View Full Version : Time for the anti-ABXers to admit the Truth
You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just keep
quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel cel
driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your old Edsel
cold fusion amp.
Clyde Slick
October 7th 05, 12:34 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>
> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just keep
> quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel cel
> driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your old
> Edsel cold fusion amp.
>
Because it may be the case.
And you don't know that iis is not.
dn
October 7th 05, 02:32 PM
Clyde Slick wrote:
> " > wrote in message=20
> link.net...
>=20
>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting ever=
y=20
>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>
>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just k=
eep=20
>>quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel cel=
=20
>>driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your old =
>>Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>
>=20
> Because it may be the case.
> And you don't know that iis is not.=20
Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of years=20
ago...
Plus =E7a change...
Robert Morein
October 7th 05, 07:46 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
> You can't debunk ABX,
Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses inferior
ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> branch of audio research,
Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi phonemes.
>and you can't claim it masks differences.
Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it masks
differences.
See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend we
didn't do it?
Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
And we reply,
Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it masks
differences.
BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
For your own benefit, Mikey, learn a little bit about the English language.
It's not a eraser that removes the claims of others.
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>
>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>> keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel
>> cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your
>> old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>
> Because it may be the case.
> And you don't know that iis is not.
I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much different than
another.
I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it is you
who must present the evidence.
If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
"dn" > wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>
>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just keep
>>quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel cel
>>driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your old
>>Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>
>
> Because it may be the case.
> And you don't know that iis is not.
Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of years
ago...
Plus ça change...
Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
you got nothin to lose."
George M. Middius
October 7th 05, 11:28 PM
Robert Morein said:
> >and you can't claim [the aBxism torture protocol] masks differences.
> Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it masks
> differences.
>
> See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend we
> didn't do it?
I think Mickey meant we can't make him admit it.
> For your own benefit, Mikey, learn a little bit about the English language.
> It's not a eraser that removes the claims of others.
Mickey's tabula is permanently rasa.
Clyde Slick
October 7th 05, 11:57 PM
"dn" > wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick wrote:
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>
>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just keep
>>quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel cel
>>driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your old
>>Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>
>
> Because it may be the case.
> And you don't know that iis is not.
Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of years
ago...
Plus ça change...
"There are things you know you don't know and there are things you don't
know
you don't know" (Don Rumsfeld).
You should strive to understand and accept that there are things you do not
know,
rather to not know there are things you don't now.
Clyde Slick
October 7th 05, 11:59 PM
" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>> branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>>
>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>>> keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel
>>> cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your
>>> old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>
>> Because it may be the case.
>> And you don't know that iis is not.
> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much different
> than another.
> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it is
> you who must present the evidence.
>
> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>
you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
Either way.
Clyde Slick
October 8th 05, 12:00 AM
" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "dn" > wrote in message
> ...
> Clyde Slick wrote:
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>
>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>>
>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel
>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your
>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>
>>
>> Because it may be the case.
>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>
> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of years
> ago...
>
> Plus ça change...
>
> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
> you got nothin to lose."
Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
know what you're missing.
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "dn" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> Clyde Slick wrote:
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>
>>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>>>
>>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa fuel
>>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your
>>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because it may be the case.
>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>
>> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of years
>> ago...
>>
>> Plus ça change...
>>
>> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
>> you got nothin to lose."
>
> Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
> know what you're missing.
Irony?
Robert Morein
October 8th 05, 12:16 AM
"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Robert Morein said:
>
> > >and you can't claim [the aBxism torture protocol] masks differences.
>
> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
masks
> > differences.
> >
> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend we
> > didn't do it?
>
> I think Mickey meant we can't make him admit it.
>
> > For your own benefit, Mikey, learn a little bit about the English
language.
> > It's not a eraser that removes the claims of others.
>
> Mickey's tabula is permanently rasa.
>
His entire view of the world resides on a collection of Polaroids?
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>>>> differences.
>>>>
>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>>>> keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa
>>>> fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to
>>>> your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>
>>> Because it may be the case.
>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much different
>> than another.
>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it is
>> you who must present the evidence.
>>
>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>
>
> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
> Either way.
Once again you confirm your idiocy.
If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded different it
would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there would be some
demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>> You can't debunk ABX,
>
> Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses inferior
> ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> branch of audio research,
> Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi phonemes.
>>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>
> Here your thinking is clearly confused.
Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're forging
again.
We can, and we do, claim it masks
> differences.
>
But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing but
unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
> See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend we
> didn't do it?
>
No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
> And we reply,
> Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it masks
> differences.
> BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>
You can claim the moon is made from green chees too, but it won't make sound
any smarter. The word that was left out and which people of normal
intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can legitmately
claim that ABX masks differences.
> For your own benefit, Mikey, learn a little bit about the English
> language.
> It's not a eraser that removes the claims of others.
>
No, but claims have to have some reliable evidence and not just an endless
series of whines form those who don't like to face facts.
Clyde Slick
October 8th 05, 12:33 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> ink.net...
>>>
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>> link.net...
>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>>>>> differences.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>>>>> keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa
>>>>> fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to
>>>>> your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>
>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much different
>>> than another.
>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it is
>>> you who must present the evidence.
>>>
>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>
>>
>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>> Either way.
> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>
> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded different
> it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there would be some
> demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> ink.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>>>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>>>>>> differences.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>>>>>> keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa
>>>>>> fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared
>>>>>> to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much different
>>>> than another.
>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it
>>>> is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>
>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>> Either way.
>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>
>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded different
>> it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there would be some
>> demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>
> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>
Really? Your evidence of this is what?
Robert Morein
October 8th 05, 12:57 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >
> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses inferior
> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> branch of audio research,
> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi phonemes.
> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >
> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>
> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're forging
> again.
>
> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> > differences.
> >
>
> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing but
> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>
> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend we
> > didn't do it?
> >
> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>
> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
> > And we reply,
> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
masks
> > differences.
> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >
>
I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but it
won't make sound any smarter"
>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can legitmately
> claim that ABX masks differences.
>
Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents. That's a
dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions. It is not for you, a
near illiterate, to challenge our right.
ABX masks differences.
Robert Morein
October 8th 05, 12:58 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>> " > wrote in message
> >>> ink.net...
> >>>>
> >>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>> link.net...
> >>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
> >>>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
> >>>>>> differences.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
Just
> >>>>>> keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa
> >>>>>> fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared
> >>>>>> to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Because it may be the case.
> >>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
> >>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
different
> >>>> than another.
> >>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it
> >>>> is you who must present the evidence.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
> >>> Either way.
> >> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
> >>
> >> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
different
> >> it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there would be some
> >> demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
> >
> > evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
> >
> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>
Bad choice of relays, Mikey. Ruthenium has 27.6 times the resistance of
silver. Arny did a very bad thing.
Clyde Slick
October 8th 05, 01:15 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>>
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>>>>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>>>>>>> differences.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>>>>>>> Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is
>>>>>>> compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much different
>>>>> than another.
>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it
>>>>> is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>> Either way.
>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>
>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded different
>>> it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there would be some
>>> demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>
>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>
> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
you currently use.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >>>
>> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >>> ink.net...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>> ...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>>> link.net...
>> >>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>> >>>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>> >>>>>> differences.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
> Just
>> >>>>>> keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>> >>>>>> Lirpa
>> >>>>>> fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is
>> >>>>>> compared
>> >>>>>> to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Because it may be the case.
>> >>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>> >>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
> different
>> >>>> than another.
>> >>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true,
>> >>>> it
>> >>>> is you who must present the evidence.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>> >>> Either way.
>> >> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>> >>
>> >> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
> different
>> >> it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there would be some
>> >> demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>> >
>> > evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>> >
>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>
> Bad choice of relays, Mikey. Ruthenium has 27.6 times the resistance of
> silver. Arny did a very bad thing.
>
Your argument has already been debunked.
IIRC that was not the final design.
None of which matter if it doesn't make an audible difference.
Thanks for showing you still have nothing.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >
>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses inferior
>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> branch of audio research,
>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi phonemes.
>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >
>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>>
>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're forging
>> again.
>>
>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> > differences.
>> >
>>
>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing
>> but
>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>>
>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend
>> > we
>> > didn't do it?
>> >
>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>>
>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
>> > And we reply,
>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
> masks
>> > differences.
>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >
>>
> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but it
> won't make sound any smarter"
>
>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can legitmately
>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>>
> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water, they
are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science reveals.
That's a
> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's the
tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of that
claim.
It is not for you, a
> near illiterate, to challenge our right.
> ABX masks differences.
>
Then prove it.
Robert Morein
October 8th 05, 03:33 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >
> >> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
inferior
> >> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
> >> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> branch of audio research,
> >> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
phonemes.
> >> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >
> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >>
> >> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
forging
> >> again.
> >>
> >> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> > differences.
