, you might fear that I would
use the fact against him, and also against you, as in, "I told you so." I
promise you I will not do that. Regardless as to your judgment of these
speakers, you are a single observer, as fallible as the rest of us. Nor will
I concede that Trotsky's speakers are merchantable based solely upon your
observations. Yet with independent confirmations, your opinion counts
powerfully.

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
> >Bob Morein wrote:
> >
> >
> >>We can't assume that Greg's speakers are better than some of the cheap
> >>stuff
> >>available -- the new little Kefs, the NHT Super Zeros, or whatever
> >>represents that class today. While it's true that the large volume
>
> makers
>
> >>count every scrap of wire, they usually have the benefit of Harmon
> >>International's speaker lab, with turntable and MLSSA, and the Canadians
> >>have their counterpart. Other small makers have their own woodshops and
> >>spend months turning out cabinets with minor variations. This, the
>
> tuning
>
> >>procedure, has been ridiculed by Greg as unnecessary to a person as
> >>"lucky"
> >>as him.
> >
> >
> >
> >Your audio history is a little weak, Bob Morion. Paradigm used to brag
> >about the use of DBTs at the National Research Center of Canada, but for
> >some reason they don't do that anymore.
>
>
> I haven't mentioned DBTs once in regard to your speakers. It's not an
> issue
> for me.


My mistake, I didn't realize you were this ignorant. Let me explain:
Floyd Toole isn't famous for being employed by Harman (please note
correct spelling) for utilizing critical listeners.

>
>
> In fact, all they do is rely on
>
> >one guy, Scott Bagby, who really is a good desiger.
>
>
> Yes, he actually designs speakers.
> You do not.
> You threw a couple Chinese drivers in a box, and pronounced yourself
> lucky.


Sure, because I'm honest. Let me make it plain: the Europa is
outstanding, in a field where the competition is somewhat fierce. The
Subterfuge subwoofer is just plain the most tonally accurate subwoofer I
have ever heard, at any price point. The competition in the subwoofer
arena is stiff too, but only because of marketing, not because of sound
quality. I've had the benefit of years at the retail level to study the
market, thus you really don't have enough knowledge to comprehend how
relevant my reasonably priced speakers are. Moreover, you don't even
seem to understand the factory direct trend in the audio biz, as you've
mentioned "getting a pair into Manhattan" several times. If somebody
buys a pair in Manhattan then they'll be a pair there. Good like trying
to get people to let you into their homes!

>
>
> Except Paradigm
>
> >cuts all the usual corners that one has to do to mass produce a speaker,
> >and the result is what it is.
> >
> >The truth is, common sense goes a long way in making a good sounding
> >speaker.
>
>
> Well sure it does, Greg. Except you didn't design the speakers. You just
> threw the drivers in a box.
> Scott designs speakers. He tries many variations of cabinet, crossover
> components, drivers, etc.
> He MODIFIES drivers per need of the design.
> You picked parts out of a catalog and screwed them together with a power
> screwdriver.
> But in reality, you're screwing the customer.



That's an opinion you get to have. The fact is, nothing you've said on
the 'net makes me think that you have the listening skills to appreciate
what good sound is. And how is a 45 day trial "screwing the customer"?
You're criticisms don't seem too well founded, do they. I guess I'm
screwing the customer out of shipping charges so UPS can make some more
money.

>
>
> I see a lot of gimmicks and bad ideas in speaker manufacture,
>
> >but not a lot of common sense.
>
> But how would you know, Greg? You've never designed a speaker.
> You did what a hobbyist would do on a rainy afternoon, nothing more.



Oh, so it's impossible to design an exceptional sounding pair of
speakers in a short amount of time? I should've gone to a "small room"
and spent more time designing? The more I hear from you, Bob Morion,
the more I realize you know NOTHING about the creative process.


> [snip Quentin Tarantino]
>
> Greg, speakers are not designed by analogy.
> They can be tuned by analogy.
> You didn't do the work. You claim you were lucky, and you're out to screw
> the customer.


What exactly happens when I "screw the customer", Bob? They return the
speakers to me and I give them a refund? Or I don't give them a refund,
and get brought up on charges by the Attorney General? If they pay by
credit card, all they have to do is to dispute the payment. Frankly, I
think this discussion just shows how ignorant you are in this matter.


>
>
> I don't think I'm going to allow that to happen.



The screenplay business must be really taking off for you.


>
>
> (slight satiric modification of the below text should be noted)
>
> >You remind me of a bit in Bukowski's first novel, "Post Office", where a
> >coworker is needling him about wanting to write a novel, as if there was
> >some special process involved. "GO TO A SMALL ROOM AND SCREW TOGETHER
>
> SPEAKERS," he tells
>
> >him. Some people were just put on this earth to be lame, I guess. Am I
> >getting warm, Bob?
> >
>
> From this distance, I cannot see if your air conditioning is working
> or not.
>
> However, I observe that you screw your speakers together in a small room.



Oh my God, did you just adulterate Bukowski's intellectual property?
Bob, you have just raised yourself to the status of the biggest
hypocrite in the history of this newsgroup. Kudos!

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...

> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:03:04 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:

> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...

> >> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>
> >> >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
> >> >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of
thegreat
> >> >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
> >> >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.

> >> Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
> >> sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made.

> >They are? Are you serious? What is the universe of discourse here? Are
you
> >including transistor radio speakers driven by 100mw? Dashboard
enunciators?
> >The ubiquitous Panasonic answering machine?

You forgot the beepers that go off when a computer boots...

;-)

> Why, yes I am.

> What part of "all speakers made" do you not understand?

It's not a matter of misunderstanding, it's a matter of searching for
relevance.

Of course, far be it from Weil to not descend into a little deception by the
well-known means of making an irrelevant comparison.

> >If Best Buy shelf systems are included, we still have to be careful.

> No we don't. Well, at least *I* don't.

We have an admission from Weil that he does not need to make careful
comparisons.

> >We don't know whether Greg's speakers have a horrendous response anomaly
which
> >deprives them of the benefit that should accrue from better drivers.

> "We" might not, but "I* do.

There's no proof that David Weil isn't stone deaf, or close to it. There's
no evidence that he can hear any of a number of horrendous response
anomalies. There is evidence that David Weil is a proud collector of
defective and/or obsolete to the point of grotesque loudspeakers.

>They are sitting in my living room as we
> speak. If you'llgo back and reread what I said, you'llrealize that I'm
> saying that there is no "horrendous response anomaly" present in his
> speakers.

Prove it. BTW please note that Weil was so upset when he typed this that he
couldn't find the space bar much of the time.

> >A bad cook can spoil any food.

We know for a fact that Greg has zero appreciation of, and zero expertise in
the application of *all known* loudspeaker development technologies. We know
that he does not know the difference between an ohm and a volt. We know that
he was unable to hold a regular engineering or even a petty sales job. We
know for a fact that Greg has terribly strange ideas about what constitutes
good bass. We know that Greg has made untrue but wildly optimistic claims
about his hearing acuity. We know that Greg pays about 4 times as much for
speaker drivers of a given quality level than your typical speaker
manufacturer, and then marks them up outlandishly.

How much bad news is required before any reasonable person simply makes a
more logical choice and looks elsewhere?

> Well, you can fly blind all you want to. I've got his speakers in
> house.

So what?

We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage ears for
years during his military career. We don't know about any congenital hearing
defects he might have. We do know that there are some acute problems with
mental stability in his family tree. We do know that he brags about owning
loudspeakers that are known to be defective and/or wildly substandard by
modern standards.

How much bad news is required before any reasonable person simply makes a
more logical choice and looks elsewhere?

[Arny Krueger]

"Bob Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> "dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:03:04 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
> > >> >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the
> > >great
> > >> >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
> > >> >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.
> > >>
> > >> Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
> > >> sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made.
> > >
> > >They are? Are you serious? What is the universe of discourse here? Are
you
> > >including transistor radio speakers driven by 100mw? Dashboard
enunciators?
> > >The ubiquitous Panasonic answering machine?

> > Why, yes I am.

Weil admits that he was using "Debating Trade" hyperbole.

How sad.

> > What part of "all speakers made" do you not understand?

> > >If Best Buy shelf systems are included, we still have to be careful.

> > No we don't. Well, at least *I* don't.

> Of course not. You don't have to be careful. I'm impressed.

Agreed. Anybody who has followed the Usenet career of Weil knows that he is
a flaming hypocrite. He sets high standards for others, misrepresents them
and their acts so that he can claim that they have failed to meet high
standards, and then follows roads low and lower for his own work.

> > >We don't know whether Greg's speakers have a horrendous response
anomaly which
> > >deprives them of the benefit that should accrue from better drivers.

Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known methodologies
for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable that
Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies. I'd expect
either thin or boomy bass or both, along with a hole in the midrange and a
level mismatch between the upper and lower range drivers. Then there are the
problems that came with the low-cost, low-performance drivers that he
choose. That topic has already been covered in the recent past so there is
no need to belabor it.

> > "We" might not, but "I* do. They are sitting in my living room as we
> > speak. If you'llgo back and reread what I said, you'llrealize that I'm
> > saying that there is no "horrendous response anomaly" present in his
> > speakers.

> I won't assume you're prejudiced, but you are just one person.

Frankly, we don't squat about Weil's hearing ability. We do have some clues
based on his inability to exploit my PCABX web site.

> You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his
> speakers.

Including the possibility that Weil is lying about having the speakers in
his possession.

> Unfortunately, I know nothing about your reputation as a reliable observer
> or reporter.

If you study the google archives, there is lots of relevant information
about Weil's hearing acuity and tastes, but it's all bad.

> If you report that the speakers are good, I will not discount your
> observation, but neither will I take it as settled that your observations
> are correct, unless they are confirmed multiple times by independent
> observers.

Let's take a for-instance. There are two RAO participants who have access to
excellent speaker evaluation facilities. One, Tom Nousiane is a professional
audio system evaluator is routinely paid well by sound system manufacturers,
to evaluate their audio products. Is there a snowball's chance in hell that
Singh tried to engage Nousaine's services? Nope!

> > >A bad cook can spoil any food.
> > >Beware of Radio Shack Linaeums, as well. The Linaeum was one helluva
good
> > >tweeter. Greg's woofers are probably better than Radio Shack's, but
he's
> > >flying blind. Misalignment of a bass reflex system is devastating to
the
> >sound, regardless of who/what drivers are used.

> > Well, you can fly blind all you want to. I've got his speakers in
> > house.

Weil also no doubt has cockroaches in his house. The cockroaches, unlike the
speakers can be reasonably assumed to be fully operational at standard
levels of operation.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:31:08 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

>My posts may have a negative impact in one way.

Yes, they show how obsessed you are with a particular person.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:31:08 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>I would imagine that this is a bit of a conflict for you. If you were to
>report that Trotsky's speakers are deficient, you might fear that I would
>use the fact against him, and also against you, as in, "I told you so." I
>promise you I will not do that. Regardless as to your judgment of these
>speakers, you are a single observer, as fallible as the rest of us. Nor will
>I concede that Trotsky's speakers are merchantable based solely upon your
>observations. Yet with independent confirmations, your opinion counts
>powerfully.

I have no conflict at all. I will simply report them as I experience
them. Then, people can do what I've always suggested that they do when
reading *any* critical commentary - first, consider the source,
second, try to factor in the known biases and knowledge of the
commentator, third, dovetail that with their own biases and
experiences, and fourth, take it all with a grain of salt.

I have *never* said or implied that my sole opinion will make Mr.
Singh's speakers marketable. That came out of left field, even for
you. I'm merely here as an observer as a courtesy to the group.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:24:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage ears for
>years during his military career. We don't know about any congenital hearing
>defects he might have. We do know that there are some acute problems with
>mental stability in his family tree. We do know that he brags about owning
>loudspeakers that are known to be defective and/or wildly substandard by
>modern standards.

Do you really think that your children would be proud of you using my
father's suicide against me in a discussion about speakers?

Oh yeah, the Army had a simple remedy for what you talk about -
mandatory ear plugs.

As to the final point, I *do* own some loudspeakers that are currently
not being used because they need repair. They are not being used,
obviously.

Arnold, your attacking me shows more about you than it does me. I
think you're mad because I didn't go after you while you were on your
vacation.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:36:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known methodologies
>for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable that
>Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies. I'd expect
>either thin or boomy bass or both, along with a hole in the midrange and a
>level mismatch between the upper and lower range drivers. Then there are the
>problems that came with the low-cost, low-performance drivers that he
>choose. That topic has already been covered in the recent past so there is
>no need to belabor it.

Unfortunately, you'd be wrong.

The speakers are *not* perfect of course, and I'll be getting into
that when I make my final comments. In fact, there's one thing I will
note that will give you fodder for comedy (but it's not anything
particularly audio-related per se).

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:36:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>Frankly, we don't squat about Weil's hearing ability

Thankfully, I might note.

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> Because you have no Christian
> morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.

I have an idea about implementing your trash-the-Christianity plan.
Start calling yourself "Reverend Singh". That may fool Krooger.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:36:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>> You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his
>> speakers.
>
>Including the possibility that Weil is lying about having the speakers in
>his possession.

Sure, I could be lying about it. I could also be setting Greg up
because, as you know, he and I took each other apart pretty regularly.
Maybe I'm holding a grudge, which makes his sending me the speakers at
the very least, an act of couraqge, especially since he knows that I
don't have the kind of gear that he would like to see associated with
his speakers.

However, neither of these scenarios is true. I could prive the first
by posting a dated picture of them, but you'd just claim that I
"Photoshopped" them. So, why should I bother?

Yes, I have them here and have listened to them as time has allowed. I
haven't *really* gotten into the meat of the listening, as I spent the
hour or so that I had available to me yesterday positioning them (and
I'm not quite satisfied yet).

The funny thing is, that there are some areas that I think you are
going to agree with me about...

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:36:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>One, Tom Nousiane is a professional
>audio system evaluator is routinely paid well by sound system manufacturers,
>to evaluate their audio products.

So, basically, when he comments about subwoofers here on RAO, we have
to take into account that he's a biased (and compensated) observer.

[George M. Middius]

dave weil said:

> No, I simply said that when I said 95% of all speakers, I wasn't
> excluding *any* speakers.

Where would you rank trotsky's speakers against comparable ones?

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:24:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> wrote:
>
>
> >We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage
> ears for
> >years during his military career. We don't know about any congenital
> hearing
> >defects he might have. We do know that there are some acute problems with
> >mental stability in his family tree. We do know that he brags about
> owning
> >loudspeakers that are known to be defective and/or wildly substandard by
> >modern standards.
>
>
> Do you really think that your children would be proud of you using my
> father's suicide against me in a discussion about speakers?



That's more of Arny's lack of Christian morals. Arny should just found
the Church of Being a ******* and have done with it. It could be that
he already tried, though, and kept on getting arrested for indecent
exposure by refusing to mend the well placed slit in his robe.

>
>

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> trotsky said:
>
> > Because you have no Christian
> > morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.
>
> I have an idea about implementing your trash-the-Christianity plan.
> Start calling yourself "Reverend Singh". That may fool Krooger.
>
It's a bit more than that.
He thinks his speakers are the Second Coming.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:31:08 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >I would imagine that this is a bit of a conflict for you. If you were to
> >report that Trotsky's speakers are deficient, you might fear that I would
> >use the fact against him, and also against you, as in, "I told you so." I
> >promise you I will not do that. Regardless as to your judgment of these
> >speakers, you are a single observer, as fallible as the rest of us. Nor
will
> >I concede that Trotsky's speakers are merchantable based solely upon your
> >observations. Yet with independent confirmations, your opinion counts
> >powerfully.
>
> I have no conflict at all. I will simply report them as I experience
> them. Then, people can do what I've always suggested that they do when
> reading *any* critical commentary - first, consider the source,
> second, try to factor in the known biases and knowledge of the
> commentator, third, dovetail that with their own biases and
> experiences, and fourth, take it all with a grain of salt.
>
> I have *never* said or implied that my sole opinion will make Mr.
> Singh's speakers marketable. That came out of left field, even for
> you. I'm merely here as an observer as a courtesy to the group.

Fair enough.
I wonder if Trotsky would consider subsequently sending them to a
destination in Manhattan.
How many people would be interested in hearing them there?

[Bob Morein]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Bob Morein wrote:
>
[sni]
>
>
> What exactly happens when I "screw the customer", Bob? They return the
> speakers to me and I give them a refund? Or I don't give them a refund,
> and get brought up on charges by the Attorney General? If they pay by
> credit card, all they have to do is to dispute the payment. Frankly, I
> think this discussion just shows how ignorant you are in this matter.
>
I think you're gambling with money you don't have.

[Joseph Oberlander]

trotsky wrote:
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
>> methodologies
>> for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable that
>> Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.
>
>
>
>
> That's blatantly false. The Europas are one of the most neutral
> speakers I have heard

Replace heard with tested and get back to us.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:08:58 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>> I have *never* said or implied that my sole opinion will make Mr.
>> Singh's speakers marketable. That came out of left field, even for
>> you. I'm merely here as an observer as a courtesy to the group.
>
>Fair enough.
>I wonder if Trotsky would consider subsequently sending them to a
>destination in Manhattan.
>How many people would be interested in hearing them there?

I doubt he would do it just to let you to take biased potshots at his
product, as I don't think that you've shown yourself to be able to
analyse his speaker with anything other than malice.

[George M. Middius]

Obie-Wan Test-MeBorg said:

> Replace heard with tested and get back to us.

Assimilation alert!

Power up your stereos, guys. The 'borgs are on the march.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:08:58 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >> I have *never* said or implied that my sole opinion will make Mr.
> >> Singh's speakers marketable. That came out of left field, even for
> >> you. I'm merely here as an observer as a courtesy to the group.
> >
> >Fair enough.
> >I wonder if Trotsky would consider subsequently sending them to a
> >destination in Manhattan.
> >How many people would be interested in hearing them there?
>
> I doubt he would do it just to let you to take biased potshots at his
> product, as I don't think that you've shown yourself to be able to
> analyse his speaker with anything other than malice.

There would be zero downside potential for him.
If I trash the speakers, then it would be attributed toward my personal
dislike of Trotsky, and be disregarded.
If I don't trash them, it's a plus for him.
He can't lose.

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
> >Bob Morein wrote:
> >
>
> [sni]
>
> >
> >What exactly happens when I "screw the customer", Bob? They return the
> >speakers to me and I give them a refund? Or I don't give them a refund,
> >and get brought up on charges by the Attorney General? If they pay by
> >credit card, all they have to do is to dispute the payment. Frankly, I
> >think this discussion just shows how ignorant you are in this matter.
> >
>
> I think you're gambling with money you don't have.



That makes no sense, but then neither does [sni].

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
> > methodologies
> > for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable that
> > Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.

> That's blatantly false.

Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.

>The Europas are one of the most neutral
> speakers I have heard at ANY price.

Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same speakers.

> Because you have no Christian
> morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.

Ironic Singh, coming from a person with no discernable ethics of *any* kind.

[trotsky]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

> trotsky wrote:
>
> >> Yes, he actually designs speakers.
> >> You do not.
> >> You threw a couple Chinese drivers in a box, and pronounced yourself
> >> lucky.
> >
> >
> > Sure, because I'm honest.
>
>
> No you are not. At least not with yourself.


So I figure you're Larry, Bob is Moe, and Mickey is Curly. Do you agree?


>
>
> Speakers are very much like guitars or violins - you cannot slap
> something together and get great sound.


How does "great sound" equate to "stomp"?


> Not as a first time builder.
> I've never seen it done. There's a reason people are apprentices to
> master craftsmen for years before building such insturments.


And let's not forget the telescopes. If you're peeping through
celebrities' windows do you refer to it as "gazing at the stars"?


>
>
> As they say, the devil's in the details. Little things like custom
> crossovers(every design requires tweaking here - no exceptions),


You're right about one thing: the devil *is* in the details. For
example, you seem to have glossed over the detail of what experience you
have in this area. I claim that you have none.


> baffles
> and internal bracing(huge with a speaker if you want the port to do
> anything other than "chuff" at you)


You've bought into marketing hype, Joseph, or even worse, "conventional
wisdom."


> - the specific type of material,
> how you mount the speakers,(you are using a proper gasket and machine
> screws? Let's hope you aren't just slapping it together with drywall
> screws) the shape of the port, and even tiny things like what exact
> glue and varnish(if wood) you use.


What would happen if you used drywall screws--would your hair catch on
fire? Also, could you explain in detail how you use machine screws in
wood? (I use T-nuts for the woofers, which utilized machine screws, but
I'm interested in your Three Stooges version.)


>
>
> The list goes on and on.
>
> If you really want to learn how to make excellent speakers then
> do yourself a huge favor and study and/or work at a major speaker
> manufacturer for a couple of years to learn some of the secrets
> and techniques.


Mass produced speakers are part of the problem. In fact, you're
contradicting yourself because in the beginning of your post you were
referring to handmade "instruments."

>
>
> You can either slap somethig together and be Kia - fine cars but
> nothing special or you can learn to do it correctly and make a
> Honda, which is built to much higher standards in every single
> way.


Uh oh, looks like we shifted gears to the car analogy. Don't you want
to compare the process to a Tarantino script?

>
>
> > Let me make it plain: the Europa is outstanding, in a field where the
> > competition is somewhat fierce.
>
>
> So far, only your opinions. Have you actually done a side-by-side
> test with other speakers using other people?



I've listened to more speakers than you will in your entire lifetime.
But you aren't the target audience, Joseph, you're Tannoy's target
audience. Why you're not saving for a pair of Joseph Audios is beyond me.


>
>
> > The Subterfuge subwoofer is just plain the most tonally accurate
> > subwoofer I have ever heard, at any price point.
>
>
> Oh - now you are really beginning to believe your own marketing.
> If you've only been looking at the subs you could find at Circuit City,
> then I could imagine that you might think that.
>
> OTOH, at your prices, there are subs what will guaranteed stomp on
> yours ten times over.



"Stomp" doesn't exactly imply finesse, or credibility. It sounds like
you're coming from a car stereo mentality.

>
>
>
> >> But how would you know, Greg? You've never designed a speaker.
> >> You did what a hobbyist would do on a rainy afternoon, nothing more.
> >
> >
> > Oh, so it's impossible to design an exceptional sounding pair of
> > speakers in a short amount of time?
>
>
> The sad fact is that it IS impossible. Too many small variables.



When did you try, Joseph? Were hallucinagenic drugs involved?


>
>
> You also forget the fact that customer bias is present. Your speakers
> will have to sound noticeably BETTER for the same price as the larger
> companies to be seen as as viable choice. Sounds the same as their
> speakers won't even cut it. Afterall - your speakers or a pair of Tannoy
> S8 L/Rs? That's your closest mainstream competition. That specific
> model.



There are lots of models at this price point.


>
>
> Street price on the S8 L/Rs is $1350. Yours better sound like Tannoy's
> $2000 speakers or you'll never get past that hurdle in customer's minds.
> All things being equal, the customer will always choose the older,
> established
> name-brand product over the generic.



Your knowledge of product niches appears to be nonexistent.


>
>
> You prattle on and on about your "years of experience in retail" selling
> speakers and are blinded to this harsh fact in your haste to make money.
>
> Tannoy? Paradigm? KEF? B&W? Some guy putting speakers together?
> Four proven winners. One unknown new guy.



I wouldn't pay money for any of those "winners". They are not good
values on an absolute basis.


> >> Greg, speakers are not designed by analogy.
> >> They can be tuned by analogy.
> >> You didn't do the work. You claim you were lucky, and you're out to
> screw
> >> the customer.
> >
> >
> > What exactly happens when I "screw the customer", Bob?
>
>
> Your prices are inflated like a big commercial manufacturer but are based
> upon your cost as a private individual.
>
> eg:
> $100 in parts marked up 5 times =$500 (DIYer going through a typical
> supply
> chain)
> $50 in parts marked up 5 times = $250 (economy of scale and buying
> thousands
> of components from the
> manufacturer)
> Same exact parts. Same exact design in this example.
>
>
> Because of the problem I stated above - namely, that you have to be BETTER
> for the money, you must price your speakers for no more than the big
> companies
> competing products *reguardless of your profit margins*.



Joseph, you can't evaluate speakers without listening to them first.
Your posts are repeatedly showing how stupid you are, but because you're
so stupid, you can't learn from the experience.


>
>
> Otherwise, they will always go out and buy the simmilar sounding name
> brand
> speaker for $1000.



Pure garbage.


> ....
>
> What you need to do



We're through talking. Come back when you've grown a brain, please.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:36:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >> You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his
> >> speakers.

> >Including the possibility that Weil is lying about having the speakers in
> >his possession.

> Sure, I could be lying about it.

It's the RAO way, very little is what it appears to be.

>I could also be setting Greg up
> because, as you know, he and I took each other apart pretty regularly.

I don't get involved in little kid's grudge matches.

> Maybe I'm holding a grudge, which makes his sending me the speakers at
> the very least, an act of couraqge, especially since he knows that I
> don't have the kind of gear that he would like to see associated with
> his speakers.

