Re: Budget hifi opinion

[George M. Middius]

Poopie Donkey admits the truth about his skills in the world of business.

> > Poopie tries to scare somebody.

> > > NAD stuff has always generally been pretty decent. I nearly worked for them once btw !

> > But just in time, the HR manager checked your "references". Whew!

> Actually, it's because I wanted to continue in a self-employed role whereas they wanted a
> full-timer.

Of course. Who could blame them.

> I was totally 'in the bag'.

No surprise there.




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[Eeyore]

"George M. Middius" wrote:

LIES

[Peter Wieck]

George M. Middius drooled:

Its typical whining, puling, silly, stupid tripe.

Now, which is it that bothers you more, Mr. Middius: That Mr.
Jute-McCoy's fingers are so far
up your fundament that you can taste them at the back of your throat?
Or that you are only its second-favorite sock-puppet?

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[paul packer]

On 5 Sep 2006 10:09:50 -0700, "Peter Wieck" > wrote:

>George M. Middius drooled:
>
>Its typical whining, puling, silly, stupid tripe.


Aren't silly and stupid effectively the same?

George will [sic] you for that.

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" > wrote in message

> On 5 Sep 2006 10:09:50 -0700, "Peter Wieck"
> > wrote:
>
>> George M. Middius drooled:
>>
>> Its typical whining, puling, silly, stupid tripe.
>
>
> Aren't silly and stupid effectively the same?

Try looking the words up in a dictionary, Paul.

> George will [sic] you for that.

Yawn.

[Peter Wieck]

paul packer wrote:

> Aren't silly and stupid effectively the same?

Not hardly.

Silly is typically applied to those who lack common sense, impulse
control, judgement, or act dazed or stunned... out-of-it, so to speak.
It can also be a temporary condition brought on by drink or drugs or
lust. But silly people may be very bright, just not always under
real-world conditions.

Stupid is systemic. Slow of mind, dull, given to unintelligent acts,
senseless, and so forth. Typically, "stupid" is permanent.

So:

Silly may be temporary but can be chronic.
Stupid is both systemic and permanent.
"Ignorant" (to ring all the changes) may be curable.

Mr. Middius is silly for the most part, stupid always, and invincibly
ignorant. A common condition in most forms of pond-scum with
pretentions to a higher rung on the evolutionary ladder.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Arny Krueger]

"Peter Wieck" > wrote in message
ps.com
>
> Mr. Middius is silly for the most part, stupid always,
> and invincibly ignorant. A common condition in most forms
> of pond-scum with pretentions to a higher rung on the
> evolutionary ladder.

I think this is by design. The Middius persona gets satisfaction from how he
can leverage his apparent ignorance into a position of dominance over his
brain-dead adherents. The person who animates him is not that much
better-informed, but he fancies himself enough of an expert that he would be
exposed if he revealed more of what he knows.

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg, desperately seeking a harbor where the jeering is muted,
eagerly embraces McCarty's familiar.

> The Middius persona gets satisfaction from how he
> can leverage his apparent ignorance into a position of dominance over his
> brain-dead adherents.

Odd that you would view my taunting of you in religious terms, Arnii. Is
your phoney "christian" posturing starting to chafe a bit?





--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[Keith G]

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> The Krooborg, desperately seeking a harbor where the jeering is muted,
> eagerly embraces McCarty's familiar.
>
>> The Middius persona gets satisfaction from how he
>> can leverage his apparent ignorance into a position of dominance over his
>> brain-dead adherents.
>
> Odd that you would view my taunting of you in religious terms, Arnii. Is
> your phoney "christian" posturing starting to chafe a bit?



I doubt Arny's 'Christian posturing' is phoney - he's got all the hallmarks
of a *true* God Botherer: Arrogance, Hypocrisy, Bigotry, Meanness....

[paul packer]

On 7 Sep 2006 07:15:56 -0700, "Peter Wieck" > wrote:

>
>paul packer wrote:
>
>> Aren't silly and stupid effectively the same?
>
>Not hardly.
>
>Silly is typically applied to those who lack common sense, impulse
>control, judgement, or act dazed or stunned... out-of-it, so to speak.
>It can also be a temporary condition brought on by drink or drugs or
>lust. But silly people may be very bright, just not always under
>real-world conditions.
>
>Stupid is systemic. Slow of mind, dull, given to unintelligent acts,
>senseless, and so forth. Typically, "stupid" is permanent.


But if a person is permanently "stupid", how does one pick when he's
also temporarily "silly"? Wouldn't the first effectively camouflage
the second?

[paul packer]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2006 10:41:02 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Peter Wieck" > wrote in message
ps.com
>>
>> Mr. Middius is silly for the most part, stupid always,
>> and invincibly ignorant. A common condition in most forms
>> of pond-scum with pretentions to a higher rung on the
>> evolutionary ladder.
>
>I think this is by design. The Middius persona gets satisfaction from how he
>can leverage his apparent ignorance into a position of dominance over his
>brain-dead adherents.

Eh?

>The person who animates him is not that much
>better-informed, but he fancies himself enough of an expert that he would be
>exposed if he revealed more of what he knows.

Don't you mean "He's just cunning enough to know that he would be
exposed if he revealed more of what he knows." It makes no sense as
you have it.

[Iain Churches]

"Keith G" > wrote in message
...
>
> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net>
> wrote in message ...
>>
>>
>> The Krooborg, desperately seeking a harbor where the jeering is muted,
>> eagerly embraces McCarty's familiar.
>>
>>> The Middius persona gets satisfaction from how he
>>> can leverage his apparent ignorance into a position of dominance over
>>> his
>>> brain-dead adherents.
>>
>> Odd that you would view my taunting of you in religious terms, Arnii. Is
>> your phoney "christian" posturing starting to chafe a bit?
>
>
>
> I doubt Arny's 'Christian posturing' is phoney - he's got all the
> hallmarks of a *true* God Botherer: Arrogance, Hypocrisy, Bigotry,
> Meanness....
>

I could understand if he were Russian Orthodox -
they have so much wonderful music:-)
But these born-again people with their dreadful
tambourine bashing.........

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" > wrote in message


> But if a person is permanently "stupid", how does one
> pick when he's also temporarily "silly"? Wouldn't the
> first effectively camouflage the second?

You've given us many examples of this conundrum, Paul.

[paul packer]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 08:29:25 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"paul packer" > wrote in message

>
>> But if a person is permanently "stupid", how does one
>> pick when he's also temporarily "silly"? Wouldn't the
>> first effectively camouflage the second?
>
>You've given us many examples of this conundrum, Paul.


You know, sometimes I think the fog inside your head is clearing.

But then in the very next post I'm disappointed.

[Keith G]

"Iain Churches" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "Keith G" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net>
>> wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>
>>> The Krooborg, desperately seeking a harbor where the jeering is muted,
>>> eagerly embraces McCarty's familiar.
>>>
>>>> The Middius persona gets satisfaction from how he
>>>> can leverage his apparent ignorance into a position of dominance over
>>>> his
>>>> brain-dead adherents.
>>>
>>> Odd that you would view my taunting of you in religious terms, Arnii. Is
>>> your phoney "christian" posturing starting to chafe a bit?
>>
>>
>>
>> I doubt Arny's 'Christian posturing' is phoney - he's got all the
>> hallmarks of a *true* God Botherer: Arrogance, Hypocrisy, Bigotry,
>> Meanness....
>>
>
> I could understand if he were Russian Orthodox -
> they have so much wonderful music:-)
> But these born-again people with their dreadful
> tambourine bashing.........



