Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

Stephen

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!
--
Chris Morriss

And a Krell to drive them?


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk

In message , Fleetie
writes
Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

Stephen

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!
--
Chris Morriss

And a Krell to drive them?


Martin

Possibly!
It's odd, I used to have a pair of the small SMGb models, and I couldn't
drive these with my Arcam 8P. Now you may say, 'not surprisingly', but
my much larger MG2.5R panels were quite happy when driven by the 8P.
(Not to huge levels of course, but the SMGb weren't happy even at lower
levels.) The SMGb were OK with a homemade MOSFET o/p amp.
--
Chris Morriss

Fleetie wrote:


Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

Stephen

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!
--
Chris Morriss

And a Krell to drive them?


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967
110890
Manchester, U.K.
http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk



Most speakers sound better if not placed adjacent to walls. This does *not*
mean they have to be approximately 4.5 to 5 feet (1.5 meters) out from the back
wall. I have several friends that run Magneplanar with good results when
ploaced no more than 2-3 feet from the back wall. Also, a few of them use tube
amplifiers (and not huge ones) with excellent results (e.g. a conrad johnson
Premier 11A at 70 watts/channel). Of course, the power requirements will alao
be dependent upon listening levels, types of music played, and the listening
room acoustics.



Bruce J. Richman

In article ,
Chris Morriss wrote:

In message , MINe
109 writes
In article , Newbie
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
: this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
: look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
: of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
: experience.

Hello Stewart. I appreciate your suggestions. However, I live a small
(expensive but tiny!) big-city apartment. The Quads are out of the
question! I suppose the speakers could be tall, but must have a small
footprint.

One general question I can't even articulate well goes like this: If
you have very good speakers of this age (my KEF's, or BC-1s, Rogers,
etc.), with no obvious breakdown, just old age, is it better to get
them "reconditioned", or has the speaker technology improved so much
that one should replace them?

Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind of
thing.

Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!

Nah, just angle them at 45 degrees to the back wall...

Okay, just kidding. It wouldn't be unusual to have a stand-mounted
speaker that far into the room. I do think there are advantages to
near-wall placement as often found in British speakers (like my tv
system Linn Kabers) or the Allisons mentioned earlier that I know by
reputation and a recent review in Absolute Sound.

Stephen

Stephen

Stephen wrote:


In article ,
Chris Morriss wrote:

In message , MINe
109 writes
In article , Newbie
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
: this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
: look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
: of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
: experience.

Hello Stewart. I appreciate your suggestions. However, I live a small
(expensive but tiny!) big-city apartment. The Quads are out of the
question! I suppose the speakers could be tall, but must have a small
footprint.

One general question I can't even articulate well goes like this: If
you have very good speakers of this age (my KEF's, or BC-1s, Rogers,
etc.), with no obvious breakdown, just old age, is it better to get
them "reconditioned", or has the speaker technology improved so much
that one should replace them?

Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind of
thing.

Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!

Nah, just angle them at 45 degrees to the back wall...

Okay, just kidding. It wouldn't be unusual to have a stand-mounted
speaker that far into the room. I do think there are advantages to
near-wall placement as often found in British speakers (like my tv
system Linn Kabers) or the Allisons mentioned earlier that I know by
reputation and a recent review in Absolute Sound.

Stephen

Stephen




Allisons are, unfortunately, gasbag certified.



Bruce J. Richman

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:20:08 GMT, "Fleetie"
wrote:

Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

Stephen

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!
--
Chris Morriss

And a Krell to drive them?

No, despite urban mythology, they're an easy load, but they do need
*lots* of power. One of the big Rotels or NADs is probably the ideal
partner.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton said:

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!

And a Krell to drive them?

No, despite urban mythology, they're an easy load, but they do need
*lots* of power. One of the big Rotels or NADs is probably the ideal
partner.