Or the track record for actually owning credible, up-to-date speakers in
working condition. Not high end speakers, not even better mid-fi.

> However, neither of these scenarios is true. I could prive the first
> by posting a dated picture of them, but you'd just claim that I
> "Photoshopped" them. So, why should I bother?

Thanks for pointing out how flakey your purported evidence would be.

> Yes, I have them here and have listened to them as time has allowed.

....and Weil you've also tried to claim that you owned high end speakers in
some useful sense. You've made a number of other deceptive claims about
Greg's speakers as well.

> I haven't *really* gotten into the meat of the listening, as I spent the
> hour or so that I had available to me yesterday positioning them (and
> I'm not quite satisfied yet).

Weiol, as if your ears have any kind of a track record for anything but
insensitivity and close connection to an egocentric, befuddled brain.

> The funny thing is, that there are some areas that I think you are
> going to agree with me about...

Without actually listening to the speakers I couldn't possibly agree with
anybody's listening evaluation of them in a meaningful way. Right now all
that I know for sure is that they are cheap, overpriced drives assembled by
a known know-nothing, hear-nothing, and vastly overpriced. All this in a
crowded marketplace with many equal-or-better alternatives.

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Bobo, can't you see the double yellow line in the middle of the road?
>
> > There would be zero downside potential for him.
> > If I trash the speakers, then it would be attributed toward my personal
> > dislike of Trotsky, and be disregarded.
> > If I don't trash them, it's a plus for him.
> > He can't lose.
>
> "I don't think I'm going to allow that to happen."
>
> Who knows what your fevered brain would cook up once you had a pair
> of the speakers in your possession.
>
Imagine the inner turmoil I would experience if I had to add the experience
to the "irony" column of my journal.
Or the righteous, foot-stomping glee if Trotsky's persona emerges, Princess
Leila - like, from the vents.

I'd take them over to my buddy Larry Zeitz, and we'd spend an evening with
them.
He has a pair of Bugtussel bookshelfs coming in.
I have a pair of MB Quarts, European versions, which similar in size to
Greg's speakers. I'd haul them over for the event.
Maybe I'd even bring a pair of Spica TC-60's.
OTOH, if Trotsky would like to get them to an established local retailer, I
believe Larry and I would both call the retailer to state that we wish to
hear the speakers.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:36:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >One, Tom Nousiane is a professional
> >audio system evaluator is routinely paid well by sound system
manufacturers,
> >to evaluate their audio products.

> So, basically, when he comments about subwoofers here on RAO, we have
> to take into account that he's a biased (and compensated) observer.

None of the speaker systems Nousaine evaluates professionally are likely to
be discussed on RAO. The better of them are sonically superior and more
accurate than the best systems owned by most RAO readers.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:24:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >> >If Best Buy shelf systems are included, we still have to be careful.
> >
> >> No we don't. Well, at least *I* don't.
> >
> >We have an admission from Weil that he does not need to make careful
> >comparisons.
>
> Sorry, both you and Bob lose because you didn't understand my point.

It appears that we understand it too well for Weil's own good.

> My point is that I don't have to "be careful" including *any* speakers
> because I've got the speakers in house to audition.

Meaningless.

>I have direct experience with the speakers...

But Weil, we all know about your well-documented correction of substandard,
outdated, and abjectly broken equipment. It speaks very poorly of your
potential as a critical, accurate, insightful, unbiased reviewer.

> and I don't have to guess how they
> compare to the type of speakers that Bob is talking about.

That would only be true if you had speakers on hand that were credible and
had some kind of track record as a reliable sensitive listener.

Weil, saying that you have equally good reasons to shaft Singh as give him a
free pass does not prove that you are unbiased. It only proves that you're
unstable, which we know very well from past experience with you.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...

> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:24:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

> >We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage ears
for
> >years during his military career. We don't know about any congenital
hearing
> >defects he might have. We do know that there are some acute problems with
> >mental stability in his family tree. We do know that he brags about
owning
> >loudspeakers that are known to be defective and/or wildly substandard by
> >modern standards.

> Do you really think that your children would be proud of you using my
> father's suicide against me in a discussion about speakers?

Where did I say anything about your father, Weil? But since you brought up
family, how many of your references to my relatively recently-deceased
family member do I need to dredge up to demonstrate your hypocrisy?

> Oh yeah, the Army had a simple remedy for what you talk about -
> mandatory ear plugs.

Proves nothing. Nobody can force people to properly use safety equipment
like earplugs. I saw safety equipment present but routinely not used during
my tour of duty. As stupid as you are Weil, you probably didn't use
available ear protection to be macho. The most dangerous place you visited
for a few days at a time in Germany was where I lived for a year straight.
People died there pretty routinely, if death can be routine.

> As to the final point, I *do* own some loudspeakers that are currently
> not being used because they need repair. They are not being used,
> obviously.

Look Weil, you bragged about these broken POS when questioned about your
qualifications as a loudspeaker evaluator. I had to search the archives to
find out how deceptive your claims are. So you get no points for having any
recent in-house experience with good modern speakers, and you've lost a
bundle of points for trying to deceive us all. That puts you in a deep hole,
right?

> Arnold, your attacking me shows more about you than it does me.

What it shows Weil is that you're well-known to many RAO regulars as a
hypocrite and a deceiver. I just had to put you through your paces for the
benefit of the newbies who might actually have their heads turned by your
song-and-dance.

> I think you're mad because I didn't go after you while you were on your
> vacation.

Just when I thought that you had been as low and lame as you could be Weil,
you come up with something weird like this.

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> dave weil wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:24:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage
> > ears for
> > >years during his military career. We don't know about any congenital
> > hearing
> > >defects he might have. We do know that there are some acute problems
with
> > >mental stability in his family tree. We do know that he brags about
> > owning
> > >loudspeakers that are known to be defective and/or wildly substandard
by
> > >modern standards.
> >
> >
> > Do you really think that your children would be proud of you using my
> > father's suicide against me in a discussion about speakers?
>
>
>
> That's more of Arny's lack of Christian morals. Arny should just found
> the Church of Being a ******* and have done with it. It could be that
> he already tried, though, and kept on getting arrested for indecent
> exposure by refusing to mend the well placed slit in his robe.

Not at all, Singh. Your ethics work something like this. You go looking for
a Christian with some fellow thugs, and then say to yourselves: Let's kick
the **** out of this guy because it will make us feel good to see another
human suffer for no reason but our pleasure. Then, if he tries to defend
himself, you accuse him of being a hypocrite for not letting you beat the
heck out of the parts you haven't yet tried to turn into mincemeat.

Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO Singh, and
try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:35:16 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:08:58 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> I have *never* said or implied that my sole opinion will make Mr.
>> >> Singh's speakers marketable. That came out of left field, even for
>> >> you. I'm merely here as an observer as a courtesy to the group.
>> >
>> >Fair enough.
>> >I wonder if Trotsky would consider subsequently sending them to a
>> >destination in Manhattan.
>> >How many people would be interested in hearing them there?
>>
>> I doubt he would do it just to let you to take biased potshots at his
>> product, as I don't think that you've shown yourself to be able to
>> analyse his speaker with anything other than malice.
>
>There would be zero downside potential for him.
>If I trash the speakers, then it would be attributed toward my personal
>dislike of Trotsky, and be disregarded.
>If I don't trash them, it's a plus for him.
>He can't lose.

Not a good enough reason to take the trouble make them available to
you.

I'm pretty sure that the last possibility is almost beyond the realm
of possibility.

But that's just my opinion.

Also, that last possibility doesn't necessarily mean a plus for him
either. Such is your credibility on this forum.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:08:39 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:36:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> You are, of course, entitled to hold any opinion you wish about his
>> >> speakers.
>
>> >Including the possibility that Weil is lying about having the speakers in
>> >his possession.
>
>> Sure, I could be lying about it.
>
>It's the RAO way, very little is what it appears to be.

You are a good example of that.
>>I could also be setting Greg up
>> because, as you know, he and I took each other apart pretty regularly.
>
>I don't get involved in little kid's grudge matches.

You really *are* joking. You stick your nose in most of them, as well
as creating most of the "little kid's grudge matches" on RAO, just as
you are now.

>> Maybe I'm holding a grudge, which makes his sending me the speakers at
>> the very least, an act of couraqge, especially since he knows that I
>> don't have the kind of gear that he would like to see associated with
>> his speakers.
>
>Or the track record for actually owning credible, up-to-date speakers in
>working condition. Not high end speakers, not even better mid-fi.

Actually I own several pairs of working "up-to-date" speakers. Just
because speakers haven't been manufactured in a while doesn't make
them "out-of-date".

>> However, neither of these scenarios is true. I could prive the first
>> by posting a dated picture of them, but you'd just claim that I
>> "Photoshopped" them. So, why should I bother?
>
>Thanks for pointing out how flakey your purported evidence would be.

No, thank me for pointing out how you would not give credence to even
photographic evidence. That's because you're an asshole. Simple as
that.

>> Yes, I have them here and have listened to them as time has allowed.
>
>...and Weil you've also tried to claim that you owned high end speakers in
>some useful sense.

I have owned Merlin speakers which even Mike Mckelvy acknowledges
makes some of the finest speakers he's ever heard.

The fact that they're down at the moment is irrelevant.

>You've made a number of other deceptive claims about
>Greg's speakers as well.

Name them.

>> I haven't *really* gotten into the meat of the listening, as I spent the
>> hour or so that I had available to me yesterday positioning them (and
>> I'm not quite satisfied yet).
>
>Weiol, as if your ears have any kind of a track record for anything but
>insensitivity and close connection to an egocentric, befuddled brain.

Simple projection of self-same flaws of Mr. krueger's personality.

>> The funny thing is, that there are some areas that I think you are
>> going to agree with me about...
>
>Without actually listening to the speakers I couldn't possibly agree with
>anybody's listening evaluation of them in a meaningful way.

Ahhhh, but you can diss them, right?

What hypocrisy!

But thanks for making my point for me.

>Right now all that I know for sure is that they are cheap, overpriced drives assembled by
>a known know-nothing, hear-nothing, and vastly overpriced. All this in a
>crowded marketplace with many equal-or-better alternatives.

Without actually listening to the speakers, you couldn't possibly make
the last claim.

BTW, you spell my last name weil.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:16:45 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>That would only be true if you had speakers on hand that were credible

I see. Now you're trashing Roy Allison.

Aren't you afraid of making Howard Ferstler angry?

That says nothing about trashing Paul Klipsch as well.

<shrug>

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:26:28 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>> Do you really think that your children would be proud of you using my
>> father's suicide against me in a discussion about speakers?
>
>Where did I say anything about your father, Weil? But since you brought up
>family, how many of your references to my relatively recently-deceased
>family member do I need to dredge up to demonstrate your hypocrisy?

You directly alluded to it.

I find it funny that you consider praising your late son is equivalent
to using my father's suicide to make a point.

Just shows your inherent instability.

BTW, I'm glad to see that you're back in attack mode. It makes the
world seem almost normal.

PS, is that a stain on your underwear?

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
> >dave weil wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:24:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage
> >>
> >>ears for
> >>
> >>>years during his military career. We don't know about any congenital
> >>
> >>hearing
> >>
> >>>defects he might have. We do know that there are some acute problems
>
> with
>
> >>>mental stability in his family tree. We do know that he brags about
> >>
> >>owning
> >>
> >>>loudspeakers that are known to be defective and/or wildly substandard
>
> by
>
> >>>modern standards.
> >>
> >>
> >>Do you really think that your children would be proud of you using my
> >>father's suicide against me in a discussion about speakers?
> >
> >
> >
> >That's more of Arny's lack of Christian morals. Arny should just found
> >the Church of Being a ******* and have done with it. It could be that
> >he already tried, though, and kept on getting arrested for indecent
> >exposure by refusing to mend the well placed slit in his robe.
>
>
> Not at all, Singh. Your ethics work something like this. You go
> looking for
> a Christian with some fellow thugs, and then say to yourselves: Let's kick
> the **** out of this guy because it will make us feel good to see another
> human suffer for no reason but our pleasure. Then, if he tries to defend
> himself, you accuse him of being a hypocrite for not letting you beat the
> heck out of the parts you haven't yet tried to turn into mincemeat.



Wait, are you really trying to say that you are somehow innocent in all
of this? This is the biggest crock o' **** you've come up with yet.

>
>
> Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO
> Singh, and
> try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
> work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!


Don't try and change the subject, Krueger. The subject is your
completely unChristian viewpoint as presented by your online persona.
You do agree there is nothing Christian about the way you behave on
Usenet, right?

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:35:16 -0400, "Bob Morein"
> wrote:
>
>
> >"dave weil" wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >>On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:08:58 -0400, "Bob Morein"
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>I have *never* said or implied that my sole opinion will make Mr.
> >>>>Singh's speakers marketable. That came out of left field, even for
> >>>>you. I'm merely here as an observer as a courtesy to the group.
> >>>
> >>>Fair enough.
> >>>I wonder if Trotsky would consider subsequently sending them to a
> >>>destination in Manhattan.
> >>>How many people would be interested in hearing them there?
> >>
> >>I doubt he would do it just to let you to take biased potshots at his
> >>product, as I don't think that you've shown yourself to be able to
> >>analyse his speaker with anything other than malice.
> >
> >There would be zero downside potential for him.
> >If I trash the speakers, then it would be attributed toward my personal
> >dislike of Trotsky, and be disregarded.
> >If I don't trash them, it's a plus for him.
> >He can't lose.
>
>
> Not a good enough reason to take the trouble make them available to
> you.



What Bob doesn't realize is that because of his behavior here I wouldn't
even sell him a pair.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually received
>with enhanced credibility.
>When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming evidence which
>compels the adversary to honesty.

This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
opinion on anything.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually received
> >with enhanced credibility.
> >When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming evidence
which
> >compels the adversary to honesty.
>
> This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
> ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
> impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
> opinion on anything.

Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far more
interesting to lurkers than what we say.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually received
>> >with enhanced credibility.
>> >When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming evidence
>which
>> >compels the adversary to honesty.
>>
>> This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
>> ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
>> impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
>> opinion on anything.
>
>Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
>The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far more
>interesting to lurkers than what we say.

That is until I weigh in. Then, the chips can fall where they may and
people can give whatever credence that they want to give.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually
received
> >> >with enhanced credibility.
> >> >When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming evidence
> >which
> >> >compels the adversary to honesty.
> >>
> >> This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
> >> ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
> >> impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
> >> opinion on anything.
> >
> >Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
> >The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far more
> >interesting to lurkers than what we say.
>
> That is until I weigh in. Then, the chips can fall where they may and
> people can give whatever credence that they want to give.

No, it begins after you weigh in.
At this point, you have made no statement which requires credibility.
After you publish your result, credibility will determine to what degree
your opinion counts by itself.
If there is confirmation from other individuals who have not been involved
in this dispute, the importance of your opinion will be amplified.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:19:21 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually
>received
>> >> >with enhanced credibility.
>> >> >When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming evidence
>> >which
>> >> >compels the adversary to honesty.
>> >>
>> >> This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
>> >> ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
>> >> impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
>> >> opinion on anything.
>> >
>> >Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
>> >The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far more
>> >interesting to lurkers than what we say.
>>
>> That is until I weigh in. Then, the chips can fall where they may and
>> people can give whatever credence that they want to give.
>
>No, it begins after you weigh in.
>At this point, you have made no statement which requires credibility.
>After you publish your result, credibility will determine to what degree
>your opinion counts by itself.
>If there is confirmation from other individuals who have not been involved
>in this dispute, the importance of your opinion will be amplified.

I really don't care if they're "amplified" or not. I'll simply be
expressing a singular opinion.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:16:45 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >That would only be true if you had speakers on hand that were credible
>
> I see. Now you're trashing Roy Allison.

Am I trashing Roy Allison or am I saying that old technology is inferior to
new technology?

> Aren't you afraid of making Howard Ferstler angry?

Irrelevant.

> That says nothing about trashing Paul Klipsch as well.

I'm sure that he's spinning in his grave at this kind of abuse of his name.

FYI, he died Mon, 6 May 2002.

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net...

> Arny Krueger wrote:

> > Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO
> > Singh, and
> > try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
> > work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!

> Don't try and change the subject, Krueger.

The truth abouyt your grotesque past misdeeds hurts even you, doesn't it
Singh?

You can't escape the facts that are in the Google archives, Singh. Why have
you worked so hard to promote pedophilia on RAO, Singh? Why isn't Marc
Phillips attacking you, Graham, and Middius in his alleged anti-pedophile
fervor?

[Arny Krueger]

"Bob Morein" > wrote in message
...

> Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
> The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far more
> interesting to lurkers than what we say.

You said a mouthful there, Bob.

I can't imagine any reasonable lurker finding doing business with Singh an
attractive option, given the reprehensible ways that he has reacted to
decent and fair technical questions about his new speakers.

[George M. Middius]

dave weil said:

> This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
> ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
> impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
> opinion on anything.

I dunno. If Krooger used that exact phrase, I'd assume he was
confused by the human meaning of "ideal" and was spewing a bunch of
random Krooglish.

[George M. Middius]

Bobo said:

> Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.

On the contrary, I'm sure most of the group expects dave weil to give
an honest and balanced appraisal. Don't forget that he's been
supportive from the beginning of trotsky's intention to build and
market speakers. He put aside the vitriolic exchanges the two have
had in the past. He's argued with you, Krooger, and Obie about
Singh's right to do his thing. He's also wished trotsky well in the
undertaking. If you were compiling a short list of the RAO regulars
who have genuine cause for bearing a grudge against Singh, dave would
certainly be near the top, and yet he hasn't uttered a discouraging
word about the Jupiter business.

So unless you think dave weil plotted out a devious strategy for
getting trotsky to send him the speakers, intending all along to
trash their performance, you need to rethink your analysis. And this
is not an occasion calling for a snippet of "If the cameras were
rolling...." fiction.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>
> >Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
> >>Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO
> >>Singh, and
> >>try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
> >>work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!
>
>
> >Don't try and change the subject, Krueger.
>
>
> The truth abouyt your grotesque past misdeeds hurts even you, doesn't it
> Singh?
>
> You can't escape the facts that are in the Google archives, Singh. Why
> have
> you worked so hard to promote pedophilia on RAO, Singh? Why isn't Marc
> Phillips attacking you, Graham, and Middius in his alleged anti-pedophile
> fervor?


What happened to the rest of my post, Krueger? Are you admitting to
being afraid to discuss the topic?

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> > Why have
> > you worked so hard to promote pedophilia on RAO, Singh? Why isn't Marc
> > Phillips attacking you, Graham, and Middius in his alleged anti-pedophile
> > fervor?

> What happened to the rest of my post, Krueger? Are you admitting to
> being afraid to discuss the topic?

No, Krooger is laying the foundation for his defense to a lawsuit.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:19:21 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein"
>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually
> >received
> >> >> >with enhanced credibility.
> >> >> >When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming
evidence
> >> >which
> >> >> >compels the adversary to honesty.
> >> >>
> >> >> This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
> >> >> ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
> >> >> impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
> >> >> opinion on anything.
> >> >
> >> >Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much
credibility.
> >> >The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far
more
> >> >interesting to lurkers than what we say.
> >>
> >> That is until I weigh in. Then, the chips can fall where they may and
> >> people can give whatever credence that they want to give.
> >
> >No, it begins after you weigh in.
> >At this point, you have made no statement which requires credibility.
> >After you publish your result, credibility will determine to what degree
> >your opinion counts by itself.
> >If there is confirmation from other individuals who have not been
involved
> >in this dispute, the importance of your opinion will be amplified.
>
> I really don't care if they're "amplified" or not. I'll simply be
> expressing a singular opinion.a

"Singular" means unique.
Did you mean that?

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Bobo said:
>
> > Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
>
> On the contrary, I'm sure most of the group expects dave weil to give
> an honest and balanced appraisal. Don't forget that he's been
> supportive from the beginning of trotsky's intention to build and
> market speakers. He put aside the vitriolic exchanges the two have
> had in the past. He's argued with you, Krooger, and Obie about
> Singh's right to do his thing. He's also wished trotsky well in the
> undertaking. If you were compiling a short list of the RAO regulars
> who have genuine cause for bearing a grudge against Singh, dave would
> certainly be near the top, and yet he hasn't uttered a discouraging
> word about the Jupiter business.

From my POV, I am most aware of the dispute I have with Weil.
The only thing I will grant is that he has more credibility than me, which
isn't hard, considering that I been asserting Greg's guilt by apriori
reasoning.
>
> So unless you think dave weil plotted out a devious strategy for
> getting trotsky to send him the speakers, intending all along to
> trash their performance, you need to rethink your analysis. And this
> is not an occasion calling for a snippet of "If the cameras were
> rolling...." fiction.
>
I am inclined to believe that Weil's judgment will unintentionally give the
speakers more quality than they deserve, for two reasons:
1. There is the "novelty" effect, whereby an anomaly can sound interesting
at first, or until one is committed by purchase.
2. Weil, unlike me, may have scruples about hurting Greg Singh in a material
way.

George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
definitive?
Do you mean people who can actually be named, or lurkers rarely heard from?
Either represent a valid assertion, but I would appreciate just a little
clarification.

[George M. Middius]

Obie-Wan Sacred Cow said:

> > Assimilation alert!
> > Power up your stereos, guys. The 'borgs are on the march.

> Well, gheezus

Is "gheezus" the god of yak butter?

> - he hasn't even run the darn thing through a
> test to find out its frequency response curve.

So? Maybe you should teach the rest of us how to mesmerize
yourself with a couple of limp meters so you'll forget about even
listening to music.

[Bob Morein]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> > "trotsky" wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> >
> > >Arny Krueger wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
> > >>methodologies
> > >>for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable that
> > >>Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.
> >
> >
> > >That's blatantly false.
> >
> >
> > Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.
> >
> >
> > >The Europas are one of the most neutral
> > >speakers I have heard at ANY price.
> >
> >
> > Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
speakers.
> >
> >
> > >Because you have no Christian
> > >morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.
> >
> >
> > Ironic Singh, coming from a person with no discernable ethics of *any*
> > kind.
>
>
>
> Yeah, but I'm an atheist, and you're masquerading as a Christian. You
> make a joke out of the religion.
>
You've made a joke out of atheism.

[Joseph Oberlander]

trotsky wrote:

>> Not as a first time builder.
>> I've never seen it done. There's a reason people are apprentices to
>> master craftsmen for years before building such insturments.
>
> And let's not forget the telescopes. If you're peeping through
> celebrities' windows do you refer to it as "gazing at the stars"?

Building your first REAL telescope requires months or years of
studying and math and calculations and such in addition to the
grinding, which can take darn near forever. 90% of first-timers
join groups and classes on how to do it and the rest that are
successful are serious engineers who do stuff like this for a living.

The same could be said about speakers or insturments. If you are
truly serious about dong this for a job/career, then you need to
study with a group. That means classes and a job with a reputable
company for a couple of years first to learn the ropes.

Look - I'm a good woodworker and know my stuff, but could I build
a better guitar then Martin or Guild? Not in a million years my
first time out. Even if I had their specs and plans and a couple
in front of me to copy. Could I build BETTER? Maybe after the
first 50 or so different tries. Maybe. Or, I could study with
a true pro who is doing it for real and learn what I need to know
in a couple of years.

What is readily apparent to even the most casual onlooker of
your speakers is that you are the true DIYer and lack the training
or engineering/psysics background or test equipment to compensate
for your rush to get into the field.

Do it right or crash and burn. There are no other ways unless
you LIKE to waste time and several years of pulling your hair out.

Honestly - I'm being as helpful as I can here. You really seem
to want to make speakers. Good. That's an honorable and good
profession if done right - and we can always use more competition
and innovation in the industry.

BUT - that requires a couple of years out of your life to learn how
to do it like the pros do. Take being an electrician. They train
you for several years and THEN you can go out and get your contractor's
license. That's if you want to really run a full-scale large company
that will be successful.

My advice would be to work for a company or go to school to
train as an acoustical engineer or both. 4-5 years out of your
life and presto! You suddenly are the guy that everyone's competing
against. They are pulling their hair out.

Sure - 4-5 years seems like a long time, but most failing businesses
can easily take 4-5 years out of your life and leave you with nothing
but an ulcer and frustration. Honsetly, life is too short to ****
away doing things halfway in your garage.


>> As they say, the devil's in the details. Little things like custom
>> crossovers(every design requires tweaking here - no exceptions),
>
> You're right about one thing: the devil *is* in the details. For
> example, you seem to have glossed over the detail of what experience you
> have in this area. I claim that you have none.

I have at least as much as you do ;)

My experience is in musical insturments and computers. I can fix and
repair many types of insturments and yet would not even attempt to
MAKE one from scratch without doing the proper schooling and training
as, again, my life is too short to **** away several years only to
most likely fail instead of doing it right and possibly being another
Les Paul or simmilar craftsman.

