Powell Quacking Over in RAP [Archive]

Marc Phillips

November 5th 03, 11:58 AM

Arny said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

>> Arny said:
>
>>> Powell Quacking Over in RAP
>
><snip funny question from Powell on RAP. Powell seems to be finding that
>just hooking up a microphone more than he can manage without help>
>
>>> Way too funny!
>
>> As funny as you trying to correct my English? No way!
>
>Way.
>
>I see Phillips, that you've again forgotten that this is an audio group, not
>a spelling and punctuation group.

So why did you attempt to correct my spelling?

>
>I guess that means that I'll keep on picking at your spelling and
>punctuation Phillips, and that of your nasty little band of flaming cohorts.

I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too. By the way, there should be a comma
before Phillips as well as after.

>I continue to be amazed by your inability to see what rotten, careless
>writers they are.

How would you know? You demonstrated yesterday that you don't have a clue as
to what rotten, careless writing is.

You seem to attract them like flies on crap.

Krooglish!

Boon

Marc Phillips

November 5th 03, 12:07 PM

I said:

>I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.

Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never know for
sure now.

Boon

Arny Krueger

November 5th 03, 12:21 PM

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

> I said:

>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.

> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
> know for sure now.

More to the point...

Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big fuss over a
comma?

Sockpuppet Yustabe

November 5th 03, 12:57 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...

>
> I guess that means that I'll keep on picking at your spelling and
> punctuation Phillips, and that of your nasty little band of flaming
cohorts.
> I continue to be amazed by your inability to see what rotten, careless
> writers they are. You seem to attract them like flies on crap.
>
>

Even flies can't stand your crap.

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

Sockpuppet Yustabe

November 5th 03, 01:02 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
>
>
> > I said:
>
> >> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
>
> > Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
> > know for sure now.
>
> More to the point...
>
> Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big fuss over
a
> comma?
>

He didn't say you were stupid, illiterate or inept. He remarked
that it was an accident.

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

Arny Krueger

November 5th 03, 01:26 PM

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> I said:
>>
>>>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
>>
>>> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
>>> know for sure now.

>> More to the point...

>> Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big
>> fuss over a comma?

> He didn't say you were stupid, illiterate or inept. He remarked
> that it was an accident.

You're not answering the question, sockpuppet Yustabe. Of course when I
posted this, I expected you to run, hide, dissemble, and deceive which you
have nicely already done.

You're a hypocrite sockpuppet Yustabe. Live with it!

Arny Krueger

November 5th 03, 01:52 PM

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>> I guess that means that I'll keep on picking at your spelling and
>> punctuation Phillips, and that of your nasty little band of flaming
> cohorts.
>> I continue to be amazed by your inability to see what rotten,
>> careless writers they are. You seem to attract them like flies on
>> crap.
>>
>>
>
> Even flies can't stand your crap.

I think I first heard that one in middle school. What middle school are you
currently attending, sockpuppet Yustabe?

The Stainless Steel Boob Orchestra

November 5th 03, 02:40 PM

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:52:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>What middle school are you currently attending, sockpuppet Yustabe?

God, it's on heat again.

--
td

Powell

November 5th 03, 02:56 PM

"Arny Krueger" wrote

> > Is there an adaptor which will connect to two XLR
> > cables (my blue cables) together or is it better to
> > just purchase a 50' cable from another manufacture?
>
> Have you ever looked at a mic cable?
>
I have now :). The XLR cable does have a locking
mechanism on the female end but not the male
end. On the MPA Pro the XLR has pulled off because
it is only a friction fit. OTOH, in my stereo system
the XLR locks/docks in on both ends.

I assumed the Blue cable was deficient and needed
an adaptor to lock two cable together. It is now
apparent that the MPA Pro is deficient because it
lacks the locking mechanism, not the cable. Cables
lock together in serial just fine. Just like you to make
a tempest out of a tea pot.

> <Remmber, this is the guy who rattles on about
> other people's lack of practical experience and
> empirical evidence.>
>
Studio microphones and the associated equipment
are new to me. Was I suppose to divine my
knowledge base without trial and error? Its not my
fault that recording equipment is sub-par in
construction quality to stereo equipment.

dave weil

November 5th 03, 08:06 PM

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:52:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>> Even flies can't stand your crap.
>
>I think I first heard that one in middle school. What middle school are you
>currently attending, sockpuppet Yustabe?

At least it's probably not the one where they talk about flies on
crap.

Marc Phillips

November 5th 03, 10:56 PM

Arny said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

>
>> I said:
>
>>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
>
>> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
>> know for sure now.
>
>More to the point...
>
>Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big fuss over a
>comma?

Why would he? It's my extra comma, and I corrected myself, which is far more
than you're capable of doing, ****head.

LOL!

Boon

Sockpuppet Yustabe

November 5th 03, 11:49 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >>> I said:
> >>
> >>>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
> >>
> >>> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
> >>> know for sure now.
>
> >> More to the point...
>
> >> Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big
> >> fuss over a comma?
>
> > He didn't say you were stupid, illiterate or inept. He remarked
> > that it was an accident.
>
> You're not answering the question, sockpuppet Yustabe. Of course when I
> posted this, I expected you to run, hide, dissemble, and deceive which you
> have nicely already done.
>
> You're a hypocrite sockpuppet Yustabe. Live with it!
>

Evidently, you couldn't figure out my answer, so let me put it more bluntly.
No, because he didn't say you were stupid, illiterate or inept. He remarked
that your error was an accident.

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

Sockpuppet Yustabe

November 6th 03, 12:02 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>
> >> I guess that means that I'll keep on picking at your spelling and
> >> punctuation Phillips, and that of your nasty little band of flaming
> > cohorts.
> >> I continue to be amazed by your inability to see what rotten,
> >> careless writers they are. You seem to attract them like flies on
> >> crap.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Even flies can't stand your crap.
>
> I think I first heard that one in middle school. What middle school are
you
> currently attending, sockpuppet Yustabe?
>

The one that you were too inept to graduate from.