I have no problems driving paralleled Maggies with a homebrew hybrid
tube/MOSFET amp that puts out ~20 volts rms. The power supply is
800VA. And then some people say power supplies aren't important :-)
That's "50 watts in 8 ohms". The Maggies are MG1 improved and SMG-A.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Michael McKelvy wrote:

The only reason IMO to go with Sonus Faber is looks, since the sound the
impart can be gotten in other brands or in kits.

"As to speakers, they are the weakest link in the audio chain sinc e
they are subject to room interaction and the fact that designs and
drivers ahve gross differences from manufacturer to manufacturer"

Michael McKelvy wrote:




First lets deal with falsehood of anybody saying all CD players and amps
sound the same. It is that all CD players working the way tehy are supposed
to sound the same.



This is just hilarious. He says that it is a falsehood that anynody
says a given, then RIGHT AFTERWARDS he says it himself..!


If you have 2 CD players and one sounds different, one
is either malfunctioning or designed to sound someway other than flat.


Well I sure wouldn't want my CD player to sound flat! I guess I'll go
with the "malfunctioning" ones!



Same for amps.


Thus spake ze god of audio-physics, ze force of knowing it all..
Resistance is futile!

George M. Middius wrote:


Fella said:


Thus spake ze god of audio-physics, ze force of knowing it all..


Real gods don't need to have the spittle wiped off their chins.


And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this mikey
boy.. For instance he writes that something or other had happened "to
late" or that it was "to little" etc.. Typical trailer park DUH! white
trash english. Can't be a typo since he makes the same mistake over
and over again in the same thread.

But then again "to late" and "too late" *sounds* the same.

PS: I bet it's the same guy with the sign that read: "Get a brain!
MORANS GO USA!"

http://www.esreality.com/files/place...843-morans.jpg

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:06:09 +0200, Fella wrote:


And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this mikey
boy.

I think that's "tongue". Also "better than".
..

paul packer wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:06:09 +0200, Fella wrote:



And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this mikey
boy.


I think that's "tongue". Also "better than".
.

Typos will be typos. Is that asking "to much"?

Besides, english is definitely not my mother tongue.

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 09:52:01 +0200, Fella wrote:

paul packer wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:06:09 +0200, Fella wrote:



And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this mikey
boy.


I think that's "tongue". Also "better than".
.

Typos will be typos. Is that asking "to much"?

Besides, english is definitely not my mother tongue.

You mean your mother tounge, don't you?

paul packer wrote:

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 09:52:01 +0200, Fella wrote:


paul packer wrote:

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:06:09 +0200, Fella wrote:




And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this mikey
boy.


I think that's "tongue". Also "better than".
.

Typos will be typos. Is that asking "to much"?

Besides, english is definitely not my mother tongue.


You mean your mother tounge, don't you?

No, I mean tongue. Listen, you be gettin on my nerves boi.. I be slappin
you silly if yous gunna keep this up.

Anyways .. I do not pretend to know .. or rather, I do not deem that
thousands of different equipment all over the world are "malfunctioning"
based on crude, borg-like, limited preconceptions and misconceptions.
And this about equipment I've never even heard, or heard of (!) much
less measured.

If I would boast such god like qualities, well, perhaps then I shouldn't
be making typos either. Now, taking spare time work and writing a quick
two or three articles here, just for the sake of contribution, I make a
typo here and there in the process, I repeat the question: is that
asking "to much" ???

There are some know-it-all bots lurking around here, like ferstler, the
retard mikey boy, you(?) (never read a single article of yours,
figures... since you *do* seem to be some sort of a bore), the
patronizing idiot krooger, etc, who think that equipped with some pink
noise and an oscilloscope they can put out instructions as to what a
standart CD player, amp, lamp cord speaker cable, etc, should be. In the
process these fruitcakes call other people "delusional" etc, and act
god-like.

It's just satisfying, and nice, and funny, and OK and lets off some
steem to ridicule such folk.