Wot? Tambourines, purple smocks and 'gospel jaw'..?? That ain't Arny's
style, he's more a shiny suit and shades type - here's one of him on one his
own recordings that I've managed to get a hold of:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Arnys%20Prayer.mp3


(He ain't half bad, asitappens....?? :-)

[Iain Churches]

"Keith G" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Iain Churches" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>
>> "Keith G" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net>
>>> wrote in message ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Krooborg, desperately seeking a harbor where the jeering is muted,
>>>> eagerly embraces McCarty's familiar.
>>>>
>>>>> The Middius persona gets satisfaction from how he
>>>>> can leverage his apparent ignorance into a position of dominance over
>>>>> his
>>>>> brain-dead adherents.
>>>>
>>>> Odd that you would view my taunting of you in religious terms, Arnii.
>>>> Is
>>>> your phoney "christian" posturing starting to chafe a bit?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I doubt Arny's 'Christian posturing' is phoney - he's got all the
>>> hallmarks of a *true* God Botherer: Arrogance, Hypocrisy, Bigotry,
>>> Meanness....
>>>
>>
>> I could understand if he were Russian Orthodox -
>> they have so much wonderful music:-)
>> But these born-again people with their dreadful
>> tambourine bashing.........
>
>
>
> Wot? Tambourines, purple smocks and 'gospel jaw'..?? That ain't Arny's
> style, he's more a shiny suit and shades type - here's one of him on one
> his own recordings that I've managed to get a hold of:
>
> http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Arnys%20Prayer.mp3
>
>
Hmm. "Page cannot be found"

Perhaps in Arny's case nothing is better than anything:-)

According to several of his "admirers", Arny is a
hell-fire-and-brimstone Baptist. Who knows?

Can't imagine him in a mohair suit. It doesn't go with the
cheapo O2R mixer and the toyshop mics:-)

Iain

[Peter Wieck]

paul packer wrote:

> But if a person is permanently "stupid", how does one pick when he's
> also temporarily "silly"? Wouldn't the first effectively camouflage
> the second?

Not at all.

Even sockpuppets can follow a script and appear not to be silly. It is
when they attempt to animate themselves that they are both stupid and
silly. In the case of Mr. Middius, it is obvious that it has no
knowledge of any of the subjects under discussion. So, when it confines
itself to attack-dog tactics, it is merely stupidly doing what it is
told. When it attempts to comment on the actual subject at hand as if
it had anything to offer, then it is both silly and stupid.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Keith G]

"Iain Churches" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Keith G" > wrote


>> Wot? Tambourines, purple smocks and 'gospel jaw'..?? That ain't Arny's
>> style, he's more a shiny suit and shades type - here's one of him on one
>> his own recordings that I've managed to get a hold of:
>>
>> http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Arnys%20Prayer.mp3
>>
>>
> Hmm. "Page cannot be found"
>
> Perhaps in Arny's case nothing is better than anything:-)


I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks sometimes
don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3


But I'm not sure of the relevance of it now...??

>
> According to several of his "admirers", Arny is a
> hell-fire-and-brimstone Baptist. Who knows?
>
> Can't imagine him in a mohair suit. It doesn't go with the
> cheapo O2R mixer and the toyshop mics:-)


Maybe it's dungarees, check shirt and a raggedy straw hat and no shoes...??
;-)

[George M. Middius]

Iain Churches said:

> > Wot? Tambourines, purple smocks and 'gospel jaw'..?? That ain't Arny's
> > style, he's more a shiny suit and shades type - here's one of him on one
> > his own recordings that I've managed to get a hold of:

> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Arnys%20Prayer.mp3

> Hmm. "Page cannot be found"

> Perhaps in Arny's case nothing is better than anything:-)

> According to several of his "admirers", Arny is a
> hell-fire-and-brimstone Baptist. Who knows?

> Can't imagine him in a mohair suit. It doesn't go with the
> cheapo O2R mixer and the toyshop mics:-)

Here's a clue to how deep Krooger's illness runs:

http://www.pcavtech.com/techtalk/index.htm




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[Keith G]

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Iain Churches said:
>
>> > Wot? Tambourines, purple smocks and 'gospel jaw'..?? That ain't Arny's
>> > style, he's more a shiny suit and shades type - here's one of him on
>> > one
>> > his own recordings that I've managed to get a hold of:
>
>> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Arnys%20Prayer.mp3
>
>> Hmm. "Page cannot be found"
>
>> Perhaps in Arny's case nothing is better than anything:-)
>
>> According to several of his "admirers", Arny is a
>> hell-fire-and-brimstone Baptist. Who knows?
>
>> Can't imagine him in a mohair suit. It doesn't go with the
>> cheapo O2R mixer and the toyshop mics:-)
>
> Here's a clue to how deep Krooger's illness runs:
>
> http://www.pcavtech.com/techtalk/index.htm



I'd counter that with the 'Wag's Prayer':

'God grant me a big dick and a pound more than I can spend....'

(But I'd only get him accusing me of being 'shallow' again!! :-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Peter Wieck" > wrote in message
oups.com
> paul packer wrote:
>
>> But if a person is permanently "stupid", how does one
>> pick when he's also temporarily "silly"? Wouldn't the
>> first effectively camouflage the second?
>
> Not at all.
>
> Even sockpuppets can follow a script and appear not to be
> silly. It is when they attempt to animate themselves that
> they are both stupid and silly. In the case of Mr.
> Middius, it is obvious that it has no knowledge of any of
> the subjects under discussion. So, when it confines
> itself to attack-dog tactics, it is merely stupidly doing
> what it is told. When it attempts to comment on the
> actual subject at hand as if it had anything to offer,
> then it is both silly and stupid.

One irony about Middius is that his animator truely believes that he's so
smart that if he didn't dumb himself down when he posts as the sockpuppet,
his real-world identity would be too apparent.

[John Atkinson]

Keith G wrote:
> I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks sometimes
> don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
> http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3

Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[Eeyore]

John Atkinson wrote:

> Keith G wrote:
> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks sometimes
> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
>
> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.

It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET amp fwiw.

Graham

[Keith G]

"John Atkinson" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Keith G wrote:
>> I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks
>> sometimes
>> don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
>> http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
>
> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.



Not mine by any standard, but I posted it - it's beyond *stunning* on my
300B/Lowther setup!

It's from the album 'The Abduction Of The Art Of Noise':

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h_/202-7686531-3099064?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=the+abduction+of+the+art+of+noise&Go.x=12&Go.y=3

....which is a bunch of (very loose) remixes of AON trax and is by an Artist
called Benge. Find him and more here:

http://www.expandingrecords.com/

....including an excellent 35 Mb video: Flotel - 'Up To The Ether' (under '01
news').

(Basically, electronica done well, which is rare....)

Here's the original AON track to compare:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3

[Keith G]

"Eeyore" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> John Atkinson wrote:
>
>> Keith G wrote:
>> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks
>> > sometimes
>> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
>> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
>>
>> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.
>
> It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET amp fwiw.
>



Validating a SET...?? Why should I want/need to do that..??

IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....

[Eeyore]

Keith G wrote:

> "Eeyore" > wrote in
> message ...
> >
> >
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >
> >> Keith G wrote:
> >> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks
> >> > sometimes
> >> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
> >> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
> >>
> >> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.
> >
> > It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET amp fwiw.
>
> Validating a SET...?? Why should I want/need to do that..??

I have no idea. It seems you got the idea I listened to numbers.


> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....

Really ? Since it seems ro be totally synthesised it's hard to see where fidelity
easily fit into that analysis unless you only consider the technical fidelity of the
reproduction chain.

Graham

[Arny Krueger]

"Keith G" > wrote in message


> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity
> Freaks'....

Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi equipment
sounds too much like live music for his happiness?

Wonders never cease.

[Eeyore]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "Keith G" > wrote in message
>
>
> > IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity
> > Freaks'....
>
> Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi equipment
> sounds too much like live music for his happiness?
>
> Wonders never cease.

At least he's being more truthful about his preferences though.

Graham

[Keith G]

"Eeyore" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> Keith G wrote:
>
>> "Eeyore" > wrote in
>> message ...
>> >
>> >
>> > John Atkinson wrote:
>> >
>> >> Keith G wrote:
>> >> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks
>> >> > sometimes
>> >> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
>> >> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
>> >>
>> >> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.
>> >
>> > It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET amp
>> > fwiw.
>>
>> Validating a SET...?? Why should I want/need to do that..??
>
> I have no idea. It seems you got the idea I listened to numbers.
>
>
>> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
>
> Really ? Since it seems ro be totally synthesised it's hard to see where
> fidelity
> easily fit into that analysis



There ya go.........!! ;-)


unless you only consider the technical fidelity of the
> reproduction chain.