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

Arny Krueger

November 7th 03, 12:14 PM

"Powell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Arny Krueger" wrote
>
> > > Is there an adaptor which will connect to two XLR
> > > cables (my blue cables) together or is it better to
> > > just purchase a 50' cable from another manufacture?
> >
> > Have you ever looked at a mic cable?

> I have now :). The XLR cable does have a locking
> mechanism on the female end but not the male
> end.

That's because it's male and the locking mechanism is on the female end!

I can't believe that you haven't figured out that male and female connectors
are complementary.

> On the MPA Pro the XLR has pulled off because
> it is only a friction fit.

That's what you get for buying snake oil products.

> OTOH, in my stereo system the XLR locks/docks in on both ends.

As it does on any decent piece of equipment that has XLRs on it.

> I assumed the Blue cable was deficient and needed
> an adaptor to lock two cable together. It is now
> apparent that the MPA Pro is deficient because it
> lacks the locking mechanism, not the cable.

Seems like you need a little more of that "empirical experience" stuff.

> Cables lock together in serial just fine. Just like you to make
> a tempest out of a tea pot.

Look Powell if you hadn't have been such a butthole about so many things
over so many years, I'd cut you some slack.

It seems like karma is another common, simple concept (like male-female
mating) that you have no clue about, Powell.

As they say, the best revenge is living well. It's clear that you're in a
hell of your own making, both on RAO and off.

> > <Remember, this is the guy who rattles on about
> > other people's lack of practical experience and
> > empirical evidence.>

> Studio microphones and the associated equipment
> are new to me.

So it common sense, it seems. Congratulations Powell on cornering the market
on out-of-date overpriced, underperforming snake-oil products for the studio
as well as your past exploits in home audio.

> Was I suppose to divine my
> knowledge base without trial and error?

Your confusion about how XLR connectors work is really quite unique, Powell.
I've never seen a person fail to determine how they work from simple
inspection. Even kids in grade school seem to figure this out!

>Its not my fault that recording equipment is sub-par in
> construction quality to stereo equipment.

Not all of it Powell, just the obsolete snake-oil piece you decided to make
the center of your world.

From the ART web site:

"Currently, ART addresses the Dynamics Processing market with a broad range
of audio tools. ART introduced the Tube MP Microphone Preamp, which set a
new standard for tube mic preamp price/performance expectations."

IOW Powell, ART's claim to fame is that they know how to garbage up mediocre
solid state gear with thermionic noise and distortion enhancers, on the
cheap. They freely admit that their products exist to reduce dynamic range
from live performance levels to that of FM radio pop pap.

LOL!

Powell

November 7th 03, 01:47 PM

"Arny Krueger" wrote

> > Just like you to make a tempest out of a tea pot.
>
> Look Powell if you hadn't have been such a butthole
> about so many things over so many years, I'd cut you
> some slack.
>
I suppose that if I respected your opinion I’d
care, but I don’t. Big yawn.

> >Its not my fault that recording equipment is sub-par in
> > construction quality to stereo equipment.
>
> Not all of it Powell, just the obsolete snake-oil piece
> you decided to make the center of your world.
>
Obsolete? The Shure studio microphone and
pre-amp are new, dote.

> From the ART web site:
>
> "Currently, ART addresses the Dynamics
> Processing market with a broad range of audio
> tools. ART introduced the Tube MP Microphone
> Preamp, which set a new standard for tube mic
> preamp price/performance expectations."
>
It's not a model "Tube MP Microphone Preamp".
Go do your home work.

> IOW Powell, ART's claim to fame is that they know
> how to garbage up mediocre solid state gear with
> thermionic noise and distortion enhancers, on the
> cheap.
>
Quack, quack, quack...

> They freely admit that their products exist to reduce
> dynamic range from live performance levels to that
> of FM radio pop pap.
>
Prove it.

> LOL!
>
You need a bigger shovel.

Michael Mckelvy

November 7th 03, 05:13 PM

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Arny said:
>
> >"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
>
> >
> >> I said:
> >
> >>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
> >
> >> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
> >> know for sure now.
> >
> >More to the point...
> >
> >Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big fuss
over a
> >comma?
>
> Why would he? It's my extra comma, and I corrected myself, which is far
more
> than you're capable of doing, ****head.
>
> LOL!
>
> Boon

Oh ****, the boredom! It's killing me...........plotz.

Talk about lame conversations.

Arny Krueger

November 7th 03, 05:46 PM

"Michael Mckelvy" > wrote in message

> "Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Arny said:
>>
>>> "Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> I said:
>>>
>>>>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
>>>
>>>> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
>>>> know for sure now.
>>>
>>> More to the point...
>>>
>>> Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big
>>> fuss over a comma?
>>
>> Why would he? It's my extra comma, and I corrected myself, which is
>> far more than you're capable of doing, ****head.
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>> Boon
>
> Oh ****, the boredom! It's killing me...........plotz.
>
> Talk about lame conversations.

Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their presence.
You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting has ever happened
in their lives. Case in point many of us moved foreward from vinyyl to
digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently not Phillips.

Perhaps that's the answer! Nothing related to audio and interesting ever
happens in their lives. Perhaps they could try listening to a little music?

Michael Mckelvy

November 7th 03, 06:09 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Michael Mckelvy" > wrote in message
>
> > "Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Arny said:
> >>
> >>> "Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I said:
> >>>
> >>>>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
> >>>
> >>>> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
> >>>> know for sure now.
> >>>
> >>> More to the point...
> >>>
> >>> Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big
> >>> fuss over a comma?
> >>
> >> Why would he? It's my extra comma, and I corrected myself, which is
> >> far more than you're capable of doing, ****head.
> >>
> >> LOL!
> >>
> >> Boon
> >
> > Oh ****, the boredom! It's killing me...........plotz.
> >
> > Talk about lame conversations.
>
> Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their
presence.
> You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting has ever
happened
> in their lives. Case in point many of us moved foreward from vinyyl to
> digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently not Phillips.
>
> Perhaps that's the answer! Nothing related to audio and interesting ever
> happens in their lives. Perhaps they could try listening to a little
music?
>
>
Very little interesting audio related stuff ever happens here at RAO. Those
with little imagination usually are comforted by what they are familiar
with, like antique technology.