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:43:23 +0200, Fella wrote:

There are some know-it-all bots lurking around here, like ferstler, the
retard mikey boy, you(?) (never read a single article of yours,
figures... since you *do* seem to be some sort of a bore)

There's some interesting logic lurking here. In what way do I deserve
to be lumped with Ferstler, McKelvy and Krueger? In what way does my
being 'some sort of a bore' (whatever that may mean) preclude my
writing an 'article' (whatever that may be)?

paul packer wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:43:23 +0200, Fella wrote:


There are some know-it-all bots lurking around here, like ferstler, the
retard mikey boy, you(?) (never read a single article of yours,
figures... since you *do* seem to be some sort of a bore)


There's some interesting logic lurking here. In what way do I deserve
to be lumped with Ferstler, McKelvy and Krueger?

Like I said I haven't read any of the *articles* that you might have
posted on RAO up to now.

But went through some 10-15 of your articles just now, and found you to
be vain, smug, patronizing, argumentative, and mostly demogogic. your
vain, patronizing attitude and the way you throw fished-from-a-thesaurus
words around indicate that you are after some sort of a compensation for
your "exceptional mediocrity" (oxymoron? No, not inyour case.) ...

All this makes you a bit of a bore, a some sort of a bore, that is, you
*are* boring, yes, no doubt about that, but you make it hard for
sensible people to pin you down. But yes, you *can* be "lumped" with the
ferstler, krooger, etc, bunch, since you are, in the end, a bore, read:
boooooooriiing..

You don't have wood for ears though.

In what way does my
being 'some sort of a bore' (whatever that may mean)

Read above. And dully snap back with some snappy question for an answer,
thank you.


preclude my
writing an 'article' (whatever that may be)?

An article is what one posts on a newsgroup in the usenet. Now, if you
would like more clarification and definitions as to what might be a
"newsgroup", a "post", or the "usenet" etc, then I suggest you dully
snap back with a smug little question, clipping all else essential and
quoting some minor detail, as in: "usenet, do enlighten us fella, what
might be this usenet?"

"Fella" wrote in message
.. .
Michael McKelvy wrote:




First lets deal with falsehood of anybody saying all CD players and amps
sound the same. It is that all CD players working the way tehy are
supposed to sound the same.



This is just hilarious. He says that it is a falsehood that anynody
says a given, then RIGHT AFTERWARDS he says it himself..!


If you have 2 CD players and one sounds different, one is either
malfunctioning or designed to sound someway other than flat.


Well I sure wouldn't want my CD player to sound flat! I guess I'll go
with the "malfunctioning" ones!


Then you don't understand the term flat as intended here.

Same for amps.


Thus spake ze god of audio-physics, ze force of knowing it all..
Resistance is futile!


Rsistance to truth is, yep.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Fella said:

Thus spake ze god of audio-physics, ze force of knowing it all..

Real gods don't need to have the spittle wiped off their chins.



A case of Kleenex is on it's way to you.

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:06:09 +0200, Fella wrote:


And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this mikey
boy.

I think that's "tongue". Also "better than".
.
Touché.

"Fella" wrote in message
...
paul packer wrote:

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 09:52:01 +0200, Fella wrote:


paul packer wrote:

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:06:09 +0200, Fella wrote:




And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this
mikey boy.


I think that's "tongue". Also "better than". .

Typos will be typos. Is that asking "to much"?

Besides, english is definitely not my mother tongue.


You mean your mother tounge, don't you?

No, I mean tongue. Listen, you be gettin on my nerves boi.. I be slappin
you silly if yous gunna keep this up.

Anyways .

Anyways????????????// Argh! Anyway.

.. I do not pretend to know .. or rather, I do not deem that
thousands of different equipment all over the world are "malfunctioning"
based on crude, borg-like, limited preconceptions and misconceptions.

How about base on numerous meansurements and listnening comparisons?

And this about equipment I've never even heard, or heard of (!) much less
measured.