Who TF could tell...??

[Keith G]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Keith G" > wrote in message
>
>
>> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity
>> Freaks'....
>
> Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi equipment
> sounds too much like live music for his happiness?



Who's 'us'....???

And I done tole you already - the day my kit sounds like most of the *live
gigs* I've been to, it's out in the skip*....!!

>
> Wonders never cease.
>

Sure don't - my kit's sounding *best ever* right this minute!! ;-)


* that's 'dumpster' your side of the pond....

[Arny Krueger]

"Eeyore"
> wrote
in message
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> "Keith G" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity
>>> Freaks'....
>>
>> Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our
>> Hi Fi equipment sounds too much like live music for his
>> happiness?
>>
>> Wonders never cease.
>
> At least he's being more truthful about his preferences
> though.

I guess.

[Eeyore]

Keith G wrote:

> "Eeyore" > wrote
> > Keith G wrote:
> >> "Eeyore" > wrote
> >> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >> >> Keith G wrote:
> >> >> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks
> >> >> > sometimes
> >> >> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
> >> >> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
> >> >>
> >> >> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.
> >> >
> >> > It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET amp
> >> > fwiw.
> >>
> >> Validating a SET...?? Why should I want/need to do that..??
> >
> > I have no idea. It seems you got the idea I listened to numbers.
> >
> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
> >
> > Really ? Since it seems ro be totally synthesised it's hard to see where
> > fidelity easily fit into that analysis
>
> There ya go.........!! ;-)
>
> > unless you only consider the technical fidelity of the
> > reproduction chain.
>
> Who TF could tell...??

By reference to a 'normal' acoustic musical instrument of similar timbre for comparison
perhaps ?

By the same token what does an electric guitar really sound like since the amplifire and
speaker play such a large role in the sound ?

Is a DI'd electric bass recorded straight into a console more 'pure' than one going
through an amp, speaker and mic to do the same job ?

Graham

[Eeyore]

Keith G wrote:

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
> > "Keith G" > wrote
> >
> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity
> >> Freaks'....
> >
> > Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi equipment
> > sounds too much like live music for his happiness?
>
> Who's 'us'....???
>
> And I done tole you already - the day my kit sounds like most of the *live
> gigs* I've been to, it's out in the skip*....!!

Most live gigs have infinitely more character than a recording. I guess it's
actually *you* who's listening to the technicalities, not me !

You have no soul !

Graham ( live sound engineer on and off since 1970 )

[Keith G]

"Eeyore" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> Keith G wrote:
>
>> "Eeyore" > wrote
>> > Keith G wrote:
>> >> "Eeyore" > wrote
>> >> > John Atkinson wrote:
>> >> >> Keith G wrote:
>> >> >> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks
>> >> >> > sometimes
>> >> >> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
>> >> >> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.
>> >> >
>> >> > It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET amp
>> >> > fwiw.
>> >>
>> >> Validating a SET...?? Why should I want/need to do that..??
>> >
>> > I have no idea. It seems you got the idea I listened to numbers.
>> >
>> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
>> >
>> > Really ? Since it seems ro be totally synthesised it's hard to see
>> > where
>> > fidelity easily fit into that analysis
>>
>> There ya go.........!! ;-)
>>
>> > unless you only consider the technical fidelity of the
>> > reproduction chain.
>>
>> Who TF could tell...??
>
> By reference to a 'normal' acoustic musical instrument of similar timbre
> for comparison
> perhaps ?



No - 'acoustic instruments' vary too much between themselves in any
case.....


>
> By the same token what does an electric guitar really sound like since the
> amplifire and
> speaker play such a large role in the sound ?


*Exactly*......


>
> Is a DI'd electric bass recorded straight into a console more 'pure' than
> one going
> through an amp, speaker and mic to do the same job ?


One of the little things the Fidelity Freaks like to overlook is that they
don't actually get the *live performance* even when it is live (never mind
'electronica' which only ever existed inside a computer) - what they get is
the Mixing Engineer's *idea* of the live performance, so we get 20' wide
pianos and violinists running backwards and forwards between the left and
right speakers.

(When they do get their copy of this 'live performance' they ram through
their systems which, because they got an amp with low quoted THD
characteristics, they consider somehow it *magically* doesn't turn it all
into slurry when pushing it through their hugely inefficient multiway,
crossovered speakers.....)

Confusion between 'fidelity' based on numbers and *realism* based on
listening is rife among the Fidelity Freaks (who all swallowed the red pill
without a second thought) - the last person (an electronics engineer) who
visited me to hear my 'SET and horns' was so unimpressed he was only here
*ELEVEN HOURS* and has since bought my 'spare' Chinese 300B SET at full
price to save himself the 6 week wait for a new one from China....

[Keith G]

"Eeyore" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> Keith G wrote:
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>> > "Keith G" > wrote
>> >
>> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity
>> >> Freaks'....
>> >
>> > Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi equipment
>> > sounds too much like live music for his happiness?
>>
>> Who's 'us'....???
>>
>> And I done tole you already - the day my kit sounds like most of the
>> *live
>> gigs* I've been to, it's out in the skip*....!!
>
> Most live gigs have infinitely more character than a recording. I guess
> it's
> actually *you* who's listening to the technicalities, not me !



Most live gigs are a PITA from a *sound quality* POV.....


>
> You have no soul !


Correct, although I have some Blues and a fair amount of 50s/60s/70s
Jazz.....

[Eeyore]

Keith G wrote:

> "Eeyore" > wrote
> > Keith G wrote:
> >> "Eeyore" > wrote
> >> > Keith G wrote:
> >> >> "Eeyore" > wrote
> >> >> > John Atkinson wrote:
> >> >> >> Keith G wrote:
> >> >> >> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so tracks
> >> >> >> > sometimes
> >> >> >> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
> >> >> >> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET amp
> >> >> > fwiw.
> >> >>
> >> >> Validating a SET...?? Why should I want/need to do that..??
> >> >
> >> > I have no idea. It seems you got the idea I listened to numbers.
> >> >
> >> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
> >> >
> >> > Really ? Since it seems ro be totally synthesised it's hard to see
> >> > where fidelity easily fit into that analysis
> >>
> >> There ya go.........!! ;-)
> >>
> >> > unless you only consider the technical fidelity of the
> >> > reproduction chain.
> >>
> >> Who TF could tell...??
> >
> > By reference to a 'normal' acoustic musical instrument of similar timbre
> > for comparison perhaps ?
>
> No - 'acoustic instruments' vary too much between themselves in any
> case.....

What I mean there is the accuracy with which the sound of a similar acoustic instrument is
reproduced accurately. Clearly no acoustic instrument will exactly match the precise timbre
of the synthesiser itself but it'll give you a good clue.


> > By the same token what does an electric guitar really sound like since the
> > amplifire and speaker play such a large role in the sound ?
>
> *Exactly*......

The answer of course it what you *want* it to sound like in this case where 'distortions'
are being used intentionally and creatively.


> > Is a DI'd electric bass recorded straight into a console more 'pure' than
> > one going through an amp, speaker and mic to do the same job ?
>
> One of the little things the Fidelity Freaks like to overlook is that they
> don't actually get the *live performance* even when it is live (never mind
> 'electronica' which only ever existed inside a computer) - what they get is
> the Mixing Engineer's *idea* of the live performance, so we get 20' wide
> pianos and violinists running backwards and forwards between the left and
> right speakers.

That sounds terribly 70s to me ! Have you *really* heard anything like that recently ?


> (When they do get their copy of this 'live performance' they ram through
> their systems which, because they got an amp with low quoted THD
> characteristics, they consider somehow it *magically* doesn't turn it all
> into slurry when pushing it through their hugely inefficient multiway,
> crossovered speakers.....)

What's wrong with multiway speakers or crossovers ?