S888Wheel

November 7th 03, 06:32 PM

>Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their presence.
>You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting has ever happened
>in their lives. Case in point many of us moved foreward from vinyyl to
>digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently not Phillips.

It is vinyl not vinyyl. Some of ussimply haven't seen CDs as an advancement
over LPs for creating the best illusion of live music. It seems Arny bases his
flawed argument on the false premise that all people who prefer vinyl haven't
been listening to anything digital as well.

Arny said

>
>Perhaps that's the answer! Nothing related to audio and interesting ever
>happens in their lives.

Eroneous conclusion based on false premises.

Arny said

>Perhaps they could try listening to a little music?

Many of us have listened to plenty of music Arny. I have noticed that when the
topic is music you don't fare very well in the discussions. Perhaps you should
listen to more music.

dave weil

November 7th 03, 06:42 PM

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:46:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Case in point many of us moved foreward from vinyyl to
>digital 20 or more years ago.

Damn Krooglish.

dave weil

November 7th 03, 06:47 PM

On 07 Nov 2003 18:32:18 GMT, (S888Wheel) wrote:

>>Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their presence.
>>You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting has ever happened
>>in their lives. Case in point many of us moved foreward from vinyyl to
>>digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently not Phillips.
>
>It is vinyl not vinyyl. Some of us simply haven't seen CDs as an advancement
>over LPs for creating the best illusion of live music. It seems Arny bases his
>flawed argument on the false premise that all people who prefer vinyl haven't
>been listening to anything digital as well.

Agreed. I'm on record as stating that I have 8 diferent CD players in
my home. I also have over 2,000 mp3s. I have something like 1,000 CDs.
I have probably close to 2,000 tracks available to me on CD at any one
time, available for anything from continuous playing to random or
programmed playback.

Contrast that with two turntables, one reel to reel deck and a 4 track
cassette deck and something like 3,000 LPs and a couple of hundred
cassettes.

I think that digital is pretty well-represented in my household.

Arny Krueger

November 7th 03, 07:07 PM

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>> Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their
>> presence. You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting
>> has ever happened in their lives. Case in point many of us moved
>> foreword from vinyyl to digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently
>> not Phillips.

> It is vinyl not vinyyl.

The irony of you correcting my spelling is really pretty extreme, sockpuppet
Wheel.

> Some of ussimply haven't seen CDs as an
> advancement over LPs for creating the best illusion of live music.

That's simply because you don't want the illusion of live music. You want
the sound of vinyl.

> It
> seems Arny bases his flawed argument on the false premise that all
> people who prefer vinyl haven't been listening to anything digital as
> well.

Nahh, I know better. I understand that listening to vinyl is an addiction,
like smoking. The world is still regrettably full of smokers who don't think
that air tastes *right* without the combustion products of burning tobacco
and paper mixed in. So it is with listening to vinyl in preference to
listening to clean, accurate reproduction.

> Arny said

>> Perhaps that's the answer! Nothing related to audio and interesting
>> ever happens in their lives.

> Eroneous conclusion based on false premises.

I see no proper foundation for that conclusion.

> Arny said
>
>> Perhaps they could try listening to a little music?

> Many of us have listened to plenty of music Arny.

Not true at all sockpuppet Wheel. You've said that you prefer to listen to
music with the egregious audible defects of vinyl mixed in. That's obviously
not the same as listening to music.

>I have noticed that when the topic is music you don't fare very well in
the discussions.

I've noticed that you set yourself as an authority on all things, sockpuppet
wheel.

> Perhaps you should listen to more music.

Perhaps you could dream about listening to as much live music as I do. For
extra credit you could try to record it. However, first you should follow
the misadventures of Powell, so you can learn the basics, like how to
properly hook up XLR connectors.

Arny Krueger

November 7th 03, 07:27 PM

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On 07 Nov 2003 18:32:18 GMT, (S888Wheel) wrote:
>
>>> Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their
>>> presence. You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting
>>> has ever happened in their lives. Case in point many of us moved
>>> foreward from vinyyl to digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently
>>> not Phillips.
>>
>> It is vinyl not vinyyl. Some of us simply haven't seen CDs as an
>> advancement over LPs for creating the best illusion of live music.
>> It seems Arny bases his flawed argument on the false premise that
>> all people who prefer vinyl haven't been listening to anything
>> digital as well.
>
> Agreed. I'm on record as stating that I have 8 diferent CD players in
> my home. I also have over 2,000 mp3s. I have something like 1,000 CDs.
> I have probably close to 2,000 tracks available to me on CD at any one
> time, available for anything from continuous playing to random or
> programmed playback.
>
> Contrast that with two turntables, one reel to reel deck and a 4 track
> cassette deck and something like 3,000 LPs and a couple of hundred
> cassettes.
>
> I think that digital is pretty well-represented in my household.

If digital doesn't as a rule sound better than vinyl, then it's obviously
under-represented, at least in your perceptions Weil.

dave weil

November 7th 03, 08:11 PM

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:07:13 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Perhaps you could dream about listening to as much live music as I do.

Perhaps *you* could dream about listening to as much live music as *I*
do. Not only do I mean *any* live music, but especially something
other than self-admitted really poorly rendered church organ music.

dave weil

November 7th 03, 08:15 PM

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:27:38 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>If digital doesn't as a rule sound better than vinyl, then it's obviously
>under-represented, at least in your perceptions Weil.

This doesn't make any sense.

Don't you *really* mean - "If digital doesn't as a rule sound better
than vinyl, then it's obviously *over*-represented, at least in your
perceptions Weil."? If not, maybe you could explain how your
statement makes any sort of sense pertaining to a household that has
almost virtual parity between the two formats.