No - I'm not into Guitars or want to build insturments right now
in my life(more interested in playing than building right now),
but if I *did*, I'd go full-bore at it with the long-term in
mind.

>> baffles
>> and internal bracing(huge with a speaker if you want the port to do
>> anything other than "chuff" at you)
>
> You've bought into marketing hype, Joseph, or even worse, "conventional
> wisdom."

Conventional wisdom is correct here. You must know what and how and WHY
your speaker works inside to get the proper sound and not a bunch of
distortion and resonance. The cabinet is the hardest part for any
speaker maker and yours look like - well - boxes made with the attention
to detail of IKEA. Serviceable furnature/boxes, but nothing more.

>> - the specific type of material,
>> how you mount the speakers,(you are using a proper gasket and machine
>> screws? Let's hope you aren't just slapping it together with drywall
>> screws) the shape of the port, and even tiny things like what exact
>> glue and varnish(if wood) you use.
>
> What would happen if you used drywall screws--would your hair catch on
> fire? Also, could you explain in detail how you use machine screws in
> wood? (I use T-nuts for the woofers, which utilized machine screws, but
> I'm interested in your Three Stooges version.)

That's one way. Another is to put mounts/etc into the cabinet itself that
give you a threaded metal hole. The worst of all, though, is just to
jam a screw into the soft MDF and hope it never needs to be taken out.

>> If you really want to learn how to make excellent speakers then
>> do yourself a huge favor and study and/or work at a major speaker
>> manufacturer for a couple of years to learn some of the secrets
>> and techniques.
>
> Mass produced speakers are part of the problem. In fact, you're
> contradicting yourself because in the beginning of your post you were
> referring to handmade "instruments."

All speakers and instruments are "handmade" at some point.(possible
exception with Yamaha and a few others that are more like true
assembly lines). Their methods of assembly, quality control,
and design alone are closely guarded secrets. Learning even a few
will save you months and years of figuring it out the hard way.

Look at Ellis - he's been doing it for YEARS and is finally just now
in the last year or so getting to the point where he is competing
with the big makers. If course he's doing it as a hobby, so that's
understandable. You are looking at facing a hard uphill climb
for several years while trying to run a full-fledged business. Ow.

>> You can either slap somethig together and be Kia - fine cars but
>> nothing special or you can learn to do it correctly and make a
>> Honda, which is built to much higher standards in every single
>> way.
>
> Uh oh, looks like we shifted gears to the car analogy. Don't you want
> to compare the process to a Tarantino script?

Proper engineering and design principles apply to almost anything
that you can buy. Q: What kind of car do you own? Q:Would you
buy a Kia instead? Why not?

>> So far, only your opinions. Have you actually done a side-by-side
>> test with other speakers using other people?
>
> I've listened to more speakers than you will in your entire lifetime.

Meaningless. I can say I've practiced more music in my lifetime than
you have ever listened to, but unless I talk about the times when I've
played in front of live people, it's all theory and what-if.

> But you aren't the target audience, Joseph, you're Tannoy's target
> audience. Why you're not saving for a pair of Joseph Audios is beyond me.

Already have an adequate speaker setup and I'm not anal about getting
perfect sound when there are a million other things that I can do
in my life wityh the money from putting in a new addition to sending
my son to a private school, to buying a new professional insturment,
to bigger goals like moving to Japan(only $10K for moving costs
last I heard - lol - that might take a while) and working abroad for
a few years.

New speakers just to sound a bit "better" is low on my list. That
doesn't mean I can't listen and look, though, as currently I do
computer and A/V systems consulting. (music never does pay the bills)

>> Oh - now you are really beginning to believe your own marketing.
>> If you've only been looking at the subs you could find at Circuit City,
>> then I could imagine that you might think that.
>>
>> OTOH, at your prices, there are subs what will guaranteed stomp on
>> yours ten times over.
>
> "Stomp" doesn't exactly imply finesse, or credibility. It sounds like
> you're coming from a car stereo mentality.

Okay - how about... Make your woofers sound like they are made out
of cotton candy? Paper mache'? Pick some term you are comfortable with,
because in a side-by-side comparison, you are going to be hard-pressed to
beat the better subs by even Velodyne.

WHY you are even offering a SUB is beyond me. I'd stay OUT of that
mire and instead buld some small full-range towers. You risk too much by
splitting your design prosess into two different types of speakers.

>> The sad fact is that it IS impossible. Too many small variables.
>
> When did you try, Joseph? Were hallucinagenic drugs involved?

I have yet to see ANY first-time builder make a good product where
audio(acoustic/speakers) or music(insturments) is concerned unless
it is a radicaly different or innovative design. It just doesn't
happen as the small details are too many and the competition is
fierce in both fields.

>> You also forget the fact that customer bias is present. Your speakers
>> will have to sound noticeably BETTER for the same price as the larger
>> companies to be seen as as viable choice. Sounds the same as their
>> speakers won't even cut it. Afterall - your speakers or a pair of Tannoy
>> S8 L/Rs? That's your closest mainstream competition. That specific
>> model.
>
> There are lots of models at this price point.

Exactly. Why choose your versus the Paradigms or B&Ws?

>
>>
>>
>> Street price on the S8 L/Rs is $1350. Yours better sound like Tannoy's
>> $2000 speakers or you'll never get past that hurdle in customer's minds.
>> All things being equal, the customer will always choose the older,
>> established
>> name-brand product over the generic.
>
> Your knowledge of product niches appears to be nonexistent.

The average consumer - you know the type - all about how much
it costs and looks - will not see your speaker as a niche of anything.
In fact, most will see that massive tweeter you are using as UGLY
and pass on it.

> I wouldn't pay money for any of those "winners". They are not good
> values on an absolute basis.

And yours are? Again, to the average consumer off the street, they
will probably buy BOSE than your designs, so you must offer something
better in terms of price or features or finish as sound isn't any
better for the money than they can do.

>> eg:
>> $100 in parts marked up 5 times =$500 (DIYer going through a typical
>> supply
>> chain)
>> $50 in parts marked up 5 times = $250 (economy of scale and buying
>> thousands
>> of components from the
>> manufacturer)
>> Same exact parts. Same exact design in this example.
>>
>>
>> Because of the problem I stated above - namely, that you have to be
>> BETTER
>> for the money, you must price your speakers for no more than the big
>> companies
>> competing products *reguardless of your profit margins*.
>
> Joseph, you can't evaluate speakers without listening to them first.

And you can't stay in business unless you can price your speakers
lower than your competition as a new player in the field. Economics 101.

Your profit margins are meaningless to EVERYONE ON THE PLANET other
than you. Your customers, doubly so.

>> Otherwise, they will always go out and buy the simmilar sounding name
>> brand
>> speaker for $1000.
>
> Pure garbage.

I've seen people not buy cars because they were going to pay $5 more
a month in payments. People are cheap asses and skinflints if you
give them half a chance to do so.

Given that your speakers are online and you don't have a salesroom where
you can flood their weak minds with sales crap, they have plenty of
opportunity to NOT buy your marketing.

Now, if you set up distribution and had salesdroids hawking them
for you, then you'd probably sell a few. Online only? Not a chance.

[S888Wheel]

<<
Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
definitive? >>


I think the question is premised on a false assumption. i for one, am of the
opinion that there are no definitive subjective opinions. It's a sort of an
oxymoron. OTOH i personally have never seen any reason not to trust Dave Weil's
honesty.

[George M. Middius]

Bobo said:

> > So unless you think dave weil plotted out a devious strategy for
> > getting trotsky to send him the speakers, intending all along to
> > trash their performance, you need to rethink your analysis. And this
> > is not an occasion calling for a snippet of "If the cameras were
> > rolling...." fiction.

> I am inclined to believe that Weil's judgment will unintentionally give the
> speakers more quality than they deserve, for two reasons:
> 1. There is the "novelty" effect, whereby an anomaly can sound interesting
> at first, or until one is committed by purchase.

If you think that, you don't know anything about weil's background.

> 2. Weil, unlike me, may have scruples about hurting Greg Singh in a material
> way.

I'd say that's irrelevant because trotsky asked for a public
evaluation. I expect weil's evaluation to be as clinical as he can
make it and as lacking in, ah, colorations as possible.


> George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
> Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
> definitive?

"Definitive"? Where on earth did you get that from? Nobody should
expect that and no reasonable person would use it to describe any one
opinion.

Put aside your histrionics. What you can get from an experienced,
knowledgeable observer (a description that fits weil, in my view) is
an informed opinion. From the way you and Obie (and duh-Mikey) have
been squawking, one would think it's a million-to-one shot that the
speakers won't sound terrible. If you have to generalize to meet some
bizarre need of yours, I think what you'll get from weil is a ballpark
evaluation. E.g., if he says they're "above average for clarity and
imaging" or "muddy sounding in the bass", won't that give you some
idea? How about "stellar performers on most music" or "a horrible
nightmare of a garage experiment"? Those should put you in the
ballpark too. It's just one guy's opinion.


> Do you mean people who can actually be named, or lurkers rarely heard from?
> Either represent a valid assertion, but I would appreciate just a little
> clarification.

If you're referring to my "most of the group" assertion, the only ones
I consciously excluded were the 'borgs and a few obstreperous
trotsky-haters. I dislike the little toad also, you will note, but I
don't prejudge his speakers. See the difference?

Another way to put this, dispensing with my customary delicacy, is to
say that you've gone way past any reasonable position on this issue.
The issue you've fixated on -- trotsky's slapdash "design" procedure
-- is irrelevant to most audio consumers. Obie's fixation is equally
strained. When he insists that every consumer will behave the way he
himself does, that puts him outside the bounds of reasonable
assumptions. Consumers buy stuff for all kinds of reasons, and it's
certainly false that they will all compare the Jupiter speakers to
those from established companies. If trotsky were gunning for a major
share of the audiophile speaker market, say 1%, he would need a
marketing warchest that no garage operator has. His actual plan,
assuming it's formulated, is probably to sell 25 sets in the first
year. And some consumers in the audiophile segment don't do critical
listening, you know. Some want speakers that a dealer or other audio
authority figure tells them are "good". Some want speakers that are
cool looking, or different (exclusivity), or perceived as avant-garde.

I do understand your feeling that because the established experts in
speaker design are much more knowledgeable and accomplished than
trots, it's an insult to their efforts for him to offer a home-brewed
box that arose through a process even less sophisticated than Wadia or
Levinson used. But I don't understand why you would get so exercised
about one little guy, even an obnoxious little twerp, trying to sell
25 pairs of speakers a year.

[Arny Krueger]

"Bob Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> "trotsky" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> > Arny Krueger wrote:

> > > "trotsky" wrote in message
> > > nk.net...

> > > >Arny Krueger wrote:

> > > >>Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
> > > >>methodologies
> > > >>for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable
that
> > > >>Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.

> > > >That's blatantly false.

> > > Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.

<Singh has had two rounds of postings in which to support his claim. Safe to
say he's a no-show, again>

> > > >The Europas are one of the most neutral
> > > >speakers I have heard at ANY price.

> > > Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
> speakers.

> > > >Because you have no Christian
> > > >morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.

Fact of the matter is that Singh hasn't shown me actually perpetuating even
one falsehood. I've supported my claims with unbiased references.

When the details of Singh's claims are investigated, they are usually found
to be completely empty. Deep down, Singh is shallow. Heck, Singh is
excruciatingly shallow even at just the skin deep level.

> > > Ironic Singh, coming from a person with no discernable ethics of *any*
> > > kind.

> > Yeah, but I'm an atheist, and you're masquerading as a Christian. You
> > make a joke out of the religion.

> You've made a joke out of atheism.

Exactly. Classic cliché, but it fits - some of my best friends are atheists.
They are also good, upright people with high ethics by any reasonable
standard.

No way would my atheist friends be found maliciously posting pedophile
fantasies on an audio group like the google record proves that Singh did,
literally for years. No way would they welsh on deals like Singh has done on
RAO. But let's not get started in the long sorry story of Singh's very sad
history on RAO. The bad news would just pile on and on.

When Singh calls himself an atheist, he's libeling a lot of very good people
who also happen to be atheists, but in contrast with Singh, have high moral
and ethical standards.

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net...

> Arny Krueger wrote:

> > "trotsky" wrote in message
> > ink.net...

> > >Arny Krueger wrote:

> > >>Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO
> > >>Singh, and
> > >>try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does
this
> > >>work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!

<No relevant response from Singh. He's tacitly admitting that he has no
defense for his reprehensible behavior.>

> > >Don't try and change the subject, Krueger.

> > The truth about your grotesque past misdeeds hurts even you, doesn't it
> > Singh?

<No relevant response from Singh. He's tacitly admitting that he has no
defense for his reprehensible behavior.>

> > You can't escape the facts that are in the Google archives, Singh. Why
> > have
> > you worked so hard to promote pedophilia on RAO, Singh? Why isn't Marc
> > Phillips attacking you, Graham, and Middius in his alleged
anti-pedophile
> > fervor?

<No relevant response from Singh. He's tacitly admitting that he has no
defense for his reprehensible behavior.>

> What happened to the rest of my post, Krueger?

No content worth responding to.

>Are you admitting to being afraid to discuss the topic?

Which topic am I afraid to discuss Singh? It seems like you have no excuse
for your reprehensible behavior on RAO. At least give us a hearty mea culpa!

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> trotsky said:
>
> > > Why have
> > > you worked so hard to promote pedophilia on RAO, Singh? Why isn't Marc
> > > Phillips attacking you, Graham, and Middius in his alleged
anti-pedophile
> > > fervor?
>
> > What happened to the rest of my post, Krueger? Are you admitting to
> > being afraid to discuss the topic?
>
> No, Krooger is laying the foundation for his defense to a lawsuit.

Let's see Middius. Aren't you the one who claimed that I was going to fall
on my knees and ask sockpuppet wheel for forgiveness on or before September
20?

What's today's date Middius?

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Bobo said:
>
> > Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
>
> On the contrary, I'm sure most of the group expects dave weil to give
> an honest and balanced appraisal.

Gee Middius, weren't you the one who claimed that I was going to fall
on my knees and ask sockpuppet wheel for forgiveness on or before September
20?

What's today's date Middius? So much for your claims of skill at
prognostication.


> Don't forget that he's been
> supportive from the beginning of trotsky's intention to build and
> market speakers.

IOW, Weil is likely to be biased in such a way that he will whitewash any
audible deficiencies of Singh's speakers. However there's a bigger problem
here and that is Weil's non-existent qualifications as a loudspeaker
reviewer.

>He put aside the vitriolic exchanges the two have
> had in the past. He's argued with you, Krooger, and Obie about
> Singh's right to do his thing.

Trouble is Middius there is no such argument. There is no argument over
Singh's right to make an ass out of himself one more time with this cockeyed
speaker scheme of his. Never was.

> He's also wished trotsky well in the
> undertaking.

As did I. So what? Just because a lot of people would like Singh to stop
screwing his life up by the numbers and finally do one little thing right,
doesn't mean that this is the time when he finally grows a brain.

>If you were compiling a short list of the RAO regulars
> who have genuine cause for bearing a grudge against Singh, dave would
> certainly be near the top, and yet he hasn't uttered a discouraging
> word about the Jupiter business.

Weil's ability to deny obvious true facts is well known. He's well-qualified
to evaluate Singh's speakers on the grounds that he's been a collector of
deadly cheap, defective and outdated loudspeaker systems for years.

> So unless you think dave weil plotted out a devious strategy for
> getting trotsky to send him the speakers, intending all along to
> trash their performance, you need to rethink your analysis.

Wrong. The problem with Weil evaluating a project by Singh is that its a
classic case of the blind misleading the blind. It's "Dumb and Dumber" all
over again. An interesting debate could be based on the question as to which
one is less qualified to do what he wants to do.

>And this
> is not an occasion calling for a snippet of "If the cameras were
> rolling...." fiction.

True facts often make for a more interesting story than any fiction
contrived by man.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...

> I personally have never seen any reason not to trust Dave Weil's honesty.

Sockpuppet Wheel, you have a track record for personally being one of the
dumber rubes in the history of RAO.

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
> >Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net...
> >>
> >>
> >>>Arny Krueger wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
> >>>>methodologies
> >>>>for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable that
> >>>>Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.
> >>
> >>
> >>>That's blatantly false.
> >>
> >>
> >>Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>The Europas are one of the most neutral
> >>>speakers I have heard at ANY price.
> >>
> >>
> >>Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
>
> speakers.
>
> >>
> >>>Because you have no Christian
> >>>morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.
> >>
> >>
> >>Ironic Singh, coming from a person with no discernable ethics of *any*
> >>kind.
> >
> >
> >
> >Yeah, but I'm an atheist, and you're masquerading as a Christian. You
> >make a joke out of the religion.
> >
>
> You've made a joke out of atheism.



Bob, when you lack cleverness as much as you do, suicide must come up as
an option often.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "Bob Morein" wrote in message
> ...
>
> >"trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> >>Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
> >>>"trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
>
> >>>>Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
> >>>>>Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
> >>>>>methodologies
> >>>>>for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable
>
> that
>
> >>>>>Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.
>
>
> >>>>That's blatantly false.
>
>
> >>>Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.
>
>
>
>
> >>>>The Europas are one of the most neutral
> >>>>speakers I have heard at ANY price.
>
>
> >>>Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
> >
> >speakers.
>
>
> >>>>Because you have no Christian
> >>>>morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.
>
>
> Fact of the matter is that Singh hasn't shown me actually perpetuating
> even
> one falsehood. I've supported my claims with unbiased references.



Krueger, I can't believe it, you're too ****ing afraid to respond to me
directly! That was easy.

[Marc Phillips]

Bob Morein said:

>"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>
>> Bobo said:
>>
>> > Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.
>>
>> On the contrary, I'm sure most of the group expects dave weil to give
>> an honest and balanced appraisal. Don't forget that he's been
>> supportive from the beginning of trotsky's intention to build and
>> market speakers. He put aside the vitriolic exchanges the two have
>> had in the past. He's argued with you, Krooger, and Obie about
>> Singh's right to do his thing. He's also wished trotsky well in the
>> undertaking. If you were compiling a short list of the RAO regulars
>> who have genuine cause for bearing a grudge against Singh, dave would
>> certainly be near the top, and yet he hasn't uttered a discouraging
>> word about the Jupiter business.
>
>From my POV, I am most aware of the dispute I have with Weil.
>The only thing I will grant is that he has more credibility than me, which
>isn't hard, considering that I been asserting Greg's guilt by apriori
>reasoning.
>>
>> So unless you think dave weil plotted out a devious strategy for
>> getting trotsky to send him the speakers, intending all along to
>> trash their performance, you need to rethink your analysis. And this
>> is not an occasion calling for a snippet of "If the cameras were
>> rolling...." fiction.
>>
>I am inclined to believe that Weil's judgment will unintentionally give the
>speakers more quality than they deserve, for two reasons:
>1. There is the "novelty" effect, whereby an anomaly can sound interesting
>at first, or until one is committed by purchase.
>2. Weil, unlike me, may have scruples about hurting Greg Singh in a material
>way.
>
>George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
>Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
>definitive?
>Do you mean people who can actually be named, or lurkers rarely heard from?
>Either represent a valid assertion, but I would appreciate just a little
>clarification.

dave is as straight-forward and as honest as they come. His audio preferences
may turn out to be different than mine, but I will trust his final impressions
of Greg's speakers to be beyond reproach. I know that Internet geeks such as
yourself may have problems with that sort of thinking, but then again, you're
geeks.

Boon

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>
> >Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >What happened to the rest of my post, Krueger?
>
>
> No content worth responding to.
>
>
> >Are you admitting to being afraid to discuss the topic?
>
>
> Which topic am I afraid to discuss Singh? It seems like you have no
> excuse
> for your reprehensible behavior on RAO. At least give us a hearty mea
> culpa!



Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you, and the
mockery you make of the Christian faith. Are you capable of discussing
this topic or not?

[George M. Middius]

Bobo accepts the reality of his credibility regarding Gregipus.

> I've been upfront about my desire to humiliate Trotsky. This is
> my personal revenge.

> There are two reasons. One is my great personal dislike for him.

> My dislike of Trotsky was the impetus to pick him apart. In the picking,

> As for the reason as to why I became so exercised, it's been the joy of
> humiliating him that has kept me going.

I did a lot of snipping because I wanted to distill your perorations
into a single thought: You despise Gregipus and you've used his
business venture as a vehicle for disparagement. So your desire for a
"definitive" opinion about his speakers must mean that you want
everybody to agree they sound like crap, whether or not that's true.

As for humiliating him, he's no more capable of acknowledging a defeat
than Krooger is. It will never happen.

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Bobo accepts the reality of his credibility regarding Gregipus.

Never in doubt. I said within the first few posts that my motives were
impure.
>
> > I've been upfront about my desire to humiliate Trotsky. This is
> > my personal revenge.
>
> > There are two reasons. One is my great personal dislike for him.
>
> > My dislike of Trotsky was the impetus to pick him apart. In the
picking,
>
> > As for the reason as to why I became so exercised, it's been the
joy of
> > humiliating him that has kept me going.
>
> I did a lot of snipping because I wanted to distill your perorations
> into a single thought: You despise Gregipus and you've used his
> business venture as a vehicle for disparagement. So your desire for a
> "definitive" opinion about his speakers must mean that you want
> everybody to agree they sound like crap, whether or not that's true.
>
George, I've had plenty of life. Some of it's tough. What happens here is
worth a shrug of the shoulders.
Realizing that, I've had fun making noise, even if the outcome is uncertain.
As is so often the case, I have conflicting feelings about Trotsky. The
hater in me wants to kick the dog, knowing that its
stupidity eases the conscience. The other part of me wishes he had done a
better job; that he had not given me the opportunity. My desire to hear the
speakers is because I prefer to stand on firm ground. If I heard them and
liked them I would say so. Some would deride me, and others would say they
have found an honest man.

There are many cases in this industry of a front man, ie., Matthew Polk in
the white lab coat, and the back room boffins that do the real work. The
fact that Trotsky probably does not have the native abilities required to
design loudspeakers doesn't bother me. He could partner with someone who
does, and the result might be quite viable.

But I think we are in agreement that he is incredibly fatuous, complacent,
smug, impenetrably unaware of his own limitations.
> As for humiliating him, he's no more capable of acknowledging a defeat
> than Krooger is. It will never happen.
>
You're right, and that eases my conscience a little as well. If he slinked
away in silent defeat, I'd feel a little guilty.
The best thing, which is most unlikely, is that some of what his critics
have been saying will penetrate. He'll involve someone who can actually
design and tune, and use his allegedly excellent ears to hone the speakers
to a high degree of subjective satisfaction.

And then he'll sign up a dealer network, which raises the question: Can
someone so needlessly irritating on r.a.o. know what to kiss and when? It's
an essential skill in pushing product.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:21:06 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:42:23 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:19:21 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein"
>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually
>> >received
>> >> >> >with enhanced credibility.
>> >> >> >When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming
>evidence
>> >> >which
>> >> >> >compels the adversary to honesty.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
>> >> >> ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
>> >> >> impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
>> >> >> opinion on anything.
>> >> >
>> >> >Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much
>credibility.
>> >> >The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far
>more
>> >> >interesting to lurkers than what we say.
>> >>
>> >> That is until I weigh in. Then, the chips can fall where they may and
>> >> people can give whatever credence that they want to give.
>> >
>> >No, it begins after you weigh in.
>> >At this point, you have made no statement which requires credibility.
>> >After you publish your result, credibility will determine to what degree
>> >your opinion counts by itself.
>> >If there is confirmation from other individuals who have not been
>involved
>> >in this dispute, the importance of your opinion will be amplified.
>>
>> I really don't care if they're "amplified" or not. I'll simply be
>> expressing a singular opinion.a
>
>"Singular" means unique.
>Did you mean that?

Bob, you don't want to play games with words with me. I'm not a near
functional illiterate like Arnold.

The first definition of singular is this:

Being only one; individual.

If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
opinion.

Frankly, you shouldn't expose your ignorance of the language like
that, as you are a "screenwriter" and all...

[dave weil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:32:18 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

>> George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
>> Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
>> definitive?
>
>"Definitive"? Where on earth did you get that from? Nobody should
>expect that and no reasonable person would use it to describe any one
>opinion.

Quite right. Anyone expecting a "definitive" observation from me is
nuts. I'm not claiming anything of the sort, nor do I expect anyone to
take it as such. I'll just be reporting my own impressions that people
can correlate with what they know about me and my likes and dislikes
(and yes, my background, I suppose). That's how any rational person
reads criticism.

>Put aside your histrionics. What you can get from an experienced,
>knowledgeable observer (a description that fits weil, in my view) is
>an informed opinion. From the way you and Obie (and duh-Mikey) have
>been squawking, one would think it's a million-to-one shot that the
>speakers won't sound terrible. If you have to generalize to meet some
>bizarre need of yours, I think what you'll get from weil is a ballpark
>evaluation. E.g., if he says they're "above average for clarity and
>imaging" or "muddy sounding in the bass", won't that give you some
>idea? How about "stellar performers on most music" or "a horrible
>nightmare of a garage experiment"? Those should put you in the
>ballpark too. It's just one guy's opinion.