A good electronic crossover ( often in DSP these days ) will provide such precise
band-to-band matching that you can end up with something that's truly quite like a single
idealised FR speaker !

And multi-amping is utterly proven as being sonically fantastic !

Bear in mind that basic physics restricts the optimal performance of any cone speaker to ~
3-4 octaves.


> Confusion between 'fidelity' based on numbers and *realism* based on
> listening is rife among the Fidelity Freaks (who all swallowed the red pill
> without a second thought) - the last person (an electronics engineer) who
> visited me to hear my 'SET and horns' was so unimpressed he was only here
> *ELEVEN HOURS* and has since bought my 'spare' Chinese 300B SET at full
> price to save himself the 6 week wait for a new one from China....

And I think you're simply obsessed with 'glowing bottles'. I doubt you've ever heard a
professional monitoring system for example and you might even hate it for its accuracy !

I also really don't care that you know 'an electronics bloke' who thinks the sun shines out
of you arse. I've been doing pro-audio for 33 yrs. I don't need any 'bloke' to validate my
gear.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Keith G wrote:

> "Eeyore" > wrote
> > Keith G wrote:
> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
> >> > "Keith G" > wrote
> >> >
> >> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
> >> >
> >> > Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi equipment
> >> > sounds too much like live music for his happiness?
> >>
> >> Who's 'us'....???
> >>
> >> And I done tole you already - the day my kit sounds like most of the
> >> *live gigs* I've been to, it's out in the skip*....!!
> >
> > Most live gigs have infinitely more character than a recording. I guess
> > it's actually *you* who's listening to the technicalities, not me !
>
> Most live gigs are a PITA from a *sound quality* POV.....

The criteria are very different to recorded sound. There's no going back for
another take for example.

OTOH it sounds to me more like you've simply been going to the 'wrong' events.

I may like certain recordings but rarely do they ever match the experience of a
good live gig. Indeed some of my fave recording are live ones.

Graham

[Keith G]

"Eeyore" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> Keith G wrote:
>
>> "Eeyore" > wrote
>> > Keith G wrote:
>> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>> >> > "Keith G" > wrote
>> >> >
>> >> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
>> >> >
>> >> > Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi
>> >> > equipment
>> >> > sounds too much like live music for his happiness?
>> >>
>> >> Who's 'us'....???
>> >>
>> >> And I done tole you already - the day my kit sounds like most of the
>> >> *live gigs* I've been to, it's out in the skip*....!!
>> >
>> > Most live gigs have infinitely more character than a recording. I guess
>> > it's actually *you* who's listening to the technicalities, not me !
>>
>> Most live gigs are a PITA from a *sound quality* POV.....
>
> The criteria are very different to recorded sound. There's no going back
> for
> another take for example.
>
> OTOH it sounds to me more like you've simply been going to the 'wrong'
> events.



Last one was at the RAH (Bryn Terfel et al) - the sound was coming from a PA
array hanging from the roof....


>
> I may like certain recordings but rarely do they ever match the experience
> of a
> good live gig. Indeed some of my fave recording are live ones.


Me too, but then I've thought that the mic got a better seat than I did....

[Eeyore]

Keith G wrote:

> "Eeyore" > wrote
> > Keith G wrote:
> >> "Eeyore" > wrote
> >> > Keith G wrote:
> >> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
> >> >> > "Keith G" > wrote
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hmm Fidelity Freaks - now Keith is telling us that our Hi Fi
> >> >> > equipment
> >> >> > sounds too much like live music for his happiness?
> >> >>
> >> >> Who's 'us'....???
> >> >>
> >> >> And I done tole you already - the day my kit sounds like most of the
> >> >> *live gigs* I've been to, it's out in the skip*....!!
> >> >
> >> > Most live gigs have infinitely more character than a recording. I guess
> >> > it's actually *you* who's listening to the technicalities, not me !
> >>
> >> Most live gigs are a PITA from a *sound quality* POV.....
> >
> > The criteria are very different to recorded sound. There's no going back
> > for another take for example.
> >
> > OTOH it sounds to me more like you've simply been going to the 'wrong'
> > events.
>
> Last one was at the RAH (Bryn Terfel et al) - the sound was coming from a PA
> array hanging from the roof....

I've never been there. It's well known for its horrid acoustics.


> > I may like certain recordings but rarely do they ever match the experience
> > of a good live gig. Indeed some of my fave recording are live ones.
>
> Me too, but then I've thought that the mic got a better seat than I did....

One of the best events I've ever been to was Dead Can Dance at the Forum (
formerly the Town and Country Club ) - North London. An excellent venue btw.

Makes me tingle even thinking about it again !

Graham

[Keith G]

"Eeyore" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> Keith G wrote:
>
>> "Eeyore" > wrote
>> > Keith G wrote:
>> >> "Eeyore" > wrote
>> >> > Keith G wrote:
>> >> >> "Eeyore" > wrote
>> >> >> > John Atkinson wrote:
>> >> >> >> Keith G wrote:
>> >> >> >> > I'm afraid the webspace we get in the UK is piddling, so
>> >> >> >> > tracks
>> >> >> >> > sometimes
>> >> >> >> > don't stay up for long - right now I've got this one up:
>> >> >> >> > http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/10%20Benge%20-%20Moment%20In%20Love.mp3
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Is this yours, Keith? It's hypnotic.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > It strikes me as strange choice of music for 'validating' an SET
>> >> >> > amp
>> >> >> > fwiw.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Validating a SET...?? Why should I want/need to do that..??
>> >> >
>> >> > I have no idea. It seems you got the idea I listened to numbers.
>> >> >
>> >> >> IIRC, it was a ****-take aimed at the 'Fidelity Freaks'....
>> >> >
>> >> > Really ? Since it seems ro be totally synthesised it's hard to see
>> >> > where fidelity easily fit into that analysis
>> >>
>> >> There ya go.........!! ;-)
>> >>
>> >> > unless you only consider the technical fidelity of the
>> >> > reproduction chain.
>> >>
>> >> Who TF could tell...??
>> >
>> > By reference to a 'normal' acoustic musical instrument of similar
>> > timbre
>> > for comparison perhaps ?
>>
>> No - 'acoustic instruments' vary too much between themselves in any
>> case.....
>
> What I mean there is the accuracy with which the sound of a similar
> acoustic instrument is
> reproduced accurately. Clearly no acoustic instrument will exactly match
> the precise timbre
> of the synthesiser itself but it'll give you a good clue.


Try that the other way round....


>
>
>> > By the same token what does an electric guitar really sound like since
>> > the
>> > amplifire and speaker play such a large role in the sound ?
>>
>> *Exactly*......
>
> The answer of course it what you *want* it to sound like in this case
> where 'distortions'
> are being used intentionally and creatively.



Sure. At least this a damn sight more positive than the usual valve-bashing
we see in here....


>
>
>> > Is a DI'd electric bass recorded straight into a console more 'pure'
>> > than
>> > one going through an amp, speaker and mic to do the same job ?
>>
>> One of the little things the Fidelity Freaks like to overlook is that
>> they
>> don't actually get the *live performance* even when it is live (never
>> mind
>> 'electronica' which only ever existed inside a computer) - what they get
>> is
>> the Mixing Engineer's *idea* of the live performance, so we get 20' wide
>> pianos and violinists running backwards and forwards between the left and
>> right speakers.
>
> That sounds terribly 70s to me ! Have you *really* heard anything like
> that recently ?



Much of my stuff is 70s or earlier but I've heard plenty of modern 'point
sources' sloshing back and forth, even on the telly! Pinpoint
instrument/artist placement is one of the reasons people use/prefer SET
amps - they are so good at it. Have you ever heard one?


>
>
>> (When they do get their copy of this 'live performance' they ram through
>> their systems which, because they got an amp with low quoted THD
>> characteristics, they consider somehow it *magically* doesn't turn it all
>> into slurry when pushing it through their hugely inefficient multiway,
>> crossovered speakers.....)
>
> What's wrong with multiway speakers or crossovers ?