Lionel

November 7th 03, 09:31 PM

S888Wheel wrote:
>
> Many of us have listened to plenty of music Arny. I have noticed that when the
> topic is music you don't fare very well in the discussions. Perhaps you should
> listen to more music.

You don't notice anything !...
Looking from your last posts on RAO you're are not in a good position to
speak about MUSIC, Mr. "S888Wheel" Redemptor.

Please give us an opportunity to believe that you know anything about
music, Scott "Suer" Wheeler...
LOL!

Sockpuppet Yustabe

November 7th 03, 11:30 PM

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...

> Scott "Suer" Wheeler...

Arny "Sewer" Krueger

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

Lionel

November 8th 03, 12:49 AM

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>
>>Scott "Suer" Wheeler...
>
>
>
> Arny "Sewer" Krueger
>
>
>
Rather than being sarcastic, you should pay attention to the California
laws lesson that S888WheelChair tried to teach you ! ;O)

Marc Phillips

November 8th 03, 02:05 AM

McKelvy said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
>> Arny said:
>>
>> >"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
>>
>> >
>> >> I said:
>> >
>> >>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
>> >
>> >> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
>> >> know for sure now.
>> >
>> >More to the point...
>> >
>> >Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big fuss
>over a
>> >comma?
>>
>> Why would he? It's my extra comma, and I corrected myself, which is far
>more
>> than you're capable of doing, ****head.
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>> Boon
>
>Oh ****, the boredom! It's killing me...........plotz.

You know, "plotz" means that you've put me in your killfile. On the other
hand, it's clear that you're going back days and days to respond to each one of
the posts I've made in every thread.

>
>Talk about lame conversations.

Talk about Internet geeks.

Boon

Marc Phillips

November 8th 03, 02:06 AM

Arny said:

>Nothing related to audio and interesting ever
>happens in their lives. Perhaps they could try listening to a little music?

So said the Internet geek with 60,000 Usenet posts under his belt.

LOL!

Boon

Marc Phillips

November 8th 03, 02:08 AM

Arny said:

>Case in point many of us moved
>>>> foreward from vinyyl to digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently
not Phillips.

I own as many CDs as LPs, well over 1500 of each.

And it's apprantly, not apparently.

Boon

Sockpuppet Yustabe

November 8th 03, 05:28 AM

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Arny said:
>
> >Case in point many of us moved
> >>>> foreward from vinyyl to digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently
> not Phillips.
>
> I own as many CDs as LPs, well over 1500 of each.
>
> And it's apprantly, not apparently.
>
> Boon
>
>

Panel party

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

Sockpuppet Yustabe

November 8th 03, 05:30 AM

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Arny said:
>
> >Case in point many of us moved
> >>>> foreward from vinyyl to digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently
> not Phillips.
>
> I own as many CDs as LPs, well over 1500 of each.
>
> And it's apprantly, not apparently.
>
> Boon
>
>

Arny lap pet

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

Scott Gardner

November 8th 03, 06:15 AM

On 08 Nov 2003 02:05:28 GMT, (Marc Phillips)
wrote:

>McKelvy said:
>
>>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...

<snip>

>>
>>Oh ****, the boredom! It's killing me...........plotz.
>
>You know, "plotz" means that you've put me in your killfile. On the other
>hand, it's clear that you're going back days and days to respond to each one of
>the posts I've made in every thread.
>
>>
>>Talk about lame conversations.
>
>Talk about Internet geeks.
>
>Boon
>

Maybe things are different here, but I always thought "plonk" was the
killfile sound, not "plotz". Isn't "plotz" Yiddish slang? I thought
it translated roughly as "to faint from excitement".

Scott Gardner

Marc Phillips

November 8th 03, 07:52 AM

Scott Gardner said:

>On 08 Nov 2003 02:05:28 GMT, (Marc Phillips)
>wrote:
>
>>McKelvy said:
>>
>>>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
>
><snip>
>
>>>
>>>Oh ****, the boredom! It's killing me...........plotz.
>>
>>You know, "plotz" means that you've put me in your killfile. On the other
>>hand, it's clear that you're going back days and days to respond to each one
>of
>>the posts I've made in every thread.
>>
>>>
>>>Talk about lame conversations.
>>
>>Talk about Internet geeks.
>>
>>Boon
>>
>
>
>Maybe things are different here, but I always thought "plonk" was the
>killfile sound, not "plotz". Isn't "plotz" Yiddish slang? I thought
>it translated roughly as "to faint from excitement".

LOL! You're right!

Boon

S888Wheel

November 8th 03, 07:52 AM

Arny said

>>> Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their
>>> presence. You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting
>>> has ever happened in their lives. Case in point many of us moved
>>> foreword from vinyyl to digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently
>>> not Phillips.

I said

>
>> It is vinyl not vinyyl.

Arny said

>
>The irony of you correcting my spelling is really pretty extreme, sockpuppet
>Wheel.

There is nothing ironic about correcting a mistake Arny. I was willing to give
you the benefit of the doubt and consider it a typo and not a misspelling.
Thanks for the correction.

I said

>
>> Some of ussimply haven't seen CDs as an
>> advancement over LPs for creating the best illusion of live music.

Arny said

>
>That's simply because you don't want the illusion of live music. You want
>the sound of vinyl.
>

Claims of mind reading noted. For the record i do want the illusion of live
music and IMO vinyl generally does a better job of it than CDs.

I said

>
>> It
>> seems Arny bases his flawed argument on the false premise that all
>> people who prefer vinyl haven't been listening to anything digital as
>> well.

Arny said

>
>Nahh, I know better. I understand that listening to vinyl is an addiction,
>like smoking.

This claim clearly shows that you don't know better. In fact you know very
little about the appeal of LP playback as it relates to creating the illusion
of live music.

Arny said

> The world is still regrettably full of smokers who don't think
>that air tastes *right* without the combustion products of burning tobacco
>and paper mixed in. So it is with listening to vinyl in preference to
>listening to clean, accurate reproduction.

