"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news "zwerl1" wrote in message
om
Can someone please point me to a website(s) that will give me some
direction in the very basics of high end stereo? I love music; I
know nothing about equipment. Thanks.

Here's a good starting point:

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/AudioFAQ/part1/


Arny,
I amazed at the utter courtesy and open mindedness you demonstrated
by recommending this site, especially since Part 8, with great open
mindedness, includes viewpoints so different from your own.

As will shortly evolve, the viewpoints in question are the same as my
viewpoints. What you meant to say Morein is that he presented
viewpoints that differ from your twisted and warped perceptions of
my viewpoints.

I would like to point out that if you continually exhibited Bob
Neidorff's good will and courtesy, there would be little hostility,
including my own, toward your espousal of your ABX viewpoints.

Morein, you seem to have missed the fact that according to google
estimates, Neidorff made a grand total of 32 posts to RAO, and none
since the last quarter of 1996. Thus Neidorff has not been subjected
a great deal of the insanity and abuse that took place since then.
More specifically, since google searching shows that you didn't
post here until well after he left, he has not had to deal with your
weirdness.

So right up front Morein, you're presenting speculation as fact,
because there is no evidence that can be used to determine how
Neidorff would respond to the current situation.

Arny,
Bob Neidorff and I have cordial relations, and I have, in fact,
contributed via correspondence to a modification in the statement of
his F.A.Q. about speaker placement. My question is not about Bob
Neidorff. It is about you. Mr. Neidorff maintains cordial relations
with just about everyone, and his F.A.Q. has had much more of an
effect on persons entering into this hobby than your espousals.

How many times has Morein posted a gratuitous personal attack on Neidorff on
Usenet, such as your series of "Bad Scientist" posts. Bob?

You are really deluded, Bob. Neidorff is so far above RAO in his own mind
that he hasn't had time to make even one post here in what, six years? Yet,
you get a few nice email replies from him and he's your hero.

Bob, you're apparently are very weak about the concept of the golden rule.
Indeed the Morein "Golden Rule" appears to be that I'm expected to praise
and glorify you each and every time you attack me on what are invariably
bogus grounds.

If your points of view and Mr. Neidorff's are actually
coincident, or nearly so, then the factor which distinguishes Mr.
Neidorff from you is his cordiality and inclusiveness.

That would have something to do with the way you perceive him, eh Bob?

I have never
known Mr. Neidorff to attack anyone, or to interject into a thread in
an antagonistic way.

Given that Neidorff has made no more than 32 posts on RAO in the past six
years, that seems to be easy to understand.

Do you realize how laughable your alleged logic is here, Bob?

In fact, while Mr. Neidorff promotes the
advantages of blind and double blind testing, he does not make a
condemnation of sighted testing.

That's a choice he gets to make.

This is a big difference between
you and Mr. Neidorff. Mr. Neidorff promotes, but you condemn.

I tell it like it is. Everybody with a brain knows that sighted testing is
inappropriate for comparisons of components like power amps and DACs that
can be reasonably expected to sound pretty similar if they are any good.
Indeed Bob, one of the more laughable elements of your posturing against
blind tests has been the way you've had to dance around reasonable
extrapolations of your own statements.

If you look at the general perception of Mr.Neidorff vs.
yourself, and you believe that your viewpoints are significantly
similar, then you must look elsewhere for the cause of polarization
and dissonance that clings to you. It would appear that only your
personality remains as the explaining variable.

The fact that you're even saying this shows how completely lacking in
personal insight you are, Bob. You also have shown that you don't understand
the basic purpose of a FAQ, which is to avoid controversy and focus on
common ground. I've written standards documents and played the game quite
successfully. However, there's a time and a place for writing FAQs and
standards documents, and there's a time and a place for other kinds of
discussion.

This may be a conscious choice, a poor choice, or an unknowing
choice. Permit me to point out, however, that abrasiveness is not
necessarily the best convincer.

The best convincer is personal experience, which I enable people to obtain
quite freely, conveniently and anonymously at my www.pcabx.com web site.

Being known as you are does not make
you a good ambassador for your cause.

Bob, you've got me confused with someone who will do anything to avoid
conflict. As I said, there's a time for diplomacy and inclusiveness, and I
have an excellent track record of being able to work well and accomplish
much in that kind of context. OTOH, when people like Bob you lie, deceive
and misrepresent my beliefs, you obviously aren't trying to be diplomatic of
fair. Not every time is the time for diplomacy, which is one reason why
every U.S. embassy in the world has a contingent of the that well-known
group of career diplomats known as the U.S. Marine Corps assigned to it.

;-)

When people think of you, Arny,
they think of someone who tries to dictate from on high.

The scientific viewpoint that I represent is the high ground. I can't do
anything about it. The fact that my detractors are generally hostile, vile,
perverted, hysterical and mental trainwrecks is not my fault.

They think of you as someone who loves to bully from the pulpit.

The power of right remains power. I can't do anything about that. If I
exercise right, I exercise one of the strongest powers there is. if not the
strongest power.

This, in itself, makes you a target.

Well dooh!

People don't mind being convinced, but
they don't want to be preached to, unless they happen to be looking
for a church.

I just lay out the facts and let people reach whatever conclusions that they
will reach.

Your choice, Arny. I suggest that you keep your beliefs, but change
your image.

I suggest that first you get your head straightened out, Bob. You don't seem
to get Science at all, and given your choice of funtime pastimes, it would
be really good if you did.