If I would boast such god like qualities, well, perhaps then I shouldn't
be making typos either. Now, taking spare time work and writing a quick

It's not God like abilities, it's science.

two or three articles here, just for the sake of contribution, I make a
typo here and there in the process, I repeat the question: is that asking
"to much" ???

Way too much.

There are some know-it-all bots lurking around here, like ferstler, the
retard mikey boy, you(?) (never read a single article of yours, figures...
since you *do* seem to be some sort of a bore), the patronizing idiot
krooger, etc, who think that equipped with some pink noise and an
oscilloscope they can put out instructions as to what a standart CD
player, amp, lamp cord speaker cable, etc, should be. In the

Thanks for demonstrating that facts mean nothing to you. Proof! Who needs
proof?

process these fruitcakes call other people "delusional" etc, and act
god-like.


It's not acting God like to understnad the thresholds of human hearing and
know that the measurements and listening comparisons mean what they mean.
Properly functioining CD players not designed to alter the Frequency
response from flat, sound the same as each other.

It's just satisfying, and nice, and funny, and OK and lets off some steem
to ridicule such folk.

If you get your kicks by making statements that don't reflect the reality of
the science of audio, it's you who set yourself up for ridicule.

****, this thread has drifted.

The first speakers I "fell in love with" were Spendor SP2s.

I ended up getting SP1s though. This was 88/89. Kept the SP1s
until '97, when some scally burglar burgled them.

Those Spendor bass units sure had some excursion!

The sticky gloopy stuff painted on them was a bit weird though. What was
all that about? ISTR I used to know, or had at least read something, but
I've forgotten now.



Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:01:59 +0200, Fella wrote:

paul packer wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:43:23 +0200, Fella wrote:


There are some know-it-all bots lurking around here, like ferstler, the
retard mikey boy, you(?) (never read a single article of yours,
figures... since you *do* seem to be some sort of a bore)


There's some interesting logic lurking here. In what way do I deserve
to be lumped with Ferstler, McKelvy and Krueger?

Like I said I haven't read any of the *articles* that you might have
posted on RAO up to now.

But went through some 10-15 of your articles just now, and found you to
be vain, smug, patronizing, argumentative, and mostly demogogic. your
vain, patronizing attitude and the way you throw fished-from-a-thesaurus
words around indicate that you are after some sort of a compensation for
your "exceptional mediocrity" (oxymoron? No, not inyour case.) ...

Well, it's definitely time for Mr. Richman to be brought in here to
see how well your amateur psychology stands up to scrutiny. I'm
astonished you can glean so much from a few posts on RAO, since I've
been living with myself for 58 years and I hadn't yet learned all
that. I'm extremely grateful for your psycholanalysis. What is the
fee, please? (And don't be modest. You deserve a just reward).

By the way, you said "vain" and "patronizing" twice. And I'll have you
know my mediocrity is in no way "exceptional". It is, unfortunately,
quite commonplace.

All this makes you a bit of a bore, a some sort of a bore, that is, you
*are* boring, yes, no doubt about that, but you make it hard for
sensible people to pin you down.

Well, I don't know, you seem to be doing a pretty good job so far in
your own opinion. Do please continue.

But yes, you *can* be "lumped" with the
ferstler, krooger, etc, bunch, since you are, in the end, a bore, read:
boooooooriiing..

Now, now, don't be boring and repeat things over and over.

You don't have wood for ears though.

Thank you. But how do you know?

In what way does my
being 'some sort of a bore' (whatever that may mean)

Read above. And dully snap back with some snappy question for an answer,
thank you.

Is that an instruction or an expectation?

preclude my
writing an 'article' (whatever that may be)?

An article is what one posts on a newsgroup in the usenet.

I thought that was a post. Like this one. I thought articles were what
one submitted to magazines.

Now, if you
would like more clarification and definitions as to what might be a
"newsgroup", a "post", or the "usenet" etc, then I suggest you dully
snap back with a smug little question,

Nope. Think I'll just check my thesaurus. The one I fish words from
all the time.

clipping all else essential and
quoting some minor detail, as in: "usenet, do enlighten us fella, what
might be this usenet?"