Nope. Well, maybe with your rig. Try getting a better setup for vinyl playback.
It does make a difference.

>
>> Arny said
>
>>> Perhaps that's the answer! Nothing related to audio and interesting
>>> ever happens in their lives.

I said

>
>> Eroneous conclusion based on false premises.

Arny said

>
>I see no proper foundation for that conclusion.
>

You can lead Arny to the facts but you can't make him acknowledge them or
understand them.

>
>> Arny said
>>
>>> Perhaps they could try listening to a little music?

I said

>
>> Many of us have listened to plenty of music Arny.
>

Arny said

>
>Not true at all sockpuppet Wheel.

Yes it is true arny.

Arny said

> You've said that you prefer to listen to
>music with the egregious audible defects of vinyl mixed in.

No Arny I haven't said that at all. i have said i think vinyl does a better job
of creating the illusion of live music than CD does most of the time. You can
misrepresent what I say all you want but it just makes you look dishonest. If
you cannot argue without misrepresenting my position you must not have much
faith in the legitimacy of your position.

Arny said

> That's obviously
>not the same as listening to music.

That is simply ridiculous. Even if one listens to music on an AM station on a
boombox with one working speaker one is still listening to music. This is just
another dishonest argument. No one is saying vinyl is perfect or that any
playback system is perfect. But it sure aint perfect with CD either.

I said

>
>>I have noticed that when the topic is music you don't fare very well in
>the discussions.

Arny said

>
>I've noticed that you set yourself as an authority on all things, sockpuppet
>wheel.
>

Really? Can you cite any evidence to support this assertion? Can you quote me
claiming to be an authority on all things?

I said

>
>> Perhaps you should listen to more music.
>

Arny said

>
>Perhaps you could dream about listening to as much live music as I do.

Why would I want to listen to some mediocre church choir every week? I listen
to plenty of live music Arny but I don't waste my time with mediocre church
music.

Arny said

>For
>extra credit you could try to record it.

Why?

Arny said

>However, first you should follow
>the misadventures of Powell, so you can learn the basics, like how to
>properly hook up XLR connectors.

I have no interest in doing crappy recordings of crappy muic Arny. Your
adventures in recording don't inspire me. I prefer to let the pros do the work
in recording. I'll just listen.

dave weil

November 8th 03, 01:22 PM

On 08 Nov 2003 02:05:28 GMT, (Marc Phillips)
wrote:

>McKelvy said:
>
>>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
>>> Arny said:
>>>
>>> >"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> >
>>> >> I said:
>>> >
>>> >>> I guess you'll keep being, wrong, too.
>>> >
>>> >> Will Arny note the extra comma, which was an accident? We'll never
>>> >> know for sure now.
>>> >
>>> >More to the point...
>>> >
>>> >Will Sockpuppet Yustabe criticize Phillips for making such a big fuss
>>over a
>>> >comma?
>>>
>>> Why would he? It's my extra comma, and I corrected myself, which is far
>>more
>>> than you're capable of doing, ****head.
>>>
>>> LOL!
>>>
>>> Boon
>>
>>Oh ****, the boredom! It's killing me...........plotz.
>
>You know, "plotz" means that you've put me in your killfile. On the other
>hand, it's clear that you're going back days and days to respond to each one of
>the posts I've made in every thread.

I was kind of hoping is was the sound of his virtual body hitting the
floor.

Something tells me that that's not it, though.

Bruce J. Richman

November 8th 03, 08:55 PM

Dave Weil wrote:

>On 07 Nov 2003 18:32:18 GMT, (S888Wheel) wrote:
>
>>>Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their
>presence.
>>>You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting has ever happened
>>>in their lives. Case in point many of us moved foreward from vinyyl to
>>>digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently not Phillips.
>>
>>It is vinyl not vinyyl. Some of us simply haven't seen CDs as an
>advancement
>>over LPs for creating the best illusion of live music. It seems Arny bases
>his
>>flawed argument on the false premise that all people who prefer vinyl
>haven't
>>been listening to anything digital as well.
>
>Agreed. I'm on record as stating that I have 8 diferent CD players in
>my home. I also have over 2,000 mp3s. I have something like 1,000 CDs.
>I have probably close to 2,000 tracks available to me on CD at any one
>time, available for anything from continuous playing to random or
>programmed playback.
>
>Contrast that with two turntables, one reel to reel deck and a 4 track
>cassette deck and something like 3,000 LPs and a couple of hundred
>cassettes.
>
>I think that digital is pretty well-represented in my household.
>
>
>
>
>
>

While I don't have as many LPs or CDs as youi do, I listen to *all* my items
(about 1600 LPs and 200 CDs) on a regular basis. In addition, I have what
might be called a high-end mobile audio system in my car (component speakers,
separate preamp and amplifier, etc.) and regularly listen to metal cassettes
processed with Dolby C (from a Nakamichi deck) while driving around. Again,
what I tape comes from both formats. And I belong to one of the CD clubs
(BMB), so it's obvious I don't have any reluctance to buy CDs if I like the
music - e.g. Oh Brother, Where Art Thou, which I'm planning to get on CD if I
can't find a vinyl version first (lol).

I agree with you that Krueger's usual and predictable routine bashing of vinyl
playback is based on many false premises such as the false belief that those
that prefer analog playback don't enjoy digitalo playback as well.

Bruce J. Richman

Arny Krueger

November 9th 03, 02:28 AM

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

> I agree with you that Krueger's usual and predictable routine bashing
> of vinyl playback is based on many false premises such as the false
> belief that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy digitalo
> playback as well.

Since I don't believe that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy
digital playback as well Bruce, you're sort of hanging in space with no
valid proof for your assertion.

Bruce J. Richman

November 9th 03, 04:19 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>
>> I agree with you that Krueger's usual and predictable routine bashing
>> of vinyl playback is based on many false premises such as the false
>> belief that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy digitalo
>> playback as well.
>
>Since I don't believe that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy
>digital playback as well Bruce, you're sort of hanging in space with no
>valid proof for your assertion.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Once again and quite predictably, Arnie, you have deliberately deleted the
entire post to which I was responding. You did this naturally, so that you
could quote me out of context - one of your old tricks, of course. So
therefore, your comments, can't be supported. Here is the post which you
deliberately deleted, and my response, IN CONTEXT.