> >> >
> >>
> >> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing
> >> but
> >> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
> >> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
> >>
> >> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend
> >> > we
> >> > didn't do it?
> >> >
> >> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >>
> >> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
> >> > And we reply,
> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
> > masks
> >> > differences.
> >> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >
> >>
> > I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but it
> > won't make sound any smarter"
> >
> >>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can legitmately
> >> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >>
> > Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>
> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water,
they
> are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science reveals.
>
> That's a
> > dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>
> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's the
> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>
> > We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>
> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of that
> claim.
>
> It is not for you, a
> > near illiterate, to challenge our right.
> > ABX masks differences.
> >
> Then prove it.
>
No need to. It contradicts the experience of a vast number of audiophiles.
The burden is on you, if you wish to impose new rules and obligations.
Clyde Slick
October 8th 05, 03:55 AM
" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
> None of which matter if it doesn't make an audible difference.
>
your talking out of your ass by making assumptions
you know nothing about.
Clyde Slick
October 8th 05, 03:56 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>>
>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> >
>>> > " > wrote in message
>>> > link.net...
>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>>> >
>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses inferior
>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>> >> branch of audio research,
>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
>>> > phonemes.
>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>> >
>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>>>
>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
>>> forging
>>> again.
>>>
>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>>> > differences.
>>> >
>>>
>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing
>>> but
>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>>>
>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend
>>> > we
>>> > didn't do it?
>>> >
>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>>>
>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
>>> > And we reply,
>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
>> masks
>>> > differences.
>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>>> >
>>>
>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but it
>> won't make sound any smarter"
>>
>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can legitmately
>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>>>
>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>
> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water,
> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
> reveals.
>
> That's a
>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>
> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's the
> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>
>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>
> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of that
> claim.
>
Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
preferences and choices.
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
>>
>
>> None of which matter if it doesn't make an audible difference.
>>
>
> your talking out of your ass by making assumptions
> you know nothing about.
>
Ooooh, wrong again, but thanks for playing.
Robert Morein
October 8th 05, 02:26 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > hlink.net...
> >>
> >
> >> None of which matter if it doesn't make an audible difference.
> >>
> >
> > your talking out of your ass by making assumptions
> > you know nothing about.
> >
> Ooooh, wrong again, but thanks for playing.
>
But that's the way it looks from the Polaroids...
Robert Morein
October 8th 05, 10:56 PM
" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "dn" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> Clyde Slick wrote:
> >>> " > wrote in message
> >>> link.net...
> >>>
> >>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
every
> >>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >>>>
> >>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
> >>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa
fuel
> >>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to your
> >>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Because it may be the case.
> >>> And you don't know that iis is not.
> >>
> >> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of years
> >> ago...
> >>
> >> Plus ça change...
> >>
> >> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
> >> you got nothin to lose."
> >
> > Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
> > know what you're missing.
> Irony?
>
Mikey's limited brain capacity puts most of the world permanently out of
reach.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > ink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "dn" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> Clyde Slick wrote:
>> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >>> link.net...
>> >>>
>> >>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
> every
>> >>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you. Just
>> >>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa
> fuel
>> >>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to
>> >>>>your
>> >>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Because it may be the case.
>> >>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>> >>
>> >> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of years
>> >> ago...
>> >>
>> >> Plus ça change...
>> >>
>> >> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
>> >> you got nothin to lose."
>> >
>> > Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
>> > know what you're missing.
>> Irony?
>>
> Mikey's limited brain capacity puts most of the world permanently out of
> reach.
>
Only from Morin world, which is a lonely place that I have no wish to visit.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > hlink.net...
>> >>
>> >
>> >> None of which matter if it doesn't make an audible difference.
>> >>
>> >
>> > your talking out of your ass by making assumptions
>> > you know nothing about.
>> >
>> Ooooh, wrong again, but thanks for playing.
>>
> But that's the way it looks from the Polaroids...
>
You've obviously been taking self portraits again.
Poor confused little dweeb that you are. Sigh.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >
>> >> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
> inferior
>> >> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>> >> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
> phonemes.
>> >> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >
>> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >>
>> >> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
> forging
>> >> again.
>> >>
>> >> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> > differences.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing
>> >> but
>> >> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
>> >> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>> >>
>> >> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
>> >> > Pretend
>> >> > we
>> >> > didn't do it?
>> >> >
>> >> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >>
>> >> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
>> >> > And we reply,
>> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
>> > masks
>> >> > differences.
>> >> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> > I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but
>> > it
>> > won't make sound any smarter"
>> >
>> >>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
>> >> legitmately
>> >> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >>
>> > Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>>
>> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water,
> they
>> are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science reveals.
>>
>> That's a
>> > dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>>
>> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's the
>> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>>
>> > We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>>
>> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
>> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of that
>> claim.
>>
>> It is not for you, a
>> > near illiterate, to challenge our right.
>> > ABX masks differences.
>> >
>> Then prove it.
>>
> No need to.
Bad science alert.
It contradicts the experience of a vast number of audiophiles.
Thank you for the Flat Earth Society viewpoint.
> The burden is on you, if you wish to impose new rules and obligations.
>
The burden is met, the entirety of those doing audio research ,use and rely
on ABX or some variant all the time.
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>> >
>>>> > " > wrote in message
>>>> > link.net...
>>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>>>> >
>>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
>>>> > inferior
>>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>>> >> branch of audio research,
>>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
>>>> > phonemes.
>>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>>> >
>>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>>>>
>>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
>>>> forging
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>>>> > differences.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing
>>>> but
>>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
>>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>>>>
>>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it? Pretend
>>>> > we
>>>> > didn't do it?
>>>> >
>>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>>>>
>>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
>>>> > And we reply,
>>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
>>> masks
>>>> > differences.
>>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but it
>>> won't make sound any smarter"
>>>
>>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can legitmately
>>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>>>>
>>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>>
>> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water,
>> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
>> reveals.
>>
>> That's a
>>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>>
>> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's the
>> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>>
>>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>>
>> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
>> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of that
>> claim.
>>
>
> Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
> preferences and choices.
It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a sonic
preference.
Clyde Slick
October 8th 05, 11:21 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>>
>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>> link.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > " > wrote in message
>>>>> > link.net...
>>>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
>>>>> > inferior
>>>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>>>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>>>>> >> branch of audio research,
>>>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
>>>>> > phonemes.
>>>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
>>>>> forging
>>>>> again.
>>>>>
>>>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>>>>> > differences.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science, nothing
>>>>> but
>>>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
>>>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>>>>>
>>>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
>>>>> > Pretend we
>>>>> > didn't do it?
>>>>> >
>>>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>>>>>
>>>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
>>>>> > And we reply,
>>>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
>>>> masks
>>>>> > differences.
>>>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but
>>>> it
>>>> won't make sound any smarter"
>>>>
>>>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>>>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
>>>>> legitmately
>>>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>>>>>
>>>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>>>
>>> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water,
>>> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
>>> reveals.
>>>
>>> That's a
>>>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>>>
>>> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's
>>> the tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>>>
>>>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>>>
>>> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
>>> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of that
>>> claim.
>>>
>>
>> Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
>> preferences and choices.
> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a sonic
> preference.
And useless for consumers
Robert Morein
October 9th 05, 12:08 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> >>
> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > ink.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "dn" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> Clyde Slick wrote:
> >> >>> " > wrote in message
> >> >>> link.net...
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
> > every
> >> >>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
Just
> >> >>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new Lirpa
> > fuel
> >> >>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to
> >> >>>>your
> >> >>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Because it may be the case.
> >> >>> And you don't know that iis is not.
> >> >>
> >> >> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of
years
> >> >> ago...
> >> >>
> >> >> Plus ça change...
> >> >>
> >> >> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
> >> >> you got nothin to lose."
> >> >
> >> > Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
> >> > know what you're missing.
> >> Irony?
> >>
> > Mikey's limited brain capacity puts most of the world permanently out of
> > reach.
> >
> Only from Morin world, which is a lonely place that I have no wish to
visit.
>
Mikey, I inhabit intellectual spheres completely beyond your grasp, as do
many other people on this newsgroup.
Robert Morein
October 9th 05, 12:09 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > hlink.net...
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >> None of which matter if it doesn't make an audible difference.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > your talking out of your ass by making assumptions
> >> > you know nothing about.
> >> >
> >> Ooooh, wrong again, but thanks for playing.
> >>
> > But that's the way it looks from the Polaroids...
> >
> You've obviously been taking self portraits again.
> Poor confused little dweeb that you are. Sigh.
>
Mikey, you have a substandard mind.
Robert Morein
October 9th 05, 12:10 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>> " > wrote in message
> >>> link.net...
> >>>>
> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >>>> ...
> >>>> >
> >>>> > " > wrote in message
> >>>> > link.net...
> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
> >>>> > inferior
> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
> >>>> > phonemes.
> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >>>>
> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
> >>>> forging
> >>>> again.