They kill 'air' and detail inasmuch as you get more of both when you *don't*
have a crossover in the equation.


>
> A good electronic crossover ( often in DSP these days ) will provide such
> precise
> band-to-band matching that you can end up with something that's truly
> quite like a single
> idealised FR speaker !
>
> And multi-amping is utterly proven as being sonically fantastic !


There's one or two here who'll take issue with you on that one....


>
> Bear in mind that basic physics restricts the optimal performance of any
> cone speaker to ~
> 3-4 octaves.


Just so long as I get deep to tinkly - the treble on my Lowthers has to be
heard to be believed...

>
>
>> Confusion between 'fidelity' based on numbers and *realism* based on
>> listening is rife among the Fidelity Freaks (who all swallowed the red
>> pill
>> without a second thought) - the last person (an electronics engineer) who
>> visited me to hear my 'SET and horns' was so unimpressed he was only here
>> *ELEVEN HOURS* and has since bought my 'spare' Chinese 300B SET at full
>> price to save himself the 6 week wait for a new one from China....
>
> And I think you're simply obsessed with 'glowing bottles'.


Don't be ridiculous, I use no less than *three* SS amps virtually every
single day! (Computer, telly, radio/PVR and occasional CD...)


I doubt you've ever heard a
> professional monitoring system for example and you might even hate it for
> its accuracy !


No idea.


>
> I also really don't care that you know 'an electronics bloke' who thinks
> the sun shines out
> of you arse. I've been doing pro-audio for 33 yrs. I don't need any
> 'bloke' to validate my
> gear.


OK, 2 things - keep it sweet or I will discard you and neither do I.....

People have been welcome to come here for the last few years - to hear
valves when they were a bit rare and latterly to hear SETs which still are.
I don't give a **** on a stick what they think of them, the visit is for
their benefit. But I am not arrogant enough to consider my own opinion to be
particularly worthy and the chance of second opinions and constructive
criticism is always useful to me....

Get one thing straight Eeeyor - the valve/vinyl users in ukra don't give a
rats what other people do and very often run SS/digital rigs themselves.
Read all the posts here carefully and see who it actaully is who's got a bug
up their arse and seem to consider valve/SS and vinyl/digital to be somehow
*mutually exclusive*...

Hint: It usually the ones throwing the word 'bigot' around who are the most
*bigotted*...

That's it! Movie time now!! ;-)

[[email protected]]

Eeyore wrote:

> What I mean there is the accuracy with which the sound of a similar acoustic instrument is
> reproduced accurately. Clearly no acoustic instrument will exactly match the precise timbre
> of the synthesiser itself but it'll give you a good clue.
>

One can certainly use their aural memory to determine a reasonable
level of realism but not accuracy. An example. I have two versions of
John Renbourn's Lady and the Unicorn. Two different masterings. The
sound of the instruments on both are startlingly realistic yet the
timbre is distinctly different between the two masterings. I can't tell
you which one is accurate but I can tell you which one sounds better.
But as for pure realism they are pretty close.


> What's wrong with multiway speakers or crossovers ?
>
> A good electronic crossover ( often in DSP these days ) will provide such precise
> band-to-band matching that you can end up with something that's truly quite like a single
> idealised FR speaker !


Can you cite any examples of such a beast. I must say I hear plenty
wrong with multi-driver speakers having lived with Martin Logan CLSs
and Sound Lab A3s.


>
> And I think you're simply obsessed with 'glowing bottles'. I doubt you've ever heard a
> professional monitoring system for example and you might even hate it for its accuracy !


I have heard a few. The good ones were quite good.



>
> I also really don't care that you know 'an electronics bloke' who thinks the sun shines out
> of you arse. I've been doing pro-audio for 33 yrs. I don't need any 'bloke' to validate my
> gear.


Are you suggesting that this gives you more authority?



Scott

[paul packer]

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:06:51 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>> Even sockpuppets can follow a script and appear not to be
>> silly. It is when they attempt to animate themselves that
>> they are both stupid and silly. In the case of Mr.
>> Middius, it is obvious that it has no knowledge of any of
>> the subjects under discussion. So, when it confines
>> itself to attack-dog tactics, it is merely stupidly doing
>> what it is told. When it attempts to comment on the
>> actual subject at hand as if it had anything to offer,
>> then it is both silly and stupid.
>
>One irony about Middius is that his animator truely believes that he's so
>smart that if he didn't dumb himself down when he posts as the sockpuppet,
>his real-world identity would be too apparent.


What are you two babbling about? The Usenet personality of George
Middius has many faults (some of which he and I have clashed over in
the past), like not knowing where to draw the line and leave well
enough alone, but stupidity isn't one of them. George rarely posts
about audio. As I've previously observed, I don't think it interests
him very much. He appears to be here to amuse himself, which is pretty
much why I'm here. If you can point to any instances where George has
been drawn on any subject, even politics, enough to make a fool of
himself I'd be interested to read it, but I certainly can't recall
one.

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

> If you can point to any instances where George has
> been drawn on any subject, even politics, enough to make a fool of
> himself I'd be interested to read it, but I certainly can't recall
> one.

Thanks, paul. I do try not to be an idiot.

What you've just seen, I believe, is two 'borgs whose vocabularies are too
limited to express their thoughts. It might be accurate to call me a
troublemaker, or a pedant, or a vituperative SOB. However, such terms as
those entail value judgments. Krooger in particular tries to view the
world without engaging his vestigial human feelings. When he says "idiot"
or "stupid" or "liar", he believes he can summon "facts" to support his
accusations. But he is simply incapable of discerning anybody's social
value because the entire concept is alien to him.

I'm rambling a bit, but do you recall Krooger's ranting about belonging to
church groups as evidence of his social skills? Tasks at churches always
outnumber those willing to do them. But Krooger fancies himself as morally
upstanding because he volunteers to do tedious chores at his church. You
have to be really nasty to get chucked out of church.




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[Peter Wieck]

George M. Middius bleated:

.. It might be accurate to call me a
> troublemaker, or a pedant, or a vituperative SOB. However, such terms as
> those entail value judgments.


"Troublemaker" endows you with the actual power to make trouble. This
you lack.

"Pedant" assumes you have knowledge to offer. You do not.

"Vituperative" assumes you have the wherewithall to be clever. You do
not.

"SOB" assumes that you are the product of a natural act. Unlikely.

"Value Judgement" is the escape-clause of those without either.

And you are clearly not amused as you are so tiresomely repetitive,
strident and generally unimaginative as to preclude that possibility.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Jon Yaeger]

in article om, Peter Wieck
at wrote on 9/11/06 9:50 PM:

>
> George M. Middius bleated:
>
> . It might be accurate to call me a
>
>> troublemaker, or a pedant, or a vituperative SOB. However, such terms as
>> those entail value judgments.
>
>
> "Troublemaker" endows you with the actual power to make trouble. This
> you lack.
>
> "Pedant" assumes you have knowledge to offer. You do not.
>
> "Vituperative" assumes you have the wherewithall to be clever. You do
> not.
>
> "SOB" assumes that you are the product of a natural act. Unlikely.
>
> "Value Judgement" is the escape-clause of those without either.
>
> And you are clearly not amused as you are so tiresomely repetitive,
> strident and generally unimaginative as to preclude that possibility.
>
> Peter Wieck
> Wyncote, PA
>


Give it a frigggin' rest mate.

Jute, Middius, Arny et. al. aren't worth two synapses of consideration.

[paul packer]

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:47:02 +0100, "Keith G" >
wrote:


>'God grant me a big dick and a pound more than I can spend....'
>
>(But I'd only get him accusing me of being 'shallow' again!! :-)


Now who would ever accuse you of that?

[paul packer]

On 11 Sep 2006 18:50:14 -0700, "Peter Wieck" > wrote:


>And you are clearly not amused as you are so tiresomely repetitive,


I assume you mean amusing. That at least is in the individual funny
bone.