I would think by now, avfter so many exposes of your deliberate deletion of
what people say so that you can misrepresent their words - you'd get tired of
resorting to this transparent trick. But no, you just invite us all to have to
correct your misrepresentations. Oh, well.

LOL!

Here's the post to which I responded, which you naturally, tried to
misrepresent through selective deletion:

<beginning of post deliberately deleted by Krueger to try and change meaning of
my response>

Message-id: >

Dave Weil wrote:

>On 07 Nov 2003 18:32:18 GMT, (S888Wheel) wrote:
>
>>>Happens every time Phillips and his merry band grace us with their
>presence.
>>>You'd think that nothing related to audio and interesting has ever happened
>>>in their lives. Case in point many of us moved foreward from vinyyl to
>>>digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently not Phillips.
>>
>>It is vinyl not vinyyl. Some of us simply haven't seen CDs as an
>advancement
>>over LPs for creating the best illusion of live music. It seems Arny bases
>his
>>flawed argument on the false premise that all people who prefer vinyl
>haven't
>>been listening to anything digital as well.
>
>Agreed. I'm on record as stating that I have 8 diferent CD players in
>my home. I also have over 2,000 mp3s. I have something like 1,000 CDs.
>I have probably close to 2,000 tracks available to me on CD at any one
>time, available for anything from continuous playing to random or
>programmed playback.
>
>Contrast that with two turntables, one reel to reel deck and a 4 track
>cassette deck and something like 3,000 LPs and a couple of hundred
>cassettes.
>
>I think that digital is pretty well-represented in my household.
>
>
>
>
>
>

While I don't have as many LPs or CDs as youi do, I listen to *all* my items
(about 1600 LPs and 200 CDs) on a regular basis. In addition, I have what
might be called a high-end mobile audio system in my car (component speakers,
separate preamp and amplifier, etc.) and regularly listen to metal cassettes
processed with Dolby C (from a Nakamichi deck) while driving around. Again,
what I tape comes from both formats. And I belong to one of the CD clubs
(BMB), so it's obvious I don't have any reluctance to buy CDs if I like the
music - e.g. Oh Brother, Where Art Thou, which I'm planning to get on CD if I
can't find a vinyl version first (lol).

I agree with you that Krueger's usual and predictable routine bashing of vinyl
playback is based on many false premises such as the false belief that those
that prefer analog playback don't enjoy digitalo playback as well.

Bruce J. Richman

<end of post almost entirely deleted by Krueger to misrepresent my response >
------------------------------------------------------------

So Arnie, although you've tried as usual to misrepresent my response, it is
quite clear that I was simply agreeing with Marc Phillips & Dave Weil's valid
observations (which you tried to delete deliberately so that it wouldn't be
seen)

So your attempt at once again bashing vinyl playback has been shown to rest on
the false premise that those that have vinyl collections don't enjoy digital
playback as well.

<Now Krueger will try to rationalize his deletion of the post to which I
responded by fraudulently claiming he was just "trying to spare the RAO
audience boredom" - his usual personal insult and excuse for deliberate
deletion and selective editing of posts that he's trying to misrepresent>

Nice try, Arnie.

But as Dave Weil, would say....." ":.
(I'm sure you can fill in the blank).

LOL!

Bruce J. Richman

Bruce J. Richman

November 9th 03, 04:27 AM

Paul Dormer wrote:

>"Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
>>I understand that listening to vinyl is an addiction, like smoking.
>
>That's patently false.
>
>
>--
>S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t
>
>
>
>
>
>

Correct, neither listening to vinyl or even smoking (in the opinion of many
professionals) is an addiction. Usually, when the term "addiction" is used by
medical and/or mental health professionals, the term refers to drugs that
create a chemical dependency. Obviously, vinyl records don't meet this
criteria. Interestingly, unlike some truly addictive drugs (e.g. heroin,
benzodiazepenes such as Xanax, Librium, Ativan, etc.), smoking (even
considering the usual arguments about nicotine) might be considered
"psychologically addicting", if one wants to use that term, but *not*
chemically addicting. People can and do quit smoking without any significant
physiological side effects or consequences all the time. This is *not* true of
drugs that create chemical dependencies. People don't have to be "detoxed"
from smoking, but they usually do from heroin, heavy benzo use, etc.

Of course, on RAO, it might be said that bashing vinyl playback, and falsely
calling those that enjoy it "vinyl bigots" has become an addiction for one
poster only :).

Bruce J. Richman

Arny Krueger

November 9th 03, 11:08 AM

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> I agree with you that Krueger's usual and predictable routine
>>> bashing of vinyl playback is based on many false premises such as
>>> the false belief that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy
>>> digitalo playback as well.
>>
>> Since I don't believe that those that prefer analog playback don't
>> enjoy digital playback as well Bruce, you're sort of hanging in
>> space with no valid proof for your assertion.

> Once again and quite predictably, Arnie, you have deliberately
> deleted the entire post to which I was responding. >

That because of your incredible verbosity and inability to properly edit,
Bruce.

This is Usenet and people can check up what I deleted by just going back one
post in the thread. Most newsreaders make this easy to do.

> So Arnie, although you've tried as usual to misrepresent my response,
> it is quite clear that I was simply agreeing with Marc Phillips &
> Dave Weil's valid observations (which you tried to delete
> deliberately so that it wouldn't be seen)

Marc Phillips and Dave Weil's observations don't shed any light on your
claim that I don't believe that those who prefer analog playback don't have
access to digital as well. You've got to show me a place where I said that I
think that I don't believe that those who prefer analog don't have access to
digital as well. So far, you've failed to do that.