> >>>>
> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >>>> > differences.
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
nothing
> >>>> but
> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
> >>>>
> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
Pretend
> >>>> > we
> >>>> > didn't do it?
> >>>> >
> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >>>>
> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks differences."
> >>>> > And we reply,
> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim it
> >>> masks
> >>>> > differences.
> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but
it
> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
> >>>
> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
legitmately
> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >>>>
> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
> >>
> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water,
> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
> >> reveals.
> >>
> >> That's a
> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >>
> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's
the
> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >>
> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >>
> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
that
> >> claim.
> >>
> >
> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
> > preferences and choices.
> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a sonic
> preference.
>
It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the capability of
Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > hlink.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> None of which matter if it doesn't make an audible difference.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > your talking out of your ass by making assumptions
>> >> > you know nothing about.
>> >> >
>> >> Ooooh, wrong again, but thanks for playing.
>> >>
>> > But that's the way it looks from the Polaroids...
>> >
>> You've obviously been taking self portraits again.
>> Poor confused little dweeb that you are. Sigh.
>>
> Mikey, you have a substandard mind.
>
You're so cute in the way you are so completely predictable.
Roll over. There's a good boy.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >>>
>> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >>> link.net...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >>>> ...
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > " > wrote in message
>> >>>> > link.net...
>> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
>> >>>> > inferior
>> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
>> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
>> >>>> > phonemes.
>> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
>> >>>> forging
>> >>>> again.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >>>> > differences.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
> nothing
>> >>>> but
>> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
>> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
> Pretend
>> >>>> > we
>> >>>> > didn't do it?
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
>> >>>> > differences."
>> >>>> > And we reply,
>> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim
>> >>>> > it
>> >>> masks
>> >>>> > differences.
>> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>>
>> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but
> it
>> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
>> >>>
>> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
> legitmately
>> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >>>>
>> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>> >>
>> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
>> >> water,
>> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
>> >> reveals.
>> >>
>> >> That's a
>> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >>
>> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's
> the
>> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >>
>> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >>
>> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
>> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
> that
>> >> claim.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
>> > preferences and choices.
>> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
>> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a sonic
>> preference.
>>
> It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and magic
ears.
> Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the capability of
> Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
>
So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
I didn't hink so.
Robert Morein
October 9th 05, 09:01 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> " > wrote in message
> >> >>> link.net...
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >>>> ...
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > " > wrote in message
> >> >>>> > link.net...
> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
> >> >>>> > inferior
> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
> >> >>>> > phonemes.
> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
> >> >>>> forging
> >> >>>> again.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
> > nothing
> >> >>>> but
> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
> > Pretend
> >> >>>> > we
> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
> >> >>>> > differences."
> >> >>>> > And we reply,
> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim
> >> >>>> > it
> >> >>> masks
> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too,
but
> > it
> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
> > legitmately
> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
> >> >>
> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
> >> >> water,
> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
> >> >> reveals.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's a
> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >> >>
> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic,
it's
> > the
> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >> >>
> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >> >>
> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you
are
> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
> > that
> >> >> claim.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
> >> > preferences and choices.
> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a sonic
> >> preference.
> >>
> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
>
> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and magic
> ears.
>
> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the capability of
> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
> >
> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
>
> I didn't hink so.
>
Hink whatever you want.
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > nk.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "dn" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> Clyde Slick wrote:
>> >> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >> >>> link.net...
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>> > every
>> >> >>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>> >> >>>>differences.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
> Just
>> >> >>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>> >> >>>>Lirpa
>> > fuel
>> >> >>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared to
>> >> >>>>your
>> >> >>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Because it may be the case.
>> >> >>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of
> years
>> >> >> ago...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Plus ça change...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
>> >> >> you got nothin to lose."
>> >> >
>> >> > Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
>> >> > know what you're missing.
>> >> Irony?
>> >>
>> > Mikey's limited brain capacity puts most of the world permanently out
>> > of
>> > reach.
>> >
>> Only from Morin world, which is a lonely place that I have no wish to
> visit.
>>
> Mikey, I inhabit intellectual spheres completely beyond your grasp, as do
> many other people on this newsgroup.
>
You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your intellectual dung
heap.
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>>>>>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>>>>>>>> differences.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>>>>>>>> Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is
>>>>>>>> compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true, it
>>>>>> is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>> Either way.
>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>
>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>
>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>
>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>
> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
> you currently use.
>
>
Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
imaging.
Clyde Slick
October 9th 05, 09:59 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>>
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>> link.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without discrediting
>>>>>>>>> every branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>>>>>>>>> differences.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>>>>>>>>> Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is
>>>>>>>>> compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true,
>>>>>>> it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>
>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>
>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>
>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>> you currently use.
>>
>>
> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
> imaging.
>
>
Thanks for making my point.
There aren't any such measurements
Ruud Broens
October 9th 05, 10:21 PM
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
<long overdue snip inserted>
: >>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
: >>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
: >>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
: >>>>
: >>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
: >>>>
: >>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
: >>
: >> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
: >> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
: >> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
: >> you currently use.
: >>
: >>
: > Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
: > imaging.
: >
: >
:
: Thanks for making my point.
: There aren't any such measurements
:
Learn how to snip ;-)
R.
Clyde Slick
October 10th 05, 12:12 AM
"Ruud Broens" > wrote in message
...
>
> :
> Learn how to snip ;-)
> R.
>
I snip when it suits my purpose.
I don't snip when not snipping suits my purpose.
October 10th 05, 12:16 AM
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't claim
>>>>>>>>>> it masks differences.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>>>>>>>>>> Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is
>>>>>>>>>> compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true,
>>>>>>>> it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>>
>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>>
>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>>
>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>>> you currently use.
>>>
>>>
>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
>> imaging.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks for making my point.
> There aren't any such measurements
Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such measurements
would be impossible.
October 10th 05, 12:19 AM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >> >>> link.net...
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >>>> ...
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >>>> > link.net...
>> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
>> >> >>>> > inferior
>> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
>> >> >>>> > phonemes.
>> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
>> >> >>>> forging
>> >> >>>> again.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
>> > nothing
>> >> >>>> but
>> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the
>> >> >>>> real
>> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
>> > Pretend
>> >> >>>> > we
>> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
>> >> >>>> > differences."
>> >> >>>> > And we reply,
>> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do,
>> >> >>>> > claim
>> >> >>>> > it
>> >> >>> masks
>> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >>>> >
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too,
> but
>> > it
>> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
>> > legitmately
>> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
>> >> >> water,
>> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the
>> >> >> science
>> >> >> reveals.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That's a
>> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic,
> it's
>> > the
>> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you
> are
>> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
>> > that
>> >> >> claim.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
>> >> > preferences and choices.
>> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
>> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a sonic
>> >> preference.
>> >>
>> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
>>
>> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and magic
>> ears.
>>
>> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the capability of
>> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
>> >
>> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
>>
>> I didn't think so.
>>
> Hink whatever you want.
>
And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not even
anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist Bob.
Robert Morein
October 10th 05, 12:27 AM
" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> " > wrote in message
> >> >> >>> link.net...
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >>>> ...
> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote in
message
> >> >> >>>> > link.net...
> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
> >> >> >>>> > inferior
> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of
silver.
> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that
you're
> >> >> >>>> forging
> >> >> >>>> again.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
> >> > nothing
> >> >> >>>> but
> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the
> >> >> >>>> real
> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
variant.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
> >> > Pretend
> >> >> >>>> > we
> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
> >> >> >>>> > differences."
> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do,
> >> >> >>>> > claim
> >> >> >>>> > it
> >> >> >>> masks
> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees
too,
> > but
> >> > it
> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
> >> > legitmately
> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
opponents.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
> >> >> >> water,
> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the
> >> >> >> science
> >> >> >> reveals.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That's a
> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic,
> > it's
> >> > the
> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you
> > are
> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof
of
> >> > that
> >> >> >> claim.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
> >> >> > preferences and choices.
> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a sonic
> >> >> preference.
> >> >>
> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
> >>
> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and magic
> >> ears.
> >>
> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the capability
of
> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
> >> >
> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
> >>
> >> I didn't think so.
> >>
> > Hink whatever you want.
> >
> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not even
> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist Bob.
>
Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
October 10th 05, 12:44 AM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >> >> >>> link.net...
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >>>> ...
>> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote in
> message
>> >> >> >>>> > link.net...
>> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that
>> >> >> >>>> > uses
>> >> >> >>>> > inferior
>> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of
> silver.
>> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying
>> >> >> >>>> > Hindi
>> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
>> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that
> you're
>> >> >> >>>> forging
>> >> >> >>>> again.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
>> >> > nothing
>> >> >> >>>> but
>> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the
>> >> >> >>>> real
>> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
> variant.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase
>> >> >> >>>> > it?
>> >> > Pretend
>> >> >> >>>> > we
>> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
>> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
>> >> >> >>>> > differences."
>> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
>> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do,
>> >> >> >>>> > claim
>> >> >> >>>> > it
>> >> >> >>> masks
>> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees
> too,
>> > but
>> >> > it
>> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
>> >> > legitmately
>> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
> opponents.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
>> >> >> >> water,
>> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the
>> >> >> >> science
>> >> >> >> reveals.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> That's a
>> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic,
>> > it's
>> >> > the
>> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing,
>> >> >> >> you
>> > are
>> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof
> of
>> >> > that
>> >> >> >> claim.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
>> >> >> > preferences and choices.
>> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
>> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a
>> >> >> sonic
>> >> >> preference.
>> >> >>
>> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
>> >>
>> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and
>> >> magic
>> >> ears.
>> >>
>> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the capability
> of
>> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
>> >> >
>> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
>> >>
>> >> I didn't think so.
>> >>
>> > Hink whatever you want.
>> >
>> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not even
>> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist Bob.
>>
> Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
>
And like all sock puppets, you're good at being hinky.
Clyde Slick
October 10th 05, 01:14 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>>
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>> link.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't claim
>>>>>>>>>>> it masks differences.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your
>>>>>>>>>>> new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound
>>>>>>>>>>> stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true,
>>>>>>>>> it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>>>
>>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>>>> you currently use.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
>>> imaging.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for making my point.
>> There aren't any such measurements
> Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such measurements
> would be impossible.
Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
Amps do have differences in amging.
We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps performance.
so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
Robert Morein
October 10th 05, 01:10 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> " > wrote in
message
> >> >> >> >>> link.net...
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >>>> ...
> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote in
> > message
> >> >> >> >>>> >
link.net...
> >> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that
> >> >> >> >>>> > uses
> >> >> >> >>>> > inferior
> >> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of
> > silver.
> >> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying
> >> >> >> >>>> > Hindi
> >> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
> >> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that
> > you're
> >> >> >> >>>> forging
> >> >> >> >>>> again.
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no
science,
> >> >> > nothing
> >> >> >> >>>> but
> >> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all
the
> >> >> >> >>>> real
> >> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
> > variant.
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase
> >> >> >> >>>> > it?
> >> >> > Pretend
> >> >> >> >>>> > we
> >> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
> >> >> >> >>>> > differences."
> >> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do,
> >> >> >> >>>> > claim
> >> >> >> >>>> > it
> >> >> >> >>> masks
> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees
> > too,
> >> > but
> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
> >> >> > legitmately
> >> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
> > opponents.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms
hold
> >> >> >> >> water,
> >> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the
> >> >> >> >> science
> >> >> >> >> reveals.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> That's a
> >> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his
tactic,
> >> > it's
> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing,
> >> >> >> >> you
> >> > are
> >> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no
poof
> > of
> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> claim.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
> >> >> >> > preferences and choices.
> >> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for difference.
> >> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a
> >> >> >> sonic
> >> >> >> preference.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and
> >> >> magic
> >> >> ears.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the
capability
> > of
> >> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
> >> >> >
> >> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
> >> >>
> >> >> I didn't think so.
> >> >>
> >> > Hink whatever you want.
> >> >
> >> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not even
> >> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist Bob.
> >>
> > Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
> >
> And like all sock puppets, you're good at being hinky.
>
Mikey, it remains as a sad fact that you have an inferior mind.
Have you figured out who you are talking to?
Robert Morein
October 11th 05, 05:06 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > nk.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "dn" > wrote in message
> >> >> >>
...
> >> >> >> Clyde Slick wrote:
> >> >> >>> " > wrote in message
> >> >> >>> link.net...
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
discrediting
> >> > every
> >> >> >>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
> >> >> >>>>differences.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
> > Just
> >> >> >>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
> >> >> >>>>Lirpa
> >> > fuel
> >> >> >>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared
to
> >> >> >>>>your
> >> >> >>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Because it may be the case.
> >> >> >>> And you don't know that iis is not.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of
> > years
> >> >> >> ago...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Plus ça change...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
> >> >> >> you got nothin to lose."
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
> >> >> > know what you're missing.
> >> >> Irony?
> >> >>
> >> > Mikey's limited brain capacity puts most of the world permanently out
> >> > of
> >> > reach.
> >> >
> >> Only from Morin world, which is a lonely place that I have no wish to
> > visit.
> >>
> > Mikey, I inhabit intellectual spheres completely beyond your grasp, as
do
> > many other people on this newsgroup.
> >
> You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your intellectual
dung
> heap.
>
Yes, Mikey, I'm sure beer makes your mind more acute.
Robert Morein
October 11th 05, 05:07 AM
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
> >
> > "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> " > wrote in message
> >> link.net...
> >>>
> >>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>>
> >>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>> link.net...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>>> link.net...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>> ink.net...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>> link.net...
> >>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
> >>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't
claim
> >>>>>>>>>>> it masks differences.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop
you.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your
> >>>>>>>>>>> new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound
> >>>>>>>>>>> stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
> >>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
> >>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
> >>>>>>>>> different than another.
> >>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be
true,
> >>>>>>>>> it is you who must present the evidence.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
> >>>>>>>> Either way.
> >>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
> >>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
> >>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
> >>>>
> >>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
> >>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
> >>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
> >>>> you currently use.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
> >>> imaging.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Thanks for making my point.
> >> There aren't any such measurements
> > Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such
measurements
> > would be impossible.
>
> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
> Amps do have differences in amging.
> We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
> Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
> You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
> yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps performance.
> so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
>
Mikey can't even tell whether he's talking to a sockpuppet.
His abilities of discrimination are limited by his inferior mind.
Robert Morein
October 11th 05, 05:08 AM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
> > inferior
> >> >> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
> >> >> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
> > phonemes.
> >> >> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
> > forging
> >> >> again.
> >> >>
> >> >> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >> > differences.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
nothing
> >> >> but
> >> >> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
> >> >> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
> >> >>
> >> >> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
> >> >> > Pretend
> >> >> > we
> >> >> > didn't do it?
> >> >> >
> >> >> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
differences."
> >> >> > And we reply,
> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim
it
> >> > masks
> >> >> > differences.
> >> >> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> > I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too, but
> >> > it
> >> > won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >
> >> >>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
> >> >> legitmately
> >> >> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >>
> >> > Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
> >>
> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold water,
> > they
> >> are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
reveals.
> >>
> >> That's a
> >> > dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >>
> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's
the
> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >>
> >> > We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >>
> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
that
> >> claim.
> >>
> >> It is not for you, a
> >> > near illiterate, to challenge our right.
> >> > ABX masks differences.
> >> >
> >> Then prove it.
> >>
> > No need to.
>
> Bad science alert.
>
> It contradicts the experience of a vast number of audiophiles.
>
> Thank you for the Flat Earth Society viewpoint.
>
> > The burden is on you, if you wish to impose new rules and obligations.
> >
> The burden is met, the entirety of those doing audio research ,use and
rely
> on ABX or some variant all the time.
>
I'm sure people use it all the time for study of Hindi phonemes. It is
useless to high fidelity.
October 11th 05, 06:25 PM
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>>>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't
>>>>>>>>>>>> claim it masks differences.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your
>>>>>>>>>>>> new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound
>>>>>>>>>>>> stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be
>>>>>>>>>> true, it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>>>>
>>>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>>>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>>>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>>>>> you currently use.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
>>>> imaging.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for making my point.
>>> There aren't any such measurements
>> Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such measurements
>> would be impossible.
>
> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
> Amps do have differences in amging.
Amaging? Nope, or imaging either.
> We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
Ever see a polar plot for a loudspeaker?
> Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
> You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
> yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps performance.
> so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
I can say that amps that measure close enough have never been shown to sound
different in a bias controlled, level matched comparison.
Unless you can prove that amps have some effect on imaging, your whole point
is meaningless.
>
October 11th 05, 06:25 PM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>> >
>> > "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >>
>> >> " > wrote in message
>> >> link.net...
>> >>>
>> >>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>> ...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>> link.net...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>>>> link.net...
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>> ink.net...
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>> >>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>> >>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't
> claim
>> >>>>>>>>>>> it masks differences.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop
> you.
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your
>> >>>>>>>>>>> new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound
>> >>>>>>>>>>> stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>> >>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>> >>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>> >>>>>>>>> different than another.
>> >>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be
> true,
>> >>>>>>>>> it is you who must present the evidence.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>> >>>>>>>> Either way.
>> >>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>> >>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and
>> >>>>>>> there
>> >>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>> >>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>> >>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>> >>>> you currently use.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect
>> >>> on
>> >>> imaging.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for making my point.
>> >> There aren't any such measurements
>> > Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such
> measurements
>> > would be impossible.
>>
>> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
>> Amps do have differences in amging.
>> We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
>> Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
>> You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
>> yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps
>> performance.
>> so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
>>
> Mikey can't even tell whether he's talking to a sockpuppet.
