"Robert Morein" wrote in message

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

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


The QSC is muddy. It's performance is a throwback to the bipolar
amplifiers of the late 70's and early 80's.

Thus says a guy who would apparently die ignorant and inexperienced
rather than do a level-matched, time-synched bias-controlled
listening test.

Thusw says an engineer who has questionable hearing.

Tell us why your hearing is unimpeachable, Morein.

You have a nasty habit of replying to nonexistent statements.

Your inability to see simple logic is quite revealing, Morein. You complain
that my hearing is questionable, but you apparently can't even understand
the need to consider whether your hearing is any less questionable.

You're belaboring the obvious - of course my hearing is questionable, and so
is yours and that of everybody else on the group.

The fact that I can't stand the QSC, while you appear to love it,
indicates to me that there is some element of your discriminatory
ability that is simply missing.

Yes, I'm arguably less biased and prejudiced based on intangibles, then you
are.

I do not know whether this is due to
physical impairment or neural processing.

OK, which means that your hearing is just as questionable as mine. Therefore
your attack on me based on the questionable nature of my hearing indicts you
as well. In short, it is a self-defeating thing for you to do.

The QSC is a piece of junk.

OSAF.

It's a watt-pumper, and I advise anyone who thinks he has taste to give
it a wide berth.

Please give whatever unqualified advice you wish to, Morein. It's a free
country and you can make yourself look as silly as you would like to.

Tell us why you shower with a firehose.

Inefficient speakers - less than 85 dB/watt. Relatively large room. Desire
for realistic sound levels.