Yep, that's what I said in the previous post - you know, the one where
Bob couldn't figure out what singular meant, in this context.

[Lionel]

George M. Middius a écrit :

>
> Bobo accepts the reality of his credibility regarding Gregipus.
>
>
>>I've been upfront about my desire to humiliate Trotsky. This is
>>my personal revenge.
>
>
>>There are two reasons. One is my great personal dislike for him.
>
>
>> My dislike of Trotsky was the impetus to pick him apart. In the picking,
>
>
>> As for the reason as to why I became so exercised, it's been the joy of
>>humiliating him that has kept me going.
>
>
> I did a lot of snipping because I wanted to distill your perorations
> into a single thought: You despise Gregipus and you've used his
> business venture as a vehicle for disparagement. So your desire for a
> "definitive" opinion about his speakers must mean that you want
> everybody to agree they sound like crap, whether or not that's true.
>
> As for humiliating him, he's no more capable of acknowledging a defeat
> than Krooger is. It will never happen.
>
>
George is the supreme judge here !
Ok George nobody will never rob your place, you are living in a nebula
of words, sentences... And I must admit that your are very good to this
game. In other word you are very witty.
*BUT* you haven't any real material world connection. This is your
definitive and *redhibitory* lack.

You forget the most important in this story, the industrial aspect of
the business.
I will simplify in order you understand correctly.
Imagine that Trotsky has built a real *good* speaker. Dave test it, no
problem, I trust Dave honesty and I don't want to debate his hability to
do that. So Dave presents us his report : the Trotsky speakers are very
good.
You will turn back to Bob and you will tell him triumphing :
"Bobo your hate for Trotsky make us lost this party you're a moron,
shame is on you, get away from RAO and don't speak to me anymore !"
I guess that you will say this in better words ! ;-)

George there is something which can be evaluate in a manufacturing
process without any needs to test the final product. This thing is the
Trotsky's aptitude to reproduce an *acceptable* level of quality in a
*regular* base.

When we watch carefully the material choices, purchasing methods,
suppliers, subcontractors etc... all the Trotsky arguments, we must say
that we are not confident.
*Confident* ! This is the main key of a relation between customer and
manufacturer.

I understand in this matter your language skill is a little bit out of
game, but I grant you the right to come for a second round.

--
Lionel J. M. Chapuis
Unemployed technical Clown

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :

> Stop speculating about my motives because you're overthinking it. I
> simply want to report my opinion of the speakers without bringing the
> designer's personality or methods into it. I've never particularly
> cared about the "behind-the-scenes" stuff.

No I don't want to stop speculating...
You are too romantic Dave, too romantic and too sentimental. Your are
the worst tester for Trotsky speakers. You are totally unable to have
the minimum "Krooborg" behaviour in this matter...
You are surely a very good *music* listener, I would like to explore
every advises you can give concerning music, but please stop this
testing game.
Anyway I am sure that you have already spent more time, energy,
intelligence in this matter than Troksky never spent...
....This is perhaps what you was unconsciously looking for, in an
indefinable way Trotsky business is a little bit your baby now...

--
Lionel J. M. Chapuis
Unemployed Clown

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:42:23 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:19:21 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein"
>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein"
> >
> >> >> >> wrote:
[snip]
>
> If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
> opinion.

Yes, I prefer that, thanks.
>
> Frankly, you shouldn't expose your ignorance of the language like
> that, as you are a "screenwriter" and all...

[Bob Morein]

"Lionel" <lionel{dot}chapuis{at}free{dot}fr> wrote in message
...
> dave weil a écrit :
>
> > Stop speculating about my motives because you're overthinking it. I
> > simply want to report my opinion of the speakers without bringing the
> > designer's personality or methods into it. I've never particularly
> > cared about the "behind-the-scenes" stuff.
>
> No I don't want to stop speculating...
> You are too romantic Dave, too romantic and too sentimental. Your are
> the worst tester for Trotsky speakers. You are totally unable to have
> the minimum "Krooborg" behaviour in this matter...
> You are surely a very good *music* listener, I would like to explore
> every advises you can give concerning music, but please stop this
> testing game.
> Anyway I am sure that you have already spent more time, energy,
> intelligence in this matter than Troksky never spent...
> ...This is perhaps what you was unconsciously looking for, in an
> indefinable way Trotsky business is a little bit your baby now...
>
Partners? Is Weil shilling for Trotsky?
Or is it going to be a formal partnership, as in T&W Audio?

Sounds as appetizing as chocolate covered tuna fish.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:21:06 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> > wrote:
>
> >They will always choose name-brand
>
> I don't think you can say this.
>
> Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

You can say that, but it won't make it false either.

[George M. Middius]

Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.

> > >They will always choose name-brand
> >
> > I don't think you can say this.
> >
> > Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.
>
> You can say that, but it won't make it false either.

Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net...

> Arny Krueger wrote:

> > "Bob Morein" wrote in message
> > ...

> > >"trotsky" wrote in message
> > ink.net...

> > >>Arny Krueger wrote:

> > >>>"trotsky" wrote in message
> > nk.net...

> > >>>>Arny Krueger wrote:

> > >>>>>Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
methodologies
> > >>>>>for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable
that
> > >>>>>Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.

<Singh has a number of opportunities to provide a well-supported response,
but instead runs away from my statement>

> > >>>>That's blatantly false.

> > >>>Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.

> > >>>>The Europas are one of the most neutral
> > >>>>speakers I have heard at ANY price.

> > >>>Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
> > >speakers.

<Singh has a number of opportunities to provide a well-supported response,
but instead runs away from my statement>


> > >>>>Because you have no Christian
> > >>>>morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant
falsehoods.

> > Fact of the matter is that Singh hasn't shown me actually perpetuating
even
> > one falsehood. I've supported my claims with unbiased references.

<Singh has an opportunity to respond, but runs away from my statement>

> Krueger, I can't believe it, you're too ****ing afraid to respond to me
> directly! That was easy.

It's not a matter of fear Singh, its a matter of wanting to discuss the
matter with a more responsive person. As I've shown above, you've already
failed to respond to the technical issues I raised in a responsible way a
number of times.

Are you going to clean up your act Singh, or are you going to continue to
whine incoherently?

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Bob Morein wrote:
>
> > "trotsky" wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >
> > >Arny Krueger wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>"trotsky" wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Arny Krueger wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
> > >>>>methodologies
> > >>>>for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable
that
> > >>>>Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>That's blatantly false.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>The Europas are one of the most neutral
> > >>>speakers I have heard at ANY price.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
> > speakers.

<Note that Singh has failed to support his claim about the sound quality of
his speakers in any meaningful way>

> > >>>Because you have no Christian
> > >>>morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.

<Note that Singh has failed to support this claim in any meaningful way>

> > >>Ironic Singh, coming from a person with no discernable ethics of *any*
> > >>kind.

<Note that Singh has failed to even try to show that he actually has any
ethics>

> > >Yeah, but I'm an atheist, and you're masquerading as a Christian. You
> > >make a joke out of the religion.

> > You've made a joke out of atheism.

> Bob, when you lack cleverness as much as you do, suicide must come up as
> an option often.

As I've shown in the other subthread you've been dancing around properly
responding to Singh, Morein is exactly right. You are a disgrace to all
ethical atheists because you have zero ethics and morals as well as zero
common sense.

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net...

> Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you.

That's a lie, Singh. Morien and I have been discussing the mockery you've
made out of atheism because you have no discernable ethics. Do you want to
play, or sit this one out?

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.
>
> > > >They will always choose name-brand
> > >
> > > I don't think you can say this.
> > >
> > > Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.
> >
> > You can say that, but it won't make it false either.
>
> Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
> right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
> Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.
>
Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.
Human behavior always incorporates a random element.
The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
speaker.
Particularly if it's sold out of the back of a white van ;).
But seriously, you are correct in assuming that all possible variations of
choice exist.

If Trotsky's success is measured in selling a mere 25 units a year, then
Trotsky's (a.k.a. Greg Singh) standard sales tactic of up-sucking, lip
smacking, kow-towing, and ass-kissing, added to a convincing derision of
brands we know to be junk, such as B&W, Kef, Tannoy, Bug-Tussel (which a
friend of mine just won on eBay for $1300), MB Quart, Canton, et al. -- have
the distinct possibility of reaching the desired sales goal.

All the more reason to be vigilant.

[Arny Krueger]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...

> dave is as straight-forward and as honest as they come.

Consider the source, a proven liar. Like Greg Singh, Marc Phillips has been
posting blatant lies and pedophile fantasies on RAO for a long time.

> His audio preferences
> may turn out to be different than mine, but I will trust his final
impressions
> of Greg's speakers to be beyond reproach.

Note the deceptive form of this sentence. It sounds like it means something
but it can easily be restated: Weil's reactions are probably irrelevant to
those of any reasonable, thinking person, but they're from his heart.

Given that it is well known that Weil is a cruel liar, and its probable that
Phillips is an even crueler liar, this is all a bunch of eye wash.

> I know that Internet geeks such as
> yourself may have problems with that sort of thinking, but then again,
you're
> geeks.

Then as is his style, Phillips descends into childish name-calling.

[Arny Krueger]

"Bob Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.
> >
> > > > >They will always choose name-brand
> > > >
> > > > I don't think you can say this.
> > > >
> > > > Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.
> > >
> > > You can say that, but it won't make it false either.
> >
> > Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
> > right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
> > Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.

> Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.

Right. Oberlander does get overtaken by his own hype pretty often.

> Human behavior always incorporates a random element.

Right. I've heard people say things like: There are 100 guys out there who
have money to burn and will buy something new and different only because
it's something new and different.

> The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
> speaker.

Perhaps a bad choice of words, in that "Satrun" is a brand name of sorts.

> Particularly if it's sold out of the back of a white van ;).

LOL but actually false. There's a brand name there, too! Acoustic-something,
right?

> But seriously, you are correct in assuming that all possible variations of
> choice exist.

Again a bad choice of words since the number of all possible variations
approaches infinity, but the number of available options is merely a very
large number.

> If Trotsky's success is measured in selling a mere 25 units a year, then
> Trotsky's (a.k.a. Greg Singh) standard sales tactic of up-sucking, lip
> smacking, kow-towing, and ass-kissing, added to a convincing derision of
> brands we know to be junk, such as B&W, Kef, Tannoy, Bug-Tussel (which a
> friend of mine just won on eBay for $1300), MB Quart, Canton, et al. --
have
> the distinct possibility of reaching the desired sales goal.

You may be interested to know that I've worked with the proprietor of
Buggtussel on AES projects on several occasions. While I disagree with some
aspects of some of his designs (i.e., transmission lines are a well-known
waste of box volume) his work includes some interesting innovations, is
accomplished with reference to and use of established good design
technologies, and FWIW the sound quality of his results are generally way
above average to my ears and the ears of people I trust.

You can read more details about Buggtussel at
http://www.stereotimes.com/speak032902.shtm .

> All the more reason to be vigilant.

Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...

[The Devil]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:31:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Not at all, Singh. Your ethics work something like this. You go looking for
>a Christian with some fellow thugs, and then say to yourselves: Let's kick
>the **** out of this guy because it will make us feel good to see another
>human suffer for no reason but our pleasure. Then, if he tries to defend
>himself, you accuse him of being a hypocrite for not letting you beat the
>heck out of the parts you haven't yet tried to turn into mincemeat.
>
>Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO Singh, and
>try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
>work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!

Greg does no profess to be a Christian, Arnii. You do.

So, in view of your stated religious beliefs, how do you square away
the kind of dig you've just directed at dave? Don't you think that
making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
him?

Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.

If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel. Or do you
contend that causing someone distress or hurting them is good
behaviour for a Christian if there exists a suitable justification for
inflicting that damage--a strong disagreement about loudspeakers, for
example?

And before you even *bother* mouthing off about me not being a
Christian and therefore being a hypocrite for marking these comments,
a few words for you:

**** off. These are *your* beliefs, not mine. You're the guy who
believes in an imaginary idol, not me.

--
td

[Lionel]

The Devil a écrit :

> So, in view of your stated religious beliefs, how do you square away
> the kind of dig you've just directed at dave? Don't you think that
> making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
> him?
>
> Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.
>
> If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
> comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel. Or do you
> contend that causing someone distress or hurting them is good
> behaviour for a Christian if there exists a suitable justification for
> inflicting that damage--a strong disagreement about loudspeakers, for
> example?
>
> And before you even *bother* mouthing off about me not being a
> Christian and therefore being a hypocrite for marking these comments,
> a few words for you:
>
> **** off. These are *your* beliefs, not mine. You're the guy who
> believes in an imaginary idol, not me.
>
> --
> td

Good ! I was waiting for that since a long time.
Thank you.

Sincerely,

--
Lionel Chapuis

[Arny Krueger]

"The Devil" > wrote in message
news:vji5nvo6jfc2nme2h0j53s48l4vc7cfrcr@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...

> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:31:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

> >Not at all, Singh. Your ethics work something like this. You go looking
for
> >a Christian with some fellow thugs, and then say to yourselves: Let's
kick
> >the **** out of this guy because it will make us feel good to see another
> >human suffer for no reason but our pleasure. Then, if he tries to defend
> >himself, you accuse him of being a hypocrite for not letting you beat the
> >heck out of the parts you haven't yet tried to turn into mincemeat.
>
> >Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO Singh,
and
> >try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
> >work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!

> Greg does no profess to be a Christian, Arnii. You do.

It appears that Greg won't admit to having any system of ethics at all. Why
should anybody do business with a person who has zero ethics and takes zero
responsibility for his past actions?

BTW, congratulations at observing the obvious Graham. This contrasts with
your past inabilities to discern even the obvious. However you screwed your
facts badly, probably because you were intoxicated with some mind-altering
substance or other while you were posting.

> So, in view of your stated religious beliefs, how do you square away
> the kind of dig you've just directed at dave?

Who is "dave" and why is he relevant? The portions of my post that you
quoted were a response to Greg.

> Don't you think that
> making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
> him?

Where did I specifically mention Dave Weil's father? Prove that this whole
dave's father thing is not another one of your mind farts.

> Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.

You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned Dave
Weil's father. Anybody who looks at the thread can see that. Well, anybody
who has normal intelligence and reading ability and who's not drunk.

> If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
> comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel.

Prove that I specifically mentioned Dave's father. If I didn't mention him
specifically then this whole issue is a figment of your imagination, Graham.

> Or do you
> contend that causing someone distress or hurting them is good
> behaviour for a Christian if there exists a suitable justification for
> inflicting that damage--a strong disagreement about loudspeakers, for
> example?

I was simply speaking to Dave's credibility as a reviewer which he's
recently been touting by obviously deceptive means. Well means that are
obvious to RAO regulars, but means that might deceive some newbies.

> And before you even *bother* mouthing off about me not being a
> Christian and therefore being a hypocrite for marking these comments,
> a few words for you:

> **** off. These are *your* beliefs, not mine. You're the guy who
> believes in an imaginary idol, not me.

Graham, besides quoting my comments to Singh as if I said them to Dave, and
then talking about non-existent comments I made to Dave, you've got a few
other more serious problems. Like what is this Jesus idol thing you are
ranting about?

I'll stick by my comments to Singh. RAO is a hell-hole because of
self-righteous idiots such as yourself, Graham. Let's talk about all the
pedophile fantasies that you've imposed on RAO readers over the past 4
years. What kind of ethical behavior is that? If you won't take
responsibility for your obviously reprehensible actions, why should I bother
to respond seriously to the highly erroneous garbage you've just drunkenly
posted?

Get help Graham, you've got a problem that RAO can't solve!

[The Devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:42:01 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned Dave
>Weil's father.

<snip--unread, as per usual>

Well, I'm glad you specifically acknowledged that your family has a
problem relating to your children and unusual circumstances of death.

--
td

[Bob Morein]

On 23/9/03 21:51, in article
, "trotsky"
> wrote:

> Bob, you're like a broken record--you can discuss me and my work, but
> you lack the balls and self awareness to discuss what you do. Come back
> when you grow up, okay?

I'm a genius. It's been in all the papers. I just haven't had to really
get a job or career yet. Yeah, I know I'm 51 but when I finally get moving
I'll really be terrific!

Now, where did I put that crack pipe??


--
Robert Morein.

Failed 51 year old loser student.
Failed Temple University
Ejected from Grad program after seven years
Ejected from Drexel University after dissertation judged "bull**** nonsense"
Sued Drexel and Lost
Even took it to the Supreme Court, but they laughed at me!
But I get even with studentsandthelaw.org my harassment site.
My poor jew mother Jane Morein died with a broken heart, watching this
poor twisted loser fail at everything I've ever done.
Daddy Sylvan Morein, who studied hard and became a fair to middlin' dentist,
is now stuck at home with his loser son; unwanted by life or any of the
relatives.
But I've discovered at last my calling: INTERNET WACKO!



Man, am I a Loser!

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> >Krueger, I can't believe it, you're too ****ing afraid to respond to me
> >directly! That was easy.
>
>
> It's not a matter of fear Singh, its a matter of wanting to discuss the
> matter with a more responsive person. As I've shown above, you've already
> failed to respond to the technical issues I raised in a responsible way a
> number of times.
>
> Are you going to clean up your act Singh, or are you going to continue to
> whine incoherently?



Krueger, quit trying to change the subject back to me, it makes you look
like a coward. Your attitude on this newsgroup is decidedly
non-Christian. Agree or disagree?

[Arny Krueger]

"The Devil" > wrote in message
news:l6m5nv8ul9ci1ad7ve6fgds2b6mp52e82r@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:42:01 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned Dave
> >Weil's father.
>
> <snip--unread, as per usual>

Typical of idiots with totally closed minds.

> Well, I'm glad you specifically acknowledged that your family has a
> problem relating to your children and unusual circumstances of death.

Say what?

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "George M. Middius" wrote in message
> ...
>
> >
> >Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.
> >
> >
> >>>>They will always choose name-brand
> >>>
> >>>I don't think you can say this.
> >>>
> >>>Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.
> >>
> >>You can say that, but it won't make it false either.
> >
> >Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
> >right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
> >Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.
> >
>
> Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.
> Human behavior always incorporates a random element.
> The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
> speaker.
> Particularly if it's sold out of the back of a white van ;).
> But seriously, you are correct in assuming that all possible variations of
> choice exist.
>
> If Trotsky's success is measured in selling a mere 25 units a year,



What do you mean "mere", Bob? That would outgross Mr. Krueger by a
comfortable margin. It's almost like you're calling Arny a loser here.

>
>
>
>
>

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> On 23/9/03 21:51, in article
> , "trotsky"
> wrote:
>
>
> >Bob, you're like a broken record--you can discuss me and my work, but
> >you lack the balls and self awareness to discuss what you do. Come back
> >when you grow up, okay?
>
>
> I'm a genius. It's been in all the papers. I just haven't had to really
> get a job or career yet. Yeah, I know I'm 51 but when I finally get
> moving
> I'll really be terrific!
>
> Now, where did I put that crack pipe??



Tell the truth: you keep a rope with a noose around to keep you "motivated".

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> Tell the truth: you keep a rope with a noose around to keep you "motivated".

Don't feed the trolls, Gregipus. I think even Krooger has this
particular one figured out.

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...

> But Arny, I've been using your business as a business model.

I seriously doubt that.

> Shouldn't there be some sort of solidarity amongst "web publishers?"

I thought your primary line of business was selling speakers, not giving
away unique technical information.

Here's a question Singh: Do you even know what technical information about
audio is?

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> As I've shown in the other subthread you've been dancing around
>> properly responding to Singh, Morein is exactly right. You are a
>> disgrace to all ethical atheists because you have zero ethics and
>> morals as well as zero common sense.

> I'm not sure what you're saying here, Krueger.

Yes Singh, I guess you are *that* stupid. Is this the FAS kicking in or
what?

>Are you saying there's a "right" way to be an atheist?

Of course.

There's nothing that non-conformists hate more than other non-conformists
who fail to rise to meet the rising standards of non-conformity. That's
especially true of atheism now that atheism is no longer a true minority.
Atheism is just a sect of Secular Humanism, and Secular Humanism is now the
prevailing World religion.

>That's a non-Christian thing to say, too.

Prove it.

<Note that Singh runs away from this question in virtually any context,
technical, moral, or what have you.>

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> "trotsky" wrote in message
>> ink.net...
>>
>>
>>> Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you.
>>
>>
>> That's a lie, Singh. Morien and I have been discussing the mockery
>> you've made out of atheism because you have no discernable ethics.
>> Do you want to play, or sit this one out?

> Morion already shot his wad and said that everything he's said about
> me isn't based on reasoning, just dislike.

Prove it.

> You used to claim you
> were a reasonable person, Krueger--what happened?

I still am a very reasonable, easy-going person. Remember, I sleep with
bears in the figurative sense, and live to tell the tale.

> Simply put, do you no longer consider yourself a Christian?

I'm too much of a skeptic to not be Christian.

Of course Singh I know this is all over your head. It takes Grace for
Christianity to make sense, and you are one of the most graceless people
I've ever had the displeasure of meeting.

[The Devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:16:20 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>> <snip--unread, as per usual>
>
>Typical of idiots with totally closed minds.

Have mercy, you abominable scrabble-eyed freak-nonce. You surely don't
hate me so much you wish I would read your posts, do you?

>> Well, I'm glad you specifically acknowledged that your family has a
>> problem relating to your children and unusual circumstances of death.
>
>Say what?

What.

That's the only thing I'll ever do for you in my life. Treasure the
moment, ****-lips.

--
td

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:16:22 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>> If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
>> opinion.
>
>Yes, I prefer that, thanks.

I don't know why, unless you just have a mental block against the word
singular.

As I have clearly shown, you have a singular idea of the way the word
is used (this is using *your* definition BTW).

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:35:51 +0200, Lionel
<lionel{dot}chapuis{at}free{dot}fr> wrote:

>
>I just want to say that if the Trotsky's speakers are really bull****
>Dave would not be able to tell that, never.

Sure I would. Considering my history with Greg, it would be delightful
revenge. He's been *very* nasty to me countless times. Nothing would
please me more than to say that his speakers are a pile of **** on a
speaker stand. I'd be able to lord it over him *and* push his buttons
over and over again.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid that I won't be able to do that. I know
*that* much already.

That doesn't mean that I'll necessarily agree with his assesments of
the speakers as the second coming of live music either.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:19:07 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:32:18 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>>
>> >> George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
>> >> Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
>> >> definitive?
>> >
>> >"Definitive"? Where on earth did you get that from? Nobody should
>> >expect that and no reasonable person would use it to describe any one
>> >opinion.
>
>> Quite right. Anyone expecting a "definitive" observation from me is
>> nuts.
>
>Ditto for anybody expecting a competent observation.
>
>> I'm not claiming anything of the sort, nor do I expect anyone to
>> take it as such. I'll just be reporting my own impressions that people
>> can correlate with what they know about me and my likes and dislikes
>> (and yes, my background, I suppose).
>
>Yup. Weil's background is that he flunked out of college, dropped out of the
>Army, became a waiter, collects broken and abysmally cheap speakers, has no
>relevant technical expertise, and denies reality every time it bites him in
>the nose.
>
>> That's how any rational person reads criticism.
>
>Years of experience has shown that using the word rational in any
>description of Weil's personal judgment needs to be proceeded or followed
>with a negative modifier.

When are you going to quite whining?

[The Devil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:20:44 -0500, dave weil >
wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:20:08 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>wrote:
>
>>Partners? Is Weil shilling for Trotsky?
>
>Nope.

Has Bob *become* McLardy?

--
td

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:26:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:21:06 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>> > wrote:
>
>> >They will always choose name-brand
>
>> I don't think you can say this.
>
>*always* is a big word. However just answer this question: why should any
>logical person buy Singh's overpriced, underdesigned speakers?

I'm not sure that they should. I haven't finished my evaluation yet.

Why should any logical person take what *you* say about his speakers
with anything other than a bulldozer worth of salt?

>> Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.
>
>Gee Weil, that's your approach - make the same false claim over and over
>again in the vain hopes that if you repeat it enough people will actually
>believe it. This sort of thing can work in your profession, where the sales
>methodology includes likkering up the mark, and then hyping high-priced
>alleged taste treats that the customer's alcohol-numbed palate can't
>distinguish from soggy white bread.

Yes, I would assume that this is your outlook on dining out.

I would also assume that even with liquor, you'd have trouble
distinguishing anything from the think that you've admittedly enjoyed
for lunch, i.e. a couple of pieces of soggy white bread with some sort
of pressed meat between them.