> His abilities of discrimination are limited by his inferior mind.
>
How big was that telescope?
October 11th 05, 06:26 PM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
>> > inferior
>> >> >> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
>> >> >> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> >> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
>> > phonemes.
>> >> >> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
>> > forging
>> >> >> again.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> >> > differences.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
> nothing
>> >> >> but
>> >> >> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the real
>> >> >> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
>> >> >> > Pretend
>> >> >> > we
>> >> >> > didn't do it?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
> differences."
>> >> >> > And we reply,
>> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do, claim
> it
>> >> > masks
>> >> >> > differences.
>> >> >> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> > I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too,
>> >> > but
>> >> > it
>> >> > won't make sound any smarter"
>> >> >
>> >> >>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> >> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
>> >> >> legitmately
>> >> >> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
>> >>
>> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
>> >> water,
>> > they
>> >> are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
> reveals.
>> >>
>> >> That's a
>> >> > dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >>
>> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic, it's
> the
>> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >>
>> >> > We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >>
>> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you are
>> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
> that
>> >> claim.
>> >>
>> >> It is not for you, a
>> >> > near illiterate, to challenge our right.
>> >> > ABX masks differences.
>> >> >
>> >> Then prove it.
>> >>
>> > No need to.
>>
>> Bad science alert.
>>
>> It contradicts the experience of a vast number of audiophiles.
>>
>> Thank you for the Flat Earth Society viewpoint.
>>
>> > The burden is on you, if you wish to impose new rules and obligations.
>> >
>> The burden is met, the entirety of those doing audio research ,use and
> rely
>> on ABX or some variant all the time.
>>
> I'm sure people use it all the time for study of Hindi phonemes. It is
> useless to high fidelity.
>
So why is it the standard for audio researchers?
October 11th 05, 06:26 PM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > ink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> " > wrote in
> message
>> >> >> >> >>> link.net...
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >>>> ...
>> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote in
>> > message
>> >> >> >> >>>> >
> link.net...
>> >> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that
>> >> >> >> >>>> > uses
>> >> >> >> >>>> > inferior
>> >> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of
>> > silver.
>> >> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying
>> >> >> >> >>>> > Hindi
>> >> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
>> >> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that
>> > you're
>> >> >> >> >>>> forging
>> >> >> >> >>>> again.
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no
> science,
>> >> >> > nothing
>> >> >> >> >>>> but
>> >> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all
> the
>> >> >> >> >>>> real
>> >> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
>> > variant.
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase
>> >> >> >> >>>> > it?
>> >> >> > Pretend
>> >> >> >> >>>> > we
>> >> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
>> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
>> >> >> >> >>>> > differences."
>> >> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
>> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we
>> >> >> >> >>>> > do,
>> >> >> >> >>>> > claim
>> >> >> >> >>>> > it
>> >> >> >> >>> masks
>> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees
>> > too,
>> >> > but
>> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
>> >> >> > legitmately
>> >> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
>> > opponents.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms
> hold
>> >> >> >> >> water,
>> >> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the
>> >> >> >> >> science
>> >> >> >> >> reveals.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> That's a
>> >> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his
> tactic,
>> >> > it's
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing,
>> >> >> >> >> you
>> >> > are
>> >> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no
> poof
>> > of
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> claim.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
>> >> >> >> > preferences and choices.
>> >> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for
>> >> >> >> difference.
>> >> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a
>> >> >> >> sonic
>> >> >> >> preference.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and
>> >> >> magic
>> >> >> ears.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the
> capability
>> > of
>> >> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I didn't think so.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Hink whatever you want.
>> >> >
>> >> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not even
>> >> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist Bob.
>> >>
>> > Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
>> >
>> And like all sock puppets, you're good at being hinky.
>>
> Mikey, it remains as a sad fact that you have an inferior mind.
> Have you figured out who you are talking to?
>
A dip****, who may or may not be Robt. Morein.
Clyde Slick
October 12th 05, 12:25 AM
" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>>
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>> link.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>>>>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim it masks differences.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between
>>>>>>>>>>>>> your new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sound stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be
>>>>>>>>>>> true, it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>>>>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>>>>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>>>>>> you currently use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
>>>>> imaging.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for making my point.
>>>> There aren't any such measurements
>>> Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such
>>> measurements would be impossible.
>>
>> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
>> Amps do have differences in amging.
>
> Amaging? Nope, or imaging either.
>
I haven't been belittling your recent series of typos, maybe
I should start getting on you for them.
I haven't been bothering you about them because
I am not a good typist, and I don't expect you to be one either.
>> We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
>
> Ever see a polar plot for a loudspeaker?
>
ever see one for an amp?
Maybe there should be head to head tests of amps for imaging, where
everything else stays the same, just to see.
I think there would be differences, but not anywhere nearly
as much as for speakers, where, say, waterfall plot differences are
enormous.
>> Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
>> You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
>> yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps
>> performance.
>> so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
> I can say that amps that measure close enough have never been shown to
> sound different in a bias controlled, level matched comparison.
>
that's meaningles both as to the tests and to the subjects being
someone other than myself.
> Unless you can prove that amps have some effect on imaging, your whole
> point is meaningless.
>>
>
I don't have to 'prove' anything. Its my opinion as well
as the opinion of a substantial number of others.
And you can't prove the negative.
paul packer
October 12th 05, 04:42 AM
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 17:25:13 GMT, "
> wrote:
>> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
>> Amps do have differences in amging.
>
>Amaging? Nope, or imaging either.
If you're going to correct a typo at least copy it correctly.
It was "amging" not "Amaging".
October 12th 05, 10:16 PM
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim it masks differences.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sound stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be
>>>>>>>>>>>> true, it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and
>>>>>>>>>> there would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>>>>>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>>>>>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>>>>>>> you currently use.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect
>>>>>> on imaging.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for making my point.
>>>>> There aren't any such measurements
>>>> Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such
>>>> measurements would be impossible.
>>>
>>> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
>>> Amps do have differences in amging.
>>
>> Amaging? Nope, or imaging either.
>>
>
> I haven't been belittling your recent series of typos, maybe
> I should start getting on you for them.
> I haven't been bothering you about them because
> I am not a good typist, and I don't expect you to be one either.
>
>>> We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
>>
>> Ever see a polar plot for a loudspeaker?
>>
>
> ever see one for an amp?
> Maybe there should be head to head tests of amps for imaging, where
> everything else stays the same, just to see.
> I think there would be differences, but not anywhere nearly
> as much as for speakers, where, say, waterfall plot differences are
> enormous.
>
>
>>> Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
>>> You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
>>> yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps
>>> performance.
>>> so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
>> I can say that amps that measure close enough have never been shown to
>> sound different in a bias controlled, level matched comparison.
>>
>
> that's meaningles both as to the tests and to the subjects being
> someone other than myself.
>
>
>> Unless you can prove that amps have some effect on imaging, your whole
>> point is meaningless.
>>>
>>
>
>
> I don't have to 'prove' anything. Its my opinion as well
> as the opinion of a substantial number of others.
> And you can't prove the negative.
It's not even an opinion, it's an article of faith.
Robert Morein
October 12th 05, 11:28 PM
" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
> >> > inferior
> >> >> >> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of silver.
> >> >> >> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> >> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >> >> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
> >> > phonemes.
> >> >> >> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that you're
> >> > forging
> >> >> >> again.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >> >> > differences.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
> > nothing
> >> >> >> but
> >> >> >> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the
real
> >> >> >> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some variant.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
> >> >> >> > Pretend
> >> >> >> > we
> >> >> >> > didn't do it?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
> > differences."
> >> >> >> > And we reply,
> >> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do,
claim
> > it
> >> >> > masks
> >> >> >> > differences.
> >> >> >> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too,
> >> >> > but
> >> >> > it
> >> >> > won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >> >> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
> >> >> >> legitmately
> >> >> >> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your opponents.
> >> >>
> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
> >> >> water,
> >> > they
> >> >> are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
> > reveals.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's a
> >> >> > dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >> >>
> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic,
it's
> > the
> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >> >>
> >> >> > We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >> >>
> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you
are
> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
> > that
> >> >> claim.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is not for you, a
> >> >> > near illiterate, to challenge our right.
> >> >> > ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >
> >> >> Then prove it.
> >> >>
> >> > No need to.
> >>
> >> Bad science alert.
> >>
> >> It contradicts the experience of a vast number of audiophiles.
> >>
> >> Thank you for the Flat Earth Society viewpoint.
> >>
> >> > The burden is on you, if you wish to impose new rules and
obligations.
> >> >
> >> The burden is met, the entirety of those doing audio research ,use and
> > rely
> >> on ABX or some variant all the time.
> >>
> > I'm sure people use it all the time for study of Hindi phonemes. It is
> > useless to high fidelity.
> >
> So why is it the standard for audio researchers?
>
It is not.