Look Bruce, this is the 21st century. Digital audio is virtually everywhere.
There's no reason why anybody in the civilized world would not have the
opportunity to listen to as much digital audio as they want to. Indeed,
digital audio is nearly impossible to avoid listening to. Ironically, many
of the LPs that vinyl bigots listen to were tracked and mastered digitally.

> So your attempt at once again bashing vinyl playback has been shown
> to rest on the false premise that those that have vinyl collections
> don't enjoy digital playback as well.

Except that you still have provided no proof for you claim Bruce. Your proof
of you claim about my beliefs won't be found in a post by yourself or Weil.
You've got to find it in something that I wrote!

> <Now Krueger will try to rationalize his deletion of the post to
> which I responded by fraudulently claiming he was just "trying to
> spare the RAO audience boredom" - his usual personal insult and
> excuse for deliberate deletion and selective editing of posts that
> he's trying to misrepresent>

> Nice try, Arnie.

> But as Dave Weil, would say....." ":.
> (I'm sure you can fill in the blank).
>
> LOL!

Except Bruce you still haven't shown me saying that I think that the people
who prefer analog don't have any digital to listen to. Do try to stay on
topic, eh?

Arny Krueger

November 9th 03, 11:15 AM

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

> Paul Dormer wrote:
>
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>>
>>> I understand that listening to vinyl is an addiction, like smoking.
>>
>> That's patently false.

> Correct, neither listening to vinyl or even smoking (in the opinion
> of many professionals) is an addiction. Usually, when the term
> "addiction" is used by medical and/or mental health professionals,
> the term refers to drugs that create a chemical dependency.

Ignoring the fact that other kinds of dependencies are recognized by
professionals.

> Obviously, vinyl records don't meet this criteria.

Obviously the criteria stated is not universal because if it were, Richman
wouldn't have used vague "hedge words" like "in the opinion of many
professionals".

> Interestingly,
> unlike some truly addictive drugs (e.g. heroin, benzodiazepenes such
> as Xanax, Librium, Ativan, etc.), smoking (even considering the usual
> arguments about nicotine) might be considered "psychologically
> addicting", if one wants to use that term, but *not* chemically
> addicting.

Interesting in that now even Richman contradicts his stated thesis that
neither smoking nor listening to vinyl is addicting.

> People can and do quit smoking without any significant
> physiological side effects or consequences all the time.

For some lucky minority, perhaps. However there are many people who have
quit smoking without reporting any significant
physiological side effects or consequences many times, begging the question
why did they start smoking again?

That's why there's a billion-dollar business called "helping people quit
smoking". That's why there are medications that are approved by the FDA for
the purpose of reducing the significant physiological side effects or
consequences or quitting smoking.

Given that Richman has already contradicted his thesis, there's no need to
go any further.

S888Wheel

November 9th 03, 04:57 PM

Bruce said

>> I agree with you that Krueger's usual and predictable routine bashing
>> of vinyl playback is based on many false premises such as the false
>> belief that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy digitalo
>> playback as well.

Arny said

>
>Since I don't believe that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy
>digital playback as well Bruce, you're sort of hanging in space with no
>valid proof for your assertion.
>

But this is what you said; "Case in point many of us moved foreword from vinyyl
to digital 20 or more years ago. Apparently
not Phillips." Now one has to figure out what is meant by "moved foreword from
vinyyl." But it looks like you are saying those who prefer vinyl haven't
embraced CDs.

George M. Middius

November 9th 03, 05:12 PM

S888Wheel said to ****-for-Brains:

> Now one has to figure out what is meant by "moved foreword from vinyyl."

Sorry to tell you this, but there will never be a 100% perfect
Krooglish-to-human translation program. In this instance, a
reasonable human being might ask why a foreword is being moved,
and to where. The back of the book, perhaps? Who knows. And what
is "vinyyl" -- a brand-new building block for polymers?

Trying to understand Krooglish is a nasty business.

Bruce J. Richman

November 9th 03, 05:23 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> I agree with you that Krueger's usual and predictable routine
>>>> bashing of vinyl playback is based on many false premises such as
>>>> the false belief that those that prefer analog playback don't enjoy
>>>> digitalo playback as well.
>>>
>>> Since I don't believe that those that prefer analog playback don't
>>> enjoy digital playback as well Bruce, you're sort of hanging in
>>> space with no valid proof for your assertion.
>
>> Once again and quite predictably, Arnie, you have deliberately
>> deleted the entire post to which I was responding. >
>
>That because of your incredible verbosity and inability to properly edit,
>Bruce.
>

That is just another one of your false claims, Arnie. The real reason you
deleted most of the post was because it clearly showed that others - namely,
Dave Weil and Mark Phillips - successfully refuted your prejudiced comments
about vinyl playback.

>This is Usenet and people can check up what I deleted by just going back one
>post in the thread. Most newsreaders make this easy to do.
>

Unlike you, most readers have the courtesy and honesty to reproduce the posts
to which they are responding. Your rationalization for your deliberate and
deceptive editing is duly noted.

>> So Arnie, although you've tried as usual to misrepresent my response,
>> it is quite clear that I was simply agreeing with Marc Phillips &
>> Dave Weil's valid observations (which you tried to delete
>> deliberately so that it wouldn't be seen)
>
>Marc Phillips and Dave Weil's observations don't shed any light on your
>claim that I don't believe that those who prefer analog playback don't have
>access to digital as well. You've got to show me a place where I said that I
>think that I don't believe that those who prefer analog don't have access to
>digital as well. So far, you've failed to do that.
>

You are wrong. You clearly claimed that many have "moved on" from vinyl to
digital playback. Yet you provide no evidence to support this claim. If we
were to ask most people what "moved on" means, chances are excellent they would
say that is equivalent to giving up one format for the other. At least as far
as those who read RAO is concerned, many here disagree with that unsupported
cliam.