[paul packer]

On 11 Sep 2006 18:50:14 -0700, "Peter Wieck" > wrote:

>
>George M. Middius bleated:
>
>. It might be accurate to call me a
>> troublemaker, or a pedant, or a vituperative SOB. However, such terms as
>> those entail value judgments.
>
>
>"Troublemaker" endows you with the actual power to make trouble. This
>you lack.

Really? I thought he was very good at it.

>"Pedant" assumes you have knowledge to offer. You do not.

Rubbish. Just ask him anything about grammar. He's very knowledgeable
about the gerand modifying the past participle or whatever.

>"Vituperative" assumes you have the wherewithall[sic] to be clever. You do
>not.

(thinks) I hope George notices I put square brackets around my [sic]

>"SOB" assumes that you are the product of a natural act. Unlikely.

He's the product of a natural act between two sockpuppets. It took
place in the third drawer down of his mother's dressing table.

[George M. Middius]

paul packer said:

> >And you are clearly not amused as you are so tiresomely repetitive,

> I assume you mean amusing. That at least is in the individual funny
> bone.

Witless is getting wobbly. Jute is staying out of this thread, so Wiecky
is impelled to channel his pent-up rage at another target.

We should remember that Worthless Wiecky, alone among all the residents of
North America, chose to aid and abet Lyin' Bwian McFraudster in a
real-world attack on an RAO regular. Infer what you will about Wiecky's
character, or lack thereof.




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[Keith G]

"paul packer" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:47:02 +0100, "Keith G" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>'God grant me a big dick and a pound more than I can spend....'
>>
>>(But I'd only get him accusing me of being 'shallow' again!! :-)
>
>
> Now who would ever accuse you of that?



Oh, only someone who wants to plaster his own failings onto someone else -
it's a form of expiation....

[Arny Krueger]

"Keith G" > wrote in message


> One of the little things the Fidelity Freaks like to
> overlook is that they don't actually get the *live
> performance* even when it is live (never mind
> 'electronica' which only ever existed inside a computer)

Yup, in Keith's world there are no groups that are entirely or mostly
acoustical. No symphonies, no string quartets, no quartets, no choirs, no
organs, no pianos, no good live rooms, and no classically-trained singers
who need no electronics to entertain 100's or perhaps even 1,000's of
people.


> - what they get is the Mixing Engineer's *idea* of the
> live performance, so we get 20' wide pianos and
> violinists running backwards and forwards between the
> left and right speakers.

Keith doesn't seem to know that most live systems are mono.

> (When they do get their copy of this 'live performance'
> they ram through their systems which, because they got an
> amp with low quoted THD characteristics, they consider
> somehow it *magically* doesn't turn it all into slurry
> when pushing it through their hugely inefficient
> multiway, crossovered speakers.....)

Yup, Keith doesn't know that low efficiency speakers can be as clean if not
cleaner than high efficiency speakers.

> Confusion between 'fidelity' based on numbers and
> *realism* based on listening is rife among the Fidelity
> Freaks (who all swallowed the red pill without a second
> thought) - the last person (an electronics engineer) who
> visited me to hear my 'SET and horns' was so unimpressed
> he was only here *ELEVEN HOURS* and has since bought my
> 'spare' Chinese 300B SET at full price to save himself
> the 6 week wait for a new one from China....

I guess you hang out with some really impressionable folks, Keith.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
oups.com
> Eeyore wrote:
>
>> What I mean there is the accuracy with which the sound
>> of a similar acoustic instrument is reproduced
>> accurately. Clearly no acoustic instrument will exactly
>> match the precise timbre of the synthesiser itself but
>> it'll give you a good clue.
>>
>
> One can certainly use their aural memory to determine a
> reasonable level of realism but not accuracy. An example.
> I have two versions of John Renbourn's Lady and the
> Unicorn. Two different masterings. The sound of the
> instruments on both are startlingly realistic yet the
> timbre is distinctly different between the two
> masterings. I can't tell you which one is accurate but I
> can tell you which one sounds better. But as for pure
> realism they are pretty close.

All this means is that you know what you like, Scott.

>> What's wrong with multiway speakers or crossovers ?

>> A good electronic crossover ( often in DSP these days )
>> will provide such precise band-to-band matching that you
>> can end up with something that's truly quite like a
>> single idealised FR speaker !

> Can you cite any examples of such a beast. I must say I
> hear plenty wrong with multi-driver speakers having lived
> with Martin Logan CLSs and Sound Lab A3s.

Interesting, because I heard plenty of things wrong the last time I
seriously listened to ML's.

>> And I think you're simply obsessed with 'glowing
>> bottles'.

That's Scott - tubes and vinyl to the end.

>> I doubt you've ever heard a professional
>> monitoring system for example and you might even hate it
>> for its accuracy !

> I have heard a few. The good ones were quite good.

Hmmm, can a light dawn?

>> I also really don't care that you know 'an electronics
>> bloke' who thinks the sun shines out of you arse. I've
>> been doing pro-audio for 33 yrs. I don't need any
>> 'bloke' to validate my gear.

> Are you suggesting that this gives you more authority?

At least as much as you have, Scott.

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" > wrote in message



>If you can
> point to any instances where George has been drawn on any
> subject, even politics, enough to make a fool of himself
> I'd be interested to read it, but I certainly can't
> recall one.

Spoken like a true Middius dupe.

George makes a fool of himself just about every time he posts.

Many of his posts are incomprehensible to anybody but his tiny clique of
dupes.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jon Yaeger" > wrote in message

> in article
> om,
> Peter Wieck at wrote on 9/11/06 9:50 PM:
>
>>
>> George M. Middius bleated:
>>
>> . It might be accurate to call me a
>>
>>> troublemaker, or a pedant, or a vituperative SOB.
>>> However, such terms as those entail value judgments.
>>
>>
>> "Troublemaker" endows you with the actual power to make
>> trouble. This you lack.
>>
>> "Pedant" assumes you have knowledge to offer. You do not.
>>
>> "Vituperative" assumes you have the wherewithall to be
>> clever. You do not.
>>
>> "SOB" assumes that you are the product of a natural act.
>> Unlikely.
>>
>> "Value Judgement" is the escape-clause of those without
>> either.
>>
>> And you are clearly not amused as you are so tiresomely
>> repetitive, strident and generally unimaginative as to
>> preclude that possibility.
>>
>> Peter Wieck
>> Wyncote, PA
>>
>
>
> Give it a frigggin' rest mate.
>
> Jute, Middius, Arny et. al. aren't worth two synapses of
> consideration.

Neither are you, Jon.

[Arny Krueger]

"Peter Wieck" > wrote in message
ups.com
> George M. Middius bleated:
>
> . It might be accurate to call me a
>> troublemaker, or a pedant, or a vituperative SOB.
>> However, such terms as those entail value judgments.
>
>
> "Troublemaker" endows you with the actual power to make
> trouble. This you lack.
>
> "Pedant" assumes you have knowledge to offer. You do not.
>
> "Vituperative" assumes you have the wherewithall to be
> clever. You do not.
>
> "SOB" assumes that you are the product of a natural act.
> Unlikely.
>
> "Value Judgement" is the escape-clause of those without
> either.
>
> And you are clearly not amused as you are so tiresomely
> repetitive, strident and generally unimaginative as to
> preclude that possibility.

Well said.

[Keith G]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Keith G" > wrote in message
>
>
>> One of the little things the Fidelity Freaks like to
>> overlook is that they don't actually get the *live
>> performance* even when it is live (never mind
>> 'electronica' which only ever existed inside a computer)
>
> Yup, in Keith's world there are no groups that are entirely or mostly
> acoustical. No symphonies, no string quartets, no quartets, no choirs, no
> organs, no pianos, no good live rooms, and no classically-trained singers
> who need no electronics to entertain 100's or perhaps even 1,000's of
> people.



What TF are you whining about Arny?

(Unsurprisingly perhaps, there's none of that stuff in this house except the
the piano....)


>
>
>> - what they get is the Mixing Engineer's *idea* of the
>> live performance, so we get 20' wide pianos and
>> violinists running backwards and forwards between the
>> left and right speakers.
>
> Keith doesn't seem to know that most live systems are mono.


