wrote in message
oups.com...
ScottW wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message
.. .
wrote:
But even before that I want to say something to you. I used to argue
furiously throughout my professional life about serioous life and
death
matters and then have coffee with my opponent. It never as much as
occurred to anybody to call the other side "liars".
Thank you Mirabel for the detailed account. I should note that it was
ScottW that called what you said "a lie", in effect calling you a liar,
not me. Though you know that, just wanted to put it on record.
Then... for the record... Ludo made no attempt to address his
misrepresentation of Olive which I clearly indicated was the reason for
my
classification of Ludo as a liar. He has made this misrepresentation
before... and been corrected before... yet he continues to repeat
himself.
ScottW
Scottie seems to think that everyone has no other life
to
live but like he lives and breathes lurking in the undergrowth of the
web waiting for an opportunity to yap at someone.
Reluctantly and feeling somewhat nauseated I had to
answer his semiliterate efforts several times before. Every time the
answer was followed by a couple of weeks silence. Then a new clever,
clever trap would be sprung quoting past failures as though they
were victories.
So in his phrase: "for the record". He started by
accusing me of
"hypocrisy" about Greenhill article. My hypocrisy consisted of quoting
one
of the participants 82% accuracy score, when distinguishing between
cables and repeating Greenhill's description of him as "golden ear".-
This was my reason for criticising the "Stereo Review"
writers'
invariable conclusions that the outcome of their ABX tests were
negative
ignoring individuals such as the "golden ear'". The distinction between
*quoting* and expressing an opinion about the quote was too
sophisticated for Scottie. He called it "hypocrisy"
It also became quite obvious that he was not
familiar with
the meaning of "reference".. After I gave the precise Journal, volume,
names of writers, title and dates reference to an article he wanted me
to copy all of it for his benefit. He claimed that he could not find a
Public Library in the City of San Diego!!! Obviously he never visited
one.
And he has not done so to-date while he has the temerity to pontificate
about subjects he simply does not understand.
His next effort culminated in calling me a liar
over Olive's
article. This was based truly incredibly on one sentence that I chose
to
quote. Once again, equally incredibly, instead of finding and reading
the
original he wanted me to post it to him.
Basing himself on that one sentence this
illiterate buffoon
had the temerity to call me a liar, and repeat it because I said that
Olive's
panel *performed badly when asked to discriminate between components
and much better when asked simply " which one do you prefer?"
So here- reluctantly (because I hate typing nearly
as much
as I hate stupidity)- is more from Olive's article: (JAES, vol.51, #9,
Sept.2003, pps. 806-825)
" "The loudspeaker preferences AND PERFORMANCE of these listeners
were compared to those of a panel of 12 trained listeners. Significant
differences IN PERFORMANCE.... were found among the different
categories of listeners.. The trained listeners were the most
discriminating and reliable listeners with mean Fl values 3-27 times
higher than the other four listener categories. PERFORMANCE DIFFERENCES
ASIDE loudspeaker PREFERENCES WERE GENERALLY CONSISTENT across all
categories of listeners...."
FURTHER:
He says also " PERFORMANCE AND preference " in the very title of
his article. And defines his index of performance so that there is no
ambiguity thusly: ""This metric accounts for the listeners'
ability to DISCRIMINATE between loudspeakers as well as their ability
to repeat their ratings expressed in the denominator."
In the future if Scottie yaps again I'll just
requote this text.
Life is to short to deal with Scotties of this world again and again.
Ludovic Mirabel.
To which I will reply:
Olive said, "In most cases, the differences between the
loudspeakers under test are measurable (both objective and subjective)and
therefore the more interesting question for me is "Which speaker do they
prefer, by how much, and why?" "
Now you've gone on and claimed 12 gauge is the same thickness as 16 gauge.
You sure that was a school you attended.... or an asylum?
ScottW