>Look Bruce, this is the 21st century. Digital audio is virtually everywhere.
>There's no reason why anybody in the civilized world would not have the
>opportunity to listen to as much digital audio as they want to. Indeed,
>digital audio is nearly impossible to avoid listening to. Ironically, many
>of the LPs that vinyl bigots listen to were tracked and mastered digitally.
>

You have not provided any evidence, Arnie, to support that claim. Your
continuous use of the term "vinyl bigot" is inappropriate and only designed to
smear those that prefer vinyl playback. Actually, it appears that *you* are the
only one on RAO that regularly smears and makes derogatory remarks about either
vinyl or digital playback. Therefore, when it comes to bigotry, Arnie, it
seems that you just can't help yourself from making bigoted remarks about
vinyl, and tubes, of course. Do you see the rest of us making bigoted comments
about either CDs or or transistors? No, you don't. The fact that we might
prefer them doesn't make us bigots. The fact that you seem to never lose an
opportunity to make negative comments on both topics makes it appear that you
are the real "vinyl and tube bigot", not those that you attack for their
preferences.

>> So your attempt at once again bashing vinyl playback has been shown
>> to rest on the false premise that those that have vinyl collections
>> don't enjoy digital playback as well.
>
>Except that you still have provided no proof for you claim Bruce. Your proof
>of you claim about my beliefs won't be found in a post by yourself or Weil.
>You've got to find it in something that I wrote!
>

See my comments above. And as for proof, you've never been able to justify
your use of the term "vinyl bigot", but you continue to use it. Therefore,
assertions aboiut proof being required ring somewhat hollow.

>> <Now Krueger will try to rationalize his deletion of the post to
>> which I responded by fraudulently claiming he was just "trying to
>> spare the RAO audience boredom" - his usual personal insult and
>> excuse for deliberate deletion and selective editing of posts that
>> he's trying to misrepresent>
>
>> Nice try, Arnie.
>
>> But as Dave Weil, would say....." ":.
>> (I'm sure you can fill in the blank).
>>
>> LOL!
>
>Except Bruce you still haven't shown me saying that I think that the people
>who prefer analog don't have any digital to listen to. Do try to stay on
>topic, eh?
>
>
>
>

Unfortunately, your customary deceptive editing of posts from others and
deletions of factual information, make any discussion of topics very difficult.
I would suggest that you give up this silly practice, since it is so
transparent and obvious. Your efforts to attack the posts of others by
misrepresenting what they have said is duly noted.

Bruce J. Richman

Bruce J. Richman

November 9th 03, 05:41 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>> Paul Dormer wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I understand that listening to vinyl is an addiction, like smoking.
>>>
>>> That's patently false.
>
>> Correct, neither listening to vinyl or even smoking (in the opinion
>> of many professionals) is an addiction. Usually, when the term
>> "addiction" is used by medical and/or mental health professionals,
>> the term refers to drugs that create a chemical dependency.
>
>Ignoring the fact that other kinds of dependencies are recognized by
>professionals.
>

A false claim. Note that Krueger has used meaningless and vague terms such as
"other kinds of dependencies" and "professionals" without providing any
specific facts to support his false claim.

>> Obviously, vinyl records don't meet this criteria.
>
>Obviously the criteria stated is not universal because if it were, Richman
>wouldn't have used vague "hedge words" like "in the opinion of many
>professionals".
>

A laughably hypocritical response from Krueger, given his vague reference to
"other kinds of dependencies" and "professionals" above. Note that Krueger
fails to define his terms, but then accuses others of errors - how laughable !

LOL!

>> Interestingly,
>> unlike some truly addictive drugs (e.g. heroin, benzodiazepenes such
>> as Xanax, Librium, Ativan, etc.), smoking (even considering the usual
>> arguments about nicotine) might be considered "psychologically
>> addicting", if one wants to use that term, but *not* chemically
>> addicting.
>
>Interesting in that now even Richman contradicts his stated thesis that
>neither smoking nor listening to vinyl is addicting.
>

This is just another of Krueger's lies. There is no contradiction, of course.
Neither listening to vinyl nor smoking is in any way equivalent to dependence
on narcotics or benzodiazepenes. To falsely claim otherwise, as Krueger is
trying to do here, is ridiculous.

>> People can and do quit smoking without any significant
>> physiological side effects or consequences all the time.
>
>For some lucky minority, perhaps. However there are many people who have
>quit smoking without reporting any significant
>physiological side effects or consequences many times, begging the question
>why did they start smoking again?
>

Krueger has just agreed with my claim that many quit smoking without any
significatn physiological side effects or consequences. He, of course, has not
provided any statistical evidence to support his claim that the relapse rate is
high. The facts remain that people can and do quit smoking on a regular basis -
and for many it is a one time experience.

>That's why there's a billion-dollar business called "helping people quit
>smoking". That's why there are medications that are approved by the FDA for
>the purpose of reducing the significant physiological side effects or
>consequences or quitting smoking.
>

Prove it! Prove that there are significant physiological side effects or
consequences from quitting smoking. Krueger's argument in favor of using drugs
to treat smoking simply reflects his lack oif respect for psychological factors
involved in smoking as well as his usual disregard for personal preferences.
More specifically, many have decided to experience a few possible days of
"missing" their cigarettes (psychologically, not physically) to enjoy the
benefits of quitting. And here, I'm also talking from -personal experience,
since earlier in my life I had a 2-3 pack/day habit myself. I went "cold
turkey" about 15 years ago - with no drugs such as the one Krueger is trying to
promote and/or advocate - and have never relapsed.

Actually, this line is of reasoning by Krueger is flawed because he can't, nor
can anybody show that nicotine substitutes or other drugs, are sold to treat
those that have relapsed. In point of fact, products such as nicotine patches
and nicorette gum have received a fair amount of criticism because of the
dangers *these* drugs involve. It is a commonly known fact that nicotine is a
stimulant. Therefore products such as these may indeed be somewhat unsafe for
those with cardiovascular problems, for example.

>Given that Richman has already contradicted his thesis, there's no need to
>go any further.
>
>

Since Krueger has not shown in any of his comments that any contradiction has
been gtiven by me, his false claims above are worthless.

Bruce J. Richman