BTW, I'm in a bit of a sour mood because I just found out that one of
the best bass players in Nashville (a town FILLED with more bass
players than you can shake a stick at) passed away from an aneurysm he
suffered at the weekend. Those of us who knew him are going to miss
him terribly. He was a gentle giant and a gentle soul.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net
>
> >Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
>
> >>>Krueger, I can't believe it, you're too ****ing afraid to respond
> >>>to me directly! That was easy.
>
>
> >>It's not a matter of fear Singh, its a matter of wanting to discuss
> >>the matter with a more responsive person. As I've shown above,
> >>you've already failed to respond to the technical issues I raised in
> >>a responsible way a number of times.
>
>
> >>Are you going to clean up your act Singh, or are you going to
> >>continue to whine incoherently?
>
>
> >Krueger, quit trying to change the subject back to me, it makes you
> >look like a coward. Your attitude on this newsgroup is decidedly
> >non-Christian. Agree or disagree?
>
>
> Disagree. However Singh, I decline to discuss this matter much further
> with
> people who have zero ethics and morals such as yourself, Phillips,
> Middius,
> or Graham.



Wow, these guys must've really served up a crown of thorns for you. For
some reason, though, I could swear it was the other way around.


>
>
> Any reasonable discussion has to be based on common ground, and I have no
> common ground with people who have a track record of flooding RAO with
> their
> pedophile fantasies, such as yourself, Phillips, Middius, or Graham.


I have no pedophile fantasies, Krueger. In fact, the recurring rumor is
that you're a pedophile. Why is this?

[George M. Middius]

dave weil said:

> The mere fact that Ellis is selling speakers (more than he can handle)
> is a great example that Joseph has himself used.
>
> I'm sure that there are plenty of other examples of lesser-known
> speakers being sold.

I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
have to supplicate for their blessing.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net
>
> >Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
> >>As I've shown in the other subthread you've been dancing around
> >>properly responding to Singh, Morein is exactly right. You are a
> >>disgrace to all ethical atheists because you have zero ethics and
> >>morals as well as zero common sense.
>
>
> >I'm not sure what you're saying here, Krueger.
>
>
> Yes Singh, I guess you are *that* stupid. Is this the FAS kicking in or
> what?



Non-Christian response duly noted.

>
>
>
> >Are you saying there's a "right" way to be an atheist?
>
>
> Of course.
>
> There's nothing that non-conformists hate more than other non-conformists
> who fail to rise to meet the rising standards of non-conformity.



How long have you been doing your Yogi Berra impersonation?


> That's
> especially true of atheism now that atheism is no longer a true minority.
> Atheism is just a sect of Secular Humanism, and Secular Humanism is
> now the
> prevailing World religion.



Interesting--do you have a link to these census results?


>
>
>
> >That's a non-Christian thing to say, too.
>
>
> Prove it.



Okay--ask Dr. Wick what his opinion is.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net
>
> >Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you.
> >>
> >>
> >>That's a lie, Singh. Morien and I have been discussing the mockery
> >>you've made out of atheism because you have no discernable ethics.
> >>Do you want to play, or sit this one out?
>
>
> >Morion already shot his wad and said that everything he's said about
> >me isn't based on reasoning, just dislike.
>
>
> Prove it.



You're starting to sound like a broken DAW here, Arny.

>
>
>
> >You used to claim you
> >were a reasonable person, Krueger--what happened?
>
>
> I still am a very reasonable, easy-going person. Remember, I sleep with
> bears in the figurative sense, and live to tell the tale.



I think I've reduced you to a pile of nonsense.


> >Simply put, do you no longer consider yourself a Christian?
>
>
> I'm too much of a skeptic to not be Christian.
>
> Of course Singh I know this is all over your head. It takes Grace for
> Christianity to make sense, and you are one of the most graceless people
> I've ever had the displeasure of meeting.



I think you put too much stock in Usenet, because in my book exchanging
messages on a computer screen isn't meeting. If it was, you'd have been
arrested for pedophilia a hundred times over.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net
>
>
> >That reminds me of a couple of days ago when you claimed not to have
> >read my post.
>
>
> What post?
>

Who's on first?

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:19:07 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> wrote:
>
>
> >"dave weil" wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >>On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:32:18 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
> >>>>Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even
> mildly
> >>>>definitive?
> >>>
> >>>"Definitive"? Where on earth did you get that from? Nobody should
> >>>expect that and no reasonable person would use it to describe any one
> >>>opinion.
> >
> >>Quite right. Anyone expecting a "definitive" observation from me is
> >>nuts.
> >
> >Ditto for anybody expecting a competent observation.
> >
> >
> >>I'm not claiming anything of the sort, nor do I expect anyone to
> >>take it as such. I'll just be reporting my own impressions that people
> >>can correlate with what they know about me and my likes and dislikes
> >>(and yes, my background, I suppose).
> >
> >Yup. Weil's background is that he flunked out of college, dropped out
> of the
> >Army, became a waiter, collects broken and abysmally cheap speakers,
> has no
> >relevant technical expertise, and denies reality every time it bites
> him in
> >the nose.
> >
> >
> >>That's how any rational person reads criticism.
> >
> >Years of experience has shown that using the word rational in any
> >description of Weil's personal judgment needs to be proceeded or followed
> >with a negative modifier.
>
>
> When are you going to quit whining?




I'd like to know the answer to this question too.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:12:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>You may be interested to know that I've worked with the proprietor of
>Buggtussel on AES projects on several occasions. While I disagree with some
>aspects of some of his designs (i.e., transmission lines are a well-known
>waste of box volume) his work includes some interesting innovations, is
>accomplished with reference to and use of established good design
>technologies, and FWIW the sound quality of his results are generally way
>above average to my ears and the ears of people I trust.
>
>You can read more details about Buggtussel at
>http://www.stereotimes.com/speak032902.shtm .
>
>> All the more reason to be vigilant.
>
>Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...

Yes. He sells this speaker for $1900:

http://www.buggtussel.com/cingulate.html

It's a small two way. Sure, he uses more expensive drivers. But do
they account for the extra FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS? He wrings an extra 5
hzs out of a smaller woofer. Should I be deriding them for taking
perfectly good drivers from companies that are known for great drivers
and modifying them without me actually hearing the results? Or should
I be impressed that they weigh an extra 10 lbs? Should I say that each
pound is worth, say $20?

Should an almost unknown company with the name of a fictional town on
a hillbily sit-com be vying for attention in the marketplace when we
have the likes of Tannoy? Why would *any* buy their stuff - Joseph
wants to know.

BTW, if anyone is interesting in larger photographs of Greg's
loudspeaker, all you have to do is ask.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:42:01 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>> Don't you think that
>> making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
>> him?
>
>Where did I specifically mention Dave Weil's father? Prove that this whole
>dave's father thing is not another one of your mind farts.
>
>> Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.
>
>You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned Dave
>Weil's father. Anybody who looks at the thread can see that. Well, anybody
>who has normal intelligence and reading ability and who's not drunk.
>
>> If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
>> comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel.
>
>Prove that I specifically mentioned Dave's father. If I didn't mention him
>specifically then this whole issue is a figment of your imagination, Graham.

Prove that anyone used the word specifically. Prove that it matters.
The thing is *you* know what you were referring to. Some people on
this forum also knew what you were referring to. But more importantly
*I* knew what you were referring to.

You really *are* miserable, aren't you?

As to my credibility as a reviewer, people will have to decide for
themselves. Since you have a known history of attacking virtually
everything I say, I think people will decide for themselves whether or
not they sould be factored in. I personally don't care one way or the
other. I think people will be able to tell from my report whether or
not I'm "credible".

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

>
>Yup. Weil's background is that he flunked out of college, dropped out of the
>Army, became a waiter, collects broken and abysmally cheap speakers, has no
>relevant technical expertise, and denies reality every time it bites him in
>the nose.

Why would someone who has admitted that he "isn't the sharpest knife in the
drawer" and has admitted that he has never excelled at anything decide to
attack another in this manner. Looks like a classic case of the guy with the
glass house chucking rocks to me. Given your own admissions Arny, you would
probably do better if you didn't try to use life acomplishments as an attack
point.

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:12:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> wrote:
>
>
> >You may be interested to know that I've worked with the proprietor of
> >Buggtussel on AES projects on several occasions. While I disagree
> with some
> >aspects of some of his designs (i.e., transmission lines are a well-known
> >waste of box volume) his work includes some interesting innovations, is
> >accomplished with reference to and use of established good design
> >technologies, and FWIW the sound quality of his results are generally way
> >above average to my ears and the ears of people I trust.
> >
> >You can read more details about Buggtussel at
> >http://www.stereotimes.com/speak032902.shtm .
> >
> >
> >>All the more reason to be vigilant.
> >
> >Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...
>
>
> Yes. He sells this speaker for $1900:
>
> http://www.buggtussel.com/cingulate.html



Shouldn't Arny be ridiculing Buggtussel because of their vinyl-zyme
offering? He sure speaks out of both sides of his mouth these days.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:16:22 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >> If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
> >> opinion.
> >
> >Yes, I prefer that, thanks.
>
> I don't know why, unless you just have a mental block against the word
> singular.
>
> As I have clearly shown, you have a singular idea of the way the word
> is used (this is using *your* definition BTW).

You said you'd use the word "individual" if I prefer, and I'm taking you up
on it. Thanks again.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:26:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>
> BTW, I'm in a bit of a sour mood because I just found out that one of
> the best bass players in Nashville (a town FILLED with more bass
> players than you can shake a stick at) passed away from an aneurysm he
> suffered at the weekend. Those of us who knew him are going to miss
> him terribly. He was a gentle giant and a gentle soul.

How about memorializing him here?
A little Google immortality.

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> dave weil said:
>
> > The mere fact that Ellis is selling speakers (more than he can handle)
> > is a great example that Joseph has himself used.
> >
> > I'm sure that there are plenty of other examples of lesser-known
> > speakers being sold.
>
> I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
> Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
> have to supplicate for their blessing.
>
Nah, just specific prohibitions.
There's only one individual on the "do not sell" list: Greg Singh.

A suitable end for the enterprise would be a fiery death spiral into the
arms of Jupiter.
Within minutes, the stock would be vaporized, with no possibility of
contamination of pristine life-forms.

[George M. Middius]

Bobo said:

> > I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
> > Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
> > have to supplicate for their blessing.

> Nah, just specific prohibitions.
> There's only one individual on the "do not sell" list: Greg Singh.

If that's your sole standard, you've done your Rip Van routine again.
Certain scenarios involving people who post on Usenet are too gruesome
to contemplate. trotsky may be a kook, but I'll bet he stands behind
his speakers. Consider, if you will, the K-Box Speakers. Since
everything sounds the same, actual listening during development would
be unnecessary. Manufacturers' spec sheets would suffice. And nice
wood veneer and an attractive grill cloth don't improve the sound, so
you'd get an unfinished MDF box with glue trails and sawdust still
clinging. Or the N-Box: A subwoofer knocked off from the cheap Hsu
design. Or the O-Box: Rather than drivers, you'd get 25 lbs. of neatly
printed charts and graphs.

Yes, it could be a lot worse than trotsky's offerings.


> A suitable end for the enterprise would be a fiery death spiral into the
> arms of Jupiter.

I believe that's impossible. Jupiter's atmosphere is nearly all
methane. Isn't oxygen required for combustion of methane?

> Within minutes, the stock would be vaporized, with no possibility of
> contamination of pristine life-forms.

The Sun is closer than Jupiter.

[Joseph Oberlander]

dave weil wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:54:06 -0400, George M. Middius
> > wrote:
>
>
>>You can say that, but it won't make it false either.
>>
>>Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
>>right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
>>Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.
>
>
> The mere fact that Ellis is selling speakers (more than he can handle)
> is a great example that Joseph has himself used.
>
> I'm sure that there are plenty of other examples of lesser-known
> speakers being sold.

You will note, though, that Ellis isn't marking up his products as much,
has better technical expertiese, better cabinets, and the components are
also a significant notch up the quality scale than these things.

In short, he works his butt off to compensate and has tons of details
on his website to ally fears. Are they the best speaker ever? No.
Are they a better deal for the money than Trotsky's designs? From
the look of it, absolutely. Moreso if he outsources the cabinets and
drops the price to $1000 as planned.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:28:20 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:26:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> BTW, I'm in a bit of a sour mood because I just found out that one of
>> the best bass players in Nashville (a town FILLED with more bass
>> players than you can shake a stick at) passed away from an aneurysm he
>> suffered at the weekend. Those of us who knew him are going to miss
>> him terribly. He was a gentle giant and a gentle soul.
>
>How about memorializing him here?
>A little Google immortality.

Sure, his name is Charles Dungey. He was known for playing all over
town with the best jazz musicians Nashville has to offer. As his
obituary shows, he was also a venerable and loved teacher at Tennessee
State University. As his obit also says, he's played with some of the
greats.

He was one of a kind and always exuded a love of mankind and music. He
weill be sorely missed, not only as a great musician but as a great
person as well.

http://tennessean.com/obits/archives/03/09/39900507.shtml?Element_ID=39900507

By the way, the lady quoted in the obit, Beegie Adair has a highly
touted recent 6 CD box set release, with each CD dedicated to a
particular renowned American composer. The composers are Irving
Berlin, Duke Ellington, Hoagy Carmichael, George Gershwin, Richard
Rodgers and Jerome Kern. It's a great survey of 100 years of American
music. It's a shame they couldn't have made a 7 disc collection and
added Cole Porter, because his omission makes it less than a perfect
survey.

Here's her record company info:

http://www.greenhillmusic.com/ghArtAdair.htm

If you have a spare $80 or so, her box set is a worthy addition. I
don't have any of her other stuff, but I'm sure it's fine.

Another BTW, the closest pianist that I can think of that reminds me
of her is Oscar Peterson. She's got that Peterson exquisite sense of
swing and choice of the perfect note or chord. If you ever get the
chance to experience her live, you should definitely do it. She's
marvelous.

[George M. Middius]

Obie-Wan Cheapskate shows his true audiophile colors.

> > Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.
> > Human behavior always incorporates a random element.
> > The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
> > speaker.
>
> Okay - not "always" - but honestly, the vast vast majority of the
> time - if you go into the drug store for some alergy medicine and
> the name-brand stuff is the same as the generaic and they are on the
> shelf right next to each other...

So you're saying that buying a package of pills is the same for
audiophiles as buying a pair of speakers?

> Which do you think will run out first?

Where is the "speaker store" that corresponds to your drugstore?

> Oh - I liked the "out of the back of a van" comment ;)

Ah yes, fond memories of your days as an "audiophile" salesdroid.....

[Joseph Oberlander]

It just occurred to me.

With the huge amount of time trotsky spends replying to flamewars
and spouting off his micro-angst-fests...

Shouldn't he be running his company instead?

[Joseph Oberlander]

dave weil wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:12:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>You may be interested to know that I've worked with the proprietor of
>>Buggtussel on AES projects on several occasions. While I disagree with some
>>aspects of some of his designs (i.e., transmission lines are a well-known
>>waste of box volume) his work includes some interesting innovations, is
>>accomplished with reference to and use of established good design
>>technologies, and FWIW the sound quality of his results are generally way
>>above average to my ears and the ears of people I trust.
>>
>>You can read more details about Buggtussel at
>>http://www.stereotimes.com/speak032902.shtm .
>>
>>
>>>All the more reason to be vigilant.
>>
>>Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...
>
>
> Yes. He sells this speaker for $1900:
>
> http://www.buggtussel.com/cingulate.html
>
> It's a small two way. Sure, he uses more expensive drivers. But do
> they account for the extra FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS? He wrings an extra 5
> hzs out of a smaller woofer.

Look at the "lowly" KEF Q1. 45Hz low-end as well. Certainly not $1900.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Bob Morein wrote:
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>>dave weil said:
>>
>>
>>>The mere fact that Ellis is selling speakers (more than he can handle)
>>>is a great example that Joseph has himself used.
>>>
>>>I'm sure that there are plenty of other examples of lesser-known
>>>speakers being sold.
>>
>>I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
>>Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
>>have to supplicate for their blessing.
>>
>
> Nah, just specific prohibitions.
> There's only one individual on the "do not sell" list: Greg Singh.
>
> A suitable end for the enterprise would be a fiery death spiral into the
> arms of Jupiter.

I'm honestly hoping this doesn't happen and he evolves his business and design
models to something more viable.

At half the price, they would probably be good speakers.

[trotsky]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

> S888Wheel wrote:
>
> > Arny said
> >
> >
> >> Yup. Weil's background is that he flunked out of college, dropped out
> >> of the
> >> Army, became a waiter, collects broken and abysmally cheap speakers,
> >> has no
> >> relevant technical expertise, and denies reality every time it bites
> >> him in
> >> the nose.
> >
> >
> >
> > Why would someone who has admitted that he "isn't the sharpest knife
> > in the
> > drawer" and has admitted that he has never excelled at anything
> decide to
> > attack another in this manner. Looks like a classic case of the guy
> > with the
> > glass house chucking rocks to me. Given your own admissions Arny, you
> > would
> > probably do better if you didn't try to use life acomplishments as an
> > attack
> > point.
>
>
> Gates never finished college either.


That's not surprising--stealing other's work is a lot harder there.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:51:16 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>Okay - not "always" - but honestly, the vast vast majority of the
>time - if you go into the drug store for some alergy medicine and
>the name-brand stuff is the same as the generaic and they are on the
>shelf right next to each other...
>
>Which do you think will run out first?

In most stores, I think that the generic holds its own. I'll bet that
the generic outsells each specific brand name in most stores, although
brand names combined probably outsell the generic.

BTW, wasn't it you that mentioned that someone boght Buggtussel off of
eBay? I went to their website and saw that they're selling a SEVEN
inch 2 way for about $2000. Do you really think that modifying known
speaker manufacturer's off the shelf components justifies the kind of
money that they're getting? Are you mad at them for not providing
testing results for their speakers on their site? Are you mad at them
for not providing any more specs than Greg did?

BTW, who in the hell is Buggtussel? <g> Seriously, this is a "no-name"
company not in the same league as Tannoy, right? I wonder how much
press *they* got in their first month of selling speakers.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:57:23 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:54:06 -0400, George M. Middius
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You can say that, but it won't make it false either.
>>>
>>>Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
>>>right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
>>>Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.
>>
>>
>> The mere fact that Ellis is selling speakers (more than he can handle)
>> is a great example that Joseph has himself used.
>>
>> I'm sure that there are plenty of other examples of lesser-known
>> speakers being sold.
>
>You will note, though, that Ellis isn't marking up his products as much,
>has better technical expertiese, better cabinets, and the components are
>also a significant notch up the quality scale than these things.
>
>In short, he works his butt off to compensate and has tons of details
>on his website to ally fears. Are they the best speaker ever? No.
>Are they a better deal for the money than Trotsky's designs? From
>the look of it, absolutely. Moreso if he outsources the cabinets and
>drops the price to $1000 as planned.

None of this has anything to do with the point being discussed.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:21:35 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:16:22 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
>> >> opinion.
>> >
>> >Yes, I prefer that, thanks.
>>
>> I don't know why, unless you just have a mental block against the word
>> singular.
>>
>> As I have clearly shown, you have a singular idea of the way the word
>> is used (this is using *your* definition BTW).
>
>You said you'd use the word "individual" if I prefer, and I'm taking you up
>on it. Thanks again.

Blinkered view of language noted.

Odd for a "screenwriter" I might add.

[George M. Middius]

Obie-Wanna Bookkeeper said:

> It just occurred to me.
>
> With the huge amount of time trotsky spends replying to flamewars
> and spouting off his micro-angst-fests...
>
> Shouldn't he be running his company instead?

You'll know when he gets his first order -- he'll vanish from Usenet
for a couple days.

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> stealing other's work

How are the world-class language skills coming, Gregipus?

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:06:07 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:12:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You may be interested to know that I've worked with the proprietor of
>>>Buggtussel on AES projects on several occasions. While I disagree with some
>>>aspects of some of his designs (i.e., transmission lines are a well-known
>>>waste of box volume) his work includes some interesting innovations, is
>>>accomplished with reference to and use of established good design
>>>technologies, and FWIW the sound quality of his results are generally way
>>>above average to my ears and the ears of people I trust.
>>>
>>>You can read more details about Buggtussel at
>>>http://www.stereotimes.com/speak032902.shtm .
>>>
>>>
>>>>All the more reason to be vigilant.
>>>
>>>Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...
>>
>>
>> Yes. He sells this speaker for $1900:
>>
>> http://www.buggtussel.com/cingulate.html
>>
>> It's a small two way. Sure, he uses more expensive drivers. But do
>> they account for the extra FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS? He wrings an extra 5
>> hzs out of a smaller woofer.
>
>Look at the "lowly" KEF Q1. 45Hz low-end as well. Certainly not $1900.

We aren't talking about *any* Kef. Hell, there are speakers you can
buy for $400 a pair that claim a frequency response down to 38 hz.
What's yer point?

Afraid to diss a brand that you like? Afraid to apply the same
standards to them that you apply to Trotsky?

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:08:20 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>S888Wheel wrote:
>> Arny said
>>
>>
>>>Yup. Weil's background is that he flunked out of college, dropped out of the
>>>Army, became a waiter, collects broken and abysmally cheap speakers, has no
>>>relevant technical expertise, and denies reality every time it bites him in
>>>the nose.
>>
>>
>> Why would someone who has admitted that he "isn't the sharpest knife in the
>> drawer" and has admitted that he has never excelled at anything decide to
>> attack another in this manner. Looks like a classic case of the guy with the
>> glass house chucking rocks to me. Given your own admissions Arny, you would
>> probably do better if you didn't try to use life acomplishments as an attack
>> point.
>
>Gates never finished college either. In fact, education for the sake of
>obtaining a piece of paper is virtually meaningless unless you are trying
>to do the corporate suck-up/droid career path.

Yes, the truth is that I didn't "flunk out of college".

I *still* have my 60 credit hours, some of which are probably still
usable.

[trotsky]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> Obie-Wanna Bookkeeper said:
>
>
> >It just occurred to me.
> >
> >With the huge amount of time trotsky spends replying to flamewars
> >and spouting off his micro-angst-fests...
> >
> >Shouldn't he be running his company instead?
>
>
> You'll know when he gets his first order -- he'll vanish from Usenet
> for a couple days.
>

Actually, I'm slated to vanish today--I'm going to Indy tomorrow to
watch the F1 practice. I do have a sub I'm already in the process of
building, if that's any help.

[trotsky]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> trotsky said:
>
>
> >stealing other's work
>
>
> How are the world-class language skills coming, Gregipus?
>

I misplaced an apostrophe? The horror! Still, I point out others' (see
that!) typographical errors, so it's only reasonable that you would do
likewise. I assume you're hanging on every word, of course. (No pun
intended.)

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> > You'll know when he gets his first order -- he'll vanish from Usenet
> > for a couple days.

> Actually, I'm slated to vanish today--I'm going to Indy tomorrow to
> watch the F1 practice. I do have a sub I'm already in the process of
> building, if that's any help.

Can we assume you're sending it to Nousiane for a "professional"
evaluation?

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> > How are the world-class language skills coming, Gregipus?

> I misplaced an apostrophe? The horror! Still, I point out others' (see
> that!) typographical errors, so it's only reasonable that you would do
> likewise.

Is this the long-awaited beginning of a dawning self-awareness?

> I assume you're hanging on every word, of course. (No pun
> intended.)

None observed. But congrats on using "you're" correctly for once.

[MiNE 109]

In article >,
The Devil > wrote:

> Have mercy, you abominable scrabble-eyed freak-nonce. You surely don't
> hate me so much you wish I would read your posts, do you?

Did you know restaurant food is indistinguishable from soggy white bread
when you're 'likkered up'?

Stephen

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...
>

.....the one about a man named Jed.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> Here's a question Singh: Do you even know what technical information about
> audio is?
>

Here is a question Arny: Do you even know what good usage about English is?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> BTW, I'm in a bit of a sour mood because I just found out that one of
> the best bass players in Nashville (a town FILLED with more bass
> players than you can shake a stick at) passed away from an aneurysm he
> suffered at the weekend. Those of us who knew him are going to miss
> him terribly. He was a gentle giant and a gentle soul.

What was his name? Would I recognize it?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > I personally have never seen any reason not to trust Dave Weil's
honesty.
>
> Sockpuppet Wheel, you have a track record for personally being one of the
> dumber rubes in the history of RAO.
>
>

How interesting
Please rank order them for us.
I want to see some consistency out of you.
Every other post its someone else who's the worst.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Michael Mckelvy]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>
> >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
> >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the
great
> >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
> >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.
>
> Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
> sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made.

So much for unbiased reporting.

They are
> different than 99% of all speakers made.
>
> The question of course is how they stand up to the remaining 5% and
> whether or not it matters whether his speakers are different than the
> other 99%.
>
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

> Bob, you need to take deep breath and get out of the apartment...
>
You need to get out and listen to some other speakers.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:29:24 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
> wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:55 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>>
>> >Sorry, Trotsky. No can do.
>> >It's necessary to draw attention to what in my opinion is one of the
>great
>> >audio frauds and misrepresentations of our time -- Jupiter Audio.
>> >You, Greg Singh, are a fraud, plain and simple.
>>
>> Actually, it's not true. He is indeed selling speakers that make
>> sound. They are better than 95% of all speakers made.
>
>So much for unbiased reporting.