Robert Morein
October 12th 05, 11:28 PM
" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > ink.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > " > wrote in
message
> >> >> >> >> >
link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >> >>> " > wrote in
> > message
> >> >> >> >> >>>
link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >>>> ...
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote in
> >> > message
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device
that
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > uses
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > inferior
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of
> >> > silver.
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Hindi
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate
that
> >> > you're
> >> >> >> >> >>>> forging
> >> >> >> >> >>>> again.
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no
> > science,
> >> >> >> > nothing
> >> >> >> >> >>>> but
> >> >> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all
> > the
> >> >> >> >> >>>> real
> >> >> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
> >> > variant.
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do?
Erase
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it?
> >> >> >> > Pretend
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > we
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences."
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > do,
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > claim
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it
> >> >> >> >> >>> masks
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green
chees
> >> > too,
> >> >> > but
> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody
can
> >> >> >> > legitmately
> >> >> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
> >> > opponents.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms
> > hold
> >> >> >> >> >> water,
> >> >> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what
the
> >> >> >> >> >> science
> >> >> >> >> >> reveals.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> That's a
> >> >> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his
> > tactic,
> >> >> > it's
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're
doing,
> >> >> >> >> >> you
> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no
> > poof
> >> > of
> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> >> claim.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
> >> >> >> >> > preferences and choices.
> >> >> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for
> >> >> >> >> difference.
> >> >> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim a
> >> >> >> >> sonic
> >> >> >> >> preference.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith and
> >> >> >> magic
> >> >> >> ears.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the
> > capability
> >> > of
> >> >> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides differences.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I didn't think so.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > Hink whatever you want.
> >> >> >
> >> >> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not
even
> >> >> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist Bob.
> >> >>
> >> > Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
> >> >
> >> And like all sock puppets, you're good at being hinky.
> >>
> > Mikey, it remains as a sad fact that you have an inferior mind.
> > Have you figured out who you are talking to?
> >
> A dip****, who may or may not be Robt. Morein.
>
Mikey, it is to be expected that, as you have an inferior mind, you would
resort to obscenity.
Robert Morein
October 13th 05, 12:51 AM
" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>> " > wrote in message
> >>> link.net...
> >>>>
> >>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>> link.net...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>>>> link.net...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> link.net...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>> ink.net...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in
message
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
link.net...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim it masks differences.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. Just keep quiet about the staggering differences
between
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> your new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sound stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
> >>>>>>>>>>>> different than another.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be
> >>>>>>>>>>>> true, it is you who must present the evidence.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Either way.
> >>>>>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
> >>>>>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and
> >>>>>>>>>> there would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is
none.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
> >>>>>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
> >>>>>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the
measurements
> >>>>>>> you currently use.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect
> >>>>>> on imaging.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for making my point.
> >>>>> There aren't any such measurements
> >>>> Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such
> >>>> measurements would be impossible.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
> >>> Amps do have differences in amging.
> >>
> >> Amaging? Nope, or imaging either.
> >>
> >
> > I haven't been belittling your recent series of typos, maybe
> > I should start getting on you for them.
> > I haven't been bothering you about them because
> > I am not a good typist, and I don't expect you to be one either.
> >
> >>> We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
> >>
> >> Ever see a polar plot for a loudspeaker?
> >>
> >
> > ever see one for an amp?
> > Maybe there should be head to head tests of amps for imaging, where
> > everything else stays the same, just to see.
> > I think there would be differences, but not anywhere nearly
> > as much as for speakers, where, say, waterfall plot differences are
> > enormous.
> >
> >
> >>> Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
> >>> You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
> >>> yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps
> >>> performance.
> >>> so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
> >> I can say that amps that measure close enough have never been shown to
> >> sound different in a bias controlled, level matched comparison.
> >>
> >
> > that's meaningles both as to the tests and to the subjects being
> > someone other than myself.
> >
> >
> >> Unless you can prove that amps have some effect on imaging, your whole
> >> point is meaningless.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> > I don't have to 'prove' anything. Its my opinion as well
> > as the opinion of a substantial number of others.
> > And you can't prove the negative.
> It's not even an opinion, it's an article of faith.
>
As Clyde said, it is the opinion of a substantial number of other people.
What ever else it is, it is an opinion.
Clyde Slick
October 13th 05, 02:17 AM
"paul packer" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 17:25:13 GMT, "
> > wrote:
>
>
>>> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
>>> Amps do have differences in amging.
>>
>>Amaging? Nope, or imaging either.
>
> If you're going to correct a typo at least copy it correctly.
> It was "amging" not "Amaging".
Huh, a typo of the typo he was ridiculing!
October 13th 05, 03:47 AM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > ink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >>>
>> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >>> link.net...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>> ...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>>> link.net...
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>> link.net...
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>> link.net...
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in
>> >>>>>>>>>>> message
>> >>>>>>>>>>> ink.net...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in
> message
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> link.net...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim it masks differences.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. Just keep quiet about the staggering differences
> between
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> your new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sound stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> different than another.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> true, it is you who must present the evidence.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Either way.
>> >>>>>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>> >>>>>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and
>> >>>>>>>>>> there would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is
> none.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>> >>>>>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>> >>>>>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the
> measurements
>> >>>>>>> you currently use.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their
>> >>>>>> effect
>> >>>>>> on imaging.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks for making my point.
>> >>>>> There aren't any such measurements
>> >>>> Since imaging is the job of the speaker/room interface, such
>> >>>> measurements would be impossible.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thank you once more for making my point, sort of.
>> >>> Amps do have differences in amging.
>> >>
>> >> Amaging? Nope, or imaging either.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I haven't been belittling your recent series of typos, maybe
>> > I should start getting on you for them.
>> > I haven't been bothering you about them because
>> > I am not a good typist, and I don't expect you to be one either.
>> >
>> >>> We haven't been able to measure it yet, as you stated..
>> >>
>> >> Ever see a polar plot for a loudspeaker?
>> >>
>> >
>> > ever see one for an amp?
>> > Maybe there should be head to head tests of amps for imaging, where
>> > everything else stays the same, just to see.
>> > I think there would be differences, but not anywhere nearly
>> > as much as for speakers, where, say, waterfall plot differences are
>> > enormous.
>> >
>> >
>> >>> Without measurements, you are so sure of yourself.
>> >>> You say that all amps measuring the same sound the same,
>> >>> yet you concede that we cannot measure all aspects of an amps
>> >>> performance.
>> >>> so, you cannot say that they sound the same.
>> >> I can say that amps that measure close enough have never been shown to
>> >> sound different in a bias controlled, level matched comparison.
>> >>
>> >
>> > that's meaningles both as to the tests and to the subjects being
>> > someone other than myself.
>> >
>> >
>> >> Unless you can prove that amps have some effect on imaging, your whole
>> >> point is meaningless.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > I don't have to 'prove' anything. Its my opinion as well
>> > as the opinion of a substantial number of others.
>> > And you can't prove the negative.
>> It's not even an opinion, it's an article of faith.
>>
> As Clyde said, it is the opinion of a substantial number of other people.
> What ever else it is, it is an opinion.
>
You frequently form opinons based on the most flawed evidence available?
October 13th 05, 03:49 AM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > nk.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "dn" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >>
> ...
>> >> >> >> Clyde Slick wrote:
>> >> >> >>> " > wrote in message
>> >> >> >>> link.net...
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>>You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
> discrediting
>> >> > every
>> >> >> >>>>branch of audio research, and you can't claim it masks
>> >> >> >>>>differences.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>>Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>> > Just
>> >> >> >>>>keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>> >> >> >>>>Lirpa
>> >> > fuel
>> >> >> >>>>cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is compared
> to
>> >> >> >>>>your
>> >> >> >>>>old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Because it may be the case.
>> >> >> >>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Golly! A quote from the "Earth is Flat" debate from hundreds of
>> > years
>> >> >> >> ago...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Plus ça change...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Or as Bob Dylan wrote: "When you ain't got nothin'
>> >> >> >> you got nothin to lose."
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Better yet, when you don't know what you don't know, you don't
>> >> >> > know what you're missing.
>> >> >> Irony?
>> >> >>
>> >> > Mikey's limited brain capacity puts most of the world permanently
>> >> > out
>> >> > of
>> >> > reach.
>> >> >
>> >> Only from Morin world, which is a lonely place that I have no wish to
>> > visit.
>> >>
>> > Mikey, I inhabit intellectual spheres completely beyond your grasp, as
> do
>> > many other people on this newsgroup.
>> >
>> You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your intellectual
> dung
>> heap.
>>
> Yes, Mikey, I'm sure beer makes your mind more acute.
>
I wouldn't know, I don't normally drink beer.
October 13th 05, 03:50 AM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > " > wrote in
> message
>> >> >> >> >> >
> link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>> " > wrote in
>> > message
>> >> >> >> >> >>>
> link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> ...
