Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


Contrary to what so-called audio person Krueger has claimed, there is
nothing mysterious or metaphysical about terms such as
"microdynamics".

Professional audio people recognize this sort of thing for what it is,
poetic licensen.


I seriously doubt that professional audio people, uhke you, even know what
poetic licensen is. Perhaps if they live in Scandinavia they might figure it
out.

Also, your efforts to smear Powell by making fun of his terminology would not
be considered by most sane readers of what you wrote to be "poetic license"
(note correct spelling). Why don't you admit that you just can't stand to be
exposed for the chronic flamer that many of RAO's posters know you to be?

Lies and attempts to disguise personal attacks on Powell as "poetic licensen"
duly noted.

Lack of creativity in newest lies also noted.


The term is generally understood by most audio
hobbyists and audio writers doing reviews.

As if it takes PhD to discect the word into its component parts.


Most PhD's don't discect at all. In fact, they laugh at grammatical and
typographical errors in the same sentence made by chronic pathological liars.

Besides, you don't believe I have a PhD or am a health professional, since you
are serious deluded and in need of psychiatric treatment. My attornies are
eagerly waiting for you to contact the authorities to arrest the Dr. Richman
impersonator on RAO. I'd suggest you bring along the proven plagiarist, Howard
Ferstler, as a "corroborating witness".

Just as macrodynamics
refer to relatively gross and easily heard differences between the
loudest and softest passages in a piece of music, microdynamics refer
to relatively small differences in level between passages of music in
which volume differences from note to note are harder to discern.

Once upon a time known as sonic detail.


Actually, only in your mind and not in that of current audio hobbyists and
writers that are willing to tolerate individual preferences - unlike yourself,
of course.

Most non anti-tube, anti-vinyl, pro-subjective-opinion audio hobbyists and
writers, unlike digital & SS bigot Krueger, have and still do consider sonic
detail to be an indication of the ability of a system to reveal "details", not
minor volume changes when presenting musical material. Since Krueger's
listening may well be limited to organ music and/or test tones, his frame of
reference is quite limited. Sonic details for those not devoted to sliming
people who have individual preferences they wish to discuss consider "sonic
detail" to include the ability of a system to clearly identify and
reveal....... "details" - i.e. the sounds, usually distinguishable by timbre
and or frequency range of different musical instruments within an ensemble. Or
within a choral group, the distinct sounds of different vocalists, or at the
very least, in large groups (e.g. Mormon Tabernacle Choir, Robert Shaw Chorale,
etc.) the 4- or 6-part harmonies/voices involved in a particular musical work.
None of this has anything particularly to do with small changes in volume
level.



Also, evaluation of loudspeakers generally includes listening to how
well a given product reproduces both male and female voices. As
Powell correctly points out, some audio systems, taken as a whole,
are simply much better than others at enabling listeners to
understand what the singers are saying.

Next to motherhood, I appreciate apple pie the most.


A rather bizarre non sequitur. Needless to say, totally irrelevant and
unrelated to anything previously posted. Further evidence of thought disorder,
perhaps?



None of this is considered unusual except to radical
anti-subjective-opinion, anti-individual-preference zealots who
discount almost everything that can't be accounted for by their
specifications uber alles preconceptions.

A little paranoid about technology, eh Bruce?

Is that what the voices in your head are telling you, Arny? Note that
aniti-subjective-opinion and anti-individual-preference bigotry as indicated in
your intolerant claims has nothing whatsoever to do with modern or classic
technology. Your trashing of many RAO posters who happen to prefer products
that you don't is ample evidence of your bigotry and inability to engage in
rational conversation with those whose opinion differ from yours.





Perhaps if you'd modernize
your listening environments a bit you'd feel better about modern technology.


Apparently you're also suffering from visual as well as auditory
hnallucinations. So since you're now claiming to know about my listening
environment, kindly share with us the visions and/or voices in your head that
have described it to us.

This should be entertaining - and highly diagnostic of your lack of contact
with reality as well.

Mind-reading attempts of yours continually provide more evidence that you're
delusional.



Needless to say, for those
bigots, even the reading of a subjective review or discussion of
individual preferences would be anathema.

Including the preference that is oh-so-close to Richman's heart - the
preference for music with audible noise and distortion added.



Prove it, delusional mind-reader Krueger.

Obviously Krueger knows absolutely nothing about my audio system and is simply
lying, as he generally does, about what he thinks he can hear. All that is
known for certain about his latest blarney is the following: (1) He's never
heard or measured the components in my audio system, (2) He has no evidence
that I even *have* an audio system or prefer one since he thinks an impostor is
posihng as Dr. Bruce J.Richman, (3) he has repeatedly claimed in his anti-tube,
anti-vinyl ranting and raving that these products produce audible noise and
distortion, yet he has presented no proof to substantiate his claims.

Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
PY 2543 (Florida)



Bruce J. Richman