Please don't write my dialogue for me. And certainly not in that
peculiar Huckleberry Finn dialect.

I usually do not top post. But for an exceptional "get-a-brain-moran"
such as yourself, I'll make an exception: Your science is limited, your
understanding of the depths of the human ear perception is limited, your
measurements are limited, your so called listening tests are limited, a
flat frequency response does not even begin to tell the story when it
comes to *music* (NOT pink noise) .. etc.

And who am I telling all this to? A "get-a-brain-moran" .. Sheeeeeeesh,
I should get a brain..




Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message
...

paul packer wrote:


On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 09:52:01 +0200, Fella wrote:



paul packer wrote:


On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:06:09 +0200, Fella wrote:





And perhaps they might *know* their mother tounge better then this
mikey boy.


I think that's "tongue". Also "better than". .

Typos will be typos. Is that asking "to much"?

Besides, english is definitely not my mother tongue.


You mean your mother tounge, don't you?

No, I mean tongue. Listen, you be gettin on my nerves boi.. I be slappin
you silly if yous gunna keep this up.

Anyways .


Anyways????????????// Argh! Anyway.

. I do not pretend to know .. or rather, I do not deem that

thousands of different equipment all over the world are "malfunctioning"
based on crude, borg-like, limited preconceptions and misconceptions.


How about base on numerous meansurements and listnening comparisons?


And this about equipment I've never even heard, or heard of (!) much less
measured.

If I would boast such god like qualities, well, perhaps then I shouldn't
be making typos either. Now, taking spare time work and writing a quick


It's not God like abilities, it's science.


two or three articles here, just for the sake of contribution, I make a
typo here and there in the process, I repeat the question: is that asking
"to much" ???


Way too much.


There are some know-it-all bots lurking around here, like ferstler, the
retard mikey boy, you(?) (never read a single article of yours, figures...
since you *do* seem to be some sort of a bore), the patronizing idiot
krooger, etc, who think that equipped with some pink noise and an
oscilloscope they can put out instructions as to what a standart CD
player, amp, lamp cord speaker cable, etc, should be. In the


Thanks for demonstrating that facts mean nothing to you. Proof! Who needs
proof?


process these fruitcakes call other people "delusional" etc, and act
god-like.



It's not acting God like to understnad the thresholds of human hearing and
know that the measurements and listening comparisons mean what they mean.
Properly functioining CD players not designed to alter the Frequency
response from flat, sound the same as each other.


It's just satisfying, and nice, and funny, and OK and lets off some steem
to ridicule such folk.


If you get your kicks by making statements that don't reflect the reality of
the science of audio, it's you who set yourself up for ridicule.

paul packer wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:01:59 +0200, Fella wrote:

since I've
been living with myself for 58 years and I hadn't yet learned all
that.

It sometimes takes an outsider to see the insides, if you get what I
mean. No but wait. You wouldn't get what I mean. Ok.




Well, I don't know,


Well, at least you know _that_. So there is some potential.


you seem to be doing a pretty good job so far in
your own opinion. Do please continue.

Well thank you masseh, for the permission granted.


Now, now, don't be boring and repeat things over and over.

Ok so when'd I say I was perfect?



Thank you. But how do you know?


You can hear the difference between a rotel, was it, and a marantz or
another. Read some of the *articles* you *posted*, remember?


Is that an instruction or an expectation?


Both. I am giving you some medicine, feel free to take it anyway you
want it.


I thought that was a post. Like this one. I thought articles were what
one submitted to magazines.


Well back to the old thesaurus for you then.


Nope. Think I'll just check my thesaurus. The one I fish words from
all the time.


Ok, and, yes, what a surprise that would be.



Please don't write my dialogue for me. And certainly not in that
peculiar Huckleberry Finn dialect.