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote in
>> >> > message
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device
> that
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > uses
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > inferior
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > of
>> >> > silver.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > studying
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Hindi
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate
> that
>> >> > you're
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> forging
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> again.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no
>> > science,
>> >> >> >> > nothing
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> but
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> all
>> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> real
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
>> >> > variant.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do?
> Erase
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it?
>> >> >> >> > Pretend
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > we
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences."
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > do,
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > claim
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it
>> >> >> >> >> >>> masks
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green
> chees
>> >> > too,
>> >> >> > but
>> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
>> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody
> can
>> >> >> >> > legitmately
>> >> >> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
>> >> > opponents.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the
>> >> >> >> >> >> criticisms
>> > hold
>> >> >> >> >> >> water,
>> >> >> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what
> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> science
>> >> >> >> >> >> reveals.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> That's a
>> >> >> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his
>> > tactic,
>> >> >> > it's
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're
> doing,
>> >> >> >> >> >> you
>> >> >> > are
>> >> >> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have
>> >> >> >> >> >> no
>> > poof
>> >> > of
>> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> >> claim.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
>> >> >> >> >> > preferences and choices.
>> >> >> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for
>> >> >> >> >> difference.
>> >> >> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to claim
>> >> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> >> sonic
>> >> >> >> >> preference.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith
>> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> magic
>> >> >> >> ears.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the
>> > capability
>> >> > of
>> >> >> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides
>> >> >> >> differences.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I didn't think so.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> > Hink whatever you want.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not
> even
>> >> >> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist Bob.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
>> >> >
>> >> And like all sock puppets, you're good at being hinky.
>> >>
>> > Mikey, it remains as a sad fact that you have an inferior mind.
>> > Have you figured out who you are talking to?
>> >
>> A dip****, who may or may not be Robt. Morein.
>>
> Mikey, it is to be expected that, as you have an inferior mind, you would
> resort to obscenity.
>
Gotta call 'em like I see 'em.
paul packer
October 13th 05, 11:05 AM
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 02:49:15 GMT, "
> wrote:
>>> You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your intellectual
>> dung
>>> heap.
>>>
>> Yes, Mikey, I'm sure beer makes your mind more acute.
>>
>I wouldn't know, I don't normally drink beer.
Well, you wouldn't have time really after posting here. In fact you
must be on a drip.
October 13th 05, 11:19 PM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that uses
>> >> > inferior
>> >> >> >> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of
>> >> >> >> > silver.
>> >> >> >> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >> >> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> >> >> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying Hindi
>> >> > phonemes.
>> >> >> >> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that
>> >> >> >> you're
>> >> > forging
>> >> >> >> again.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> >> >> > differences.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
>> > nothing
>> >> >> >> but
>> >> >> >> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the
> real
>> >> >> >> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
>> >> >> >> variant.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase it?
>> >> >> >> > Pretend
>> >> >> >> > we
>> >> >> >> > didn't do it?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
>> > differences."
>> >> >> >> > And we reply,
>> >> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do,
> claim
>> > it
>> >> >> > masks
>> >> >> >> > differences.
>> >> >> >> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> > I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees too,
>> >> >> > but
>> >> >> > it
>> >> >> > won't make sound any smarter"
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> >> >> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
>> >> >> >> legitmately
>> >> >> >> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> > Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
>> >> >> > opponents.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
>> >> >> water,
>> >> > they
>> >> >> are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
>> > reveals.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That's a
>> >> >> > dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic,
> it's
>> > the
>> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you
> are
>> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof of
>> > that
>> >> >> claim.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is not for you, a
>> >> >> > near illiterate, to challenge our right.
>> >> >> > ABX masks differences.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> Then prove it.
>> >> >>
>> >> > No need to.
>> >>
>> >> Bad science alert.
>> >>
>> >> It contradicts the experience of a vast number of audiophiles.
>> >>
>> >> Thank you for the Flat Earth Society viewpoint.
>> >>
>> >> > The burden is on you, if you wish to impose new rules and
> obligations.
>> >> >
>> >> The burden is met, the entirety of those doing audio research ,use and
>> > rely
>> >> on ABX or some variant all the time.
>> >>
>> > I'm sure people use it all the time for study of Hindi phonemes. It is
>> > useless to high fidelity.
>> >
>> So why is it the standard for audio researchers?
>>
> It is not.
>
Like you'd know.
Robert Morein
October 13th 05, 11:21 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > hlink.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > " > wrote in
message
> >> >> >> >> >
link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device that
uses
> >> >> > inferior
> >> >> >> >> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance of
> >> >> >> >> > silver.
> >> >> >> >> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> >> >> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >> >> >> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for studying
Hindi
> >> >> > phonemes.
> >> >> >> >> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate that
> >> >> >> >> you're
> >> >> > forging
> >> >> >> >> again.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >> >> >> > differences.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no science,
> >> > nothing
> >> >> >> >> but
> >> >> >> >> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of all the
> > real
> >> >> >> >> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or some
> >> >> >> >> variant.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do? Erase
it?
> >> >> >> >> > Pretend
> >> >> >> >> > we
> >> >> >> >> > didn't do it?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it masks
> >> > differences."
> >> >> >> >> > And we reply,
> >> >> >> >> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and we do,
> > claim
> >> > it
> >> >> >> > masks
> >> >> >> >> > differences.
> >> >> >> >> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green chees
too,
> >> >> >> > but
> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> > won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >> >> >> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate. Nobody can
> >> >> >> >> legitmately
> >> >> >> >> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
> >> >> >> > opponents.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the criticisms hold
> >> >> >> water,
> >> >> > they
> >> >> >> are simple bull**** from people who don't like what the science
> >> > reveals.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That's a
> >> >> >> > dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his tactic,
> > it's
> >> > the
> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're doing, you
> > are
> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have no poof
of
> >> > that
> >> >> >> claim.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It is not for you, a
> >> >> >> > near illiterate, to challenge our right.
> >> >> >> > ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Then prove it.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > No need to.
> >> >>
> >> >> Bad science alert.
> >> >>
> >> >> It contradicts the experience of a vast number of audiophiles.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you for the Flat Earth Society viewpoint.
> >> >>
> >> >> > The burden is on you, if you wish to impose new rules and
> > obligations.
> >> >> >
> >> >> The burden is met, the entirety of those doing audio research ,use
and
> >> > rely
> >> >> on ABX or some variant all the time.
> >> >>
> >> > I'm sure people use it all the time for study of Hindi phonemes. It
is
> >> > useless to high fidelity.
> >> >
> >> So why is it the standard for audio researchers?
> >>
> > It is not.
> >
> Like you'd know.
>
Bad grammar, Mikey McKelviphibian.
Robert Morein
October 13th 05, 11:22 PM
" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > " > wrote in message
> > hlink.net...
> >>
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> > link.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > " > wrote in
message
> >> >> >> >> >
link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > " > wrote in
> > message
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> " > wrote in
> >> > message
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> ...
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote
in
> >> >> > message
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> > link.net...
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device
> > that
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > uses
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > inferior
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the resistance
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > of
> >> >> > silver.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > studying
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Hindi
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate
> > that
> >> >> > you're
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> forging
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> again.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no
> >> > science,
> >> >> >> >> > nothing
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> but
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> all
> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> real
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or
some
> >> >> > variant.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do?
> > Erase
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it?
> >> >> >> >> > Pretend
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > we
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it
masks
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences."
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and
we
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > do,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > claim
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> masks
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green
> > chees
> >> >> > too,
> >> >> >> > but
> >> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate.
Nobody
> > can
> >> >> >> >> > legitmately
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of your
> >> >> > opponents.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> criticisms
> >> > hold
> >> >> >> >> >> >> water,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like what
> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> science
> >> >> >> >> >> >> reveals.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> That's a
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's his
> >> > tactic,
> >> >> >> > it's
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're
> > doing,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> you
> >> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You have
> >> >> >> >> >> >> no
> >> > poof
> >> >> > of
> >> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> claim.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
> >> >> >> >> >> > preferences and choices.
> >> >> >> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for
> >> >> >> >> >> difference.
> >> >> >> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to
claim
> >> >> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> >> sonic
> >> >> >> >> >> preference.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith
> >> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> magic
> >> >> >> >> ears.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the
> >> > capability
> >> >> > of
> >> >> >> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides
> >> >> >> >> differences.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I didn't think so.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Hink whatever you want.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof, not
> > even
> >> >> >> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist
Bob.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
> >> >> >
> >> >> And like all sock puppets, you're good at being hinky.
> >> >>
> >> > Mikey, it remains as a sad fact that you have an inferior mind.
> >> > Have you figured out who you are talking to?
> >> >
> >> A dip****, who may or may not be Robt. Morein.
> >>
> > Mikey, it is to be expected that, as you have an inferior mind, you
would
> > resort to obscenity.
> >
> Gotta call 'em like I see 'em.