It has nothing to do with bias. Most speakers on the planet suck big
time. There is a smaller group that all sound quite good. I would
label this the 5%. Greg's speakers *definitely* belong in this group.
The speakers *you* make might very well belong in this group, bit
Idont' know since I haven't heard them.

>They are
>> different than 99% of all speakers made.
>>
>> The question of course is how they stand up to the remaining 5% and
>> whether or not it matters whether his speakers are different than the
>> other 99%.
>>
>Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
>
>> Bob, you need to take deep breath and get out of the apartment...
>>
>You need to get out and listen to some other speakers.

That's *always* true of everyone. You can never hear enough speakers.

[Joseph Oberlander]

George M. Middius wrote:
>
> Obie-Wan Cheapskate shows his true audiophile colors.
>
>
>>>Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.
>>>Human behavior always incorporates a random element.
>>>The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
>>>speaker.
>>
>>Okay - not "always" - but honestly, the vast vast majority of the
>>time - if you go into the drug store for some alergy medicine and
>>the name-brand stuff is the same as the generaic and they are on the
>>shelf right next to each other...
>
> So you're saying that buying a package of pills is the same for
> audiophiles as buying a pair of speakers?

Well, audiophileism is an addiction. :)

Seriously, though - a person walks into a high-end store. They
see Joseph Audio, KEF(or Tannoy - usually one or the other), B&W,
plus a few other brands - maybe Paradigm or Mirage.

They listen to them all and choose. Price is a concern at under
$2000 as Trotsky's speakers are NOT marketed towards true high-end
audiophilie types.

>>Which do you think will run out first?
>
> Where is the "speaker store" that corresponds to your drugstore?

Heh. Get both fixes at one location. Interesting marketing
concept :)

[Joseph Oberlander]

dave weil wrote:

>>>Yes. He sells this speaker for $1900:
>>>
>>>http://www.buggtussel.com/cingulate.html
>>>
>>>It's a small two way. Sure, he uses more expensive drivers. But do
>>>they account for the extra FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS? He wrings an extra 5
>>>hzs out of a smaller woofer.
>>
>>Look at the "lowly" KEF Q1. 45Hz low-end as well. Certainly not $1900.
>
>
> We aren't talking about *any* Kef. Hell, there are speakers you can
> buy for $400 a pair that claim a frequency response down to 38 hz.
> What's yer point?
>
> Afraid to diss a brand that you like? Afraid to apply the same
> standards to them that you apply to Trotsky?

That a DIYer isn't likely to do the same job that a big firm
can do. Not at the large firm's prices. The Q1s sell for
a LOT less than the bugtussels and probably sound very close in
sound quality.

[Joseph Oberlander]

> They are
>
>>different than 99% of all speakers made.

I could drill four ports in a box and put a stobe light on top
of it and make the exact same claim. Your point?

[Bob Morein]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> George M. Middius wrote:
>
> >
> > Obie-Wanna Bookkeeper said:
> >
> >
> > >It just occurred to me.
> > >
> > >With the huge amount of time trotsky spends replying to flamewars
> > >and spouting off his micro-angst-fests...
> > >
> > >Shouldn't he be running his company instead?
> >
> >
> > You'll know when he gets his first order -- he'll vanish from Usenet
> > for a couple days.
> >
>
> Actually, I'm slated to vanish today--I'm going to Indy tomorrow to
> watch the F1 practice. I do have a sub I'm already in the process of
> building, if that's any help.
>
Indy is not a good place for Roadkill to hang around.
They might paint a stripe on his ass.

[Bob Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Bobo said:
>
> > > I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
> > > Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
> > > have to supplicate for their blessing.
>
> > Nah, just specific prohibitions.
> > There's only one individual on the "do not sell" list: Greg Singh.
>
> If that's your sole standard, you've done your Rip Van routine again.
> Certain scenarios involving people who post on Usenet are too gruesome
> to contemplate. trotsky may be a kook, but I'll bet he stands behind
> his speakers. Consider, if you will, the K-Box Speakers. Since
> everything sounds the same, actual listening during development would
> be unnecessary. Manufacturers' spec sheets would suffice. And nice
> wood veneer and an attractive grill cloth don't improve the sound, so
> you'd get an unfinished MDF box with glue trails and sawdust still
> clinging. Or the N-Box: A subwoofer knocked off from the cheap Hsu
> design. Or the O-Box: Rather than drivers, you'd get 25 lbs. of neatly
> printed charts and graphs.
>
> Yes, it could be a lot worse than trotsky's offerings.
>
It's a question of untested character. If he stands behind his speakers,
then, yes, his occupation is harmless. But I'm disturbed by the moral
compromise of the T-Box: screw'em together, listen, and pronounce one's self
lucky. It seems likely he merely rationalized what he heard, rather than
responding to it. This on the face of it is not better than the K-Box. They
are both bad.

If Trotsky has morally compromised himself by rationalizing what he heard,
this does not bode well for the responsibility and sacrifice required to
refund the monies of a significant number of purchasers. You believe he
intends to be honest, but this is an intent that can be modified by
exigencies. Honesty can be established only by hardship. Do you know him on
a more personal level that would give you assurance he would pass the test?

[Michael Mckelvy]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> > "trotsky" wrote in message
> > nk.net
> >
> > >Arny Krueger wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>"trotsky" wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>That's a lie, Singh. Morien and I have been discussing the mockery
> > >>you've made out of atheism because you have no discernable ethics.
> > >>Do you want to play, or sit this one out?
> >
> >
> > >Morion already shot his wad and said that everything he's said about
> > >me isn't based on reasoning, just dislike.
> >
> >
> > Prove it.
>
>
>
> You're starting to sound like a broken DAW here, Arny.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >You used to claim you
> > >were a reasonable person, Krueger--what happened?
> >
> >
> > I still am a very reasonable, easy-going person. Remember, I sleep with
> > bears in the figurative sense, and live to tell the tale.
>
>
>
> I think I've reduced you to a pile of nonsense.
>
>
That would mean you reduced him to your level.

> > >Simply put, do you no longer consider yourself a Christian?
> >
> >
> > I'm too much of a skeptic to not be Christian.
> >
You seem to be equally skeptical of ethical behavior, welcher.

> > Of course Singh I know this is all over your head. It takes Grace for
> > Christianity to make sense, and you are one of the most graceless people
> > I've ever had the displeasure of meeting.
>
>
>
> I think you put too much stock in Usenet, because in my book exchanging
> messages on a computer screen isn't meeting. If it was, you'd have been
> arrested for pedophilia a hundred times over.

Middous' rejection of you seems to have made you slightly more insane.

>

[Lionel]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>>Bobo said:
>>
>>
>>>>I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
>>>>Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
>>>>have to supplicate for their blessing.
>>
>>>Nah, just specific prohibitions.
>>>There's only one individual on the "do not sell" list: Greg Singh.
>>
>>If that's your sole standard, you've done your Rip Van routine again.
>>Certain scenarios involving people who post on Usenet are too gruesome
>>to contemplate. trotsky may be a kook, but I'll bet he stands behind
>>his speakers. Consider, if you will, the K-Box Speakers. Since
>>everything sounds the same, actual listening during development would
>>be unnecessary. Manufacturers' spec sheets would suffice. And nice
>>wood veneer and an attractive grill cloth don't improve the sound, so
>>you'd get an unfinished MDF box with glue trails and sawdust still
>>clinging. Or the N-Box: A subwoofer knocked off from the cheap Hsu
>>design. Or the O-Box: Rather than drivers, you'd get 25 lbs. of neatly
>>printed charts and graphs.
>>
>>Yes, it could be a lot worse than trotsky's offerings.
>>
>
> It's a question of untested character. If he stands behind his speakers,
> then, yes, his occupation is harmless. But I'm disturbed by the moral
> compromise of the T-Box: screw'em together, listen, and pronounce one's self
> lucky. It seems likely he merely rationalized what he heard, rather than
> responding to it. This on the face of it is not better than the K-Box. They
> are both bad.
>
> If Trotsky has morally compromised himself by rationalizing what he heard,
> this does not bode well for the responsibility and sacrifice required to
> refund the monies of a significant number of purchasers. You believe he
> intends to be honest, but this is an intent that can be modified by
> exigencies. Honesty can be established only by hardship. Do you know him on
> a more personal level that would give you assurance he would pass the test?
>
>
>

Bob,
The game is over now.
Middius has already proclamed his victory over Trotsky and he granted us
accessit : Silver and Bronze medals.
But it looks like that it was a kind of Pyrrhus' victory...
....So you will have to pay for that.

Do you know that ? Ok !
Perhaps in a few days you will strangely prefer Mr. McCarty ! ;-)

Lionel

[Lionel]

George M. Middius wrote:

> trotsky may be a kook, but I'll bet he stands behind
> his speakers. Consider, if you will, the K-Box Speakers. Since
> everything sounds the same, actual listening during development would
> be unnecessary. Manufacturers' spec sheets would suffice. And nice
> wood veneer and an attractive grill cloth don't improve the sound, so
> you'd get an unfinished MDF box with glue trails and sawdust still
> clinging. Or the N-Box: A subwoofer knocked off from the cheap Hsu
> design. Or the O-Box: Rather than drivers, you'd get 25 lbs. of neatly
> printed charts and graphs.
>


Ladies and Gentlemen this was the Middius' show...
....His annual technical parade !

Too much LOL!

Lionel

PS : George can you provide me your Webcam file ? Send it to my mail.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:21:35 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:16:22 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
> >> >> opinion.
> >> >
> >> >Yes, I prefer that, thanks.
> >>
> >> I don't know why, unless you just have a mental block against the word
> >> singular.
> >>
> >> As I have clearly shown, you have a singular idea of the way the word
> >> is used (this is using *your* definition BTW).
> >
> >You said you'd use the word "individual" if I prefer, and I'm taking you
up
> >on it. Thanks again.
>
> Blinkered view of language noted.
>
> Odd for a "screenwriter" I might add.

Yes. Thanks for the accommodation.

[Bob Morein]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Bob Morein wrote:
>
> > "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>
> >>Bobo said:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
> >>>>Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
> >>>>have to supplicate for their blessing.
> >>
> >>>Nah, just specific prohibitions.
> >>>There's only one individual on the "do not sell" list: Greg Singh.
> >>
> >>If that's your sole standard, you've done your Rip Van routine again.
> >>Certain scenarios involving people who post on Usenet are too gruesome
> >>to contemplate. trotsky may be a kook, but I'll bet he stands behind
> >>his speakers. Consider, if you will, the K-Box Speakers. Since
> >>everything sounds the same, actual listening during development would
> >>be unnecessary. Manufacturers' spec sheets would suffice. And nice
> >>wood veneer and an attractive grill cloth don't improve the sound, so
> >>you'd get an unfinished MDF box with glue trails and sawdust still
> >>clinging. Or the N-Box: A subwoofer knocked off from the cheap Hsu
> >>design. Or the O-Box: Rather than drivers, you'd get 25 lbs. of neatly
> >>printed charts and graphs.
> >>
> >>Yes, it could be a lot worse than trotsky's offerings.
> >>
> >
> > It's a question of untested character. If he stands behind his speakers,
> > then, yes, his occupation is harmless. But I'm disturbed by the moral
> > compromise of the T-Box: screw'em together, listen, and pronounce one's
self
> > lucky. It seems likely he merely rationalized what he heard, rather than
> > responding to it. This on the face of it is not better than the K-Box.
They
> > are both bad.
> >
> > If Trotsky has morally compromised himself by rationalizing what he
heard,
> > this does not bode well for the responsibility and sacrifice required to
> > refund the monies of a significant number of purchasers. You believe he
> > intends to be honest, but this is an intent that can be modified by
> > exigencies. Honesty can be established only by hardship. Do you know him
on
> > a more personal level that would give you assurance he would pass the
test?
> >
> >
> >
>
> Bob,
> The game is over now.
> Middius has already proclamed his victory over Trotsky and he granted us
> accessit : Silver and Bronze medals.
> But it looks like that it was a kind of Pyrrhus' victory...
> ...So you will have to pay for that.
>
> Do you know that ? Ok !
> Perhaps in a few days you will strangely prefer Mr. McCarty ! ;-)
>
"It's not over till it's over" :) Yogi Berra

[Joseph Oberlander]

Bob Morein wrote:
>> Or the O-Box: Rather than drivers, you'd get 25 lbs. of neatly
>>printed charts and graphs.

Sign me up :) Oh - wait - first you have to get a request for
form 37a form filled out - to indemnify us for back problems due
to excessive weight of the manuals.

:)

Any, yes, I do like printed charts and graphs.


> If Trotsky has morally compromised himself by rationalizing what he heard,
> this does not bode well for the responsibility and sacrifice required to
> refund the monies of a significant number of purchasers. You believe he
> intends to be honest, but this is an intent that can be modified by
> exigencies. Honesty can be established only by hardship. Do you know him on
> a more personal level that would give you assurance he would pass the test?

There's actually nothing wrong with his way of doing things, but he's
entering the same area that Bose is - namely, poor sound that you have
to spend a LOT of money on in the end to keep up the image - in sales
and advertizing and promotions.

Those of us who have actually run businesses before tend to have a more
practical approach of do it right the first time. Failing in business
stinks. He really should trust some of us on this - to not do what
all too many of us have already tried or seen others try and just not
work.

Sure, he may have to lower his price or put better components in, or
do some real testing, but he can end up with a good design and almost
no overhead, returns, or bad reviews. CAN is the operative term, tough.

[Arny Krueger]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
ink.net


> I have no pedophile fantasies, Krueger. In fact, the recurring rumor
> is that you're a pedophile. Why is this?

It's just one of your pedophile fantasies, Singh.

(drum roll in the background).

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message

> It just occurred to me.
>
> With the huge amount of time trotsky spends replying to flamewars
> and spouting off his micro-angst-fests...
>
> Shouldn't he be running his company instead?

Obviously, he has no business to run.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 04:54:03 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>
>>>>Yes. He sells this speaker for $1900:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.buggtussel.com/cingulate.html
>>>>
>>>>It's a small two way. Sure, he uses more expensive drivers. But do
>>>>they account for the extra FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS? He wrings an extra 5
>>>>hzs out of a smaller woofer.
>>>
>>>Look at the "lowly" KEF Q1. 45Hz low-end as well. Certainly not $1900.
>>
>>
>> We aren't talking about *any* Kef. Hell, there are speakers you can
>> buy for $400 a pair that claim a frequency response down to 38 hz.
>> What's yer point?
>>
>> Afraid to diss a brand that you like? Afraid to apply the same
>> standards to them that you apply to Trotsky?
>
>That a DIYer isn't likely to do the same job that a big firm
>can do. Not at the large firm's prices. The Q1s sell for
>a LOT less than the bugtussels and probably sound very close in
>sound quality.

Why did your friend buy Buggtussels on eBay then?

And you *are* aware that Buggtussel isn't a DIY thing, right? They are
a company that has used Arnold for some ungodly purpose.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 04:56:20 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>> They are
>>
>>>different than 99% of all speakers made.
>
>I could drill four ports in a box and put a stobe light on top
>of it and make the exact same claim. Your point?

My point continues later by me saying that the important thing was
whether or not it mattered. In *your* case, it *would* matter in that
your speaker wouldn't compare sonically, nor would it reproduce sound.

You really need to read whole posts, you know.

[Lionel Chapuis]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> [...]
> If we knew who you really are and what you did with your life, sockpuppet
> Wheel, the fun could probably really begin. I think there is a good reason
> you are hiding your true complete identity, [...]

Up to this mail in which you, fallaciously(*), declare that Mr. Krueger
has insulted you.
At this moment only you have done the choice to link your nickname
"S888Wheel" (LOL!) to what you pretend to be your real name :
Scott "Sockpuppet" Wheeler.

You are a coward Mr. Wheeler, a coward and a liar.

Lionel

(*)
Entry Word: fallacious
Function: adjective
Synonyms : ILLOGICAL, invalid, irrational, mad, nonrational, reasonless,
sophistic, unreasonable, unreasoned
Antonyms : sound, valid

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:27:02 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>
>> BTW, if anyone is interesting in larger photographs of Greg's
>> loudspeaker, all you have to do is ask.
>
>Tester and marketing manager Dave ?
>It looks like you are judge and party...
>Who manage finances ? Middius ?
>
>LOL !

Others besides myself had mentioned that one of the downsides of his
web site was that there weren't larger pictures. I was simply saying
that, if anyone was *really* interested, I could pop some off for
them.

One person *did* express interest and I presume that he has the
pictures now.

Got a problem with that?

[Lionel Chapuis]

dave weil wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:27:02 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil wrote:
>>
>>
>>>BTW, if anyone is interesting in larger photographs of Greg's
>>>loudspeaker, all you have to do is ask.
>>
>>Tester and marketing manager Dave ?
>>It looks like you are judge and party...
>>Who manage finances ? Middius ?
>>
>>LOL !
>
>
> Others besides myself had mentioned that one of the downsides of his
> web site was that there weren't larger pictures. I was simply saying
> that, if anyone was *really* interested, I could pop some off for
> them.
>
> One person *did* express interest and I presume that he has the
> pictures now.
>
> Got a problem with that?

Me Dave ? No, no problemo.
I just try to be gently sarcastic showing that you are doing more than
your job (tester) and obviously more job than the boss who is looking
for prestigious customers at Indy F1 car race ! (LOL).
I just want to lead your attention on what people with guilty mind could
knowingly misinterpret.

Dave you invest to much of yourself in this mission. Most of them find
that your attitude is suspect.
Are you looking for a kind of redemption ?

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:42:01 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Don't you think that
>>>> making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
>>>> him?
>>>
>>> Where did I specifically mention Dave Weil's father? Prove that this
>>> whole dave's father thing is not another one of your mind farts.
>>>
>>>> Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.
>>>
>>> You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned
>>> Dave Weil's father. Anybody who looks at the thread can see that.
>>> Well, anybody who has normal intelligence and reading ability and
>>> who's not drunk.
>>>
>>>> If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
>>>> comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel.
>>>
>>> Prove that I specifically mentioned Dave's father. If I didn't
>>> mention him specifically then this whole issue is a figment of your
>>> imagination, Graham.
>>
>> Prove that anyone used the word specifically.
>
>Which word?

Specifically, of course.

>> Prove that it matters.
>
>It seems to matter to you Weil, matter a lot. If not, why all the ranting?

Because it's *you* who claims that anyone claimed that you
*specifically* mantioned my father.

>> The thing is *you* know what you were referring to.
>
>I was referring to YOUR well-known lack of qualifications to properly review
>speakers, Weil.

How is referring to *known* admitted mental problems in my family have
anything to do with my "well-known lack of qualifications to properly
review speakers"?

If you weren't referring to my father's suicide, which "known" mental
problems in my family *were* you referring to?

>> Some people on this forum also knew what you were referring to.
>
>One of them is a leading poster of pedophile fantasies on RAO. So what?
>
>> But more importantly *I* knew what you were referring to.
>
>I was referring to YOUR well-known lack of qualifications to properly review
>speakers, Weil.

You are a liar, pure and simple.

<snip>

I hope Mr. Bass is reading this sort of dissemination. For the record,
Mr. Bass, what Arnold was referring to when he included "known mental
problems in my family" (or whatever the exact verbiage was) in his
recounting of why anyone should ignore my review of Jupiter Audio's
speakers, was the suicide of my father, as that's the only thing about
my family that I've talked about on this group that could be tied to
such a statement. He has used it in the past as well.

This post is a perfect example of his "tactics".

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage ears for
>ears during his questionable military career. You were a PFC right, Weil?
>Should I name another well-known slightly-deranged PFC? LOL!

Yes, I was a PFC during part of my service.

I was also a Corporal.

What were *you* during *your* military career? Were *you* ever a PFC?

Did *you* Army require hearing protection when operating ear-damaging
equipment? Mine did.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in danger (i.e.,
>use mind-altering substances) for the sake of excitement and bravado.

I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
Krueger. For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
claim that I have used.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>We don't know about any congenital hearing defects that Weil might have.

Or *you* for that matter.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>We know that Weil does not know an ohm from
>a volt.

I'm afraid that I do.

>We know that Weil was incapable of completing a college education,
>probably because he was too involved with mind-altering substances at the
>time.

This, of course, is a lie.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>We do know that there are some acute problems with mental stability in
>Weil's family tree which Weil strangely enough brags about, first doing so I
>believe on a Christmas day.

Here is the reference to the suicide of my father, Mr. Bass.

I hope that you reevaluate your opinoion of Mr. Krueger. You are
seeing him in full attack mode.

This is what the group has had to put up with for years.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:58:12 +0100, The Devil > wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:52:36 GMT, MiNE 109 >
>wrote:
>
>>> Have mercy, you abominable scrabble-eyed freak-nonce. You surely don't
>>> hate me so much you wish I would read your posts, do you?
>>
>>Did you know restaurant food is indistinguishable from soggy white bread
>>when you're 'likkered up'?
>
>Hell, if you can afford a bottle of wine before you hit Mickey D's,
>and if you are indeed listening to an $89 MP3 player full of music you
>edited together with Adobe Acrobat, you're doing very well for
>yourself indeed.

I'm sure that the wine was from a vintage week.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:56:29 +0200, Lionel Chapuis
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:27:02 +0200, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>dave weil wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>BTW, if anyone is interesting in larger photographs of Greg's
>>>>loudspeaker, all you have to do is ask.
>>>
>>>Tester and marketing manager Dave ?
>>>It looks like you are judge and party...
>>>Who manage finances ? Middius ?
>>>
>>>LOL !
>>
>>
>> Others besides myself had mentioned that one of the downsides of his
>> web site was that there weren't larger pictures. I was simply saying
>> that, if anyone was *really* interested, I could pop some off for
>> them.
>>
>> One person *did* express interest and I presume that he has the
>> pictures now.
>>
>> Got a problem with that?
>
>Me Dave ? No, no problemo.

Of course you don't...

<cue gentle sarcasm mode>

>I just try to be gently sarcastic showing that you are doing more than
>your job (tester) and obviously more job than the boss who is looking
>for prestigious customers at Indy F1 car race ! (LOL).
>I just want to lead your attention on what people with guilty mind could
>knowingly misinterpret.
>
>Dave you invest to much of yourself in this mission. Most of them find
>that your attitude is suspect.

I think that you're wrong. But, it really doesn't matter, now does it?

>Are you looking for a kind of redemption ?

No, I'm just trying to evaluate some speakers.

[Lionel Chapuis]

dave weil wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>>
>>>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:42:01 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Don't you think that
>>>>>making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
>>>>>him?
>>>>
>>>>Where did I specifically mention Dave Weil's father? Prove that this
>>>>whole dave's father thing is not another one of your mind farts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.
>>>>
>>>>You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned
>>>>Dave Weil's father. Anybody who looks at the thread can see that.
>>>>Well, anybody who has normal intelligence and reading ability and
>>>>who's not drunk.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
>>>>>comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel.
>>>>
>>>>Prove that I specifically mentioned Dave's father. If I didn't
>>>>mention him specifically then this whole issue is a figment of your
>>>>imagination, Graham.
>>>
>>>Prove that anyone used the word specifically.
>>
>>Which word?
>
>
> Specifically, of course.
>
>
>>>Prove that it matters.
>>
>>It seems to matter to you Weil, matter a lot. If not, why all the ranting?
>
>
> Because it's *you* who claims that anyone claimed that you
> *specifically* mantioned my father.
>
>
>>>The thing is *you* know what you were referring to.
>>
>>I was referring to YOUR well-known lack of qualifications to properly review
>>speakers, Weil.
>
>
> How is referring to *known* admitted mental problems in my family have
> anything to do with my "well-known lack of qualifications to properly
> review speakers"?
>
> If you weren't referring to my father's suicide, which "known" mental
> problems in my family *were* you referring to?
>
>
>>>Some people on this forum also knew what you were referring to.
>>
>>One of them is a leading poster of pedophile fantasies on RAO. So what?
>>
>>
>>>But more importantly *I* knew what you were referring to.
>>
>>I was referring to YOUR well-known lack of qualifications to properly review
>>speakers, Weil.
>
>
> You are a liar, pure and simple.
>
> <snip>
>
> I hope Mr. Bass is reading this sort of dissemination. For the record,
> Mr. Bass, what Arnold was referring to when he included "known mental
> problems in my family" (or whatever the exact verbiage was) in his
> recounting of why anyone should ignore my review of Jupiter Audio's
> speakers, was the suicide of my father, as that's the only thing about
> my family that I've talked about on this group that could be tied to
> such a statement. He has used it in the past as well.
>
> This post is a perfect example of his "tactics".

I don't know if Mr. Bass is reading but for me Mr. Arnold Krueger is a
****ing ******* with a strong paranoid behaviour.
Sometime we must exhibit our tripe. I have already expressed this point
only after 2 days posting on RAO.

Lionel

[George M. Middius]

dave weil said:

> Here is the reference to the suicide of my father, Mr. Bass.
>
> I hope that you reevaluate your opinoion of Mr. Krueger. You are
> seeing him in full attack mode.

This thread isn't crossposted to whichever group Bass reads.