Do try to wake up to the fact we are talking about audio
*replay/reproduction* kit....


>
>> (When they do get their copy of this 'live performance'
>> they ram through their systems which, because they got an
>> amp with low quoted THD characteristics, they consider
>> somehow it *magically* doesn't turn it all into slurry
>> when pushing it through their hugely inefficient
>> multiway, crossovered speakers.....)
>
> Yup, Keith doesn't know that low efficiency speakers can be as clean if
> not cleaner than high efficiency speakers.


Arny doesn't seem to know one of my pairs of speakers has 82 dB FR drivers
in it....


>
>> Confusion between 'fidelity' based on numbers and
>> *realism* based on listening is rife among the Fidelity
>> Freaks (who all swallowed the red pill without a second
>> thought) - the last person (an electronics engineer) who
>> visited me to hear my 'SET and horns' was so unimpressed
>> he was only here *ELEVEN HOURS* and has since bought my
>> 'spare' Chinese 300B SET at full price to save himself
>> the 6 week wait for a new one from China....
>
> I guess you hang out with some really impressionable folks, Keith.


Sure, walked right in (a stranger to me then) and made a snap decision, I
guess....

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article >,
George M. Middius <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net>
wrote:
> > >And you are clearly not amused as you are so tiresomely repetitive,
>
> > I assume you mean amusing. That at least is in the individual funny
> > bone.

> Witless is getting wobbly. Jute is staying out of this thread, so Wiecky
> is impelled to channel his pent-up rage at another target.

What makes you think any readers of ukra give a toss?

--
*A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[George M. Middius]

Dodo Plowborg said:

> > Witless is getting wobbly. Jute is staying out of this thread, so Wiecky
> > is impelled to channel his pent-up rage at another target.

> What makes you think any readers of ukra give a toss?

Plowie, are you having another bad day?




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[paul packer]

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:12:00 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"paul packer" > wrote in message

>
>
>>If you can
>> point to any instances where George has been drawn on any
>> subject, even politics, enough to make a fool of himself
>> I'd be interested to read it, but I certainly can't
>> recall one.
>
>Spoken like a true Middius dupe.

Interesting that you chopped the part where I criticise Middius.

>George makes a fool of himself just about every time he posts.

No. He shows that he's obsessed with bashing you every time he posts.
There's a difference.

>Many of his posts are incomprehensible to anybody but his tiny clique of
>dupes.

I'm supposed to be one of his clique of dupes and I don't understand
them half the time, so that can't be right.

[Peter Wieck]

paul packer wrote:

> I assume you mean amusing. That at least is in the individual funny
> bone.

Oh, no. I meant "amused"...

Mr. Middius displays neither humor nor wit. And it even tried to
justify itself with a bit of apologia. "Obsessed" would be applicable.
Amusement ceases entirely when obsession begins.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" > wrote in message

> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:12:00 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> > wrote:
>
>> "paul packer" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>> If you can
>>> point to any instances where George has been drawn on
>>> any subject, even politics, enough to make a fool of
>>> himself I'd be interested to read it, but I certainly
>>> can't recall one.
>>
>> Spoken like a true Middius dupe.

> Interesting that you chopped the part where I criticise
> Middius.

Those were love taps. It's all a setup Paul, you have a few little public
lover's quarrels with the Middiot so you can feign a modicum of objectivity.
The man is nuts, we all know it, but you can't bring yourself to even 1% of
the vituperation you unleash on me with considerable regularity.

>> George makes a fool of himself just about every time he
>> posts.

> No. He shows that he's obsessed with bashing you every
> time he posts. There's a difference.

That, too. At least he is making those really crazy noises about scaring me
off of RAO any more. Or is he?

>> Many of his posts are incomprehensible to anybody but
>> his tiny clique of dupes.

> I'm supposed to be one of his clique of dupes and I don't
> understand them half the time, so that can't be right.

That must be why you're such a dupe, Paul. In essence you've admitted that
you aren't qualified to judge George's posts on the grounds of poor mental
powers. I can live with that. ;-)

[paul packer]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 08:39:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"paul packer" > wrote in message

>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:12:00 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> "paul packer" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> If you can
>>>> point to any instances where George has been drawn on
>>>> any subject, even politics, enough to make a fool of
>>>> himself I'd be interested to read it, but I certainly
>>>> can't recall one.
>>>
>>> Spoken like a true Middius dupe.
>
>> Interesting that you chopped the part where I criticise
>> Middius.
>
>Those were love taps.

Some of those love taps over the years have been delivered with
baseball bats on both sides. It should be obvious to anybody with
reading skills that George and I will never agree on many very basic
issues, especially given my conservative views.

> It's all a setup Paul, you have a few little public
>lover's quarrels with the Middiot so you can feign a modicum of objectivity.
>The man is nuts, we all know it, but you can't bring yourself to even 1% of
>the vituperation you unleash on me with considerable regularity.

I see that vituperation (verbal abuse or castigation; violent
denunciation or condemnation) is This Month's Word, replacing
dissemble. Well, first off I never unleash vituperation on anyone; I
take gentle digs at a few people, specifically you because you ask for
it more than anyone else. If you insist that what I post to you is
vituperation, I believe the impression held by many at RAO that you do
not see things as they are will only be reinforced.

>>> George makes a fool of himself just about every time he
>>> posts.
>
>> No. He shows that he's obsessed with bashing you every
>> time he posts. There's a difference.
>
>That, too. At least he is making those really crazy noises about scaring me
>off of RAO any more. Or is he?

I assume you mean he's NOT making crazy noises.

>>> Many of his posts are incomprehensible to anybody but
>>> his tiny clique of dupes.
>
>> I'm supposed to be one of his clique of dupes and I don't
>> understand them half the time, so that can't be right.
>
>That must be why you're such a dupe, Paul. In essence you've admitted that
>you aren't qualified to judge George's posts on the grounds of poor mental
>powers. I can live with that. ;-)

What I'm saying is that George likes to write cryptic posts. Those I
ignore. Fortunately he writes enough posts in plain English for me to
gather what he's on about most of the time. You will note that I
write no more posts in support of his posts than I write in
opposition. As I'm sure he'd admit himself, George is slightly
eccentric, so there's no point going into agree/disagree mode with
him. I'm sure Jenn, Sander and others feel the same, which explains
why, despite your passionate urging, half of RAO doesn't rush to
condemn George every five minutes.

Please print this explanation onto a "sticky" and stick it somewhere
prominent for future reference.

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" > wrote in message

> On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 08:39:23 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> > wrote:
>
>> "paul packer" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:12:00 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "paul packer" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If you can
>>>>> point to any instances where George has been drawn on
>>>>> any subject, even politics, enough to make a fool of
>>>>> himself I'd be interested to read it, but I certainly
>>>>> can't recall one.
>>>>
>>>> Spoken like a true Middius dupe.
>>
>>> Interesting that you chopped the part where I criticise
>>> Middius.
>>
>> Those were love taps.
>
> Some of those love taps over the years have been
> delivered with baseball bats on both sides.

Pshaw.

> It should be
> obvious to anybody with reading skills that George and I
> will never agree on many very basic issues, especially
> given my conservative views.

That is no doubt by design. But, your disagreements have the impact of the
wings of a butterfly fluttering.

>> It's all a setup Paul, you have a few little public
>> lover's quarrels with the Middiot so you can feign a
>> modicum of objectivity. The man is nuts, we all know it,
>> but you can't bring yourself to even 1% of the
>> vituperation you unleash on me with considerable
>> regularity.

> I see that vituperation (verbal abuse or castigation;
> violent denunciation or condemnation) is This Month's
> Word, replacing dissemble.

Nonsense. I

> Well, first off I never
> unleash vituperation on anyone; I take gentle digs at a
> few people, specifically you because you ask for it more
> than anyone else.

How Middius-like of you, Paul. In fact I don't ask for abuse, I simply
respond in kind to a fraction of the abuse you gratutiously heap on me. I
know that both you and Middius have a thing for me, you can hardly contain
yourselves.

