Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#29
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ups.com... Clyde Slick wrote: "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... wrote: swallowing your codswallop Is that some kind of seafood dish, cod and scallops, perhaps No, Mr. Slick. This is just one frustrated chapel member venting his spite. Mind you , it could be worse. At least Sullivan stops at inventing a funny ha ha name for me: and talking about "codswallop". I wonder how I earned all this bile? Could it really be that it sticks in his craw that I am an M.D and a Fellow of the Royal College and a former researcher in the Medical Research Ccil of Great Britain while he contributes to news groups. Does seem a little primitive but what is one to think knowing that once he really took trouble to search for my credentials (in the wrong place) hoping to prove that I was a fake because he could not find my name in the U.S. sources where I never practiced. At that his is only a mild version of the foam at the mouth fury of some of his brethren in the in true faith chapel. "Liar" from the pens of these fanatics for truth the fatuous NYOB and his pal Scottie, "Lying ****bag" repeated 3 times in one posting from Pinkerton when I caught him spewing fake references. that had nothing to do with the subject under discussion. That is why I feel obliged to note that Krueger, at least in his arguments with me, kept to the rules of civilised discourse. Which does not mean that I won't continue fighting him tooth and nail....on paper. I do wish though he'd stop giving the impression he suspects that most of those disagreeing with him are in a sinister plot. Ludovic Mirabel Not being able to resist argument but unwilling to have Sullivan go into one of his "I don't have an answer" silent sulks ( Sully sulking. Ha ha- irresistibly funny. Almost as funny as his "Dr. Mirabilis") I'll say something here about his posting today: He says: "The scores were not *uniformly* worse". My sentence was: "uniformly worse when MUSIC was played" (as compared with pink noise) Granted anputating crucial sense in this fashion allows you to argue still standing up. All in a day's work for our local self-nominated representative of science. Since it seems consistent with his standards of debate he can have it and keep it. He continues: " In fact the scores were almost uniformly *better* whenever 24 guage was used -- and two listeners still scoring better than chance regardless of sound samples used. That is sufficient evidence that the two cables were *different* -- a result that you have claimed, btw, never occurs in audio gear ABX tests" It is hard to believe that a man wants to be taken seriously while attributing such moronisms dug out from the depths of his distorted psyche to others. I "claimed" that you can "never" get a "different result".in ABX!!!!. Just two weeks ago I rereviewed for his benefit the Oakland ABX website that Sullivan quoted at me twice. For the nth time I pointed out that the had positive results but only when comparing badly dissimilar components that a deaf man would have a problem not hearing.. Of course you have positive results when you compare apples with oranges or a 24 g wire with a 16 g wire- using man made noise instead of music. Now kiddies watch Sullivan tie himself up in knots.. Greenhill's states his statistical criteria thus( loc.cit.p.50) "It is generally accepted that the threshold at which a phenomenon can be considered definitely audible is when listeners are aware of it at least 75% of the time" Did you see it? 75&. Two listeners out of 11 just reached that threshold. I pointed out several times before and Sullivan must know (am I overestimating him?) that the moderators of all the other "Stereo Review" and "Audio" ABX component comparions amalgamated the results and came up with nul, negative majority verdict while in my opinion the only interesting panelists were those few who HEARD inspite of the ABX fog. There was quite a discussion about it in RAHE with Marcus the litigation lawyer putting on a positively last appearance in this thread telling me how wrong I was I was severely chastised by the other members and friends of Sullivan's chapel Ovchain, Pierce, JJ etc. (Quotes on request) The positive results were just flukes- majority rules, Mirabel doesn't know what he's talking about. Lo and behold Suddenly our Sullivan prefers the minority verdict. At his convenience- when it suits him he finds "sufficient evidence" in a testimony of two. more gifted listeners. And he has the brass to charge ME with neglecting those who did better than the average........ Watch now. .As it happens TWO ( note;also TWO) listeners also reached this threshold of "hits" when comparing Monster vs. 16 gauge cable (same diameter- remember?:"wire is wire) in pink noise test. They HEARD the difference. Same diameter my ass..... look at this pdf page 3 http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Greenhill.pdf The monster cable looks to be 12 gauge equivalent. Resistance measurements for a 30 foot run are .09 ohms vs .24 ohms for the 16 gauge. Ludo... you are simply not to be trusted... and thats putting it politely. ScottW |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Just for Ludovic | Audio Opinions | |||
STEREO: Scam of the Century? | Tech | |||
Stereo: Scam of the Century? | Audio Opinions | |||
Bose 901 Review | General |