> This is what the group has had to put up with for years.

That's certainly true.

[The Devil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 08:18:34 -0500, dave weil >
wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:58:12 +0100, The Devil > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:52:36 GMT, MiNE 109 >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>> Have mercy, you abominable scrabble-eyed freak-nonce. You surely don't
>>>> hate me so much you wish I would read your posts, do you?
>>>
>>>Did you know restaurant food is indistinguishable from soggy white bread
>>>when you're 'likkered up'?
>>
>>Hell, if you can afford a bottle of wine before you hit Mickey D's,
>>and if you are indeed listening to an $89 MP3 player full of music you
>>edited together with Adobe Acrobat, you're doing very well for
>>yourself indeed.
>
>I'm sure that the wine was from a vintage week.

Heck yes. £2.99 from Tesco. Only the best.

--
td

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:02:56 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>However, accepted wisdom in knowledgeable circles is that the market for
>good small 2-ways is pretty full. Even if your time is free, you can get
>better tunes for the money by picking a modestly-priced, well-designed
>system from someone like NHT, BA, Infinity, Paradigm, PSB, KEF, B&W, Tannoy,
>etc. I've followed my own advice, personally lacking only examples from PSB,
>B&W and Tannoy.

Why you're collecting small 2-ways is beyond me.

Of course, you've just dissed Buggtussel and claimed that people
probably shouldn't buy their 2-way. Why you want to bite the hand that
feeds you is beyond me.

PS, I'm not a big fan of 2-ways. None of my main speakers are
two-ways.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

>> We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage
>> ears for ears during his questionable military career. You were a
>> PFC right, Weil? Should I name another well-known slightly-deranged
>> PFC? LOL!

> Yes, I was a PFC during part of my service.

> I was also a Corporal.

Whoop-de-doo!

What did you separate as?

> What were *you* during *your* military career?

SP/5 after about 9 months. Separated as SP/5 with Good Conduct Medal.

>Were *you* ever a PFC?

For about three months. Just passing through!

> Did *you* Army require hearing protection when operating ear-damaging
equipment?

I don't have an Army.

>Mine did.

I don't think you have an Army either Weil, unless we count Graham,
Phillips, Yustabe and Middius.

LOL!

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in danger
>> (i.e., use mind-altering substances) for the sake of excitement and
>> bravado.

> I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
> Krueger.

I've never been drunk in any reasonable sense of the word.

>For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
> claim that I have used.

Not really Weil, because you've been more unguarded about your use of
mind-altering substances in the past.

Repeat after me Weil:

I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.

I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.

I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription drugs.

I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> We know that Weil does not know an ohm from
>> a volt.
>
> I'm afraid that I do.
>
>> We know that Weil was incapable of completing a college education,
>> probably because he was too involved with mind-altering substances
>> at the time.
>
> This, of course, is a lie.

Since it's not a definate statement it can't be a lie.

That it's a lie is therefore in itself a lie.

It could be incorrect, of course.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> We do know that there are some acute problems with mental stability
>> in Weil's family tree which Weil strangely enough brags about, first
>> doing so I believe on a Christmas day.
>
> Here is the reference to the suicide of my father, Mr. Bass.

You introduced it to this thread, Weil. You can't complain about me
referring to topics that you yourself brought up in the very thread that you
brought it up!

> I hope that you reevaluate your opinoion of Mr. Krueger. You are
> seeing him in full attack mode.

Not hardly - this is all old news.

> This is what the group has had to put up with for years.

Weil bites at me N times. After being pushed and pushed, I respond in a
limited way once. This is of course a crime.

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

>>> Yup. Weil's background is that he flunked out of college, dropped
>>> out of the Army, became a waiter, collects broken and abysmally
>>> cheap speakers, has no relevant technical expertise, and denies
>>> reality every time it bites him in the nose.

I said

>
>> Why would someone who has admitted that he "isn't the sharpest knife
>> in the drawer" and has admitted that he has never excelled at
>> anything decide to attack another in this manner.

Arny said

>
>Sue me for knowing my limitations.

Unlike libel that is not a cause of action. Besides, that wasn't the point. I
think you are far more limmited than you think.

I said



>
>>Looks like a classic case of the guy with the glass house chucking rocks
>to me.

Arny said

>
>Wrong.

Now Arny is making claims of fact about what things look like to me. You see
Arny , you have many limmitations besides the ones you are in touch with.

Arny said

> I'm the guy in a straw house laughing at people who live in glass
>house and throw rocks.

This bizarre mix of figyrative speech, fairy tale and twisted perspective
pretty much speaks for itself. You need to get out of the basement more Arny
and get in touch with reality. And by getting out I mean lurking in the woods
for a week.

I said

>
>> Given your own admissions Arny, you would probably do better if you
>> didn't try to use life acomplishments as an attack point.
>

Arny said

>
>If we knew who you really are and what you did with your life, sockpuppet
>Wheel, the fun could probably really begin.

IOW you would try to take any fact about my life and with your twisted sadistic
mind try to turn it into an insult. That's just sad.


Arny said

> I think there is a good reason
>you are hiding your true complete identity,

Yet another example of your disconnect with reality. My identity is known. I
don't talk about my personal and proffessional life on RAO becauase niether has
anything to do with audio. Remeber the name of the group? Rec. Audio Opinion?


Arny said


>and it has to do with abject
>mediocrity and your denial of same.

Fantasize all you want.I think it is vulgar to brag about proffessional
acomplishments on a Usenet group that is totally unrelated to my prffession.
Why would you assume that everyone else is an underachiever like yourself. How
do you think those of us who own the equipment you despise due to class envy
pay for such equipment? No doubt you simply fantasize about that as well.

Arny said

>So post your resume and home address at
>your earliest convenience, to show that you don't have lots to hide.

Why do you want my resume/ You would just deny it's validity. It looks like you
will have my home address soon enough. Please don't stalk me once you know
where I live.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message


> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:02:56 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

>> However, accepted wisdom in knowledgeable circles is that the market
>> for good small 2-ways is pretty full. Even if your time is free, you
>> can get better tunes for the money by picking a modestly-priced,
>> well-designed system from someone like NHT, BA, Infinity, Paradigm,
>> PSB, KEF, B&W, Tannoy, etc. I've followed my own advice, personally
>> lacking only examples from PSB, B&W and Tannoy.

> Why you're collecting small 2-ways is beyond me.

This would be the sort of weirdness that we can expect from someone who
thinks that Kilpsch Cornwalls are modern SOTA speakers.

> Of course, you've just dissed Buggtussel and claimed that people
> probably shouldn't buy their 2-way.

That would be a conclusion that exists in your own mind, Weil.

>Why you want to bite the hand that feeds you is beyond me.

Who said that Buggtussel fed me?

LOL!

> PS, I'm not a big fan of 2-ways. None of my main speakers are two-ways.

None of them (in their current state) are credible in most audiophile
circles, either.

[S888Wheel]

I said

>
>> Fantasize all you want.I think it is vulgar to brag about
>> proffessional acomplishments on a Usenet group that is totally
>> unrelated to my prffession.
>

Arny said

>
>When did "prffession" come into the picture?

When you attacked Dave Weil for his proffession.

I said

>
>>Why would you assume that everyone else is an underachiever like yourself.
>

Arny said

>
>False premise.
>

It's not a premise it is a deduction premised on your attacks on others. those
attacks are quite real.

I said

>
>> How do you think those of us who
>> own the equipment you despise due to class envy pay for such
>> equipment?

Arny said

>
>False premise.

Again it is not a premise, it is a deduction based on a mountain of evidence in
your posts on RAO.

I said

>
>> No doubt you simply fantasize about that as well.

Arny said

>
>Self-aggrandizing statements, noted.

Nope just deductions based on observations.

Arny said

> Lack of substance, noted.

Only because you think deductions are premises. That allows you to disregard
the mountain of evidence pointing to the correctness of my deductions.
Sometimes your limmitations are a convenience.


Arny said

>noted. Lack of substance, noted. Personal
>threats (snipped) noted.

What threat?

You never answered my question Arny, why do you want my resume? Is it for any
reason other than the ones I suspect? You know, for the purpose of picking
small facts, twisting them in a saddistic manner to turn them into petty
personal attacks.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:30:21 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>
>>> We know that Weil regularly operated equipment well-known to damage
>>> ears for ears during his questionable military career. You were a
>>> PFC right, Weil? Should I name another well-known slightly-deranged
>>> PFC? LOL!
>
>> Yes, I was a PFC during part of my service.
>
>> I was also a Corporal.
>
>Whoop-de-doo!

Yes, it was a big whoop-de-do.

>What did you separate as?
>
>> What were *you* during *your* military career?
>
>SP/5 after about 9 months. Separated as SP/5 with Good Conduct Medal.

Well, I was an NCO and you weren't.

Sorry.

Oh yeah, I got one of those medals as well.

>>Were *you* ever a PFC?
>
>For about three months. Just passing through!

There you go. That was about the number of months that *I* was as
well.

>> Did *your* Army require hearing protection when operating ear-damaging
>equipment?
>
>I don't have an Army.

Sure you did.

>>Mine did.
>
>I don't think you have an Army either Weil, unless we count Graham,
>Phillips, Yustabe and Middius.

The US Army was *my* Army.

>LOL!
>

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:34:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in danger
>>> (i.e., use mind-altering substances) for the sake of excitement and
>>> bravado.
>
>> I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
>> Krueger.
>
>I've never been drunk in any reasonable sense of the word.

>>For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
>> claim that I have used.
>
>Not really Weil, because you've been more unguarded about your use of
>mind-altering substances in the past.

Really? Prove it.

>Repeat after me Weil:
>
>I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
>
>I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
>
>I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription drugs.
>
>I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.
>

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:35:52 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We know that Weil does not know an ohm from
>>> a volt.
>>
>> I'm afraid that I do.
>>
>>> We know that Weil was incapable of completing a college education,
>>> probably because he was too involved with mind-altering substances
>>> at the time.
>>
>> This, of course, is a lie.
>
>Since it's not a definate (sic) statement it can't be a lie.

Sure it's a lie. There's no reasonable "probability" at all.

>That it's a lie is therefore in itself a lie.
>
>It could be incorrect, of course.

Well, there's *that* too. Knowing making an incorrect statement is
certainly a lie.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:37:50 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We do know that there are some acute problems with mental stability
>>> in Weil's family tree which Weil strangely enough brags about, first
>>> doing so I believe on a Christmas day.
>>
>> Here is the reference to the suicide of my father, Mr. Bass.
>
>You introduced it to this thread, Weil. You can't complain about me
>referring to topics that you yourself brought up in the very thread that you
>brought it up!

Nope. *You* brought it up. The fact that you admit the linkage is
proof of my original contention.

>> I hope that you reevaluate your opinoion of Mr. Krueger. You are
>> seeing him in full attack mode.
>
>Not hardly (sic) - this is all old news.

Yes, the fact that most of your posts on RAO are attack posts *is* old
news, to those of us on RAO.

>> This is what the group has had to put up with for years.
>
>Weil bites at me N times. After being pushed and pushed, I respond in a
>limited way once. This is of course a crime.

Now *this* is a crock.

[Lionel]

S888Wheel wrote:

[snip]

Sir,
In fact I think that you have done the good choice.
It is a very good idea to sue Mr. Krueger.
So please, now let your lawyer answers to Krueger attacks.

LOL !

[MiNE 109]

In article >,
dave weil > wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:58:12 +0100, The Devil > wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:52:36 GMT, MiNE 109 >
> >wrote:
> >
> >>> Have mercy, you abominable scrabble-eyed freak-nonce. You surely don't
> >>> hate me so much you wish I would read your posts, do you?
> >>
> >>Did you know restaurant food is indistinguishable from soggy white bread
> >>when you're 'likkered up'?
> >
> >Hell, if you can afford a bottle of wine before you hit Mickey D's,
> >and if you are indeed listening to an $89 MP3 player full of music you
> >edited together with Adobe Acrobat, you're doing very well for
> >yourself indeed.
>
> I'm sure that the wine was from a vintage week.

Twist a cap for me, Dev!

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:34:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in
>>>> danger (i.e., use mind-altering substances) for the sake of
>>>> excitement and bravado.
>>
>>> I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
>>> Krueger.
>>
>> I've never been drunk in any reasonable sense of the word.
>
>>> For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
>>> claim that I have used.
>>
>> Not really Weil, because you've been more unguarded about your use of
>> mind-altering substances in the past.

> Really? Prove it.

Thanks for again taking the deceptive way out, Weil.

>> Repeat after me Weil:
>>
>> I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
>>
>> I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
>>
>> I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription
>> drugs.
>>
>> I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.


Take this as tacit admission from Weil that he's done all of the above, no
doubt many times.

[Arny Krueger]

"Lionel" > wrote in message

> S888Wheel wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> Sir,
> In fact I think that you have done the good choice.
> It is a very good idea to sue Mr. Krueger.
> So please, now let your lawyer answers to Krueger attacks.
>
> LOL !

It would help me to. Most lawyers seem to be pretty literate, which would be
a big improvement over trying to correspond with sockpuppet Wheel.

Of course sockpuppet Wheel would have to find a lawyer who would risk his
career by taking on the purported lawsuit.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:56:15 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:34:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in
>>>>> danger (i.e., use mind-altering substances) for the sake of
>>>>> excitement and bravado.
>>>
>>>> I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
>>>> Krueger.
>>>
>>> I've never been drunk in any reasonable sense of the word.
>>
>>>> For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
>>>> claim that I have used.
>>>
>>> Not really Weil, because you've been more unguarded about your use of
>>> mind-altering substances in the past.
>
>> Really? Prove it.
>
>Thanks for again taking the deceptive way out, Weil.
>
>>> Repeat after me Weil:
>>>
>>> I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
>>>
>>> I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
>>>
>>> I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription
>>> drugs.
>>>
>>> I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.
>
>
>Take this as tacit admission from Weil that he's done all of the above, no
>doubt many times.

Nope. I'm not answering any of your questions until you can produce a
quote that shows me being "more unguarded" about my use of
mind-altering substances in the past (other than alcohol, of course).

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:15:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:02:56 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>
>>>> However, accepted wisdom in knowledgeable circles is that the
>>>> market for good small 2-ways is pretty full. Even if your time is
>>>> free, you can get better tunes for the money by picking a
>>>> modestly-priced, well-designed system from someone like NHT, BA,
>>>> Infinity, Paradigm, PSB, KEF, B&W, Tannoy, etc. I've followed my
>>>> own advice, personally lacking only examples from PSB, B&W and
>>>> Tannoy.

>>> Why you're collecting small 2-ways is beyond me.

>> This would be the sort of weirdness that we can expect from someone
>> who thinks that Klipsch Cornwalls are modern SOTA speakers.

<no response from Weil because he wants to deceive people that he's not
beating the same old dead horse?

>>> Of course, you've just dissed Buggtussel and claimed that people
>>> probably shouldn't buy their 2-way.

>> That would be a conclusion that exists in your own mind, Weil.

> It's your own conclusion.

Quote it. But of course there's nothing to quote because I never posted any
such conclusion. You're lying again, Weil. That or delusional or illiterate.

> Buggtussel's 2-way sells for $500 more than
> Trotsky's. Therefore, what you said about "modestly-priced, well
> designed systems" applies even *more* to Buggtussel.

It's not my conclusion no matter how you lie and posture, Weil.

>>> Why you want to bite the hand that feeds you is beyond me.

>> Who said that Buggtussel fed me?

> You did.

You're lying again, Weil. Or admitting that you are a functional illiterate,
delusional or something like that.

>They either fed you with cash or they fed your ego. You *did*
> say you did some work for them, right?

You're lying again, Weil. Learn to read and comprehend.

>> LOL!

>>> PS, I'm not a big fan of 2-ways. None of my main speakers are
>>> two-ways.

>> None of them (in their current state) are credible in most audiophile
>> circles, either.

> Sure they are.

I'm going to laugh so hard I may hurt something!

Klipsch Cornwalls are legacy speakers with only even sentimental value to a
small clique of audiophiles.

LOL!

[Lionel]

dave weil wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:56:15 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>>
>>>On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:34:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in
>>>>>>danger (i.e., use mind-altering substances) for the sake of
>>>>>>excitement and bravado.
>>>>
>>>>>I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
>>>>>Krueger.
>>>>
>>>>I've never been drunk in any reasonable sense of the word.
>>>
>>>>>For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
>>>>>claim that I have used.
>>>>
>>>>Not really Weil, because you've been more unguarded about your use of
>>>>mind-altering substances in the past.
>>
>>>Really? Prove it.
>>
>>Thanks for again taking the deceptive way out, Weil.
>>
>>
>>>>Repeat after me Weil:
>>>>
>>>>I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
>>>>
>>>>I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
>>>>
>>>>I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription
>>>>drugs.
>>>>
>>>>I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.
>>
>>
>>Take this as tacit admission from Weil that he's done all of the above, no
>>doubt many times.
>
>
> Nope. I'm not answering any of your questions until you can produce a
> quote that shows me being "more unguarded" about my use of
> mind-altering substances in the past (other than alcohol, of course).

Why to be ashamed of that ?
I have and I will take a lot of different substances in the past, now
and in the futur I guess.
....Sometime I just need to forget guys like Marc "Oily Target" Phillips.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:56:15 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:34:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in
>>>>>> danger (i.e., use mind-altering substances) for the sake of
>>>>>> excitement and bravado.
>>>>
>>>>> I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
>>>>> Krueger.
>>>>
>>>> I've never been drunk in any reasonable sense of the word.
>>>
>>>>> For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
>>>>> claim that I have used.
>>>>
>>>> Not really Weil, because you've been more unguarded about your use
>>>> of mind-altering substances in the past.
>>
>>> Really? Prove it.
>>
>> Thanks for again taking the deceptive way out, Weil.
>>
>>>> Repeat after me Weil:
>>>>
>>>> I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
>>>>
>>>> I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
>>>>
>>>> I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription
>>>> drugs.

>>>> I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.

>> Take this as tacit admission from Weil that he's done all of the
>> above, no doubt many times.

> Nope. I'm not answering any of your questions until you can produce a
> quote that shows me being "more unguarded" about my use of
> mind-altering substances in the past (other than alcohol, of course).

Lame, weak.

BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any speakers - and that
you're just lying?

[George M. Middius]

MiNE 109 said:

> Twist a cap for me, Dev!

Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:56:15 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:34:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:19:26 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We know that Weil the sort of idiot that would put himself in
>>>>>>> danger (i.e., use mind-altering substances) for the sake of
>>>>>>> excitement and bravado.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I take it that you claim to have never drunk alcohol either, Mr.
>>>>>> Krueger.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never been drunk in any reasonable sense of the word.
>>>>
>>>>>> For that is the only "mind-altering substance" that you can
>>>>>> claim that I have used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not really Weil, because you've been more unguarded about your use
>>>>> of mind-altering substances in the past.
>>>
>>>> Really? Prove it.
>>>
>>> Thanks for again taking the deceptive way out, Weil.
>>>
>>>>> Repeat after me Weil:
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription
>>>>> drugs.
>
>>>>> I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.
>
>>> Take this as tacit admission from Weil that he's done all of the
>>> above, no doubt many times.
>
>> Nope. I'm not answering any of your questions until you can produce a
>> quote that shows me being "more unguarded" about my use of
>> mind-altering substances in the past (other than alcohol, of course).
>
>Lame, weak.

I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any quotes
that support your claim.

Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your inquisition
anytime soon.

>BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any speakers - and that
>you're just lying?

No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be contentious?

BTW, not only did he send me speakers, he sent me stands under
separate cover. This will be covered in the eventual evaluation.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:31:14 -0400, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>
>
>MiNE 109 said:
>
>> Twist a cap for me, Dev!
>
>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.

Actually, this is quite true. Some good German wines are starting to
unashamably use them. Gunderloch is a good example of such a wine.

I don't think it's all that appropriate for age-worthy wines though,
because I'm not sure that hermetically sealing such wine helps in the
aging process. But it's perfect for most of the wines out there,
because they are meant to be drunk within a time frame of immediately
to 5 years.

[MiNE 109]

In article >,
Langis > wrote:

> The Devil > wrote:
>
> >>I'm sure that the wine was from a vintage week.
> >
> >Heck yes. £2.99 from Tesco. Only the best.
>
> Do they have Tesco in America?
>
> You can actually get some pretty good wines from supermarket chains
> (ie. supermarket branded) for not much more. That's what the expert
> wine critics say.

For barely drinkable commodity wine, it's hard to beat Charles Shaw aka
Two-buck Chuck from Trader Joe's.

Stephen

[George M. Middius]

MiNE 109 said:

> For barely drinkable commodity wine, it's hard to beat Charles Shaw aka
> Two-buck Chuck from Trader Joe's.

$3.29 on the East Coast.

[MiNE 109]

In article >,
Langis > wrote:

> MiNE 109 > wrote:
>
> >> >>I'm sure that the wine was from a vintage week.
> >> >
> >> >Heck yes. £2.99 from Tesco. Only the best.
> >>
> >> Do they have Tesco in America?
> >>
> >> You can actually get some pretty good wines from supermarket chains
> >> (ie. supermarket branded) for not much more. That's what the expert
> >> wine critics say.
> >
> >For barely drinkable commodity wine, it's hard to beat Charles Shaw aka
> >Two-buck Chuck from Trader Joe's.
>
> For a real saving on intoxicants, you might try methylated spirits, or
> coal filtered through milk.

Damn! I tried filtering milk through coal.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message


> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>

> I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any quotes
> that support your claim.

> Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your inquisition
> anytime soon.

>> BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any speakers -
>> and that you're just lying?

> No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be contentious?

No Weil, I just wanted to see you make youself into a liar by getting you
answer an inquisition of mine.

LOL!

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:11:17 +0100, Langis > wrote:

>dave weil > wrote:
>
>>>> Twist a cap for me, Dev!
>>>
>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>
>>Actually, this is quite true. Some good German wines are starting to
>>unashamably use them. Gunderloch is a good example of such a wine.
>>
>>I don't think it's all that appropriate for age-worthy wines though,
>>because I'm not sure that hermetically sealing such wine helps in the
>>aging process. But it's perfect for most of the wines out there,
>>because they are meant to be drunk within a time frame of immediately
>>to 5 years.
>
>How about 100+ year old wines that auction for tens or hundreds of
>thousands of dollars.. apparently they are invariably so oxidized,
>they taste like granny's armpits. Only for the most elite, obviously.

This isn't a true statement. They *aren't* invariably so oxidized that
they taste like granny's armpits. Many of them have long since dropped
their fruit though. I've never tasted a wine over about 40 years old,
so I'm only speaking from second-hand knowledge. That wine, a '61
Lafitte, was just fine, thankyouverymuch. I sure wish I had been able
to drink more than just the smallest taste. I have no doubt that with
proper storage, it would have lasted another 55 years.

On the other hand, just the other day I tasted a mid 70s wine whose
name escapes me that was completely dead and slightly skanky. I want
to say that it was Clos du Bois, but don't quote me. I wanted to
forget it as soon as I tasted it.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:18:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>
>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>
>> I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any quotes
>> that support your claim.
>
>> Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your inquisition
>> anytime soon.
>
>>> BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any speakers -
>>> and that you're just lying?
>
>> No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be contentious?
>
>No Weil, I just wanted to see you make youself into a liar by getting you
>answer an inquisition of mine.

That doesn't make me a liar. This had nothing to do with mind-altering
substances.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:18:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>
>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>
>>> I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any quotes
>>> that support your claim.
>>
>>> Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your inquisition
>>> anytime soon.
>>
>>>> BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any speakers -
>>>> and that you're just lying?
>>
>>> No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be contentious?
>>
>> No Weil, I just wanted to see you make youself into a liar by
>> getting you answer an inquisition of mine.
>
> That doesn't make me a liar. This had nothing to do with mind-altering
> substances.

Weil, thanks for reminding us that you've made up a bogus issue to avoid
answering some simple questions on this topic.

I knew all along you'd run away from this question. Frankly I don't know why
you don't hold true to form and just flat-out lie.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:34:24 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:18:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any quotes
>>>> that support your claim.
>>>
>>>> Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your inquisition
>>>> anytime soon.
>>>
>>>>> BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any speakers -
>>>>> and that you're just lying?
>>>
>>>> No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be contentious?
>>>
>>> No Weil, I just wanted to see you make youself into a liar by
>>> getting you answer an inquisition of mine.
>>
>> That doesn't make me a liar. This had nothing to do with mind-altering
>> substances.
>
>Weil, thanks for reminding us that you've made up a bogus issue to avoid
>answering some simple questions on this topic.
>
>I knew all along you'd run away from this question. Frankly I don't know why
>you don't hold true to form and just flat-out lie.

Until you provide credible evidence of your claim that I've been more
forthcoming in the past about the use of mind-altering substances, you
get no answers from me.