>If you insist that what I post to you
> is vituperation, I believe the impression held by many at
> RAO that you do not see things as they are will only be
> reinforced.

Would that be opinions held by many real people, or opinions asserted by
many sockpuppets?

>>>> George makes a fool of himself just about every time he
>>>> posts.
>>
>>> No. He shows that he's obsessed with bashing you every
>>> time he posts. There's a difference.
>>
>> That, too. At least he is making those really crazy
>> noises about scaring me off of RAO any more. Or is he?

> I assume you mean he's NOT making crazy noises.

You got to get that reading comprehension problem of yours fixed one day,
Paul.

>>>> Many of his posts are incomprehensible to anybody but
>>>> his tiny clique of dupes.
>>
>>> I'm supposed to be one of his clique of dupes and I
>>> don't understand them half the time, so that can't be
>>> right.
>>
>> That must be why you're such a dupe, Paul. In essence
>> you've admitted that you aren't qualified to judge
>> George's posts on the grounds of poor mental powers. I
>> can live with that. ;-)

> What I'm saying is that George likes to write cryptic
> posts.

Middius likes to fancy himself the leader of an in-crowd that adores him.
His social development seems locked at the middle or high school level.

> Those I ignore.

Actually Paul, you just said that you don't understand them which implies
that you don't ignore them. But why should you worry about consistency when
you are back-pedaling at such a high rate of speed?

> Fortunately he writes enough posts
> in plain English for me to gather what he's on about most
> of the time. You will note that I write no more posts in
> support of his posts than I write in opposition.

I will note no such thing. If you think this is really true, you've got some
serious problems with perceiving your own actions, Paul.

> As I'm
> sure he'd admit himself, George is slightly eccentric, so
> there's no point going into agree/disagree mode with him.

Goodness, what kind of a dupe does it take to characterize George as being
"slightly eccentric"?

> I'm sure Jenn, Sander and others feel the same, which
> explains why, despite your passionate urging, half of RAO
> doesn't rush to condemn George every five minutes.

Sorry Paul, but an explanation based on such an obviously false premise as
"George is slightly eccentric" is meaningless. Try to craft a more
believable falsehood next time, it makes things a tad more interesting.

> Please print this explanation onto a "sticky" and stick
> it somewhere prominent for future reference.

It's going where it belongs - the bit bucket.

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg

> I don't ask for abuse

--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg risks his afterlife in heaven by lying blatantly.

> I don't ask for abuse

Arnii, really now. Who do you think you're talking to? We're not a bunch
of teenage "trainees" who will take you at your dissembling word. We know
you; we've seen your shtick. Do try harder if you want to wring a few
sympathy tears out of the Usenet crowd.



--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[paul packer]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:56:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:


>> It should be
>> obvious to anybody with reading skills that George and I
>> will never agree on many very basic issues, especially
>> given my conservative views.
>
>That is no doubt by design. But, your disagreements have the impact of the
>wings of a butterfly fluttering.

By design? What, my conservatism? Haven't you noticed George's and my
world views are fundamentally opposed?

>>> It's all a setup Paul, you have a few little public
>>> lover's quarrels with the Middiot so you can feign a
>>> modicum of objectivity. The man is nuts, we all know it,
>>> but you can't bring yourself to even 1% of the
>>> vituperation you unleash on me with considerable
>>> regularity.
>
>> I see that vituperation (verbal abuse or castigation;
>> violent denunciation or condemnation) is This Month's
>> Word, replacing dissemble.
>
>Nonsense. I

Time will tell.

>> Well, first off I never
>> unleash vituperation on anyone; I take gentle digs at a
>> few people, specifically you because you ask for it more
>> than anyone else.
>
>How Middius-like of you, Paul. In fact I don't ask for abuse, I simply
>respond in kind to a fraction of the abuse you gratutiously heap on me. I
>know that both you and Middius have a thing for me, you can hardly contain
>yourselves.

Get help, Arnie. Soon.

>>If you insist that what I post to you
>> is vituperation, I believe the impression held by many at
>> RAO that you do not see things as they are will only be
>> reinforced.
>
>Would that be opinions held by many real people, or opinions asserted by
>many sockpuppets?

Take a poll of the real people. Does Arny see things as they really
are?

No....nope...no way....hell no....you're joking.....

Thank you.

>>>>> George makes a fool of himself just about every time he
>>>>> posts.
>>>
>>>> No. He shows that he's obsessed with bashing you every
>>>> time he posts. There's a difference.
>>>
>>> That, too. At least he is making those really crazy
>>> noises about scaring me off of RAO any more. Or is he?
>
>> I assume you mean he's NOT making crazy noises.
>
>You got to get that reading comprehension problem of yours fixed one day,
>Paul.

Your sentence makes no sense unless you meant to say, "At least he is
NOT making those really crazy noises...." Are you going to deny that?
Better not--it'll just be another corner you've painted yourself into.

>>>>> Many of his posts are incomprehensible to anybody but
>>>>> his tiny clique of dupes.
>>>
>>>> I'm supposed to be one of his clique of dupes and I
>>>> don't understand them half the time, so that can't be
>>>> right.
>>>
>>> That must be why you're such a dupe, Paul. In essence
>>> you've admitted that you aren't qualified to judge
>>> George's posts on the grounds of poor mental powers. I
>>> can live with that. ;-)
>
>> What I'm saying is that George likes to write cryptic
>> posts.
>
>Middius likes to fancy himself the leader of an in-crowd that adores him.
>His social development seems locked at the middle or high school level.
>
>> Those I ignore.
>
>Actually Paul, you just said that you don't understand them which implies
>that you don't ignore them. But why should you worry about consistency when
>you are back-pedaling at such a high rate of speed?

Now, now, Arnie. You know very well that I have to read them in order
to ignore them---i.e, not reply to them. You won't get any points on
RAO for that kind of transparent word trickery.

>> Fortunately he writes enough posts
>> in plain English for me to gather what he's on about most
>> of the time. You will note that I write no more posts in
>> support of his posts than I write in opposition.
>
>I will note no such thing. If you think this is really true, you've got some
>serious problems with perceiving your own actions, Paul.

Please reference those posts where I post after George saying things
like, "You're right, George, I agree absolutely." "That;'s just what I
was thinking, George," and "Go get 'em, George." I believe "paucity"
will be your new Word Of The Month after searching for those posts.

>> As I'm
>> sure he'd admit himself, George is slightly eccentric, so
>> there's no point going into agree/disagree mode with him.
>
>Goodness, what kind of a dupe does it take to characterize George as being
>"slightly eccentric"?

You will at least admit that his behaviour has improved considerably
over the last five years, unlike your own. Yet....I will give you
this: your literacy has improved somewhat, which is no small thing.
When you concentrate your posts are often of a quite admirable
standard.

>> I'm sure Jenn, Sander and others feel the same, which
>> explains why, despite your passionate urging, half of RAO
>> doesn't rush to condemn George every five minutes.
>
>Sorry Paul, but an explanation based on such an obviously false premise as
>"George is slightly eccentric" is meaningless. Try to craft a more
>believable falsehood next time, it makes things a tad more interesting.

You should take what you can get, Arnie. Would you rather I'd claimed
that George was a shining example of charity and chastity?

>> Please print this explanation onto a "sticky" and stick
>> it somewhere prominent for future reference.
>
>It's going where it belongs - the bit bucket.

I'm not familiar with that particular receptacle.

[Arny Krueger]

"paul packer" > wrote in message
...

> Take a poll of the real people.

Enough of them respect me, like to hang out with me, work with me, and share
life's experiences with me, to keep my life interesting. You're the guy that
actually bases his judgements of people on what you see on RAO.

> Does Arny see things as they really are?

Well nobody sees things as they really are, Paul. I guess that's part of
your psychosis - you seem to think you see things as they really are.

The fundamental flaw with your mind-set is that nobody knows how things
*really* are - we just know about our perceptions.

In your case Paul, you base your judgements on what you see in RAO, which is
a well-known pile of crap due to Middius and his clique, yourself and Jenn
included.