Sorry me then, I should have fished a fancy word for "enlighten" from
your thesaurus. Ok, lets see:

"acculturate, acquaint, cultivate, edify, educate, ennoble, enrich,
foster, help forward, indoctrinate, inform, instruct" .. So, pick one.

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:43:25 +0200, Fella wrote:


I usually do not top post. But for an exceptional "get-a-brain-moran"
such as yourself, I'll make an exception: Your science is limited, your
understanding of the depths of the human ear perception is limited, your
measurements are limited, your so called listening tests are limited, a
flat frequency response does not even begin to tell the story when it
comes to *music* (NOT pink noise) .. etc.

And who am I telling all this to? A "get-a-brain-moran" .. Sheeeeeeesh,
I should get a brain..

His name is McKelvy, not Moran.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:51:10 +0200, Fella wrote:

(snip hacked postings and incomprehensible responses)

Please don't write my dialogue for me. And certainly not in that
peculiar Huckleberry Finn dialect.

Sorry me then,

Eh?

I should have fished a fancy word for "enlighten" from
your thesaurus.

Really? What has 'enlighten' to do with it? I asked you not to try to
predict what I was going to say and say it beforehand.

Ok, lets see:

"acculturate, acquaint, cultivate, edify, educate, ennoble, enrich,
foster, help forward, indoctrinate, inform, instruct" .. So, pick one.

Perhaps you should tell us what your mother toung..er tongue is,
because it's obviously not one with which I'm familiar.

paul packer wrote:

Perhaps you should tell us what your mother toung..er tongue is,
because it's obviously not one with which I'm familiar.


Hmmm.. Shall I fish around for any of your typos? .. Maybe not.

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:43:25 +0200, Fella wrote:


I usually do not top post. But for an exceptional "get-a-brain-moran"
such as yourself, I'll make an exception: Your science is limited, your
understanding of the depths of the human ear perception is limited, your
measurements are limited, your so called listening tests are limited, a
flat frequency response does not even begin to tell the story when it
comes to *music* (NOT pink noise) .. etc.

And who am I telling all this to? A "get-a-brain-moran" .. Sheeeeeeesh,
I should get a brain..


His name is McKelvy, not Moran.


The depth of your observational and perceptional skills never cease to
amaze.

What _I_ am observing is that borgs are gathering around, teaming up,
protecting each other.

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:34:53 +0200, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:43:25 +0200, Fella wrote:


I usually do not top post. But for an exceptional "get-a-brain-moran"
such as yourself, I'll make an exception: Your science is limited, your
understanding of the depths of the human ear perception is limited, your
measurements are limited, your so called listening tests are limited, a
flat frequency response does not even begin to tell the story when it
comes to *music* (NOT pink noise) .. etc.

And who am I telling all this to? A "get-a-brain-moran" .. Sheeeeeeesh,
I should get a brain..


His name is McKelvy, not Moran.


The depth of your observational and perceptional skills never cease to
amaze.

What _I_ am observing is that borgs are gathering around, teaming up,
protecting each other.

What has that to do with you calling him Moran, when his name is
McKelvy?

Or did you perhaps mean that he is a moron?

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:34:53 +0200, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:43:25 +0200, Fella wrote:



I usually do not top post. But for an exceptional "get-a-brain-moran"
such as yourself, I'll make an exception: Your science is limited, your
understanding of the depths of the human ear perception is limited, your
measurements are limited, your so called listening tests are limited, a
flat frequency response does not even begin to tell the story when it
comes to *music* (NOT pink noise) .. etc.

And who am I telling all this to? A "get-a-brain-moran" .. Sheeeeeeesh,
I should get a brain..


His name is McKelvy, not Moran.


The depth of your observational and perceptional skills never cease to
amaze.

What _I_ am observing is that borgs are gathering around, teaming up,
protecting each other.


What has that to do with you calling him Moran, when his name is
McKelvy?

Or did you perhaps mean that he is a moron?