>
We understand that, but as you have an inferior mind, your brain is
incapable of processing very much information.
Robert Morein
October 13th 05, 11:28 PM
"paul packer" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 02:49:15 GMT, "
> > wrote:
>
>
> >>> You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your
intellectual
> >> dung
> >>> heap.
> >>>
> >> Yes, Mikey, I'm sure beer makes your mind more acute.
> >>
> >I wouldn't know, I don't normally drink beer.
>
> Well, you wouldn't have time really after posting here. In fact you
> must be on a drip.
Perhaps Mikey is into absinthe.
Mikey, do you worship the Green Goddess?
October 14th 05, 05:16 PM
"paul packer" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 02:49:15 GMT, "
> > wrote:
>
>
>>>> You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your intellectual
>>> dung
>>>> heap.
>>>>
>>> Yes, Mikey, I'm sure beer makes your mind more acute.
>>>
>>I wouldn't know, I don't normally drink beer.
>
> Well, you wouldn't have time really after posting here. In fact you
> must be on a drip.
No, no, I'm not even related to any Australians.
October 14th 05, 05:17 PM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> "paul packer" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 02:49:15 GMT, "
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>> You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your
> intellectual
>> >> dung
>> >>> heap.
>> >>>
>> >> Yes, Mikey, I'm sure beer makes your mind more acute.
>> >>
>> >I wouldn't know, I don't normally drink beer.
>>
>> Well, you wouldn't have time really after posting here. In fact you
>> must be on a drip.
>
> Perhaps Mikey is into absinthe.
> Mikey, do you worship the Green Goddess?
>
Salad Dressing?
You are a sick puppy.
October 14th 05, 05:19 PM
"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > " > wrote in message
>> > hlink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > " > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > " > wrote in
> message
>> >> >> >> >> >
> link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > " > wrote in
>> > message
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> " > wrote in
>> >> > message
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> message
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> ...
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > " > wrote
> in
>> >> >> > message
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> > link.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> You can't debunk ABX,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Mikey, Arny did the job for us, with an ABX device
>> > that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > uses
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > inferior
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > ruthenium relays that have 27.5 times the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > resistance
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > of
>> >> >> > silver.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> you can't discredit it, without discrediting every
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> branch of audio research,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Actually, we don't. It's an excellent tool for
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > studying
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Hindi
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > phonemes.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >>and you can't claim it masks differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> Not my thinking, not my writing. You're so desparate
>> > that
>> >> >> > you're
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> forging
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> again.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> We can, and we do, claim it masks
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> But your claims are made of nothing. No evidence, no
>> >> > science,
>> >> >> >> >> > nothing
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> but
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> unfounded claims, which once again fly in the face of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> all
>> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> real
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> scientists doing audio research that rely on ABX or
> some
>> >> >> > variant.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > See? We MADE THE CLAIM. What are you going to do?
>> > Erase
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it?
>> >> >> >> >> > Pretend
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > we
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > didn't do it?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> No reason to, it's the usual unsupported bull****.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Once again, Mikey says, "and you can't claim it
> masks
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences."
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > And we reply,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > Here your thinking is clearly confused. We can, and
> we
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > do,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > claim
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > it
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> masks
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > BINGO! We made the claim AGAIN.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> I love this illiteracy: " the moon is made from green
>> > chees
>> >> >> > too,
>> >> >> >> > but
>> >> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> won't make sound any smarter"
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>The word that was left out and which people of normal
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> intelligence would have assumed, is legitimate.
> Nobody
>> > can
>> >> >> >> >> > legitmately
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> claim that ABX masks differences.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Mikey, you cannot apriori remove the legitimacy of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> your
>> >> >> > opponents.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> What legitmacy? You don't have any, none of the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> criticisms
>> >> > hold
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> water,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> they are simple bull**** from people who don't like
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> what
>> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> science
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> reveals.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> That's a
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> dirty tactic you learned from Arny Krueger.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Calling liars for what they are? I don't think it's
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> his
>> >> > tactic,
>> >> >> >> > it's
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> tactic of anybody who desoises liars.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> We are legitimately entitled to express our opinions.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Go ahead and express them, but that is not what you're
>> > doing,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> you
>> >> >> >> > are
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> claiming that it's a fact that ABX is invalid. You
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> have
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> no
>> >> > poof
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> claim.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Its merely useless, for assisting in comsumer
>> >> >> >> >> >> > preferences and choices.
>> >> >> >> >> >> It's purpose was never meant for preference, only for
>> >> >> >> >> >> difference.
>> >> >> >> >> >> Of course if there's no sonic difference, it's hard to
> claim
>> >> >> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> >> >> sonic
>> >> >> >> >> >> preference.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> > It has no purpose with respect to the High End at all.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Sure it does, just not your high end, which consists of faith
>> >> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> >> magic
>> >> >> >> >> ears.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> > Audio reproduction by High End componentry transcends the
>> >> > capability
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> >> > Arny's cheap apparatus to transmit it correctly.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> So now you will offer up proof that an ABX box hides
>> >> >> >> >> differences.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I didn't think so.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Hink whatever you want.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> And you never fail to disappoint. Wild claims, and no proof,
>> >> >> >> not
>> > even
>> >> >> >> anything remotely like evidence. You're a very bad scientist
> Bob.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> > Keep hinking, Mikey. You are very good at hinking.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> And like all sock puppets, you're good at being hinky.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Mikey, it remains as a sad fact that you have an inferior mind.
>> >> > Have you figured out who you are talking to?
>> >> >
>> >> A dip****, who may or may not be Robt. Morein.
>> >>
>> > Mikey, it is to be expected that, as you have an inferior mind, you
> would
>> > resort to obscenity.
>> >
>> Gotta call 'em like I see 'em.
>>
> We understand that, but as you have an inferior mind, your brain is
> incapable of processing very much information.
>
Seems to be better than yours, I don't confuse 2.4 meters with 40 inches.
paul packer
October 15th 05, 11:07 AM
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 16:16:24 GMT, "
> wrote:
>
>"paul packer" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 02:49:15 GMT, "
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> You're correct, I'm stuck here in the real world, not your intellectual
>>>> dung
>>>>> heap.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, Mikey, I'm sure beer makes your mind more acute.
>>>>
>>>I wouldn't know, I don't normally drink beer.
>>
>> Well, you wouldn't have time really after posting here. In fact you
>> must be on a drip.
>
>No, no, I'm not even related to any Australians.
Tell me, Mike, how DO you find time for all these posts? Very fast
typing? I wouldn't like to sugest any other possibilities for fear of
being intrusive.
November 7th 05, 09:15 PM
"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> " > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> " > wrote in message
>>> link.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't claim
>>>>>>>>>> it masks differences.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your new
>>>>>>>>>> Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound stage is
>>>>>>>>>> compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true,
>>>>>>>> it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>>
>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>>
>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>>
>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>>> you currently use.
>>>
>>>
>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
>> imaging.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks for making my point.
> There aren't any such measurements
>
Because there is no such effect as amplifier imaging.
Clyde Slick
November 8th 05, 01:14 AM
> wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>>
>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>> link.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ink.net...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> " > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> link.net...
>>>>>>>>>>> You can't debunk ABX, you can't discredit it, without
>>>>>>>>>>> discrediting every branch of audio research, and you can't claim
>>>>>>>>>>> it masks differences.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why not relax and keep buying what you want, we won't stop you.
>>>>>>>>>>> Just keep quiet about the staggering differences between your
>>>>>>>>>>> new Lirpa fuel cel driven SET and how much bigger the sound
>>>>>>>>>>> stage is compared to your old Edsel cold fusion amp.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because it may be the case.
>>>>>>>>>> And you don't know that iis is not.
>>>>>>>>> I know there's no reason to suspect one amp may be that much
>>>>>>>>> different than another.
>>>>>>>>> I know the burden of proof is on you if you believe it to be true,
>>>>>>>>> it is you who must present the evidence.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you find some, I'll be happy to hear about it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> you don't have to accept any evidence, it is only an opinion.
>>>>>>>> Either way.
>>>>>>> Once again you confirm your idiocy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If there were amps that measured similarly enough, but sounded
>>>>>>> different it would for some sort of demonstrable reason, and there
>>>>>>> would be some demonstrable evidence of it. There is none.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> evidently, your measurements are not up to snuff.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Really? Your evidence of this is what?
>>>>
>>>> the same stuff you sent me yesterday.
>>>> If you standardized everything else in the setup, you could
>>>> use that as one better tool for measuring amps than the measurements
>>>> you currently use.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Please post the excerpt that deals with amplifiers and their effect on
>>> imaging.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for making my point.
>> There aren't any such measurements
>>
> Because there is no such effect as amplifier imaging.
>
How do you 'know' that?
George M. Middius
November 8th 05, 01:23 AM
Clyde Slick said:
> > Because there is no such effect as amplifier imaging.
> How do you 'know' that?
It's in his Krooble.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.