Google is waiting.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:34:24 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:18:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any
>>>>> quotes that support your claim.
>>>>
>>>>> Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your inquisition
>>>>> anytime soon.
>>>>
>>>>>> BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any speakers
>>>>>> - and that you're just lying?
>>>>
>>>>> No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be
>>>>> contentious?
>>>>
>>>> No Weil, I just wanted to see you make youself into a liar by
>>>> getting you answer an inquisition of mine.
>>>
>>> That doesn't make me a liar. This had nothing to do with
>>> mind-altering substances.
>>
>> Weil, thanks for reminding us that you've made up a bogus issue to
>> avoid answering some simple questions on this topic.

>> I knew all along you'd run away from this question. Frankly I don't
>> know why you don't hold true to form and just flat-out lie.

> Until you provide credible evidence of your claim that I've been more
> forthcoming in the past about the use of mind-altering substances, you
> get no answers from me.

Thanks again Weil for reciting the bogus issue that you made up to avoid
answering some simple questions.

As usual Weil, it's all my fault - your substance abuse, your military
record, your poor academics, the whole nine yards. You take no
responsibility at all.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:04:08 +0100, Langis > wrote:

>dave weil > wrote:
>
>>>How about 100+ year old wines that auction for tens or hundreds of
>>>thousands of dollars.. apparently they are invariably so oxidized,
>>>they taste like granny's armpits. Only for the most elite, obviously.
>>
>>This isn't a true statement. They *aren't* invariably so oxidized that
>>they taste like granny's armpits.
>
>Don't take my word for it Dave. This is what the auctioneer at
>Sotheby's claimed in a recent documentary about such wines. One of the
>few individuals on the planet who has tasted many of these extremely
>rare, prohibitively expensive brews.

What was the documentary? I'd be interested in trying to find that.

It's interesting that a current auctioneer at Sotheby's would be so
forthcoming.

BTW, does the auctioneer actually taste those wines? This isn't a
sarcastic question - I'm just wondering. For instance, it's clear that
they view up close the works of art that they auction. But does it
follow that they actually taste the wines that change hands as well?

[The Devil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:31:14 -0400, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>
>
>MiNE 109 said:
>
>> Twist a cap for me, Dev!
>
>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.

Polypropylene is the future.

--
td

[George M. Middius]

The Devil said:

> >Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>
> Polypropylene is the future.

I didn't know they could vinify that. Technology is wondrous.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:54:48 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:34:24 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:18:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any
>>>>>>> quotes that support your claim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your
>>>>>>> inquisition anytime soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any
>>>>>>>> speakers
>>>>>>>> - and that you're just lying?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be
>>>>>>> contentious?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No Weil, I just wanted to see you make youself into a liar by
>>>>>> getting you answer an inquisition of mine.
>>>>>
>>>>> That doesn't make me a liar. This had nothing to do with
>>>>> mind-altering substances.
>>>>
>>>> Weil, thanks for reminding us that you've made up a bogus issue to
>>>> avoid answering some simple questions on this topic.
>>
>>>> I knew all along you'd run away from this question. Frankly I don't
>>>> know why you don't hold true to form and just flat-out lie.
>>
>>> Until you provide credible evidence of your claim that I've been
>>> more forthcoming in the past about the use of mind-altering
>>> substances, you get no answers from me.
>>
>> Thanks again Weil for reciting the bogus issue that you made up to
>> avoid answering some simple questions.
>>
>> As usual Weil, it's all my fault - your substance abuse, your
>> military record, your poor academics, the whole nine yards. You take
>> no responsibility at all.
>>
> You made your claim the lynchpin of your "case" regarding the alleged
> use of mind-altering drugs and "substance abuse".

Thanks again Weil for reciting the bogus issue that you made up to
avoid answering some simple questions.

> And I can't help it if I was a non-commissioned officer and you were
> just plain enlisted.

I marched Corporals, PFCs and privates and other such lower ranking
individuals.

I told corporals when to serve guard and how.

Corporals asked me how high, after they were on their way up, when I told
them to jump.

GMAB!

BTW Weil, I see you're evading my question about your rank at separation, so
I won't bring that sore point up again...

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:49:22 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:54:48 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:34:24 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:18:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:16:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I see. This is the tacit admission that you can't produce any
>>>>>>>> quotes that support your claim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Therefore, you won't be getting any answers from your
>>>>>>>> inquisition anytime soon.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BTW Weil, is it true that Singh never even sent you any
>>>>>>>>> speakers
>>>>>>>>> - and that you're just lying?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No it's not true. Is it true that you just asked to be
>>>>>>>> contentious?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No Weil, I just wanted to see you make youself into a liar by
>>>>>>> getting you answer an inquisition of mine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That doesn't make me a liar. This had nothing to do with
>>>>>> mind-altering substances.
>>>>>
>>>>> Weil, thanks for reminding us that you've made up a bogus issue to
>>>>> avoid answering some simple questions on this topic.
>>>
>>>>> I knew all along you'd run away from this question. Frankly I don't
>>>>> know why you don't hold true to form and just flat-out lie.
>>>
>>>> Until you provide credible evidence of your claim that I've been
>>>> more forthcoming in the past about the use of mind-altering
>>>> substances, you get no answers from me.
>>>
>>> Thanks again Weil for reciting the bogus issue that you made up to
>>> avoid answering some simple questions.
>>>
>>> As usual Weil, it's all my fault - your substance abuse, your
>>> military record, your poor academics, the whole nine yards. You take
>>> no responsibility at all.
>>>
>> You made your claim the lynchpin of your "case" regarding the alleged
>> use of mind-altering drugs and "substance abuse".
>
>Thanks again Weil for reciting the bogus issue that you made up to
>avoid answering some simple questions.
>
>> And I can't help it if I was a non-commissioned officer and you were
>> just plain enlisted.
>
>I marched Corporals, PFCs and privates and other such lower ranking
>individuals.

You were still just an enlisted man all of your military career. Of
course, you weren't in a particularly manly MOS, were you?

>I told corporals when to serve guard and how.

And when I was the Duty Officer, I did the same for E-5s (we didn't
have any weeny spec fives in our units, they were all NCOs).
..
>Corporals asked me how high, after they were on their way up, when I told
>them to jump.

I'll bet. I doubt you *ever* had any reason to make *anyone* jump.

>GMAB!

Quite.

>BTW Weil, I see you're evading my question about your rank at separation, so
>I won't bring that sore point up again...

Were you asking? Where did you ask me about my rank at separation? If
you want to ask, simply ask and I'll tell you.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:59:26 +0100, Langis > wrote:

>dave weil > wrote:
>
>>>>>How about 100+ year old wines that auction for tens or hundreds of
>>>>>thousands of dollars.. apparently they are invariably so oxidized,
>>>>>they taste like granny's armpits. Only for the most elite, obviously.
>>>>
>>>>This isn't a true statement. They *aren't* invariably so oxidized that
>>>>they taste like granny's armpits.
>>>
>>>Don't take my word for it Dave. This is what the auctioneer at
>>>Sotheby's claimed in a recent documentary about such wines. One of the
>>>few individuals on the planet who has tasted many of these extremely
>>>rare, prohibitively expensive brews.
>>
>>What was the documentary? I'd be interested in trying to find that.
>
>The series was called "The Highest Bidder" and ran on BBC2.
>
>>It's interesting that a current auctioneer at Sotheby's would be so
>>forthcoming.
>
>Did I say Sotheby's?? Christie's.
>
>He also said that many of these ultra-expensive wines aren't really
>drinkable, in any normal sense.
>
>>BTW, does the auctioneer actually taste those wines?
>
>No, I lied!
>
>Hahaha. Seriously though, Mr Broadbent's profile is here:
>
>http://www.christies.com/departments/specialists.asp?DID=61

Michael Broadbent said those things? That surprises me.
>
>Some comments on the documentary here :
>
>http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/comment/0,7493,1014618,00.html

I'll check it out, as well as Broadbent's profile. And I'll start
watching BBC2 and see if I can catch the docu.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:59:26 +0100, Langis > wrote:

>dave weil > wrote:
>
>>>>>How about 100+ year old wines that auction for tens or hundreds of
>>>>>thousands of dollars.. apparently they are invariably so oxidized,
>>>>>they taste like granny's armpits. Only for the most elite, obviously.
>>>>
>>>>This isn't a true statement. They *aren't* invariably so oxidized that
>>>>they taste like granny's armpits.
>>>
>>>Don't take my word for it Dave. This is what the auctioneer at
>>>Sotheby's claimed in a recent documentary about such wines. One of the
>>>few individuals on the planet who has tasted many of these extremely
>>>rare, prohibitively expensive brews.
>>
>>What was the documentary? I'd be interested in trying to find that.
>
>The series was called "The Highest Bidder" and ran on BBC2.
>
>>It's interesting that a current auctioneer at Sotheby's would be so
>>forthcoming.
>
>Did I say Sotheby's?? Christie's.
>
>He also said that many of these ultra-expensive wines aren't really
>drinkable, in any normal sense.
>
>>BTW, does the auctioneer actually taste those wines?
>
>No, I lied!
>
>Hahaha. Seriously though, Mr Broadbent's profile is here:
>
>http://www.christies.com/departments/specialists.asp?DID=61
>
>Some comments on the documentary here :
>
>http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/comment/0,7493,1014618,00.html

I just went to the site but there's nothing about Broadbent saying
what you said. This doesn't mean that he didn't say it in the
documentary of course.

Michael Broadbent is pretty unimpeachable when it comes to wine, so I
would certainly take him as an expert.

You know what I'm quibbling about of course, right? It's a single word
in your initial comment.

This should be an interesting documentary. I knew a guy in Memphis who
set the single bottle record for wine back in the 70s (it's been far
surpassed since then obviously). His name was John Grisanti. It was a
double magnum of Lafitte from the late 1800s. He paid $18,000 for it.
This has of course been far surpassed. By the way, when it was opened,
it was $18,000 vinegar. But it did raise a bunch of money for charity.

Here was a funny quote that I found that sort of backs up your
comments:

"Broadbent recalls occasional showstopping moments, like when André
Tchelistcheff, the doyen of Napa Valley winemakers, decanted a bottle
of Château Lafite 1899 before a hushed crowd. Not realizing his
microphone was connected, he blurted out his now infamous assessment:
"Appreciating an old wine is like making love to an old lady; it is
possible ... but requires a bit of imagination." Risqué for 1971".

[Joseph Oberlander]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> However, accepted wisdom in knowledgeable circles is that the market for
> good small 2-ways is pretty full.

I did ask him this question - why not build a 3-way bookshelf? Something
like the Athena S3. I know of very few bookshelf-sized 3-way speakers,
yet the Athena sounds very very good. Pricey, but excellent. It even
bettered Tannoy's MX and Revolution series bookshelf speakers.

But most of all, it would give him a real marketing claim to being
different.

My guess is that designing a proper 3-way speaker is beyond his ken.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:29:00 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 04:56:20 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>They are
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>different than 99% of all speakers made.
>>>>
>>>I could drill four ports in a box and put a stobe light on top
>>>of it and make the exact same claim. Your point?
>>
>>
>> My point continues later by me saying that the important thing was
>> whether or not it mattered. In *your* case, it *would* matter in that
>> your speaker wouldn't compare sonically, nor would it reproduce sound.
>
>Neither does Trotsky's cheapass designs.

I'm afraid you're wrong.

Still no idea whether you actually got the point or not...

[Lionel]

George M. Middius wrote:
>
> MiNE 109 said:
>
>
>>Twist a cap for me, Dev!
>
>
> Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>
>
He said that because he thinks he has definitively solve his
incontinence problem !

Yo ! Georgetta, Yo !

[George M. Middius]

dave weil said:

> >Opening a screwcap vs. pulling a cork? Even Krooger can figure out
> >which of those is easier.
>
> Wait until you're standing tableside and you try to open a screwcap
> with a corkscrew. Not fun. <chuckle>

Krooger will use this as an admission that you report to work while
high on something or other.

[Lionel]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> dave weil said:
>
>
>>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>
>>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>
>>However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>>for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>>the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>>and science.
>
>
> Opening a screwcap vs. pulling a cork? Even Krooger can figure out
> which of those is easier.
>
>
Ho George,
You should come here I will show you what is really easier.
....If you can !

[dave weil]

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:04:21 -0400, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>
>
>dave weil said:
>
>> >Opening a screwcap vs. pulling a cork? Even Krooger can figure out
>> >which of those is easier.
>>
>> Wait until you're standing tableside and you try to open a screwcap
>> with a corkscrew. Not fun. <chuckle>
>
>Krooger will use this as an admission that you report to work while
>high on something or other.

Probably.

[George M. Middius]

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

> > I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
> >
> > I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
> >
> > I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription drugs.
> >
> > I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.
> >
>
> Yeah, but you kept kiddie porn on your pc for three years.
> You said so yourself.

Or, more likely in my view, the pornographic vignettes burbled out of
Mr. ****'s filthy subconscious.

[George M. Middius]

Obie-Wanna Seal of Approval said:

> > Obi Wanna-Crossover LOt"S! said:

> >>My guess is that designing a proper 3-way speaker is beyond his ken.

> > The more crossovers, the greater the chance they'll be audible. Didn't
> > you learn anything in Audio 101?

> Heh. I know this and you know this, but he honestly needs SOMETHING
> to make his designs marketable other than that butt-ugly tweeter.

"Recommended by the Hive -- LOt"S!"

Would that do it for you?

[Lionel]

Langis wrote:

> dave weil > wrote:
>
>
>>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>
>>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>
>>However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>>for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>>the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>>and science.
>
>
> Picking up a Miele washer tomorrow -- Incredible German engineering!
> Last forever! Unfortunately, a pragmatic approach, at the expense of
> aesthetics. Cold, hard, clinical.. yep it's German.
>
>
> --
> S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

....but not fair for a good wine !
Nobody's perfect !

[Lionel]

dave weil wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:01:03 +0100, Langis > wrote:
>
>
>>George M. Middius > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>
>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>
>
> However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
> for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
> the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
> and science.

Dave,
Germans are definitively beer drinkers.
Screwcaps just apply for beer in other to avoid CO2 escape.
Wine is really something else !

[Lionel]

Lionel wrote:

> dave weil wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:01:03 +0100, Langis > wrote:
>>
>>
>>> George M. Middius > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>
>>>
>>> If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>
>>
>>
>> However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>> for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>> the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>> and science.
>
>
> Dave,
> Germans are definitively beer drinkers.
> Screwcaps just apply for beer in other to avoid CO2 escape.
> Wine is really something else !
>

Screwcaps just apply for beer in "order" to avoid CO2 escape.
Wine is really something else !

I know... it was already done !

[Lionel]

Langis wrote:

> Lionel > wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>>>
>>>>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>>>
>>>>However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>>>>for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>>>>the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>>>>and science.
>>>
>>>
>>>Picking up a Miele washer tomorrow -- Incredible German engineering!
>>>Last forever! Unfortunately, a pragmatic approach, at the expense of
>>>aesthetics. Cold, hard, clinical.. yep it's German.
>>
>>...but not fair for a good wine !
>
>
> Whatever that means!
>
>
>>Nobody's perfect !
>
>
> Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
>
>
> --
> S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t
If you're already asleep I guess that you are a pure tea-drinker.
:-)

[Lionel]

Langis wrote:

> Lionel > wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>>>>>>for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>>>>>>the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>>>>>>and science.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Picking up a Miele washer tomorrow -- Incredible German engineering!
>>>>>Last forever! Unfortunately, a pragmatic approach, at the expense of
>>>>>aesthetics. Cold, hard, clinical.. yep it's German.
>>>>
>>>>...but not fair for a good wine !
>>>
>>>
>>>Whatever that means!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Nobody's perfect !
>>>
>>>
>>>Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
>>>
>>
>>If you're already asleep I guess that you are a pure tea-drinker.
>> :-)
>
>
> I do try to keep my beverages distinct.
>
>
> --
> S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

"Chassez le naturel il revient au galop"

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Sockpuppet Yustabe said:
>
> > > I've never been drunk or inebriated in any way.
> > >
> > > I've never knowingly consumed any illegal substance.
> > >
> > > I've only used legal amounts of patent medicines and prescription
drugs.
> > >
> > > I've never been prescribed any psychoactive substances.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, but you kept kiddie porn on your pc for three years.
> > You said so yourself.
>
> Or, more likely in my view, the pornographic vignettes burbled out of
> Mr. ****'s filthy subconscious.
>
>

I agree. He made the whole thiong up
There never was any kiddie porn
It just another Arny big lie




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[trotsky]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> trotsky said:
>
>
> >>How are the world-class language skills coming, Gregipus?
>
>
>
> >I misplaced an apostrophe? The horror! Still, I point out others' (see
> >that!) typographical errors, so it's only reasonable that you would do
> >likewise.
>
>
> Is this the long-awaited beginning of a dawning self-awareness?



You first! I've noticed you haven't given us much of a summary on the
efficacy of your borg campaign.

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
> >George M. Middius wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Obie-Wanna Bookkeeper said:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>It just occurred to me.
> >>>
> >>>With the huge amount of time trotsky spends replying to flamewars
> >>>and spouting off his micro-angst-fests...
> >>>
> >>>Shouldn't he be running his company instead?
> >>
> >>
> >>You'll know when he gets his first order -- he'll vanish from Usenet
> >>for a couple days.
> >>
> >
> >Actually, I'm slated to vanish today--I'm going to Indy tomorrow to
> >watch the F1 practice. I do have a sub I'm already in the process of
> >building, if that's any help.
> >
>
> Indy is not a good place for Roadkill to hang around.
> They might paint a stripe on his ass.
>


Don't you have any hobbies, Bob?

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> > Is this the long-awaited beginning of a dawning self-awareness?

> You first! I've noticed you haven't given us much of a summary on the
> efficacy of your borg campaign.

My "borg campaign" is a figment of your imagination. Perhaps you're
referring, in your clumsy, world-class way, to my erstwhile manner
of referring to Krooger and his abettors as Audio 'Borgs, and making
up stories about the Hive, Dr. Kroomacher (your favorite), implants,
etc.

At this point, you should be able to let go of the 'borg metaphor.
It ran its course. Krooger has been thoroughly discredited as a
ridiculous (albeit hugely obnoxious) clown, with all kinds of mental
problems. There is no longer any need to use the conceit of
assimilation-minded Audio 'Borgs. Furthermore, the lesser 'borgs
have pretty much given up the fight. I take partial credit for the
cleansing of this corner of Usenet.

Your other point, about the "best" way to chase Krooger off of RAO,
is quite silly. Krooger will leave when he chooses to, or when he's
forced to. Nobody can humiliate him deeply enough so that he'll be
ashamed to post here. It's just not possible. If you doubt this,
consider all the punishment he's absorbed from Real Audio Guys. If
Mr. **** had the tiniest amount of self-esteem, he would make some
kind of effort to prove he's not totally full of ****. But the truth
is that he expects the abuse, and I believe he needs it. He can't
face the truth about what he is.

So you can keep pricking him about the Christian issue. At best,
you'll get a rise out of him like Rev. Adams did a few times. But
you'll never influence him to leave RAO. Never.

[trotsky]

Michael Mckelvy wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
> >Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net
> >>
> >>
> >>>Arny Krueger wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>"trotsky" wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>That's a lie, Singh. Morien and I have been discussing the mockery
> >>>>you've made out of atheism because you have no discernable ethics.
> >>>>Do you want to play, or sit this one out?
> >>
> >>
> >>>Morion already shot his wad and said that everything he's said about
> >>>me isn't based on reasoning, just dislike.
> >>
> >>
> >>Prove it.
> >
> >
> >
> >You're starting to sound like a broken DAW here, Arny.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>You used to claim you
> >>>were a reasonable person, Krueger--what happened?
> >>
> >>
> >>I still am a very reasonable, easy-going person. Remember, I sleep with
> >>bears in the figurative sense, and live to tell the tale.
> >
> >
> >
> >I think I've reduced you to a pile of nonsense.
> >
> >
>
> That would mean you reduced him to your level.
>
>
> >>>Simply put, do you no longer consider yourself a Christian?
> >>
> >>
> >>I'm too much of a skeptic to not be Christian.
> >>
>
> You seem to be equally skeptical of ethical behavior, welcher.



Hey Mickey--do you suppose it was a "welcher" that came up with Welch's
Grape Jelly? Just curious.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
>
>
> >It just occurred to me.
> >
> >With the huge amount of time trotsky spends replying to flamewars
> >and spouting off his micro-angst-fests...
> >
> >Shouldn't he be running his company instead?
>
>
> Obviously, he has no business to run.



Now *that's* irony.

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:02:56 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> wrote:
>
>
> >However, accepted wisdom in knowledgeable circles is that the market for
> >good small 2-ways is pretty full. Even if your time is free, you can get
> >better tunes for the money by picking a modestly-priced, well-designed
> >system from someone like NHT, BA, Infinity, Paradigm, PSB, KEF, B&W,
> Tannoy,
> >etc. I've followed my own advice, personally lacking only examples
> from PSB,
> >B&W and Tannoy.
>
>
> Why you're collecting small 2-ways is beyond me.
>


That's another reference to his pedophilia, isn't it.

[trotsky]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "trotsky" wrote in message
> nk.net
>
> >Bob Morein wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"George M. Middius" wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >>
> >>>Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>They will always choose name-brand
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I don't think you can say this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.
> >>>>
> >>>>You can say that, but it won't make it false either.
> >>>
> >>>Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave
> >>>is right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%.
> >>>Probability Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist
> >>terms. Human behavior always incorporates a random element.
> >>The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
> >>speaker.
> >>Particularly if it's sold out of the back of a white van ;).
> >>But seriously, you are correct in assuming that all possible
> >>variations of choice exist.
> >>
> >>If Trotsky's success is measured in selling a mere 25 units a year,
>
>
> >What do you mean "mere", Bob? That would outgross Mr. Krueger by a
> >comfortable margin. It's almost like you're calling Arny a loser
> >here.
>
>
> 25 units would be 12.5 pairs selling for $16,875.00 at current pricing.
>
> Singh is clearly speaking from ignorance, here.
>
> What's new?



I wanted to see how non-Christian your response would be, and you took
the bait, fishie.

[dave weil]

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:14:05 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:01:03 +0100, Langis > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>George M. Middius > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>
>>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>
>>
>> However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>> for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>> the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>> and science.
>
>Dave,
>Germans are definitively beer drinkers.

They also grow a few grapes you know.

>Screwcaps just apply for beer in other to avoid CO2 escape.
>Wine is really something else !

Actually, you're wrong. But what's new?

[Joseph Oberlander]

trotsky wrote:

>> 25 units would be 12.5 pairs selling for $16,875.00 at current pricing.
>>
>> Singh is clearly speaking from ignorance, here.
>>
>> What's new?

Dang. I'm in the wrong business.

Given his prices, that's a couple thousand dollars outlay for almost 15K
profit.

Considering that I or half of the people on this group could build a
better speaker for the same money(and likely keep the same profit
margins...)

[dave weil]

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:57:34 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:14:05 +0200, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>dave weil wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:01:03 +0100, Langis > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>George M. Middius > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>>>
>>>>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>>>>for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>>>>the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>>>>and science.
>>>
>>>Dave,
>>>Germans are definitively beer drinkers.
>>
>>
>> They also grow a few grapes you know.
>>
>>
>>>Screwcaps just apply for beer in other to avoid CO2 escape.
>>>Wine is really something else !
>>
>>
>> Actually, you're wrong. But what's new?
>
>
>This is just a language coquetry, I forgive that.
>You know Dave wine testing is really harder than audio testing.
>I am not sure you could be a good audio tester I let you imagine what I
>think about your potential to be a wine tester !

Since I sell about $50,000 worth of wine a year, I'll let the results
speak for itself.

[Lionel]

dave weil wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:57:34 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:14:05 +0200, Lionel >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>dave weil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:01:03 +0100, Langis > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>George M. Middius > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Screwcaps are the future of fine wine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If anybody thinks caps are cheap, note that corks are cheaper!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>However, the supply of corks is not assured. This is the main reason
>>>>>for the gradual switchover to screwcaps and composite corks, although
>>>>>the Germans are probably employing their typical adherance to logic
>>>>>and science.
>>>>
>>>>Dave,
>>>>Germans are definitively beer drinkers.
>>>
>>>
>>>They also grow a few grapes you know.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Screwcaps just apply for beer in other to avoid CO2 escape.
>>>>Wine is really something else !
>>>
>>>
>>>Actually, you're wrong. But what's new?
>>
>>
>>This is just a language coquetry, I forgive that.
>>You know Dave wine testing is really harder than audio testing.
>>I am not sure you could be a good audio tester I let you imagine what I
>>think about your potential to be a wine tester !
>
>
> Since I sell about $50,000 worth of wine a year, I'll let the results
> speak for itself.


This is only what could give you a kind of "credibility" for your
American fellow... ;-)
Based on a gross margin of 75% - 80% which is common in restaurants it's
not a lot of bottles.
For expample my neighbor is wine reseller he use to sell about 50 to
70,000 liters per year. Believe me or not, it's my friend but he is not
a good wine tester and he knows that... A cultural problem I suppose.