He is much more than a moron. He is a "get-a-brain-moran" .. There is a
subtle, yet *very* important difference.

But since you wouldn't be able measure it with an oscilloscope, it
wouldn't exist for you.

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:59:22 +0200, Fella wrote:

He is much more than a moron. He is a "get-a-brain-moran" .. There is a
subtle, yet *very* important difference.

But since you wouldn't be able measure it with an oscilloscope, it
wouldn't exist for you.

But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.

And what do oscilloscopes have to do with it? You have confused me.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:59:22 +0200, Fella wrote:


He is much more than a moron. He is a "get-a-brain-moran" .. There is a
subtle, yet *very* important difference.

But since you wouldn't be able measure it with an oscilloscope, it
wouldn't exist for you.


But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.


Here is a link:

http://www.esreality.com/files/place...843-morans.jpg

Read this part slowly: _Move_ _the pointer_of_your_ _mouse_ OVER it
and click the primary button O N C E.

Oh but, now you're confused even more!


And what do oscilloscopes have to do with it?

Whatever they have to do with the art of reproducing music.

You have confused me.

You are "to much", ahahaa, I be lafin now.

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:34:53 +0200, Fella wrote:


What _I_ am observing is that borgs are gathering around, teaming up,
protecting each other.

Yah. We be gonna get you, fella, we is.

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:01:29 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



Don Pearce said:

But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.

Pull the plug, Donny. You've crossed into that neverland known as
"beating a dead 'borg".



Good advice - plug pulled.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:01:29 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



Don Pearce said:


But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.

Pull the plug, Donny. You've crossed into that neverland known as
"beating a dead 'borg".




Good advice - plug pulled.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Come on Middius, I wanted to slap'm silly some more!

paul packer wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:34:53 +0200, Fella wrote:



What _I_ am observing is that borgs are gathering around, teaming up,
protecting each other.


Yah. We be gonna get you, fella, we is.


Yeah! It's like that movie, night of the living dead, the BW one, you
will note. But it's *more* like "Night of the Day of the Dawn of the Son
of the Bride of the Return of the Terror". As it were.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0230575/

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:33:00 +0200, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:01:29 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



Don Pearce said:


But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.

Pull the plug, Donny. You've crossed into that neverland known as
"beating a dead 'borg".




Good advice - plug pulled.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Come on Middius, I wanted to slap'm silly some more!

You need to be somewhere close, or you're just slapping air :-)

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:33:00 +0200, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:01:29 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



Don Pearce said:



But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.

Pull the plug, Donny. You've crossed into that neverland known as
"beating a dead 'borg".




Good advice - plug pulled.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Come on Middius, I wanted to slap'm silly some more!


You need to be somewhere close, or you're just slapping air :-)



You borgish entities take everything so literally. ;\





d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:28:32 +0200, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:33:00 +0200, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:01:29 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



Don Pearce said:



But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.

Pull the plug, Donny. You've crossed into that neverland known as
"beating a dead 'borg".




Good advice - plug pulled.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Come on Middius, I wanted to slap'm silly some more!


You need to be somewhere close, or you're just slapping air :-)



You borgish entities take everything so literally. ;\



And George told me that I was beating a dad borg. Oh well, if I knew
what one of those was, I could make some sort of comment.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:28:32 +0200, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:33:00 +0200, Fella wrote:



Don Pearce wrote:


On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:01:29 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:




Don Pearce said:




But please, who is this "moran"? As far as I know it is a name of
Irish origin. I've never come across it in any other context.

Pull the plug, Donny. You've crossed into that neverland known as
"beating a dead 'borg".




Good advice - plug pulled.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Come on Middius, I wanted to slap'm silly some more!


You need to be somewhere close, or you're just slapping air :-)



You borgish entities take everything so literally. ;\




And George told me that I was beating a dad borg. Oh well, if I knew
what one of those was, I could make some sort of comment.



Ok so you're a dad, congrats! But why you be goin beatin yourself around?


d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com