"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...

Robert Morein wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"paul packer" wrote in message


[snip]
More arrogant twaddle from someone who apparently has highly
limited reading and thinking skills. I'm thinking Paul that
maybe you have an IQ in the 110-120 range? IQ is not a
really good indicator, but your inability to see the more
obvious subtlties of the situation point in that direction.

Arny,
I'm flattered that you copied my "so-and-so is a stupid person"
gambit,
but Paul is not the guy to do it to. Unlike you, me, or practically
anybody
else on r.a.o., Paul has never stooped to a low blow. He has been a
model
of cordiality. Except in very rare circumstances, it is impossible to
tell
very much about a person's native intelligence, and certainly not from
someone's attitudes. In David Halberstam's book, "The Best and the
Brightest", he chronicles how some of the most talented and brilliant
member
of this country's elite made the tragic mistake called Vietnam. The
correlation between "book intelligence" and common sense is not as
strong as
it should be.

By his own admission, Paul is not pointed toward hard science, but
he
may have sensibilities and abilities of an artistic, verbal, and
proportional nature of which you are unaware. Paradoxically, the music
we
listen to and care so much about is mostly composed by non scientists,
created by people who mostly don't care about our argument at all.

Your reply to Paul is a stark illustration of your antisocial
tendencies. While such a post might be excused in the context of the
gamesmanship that goes on with other players here, it will not be
understood
in terms of Paul's gentle challenge to you.

Note to Middius: Arny's post is unequivocal evidence of your thesis
that
he's nuts. While whether he's insane is up in the air, Arny has strong
antisocial tendencies. He doesn't play well with his friends. I suggest
retaining Arny's reply for periodic FAQ posts.
__________________________________________________ _______________

I agree: there is something very odd about Arny's response to civility.
Recently I recognised his knowledge of electronics, gave him credit for
inventiveness and literacy, acknowledged the usefulness of his ABX
method in research and appealed to him for a civilised response to
civilised questioning of its applicability to the study of audio
component comparisons by listening panels. I omitted to add that when I
once asked for help in an electronics problem I got a courteous and
helpful answer from him.

Yes, Arny's boundaries are rigid. Within a limited realm of discourse, he
is
helpful and knowledgeable.

But don't dare to question his Empire building! In place of discussion
I got stream of abuse about my low intelligence level and my poor
immigrant's English; and zero response to the matter of fact questions.
It seems that he understands abuse and responds to it enthusiastically
on the same level but civilised argument is beyond his scope. Paul
Packer is only the latest in line trying to get to the man through the
paranoid carapace and getting all the eight tentacles out for an
answer.
Ludovic Mirabel

Ludovic, thanks for fleshing out the anti ABX position.

The anti-ABX position is in direct contradiction to reality.

Your collation of of
the evidence has been most useful, and presents an insuperable challenge
to
the ABXers.

No, it is a denial of reality.

An interesting conundrum is, why does ABX work so poorly?

A false statement, it works ecactly as intended.

I
think there is at least a masters thesis in the analysis.

Go ahead and write one and then get it critiqued by the real experts and
prepare for another ass whuppin'.

I really do think
that as flawed as the current execution may be, there is merit in the
concept. But it will require a better mind than Arny's to find the flaws.

It is not flawed in any way that you have described. It does what it is
supposed to exactly as it is supposed to do it, that is whay it is
recognized as a valid test protocol.

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...

Robert Morein wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"paul packer" wrote in message


[snip]
More arrogant twaddle from someone who apparently has highly
limited reading and thinking skills. I'm thinking Paul that
maybe you have an IQ in the 110-120 range? IQ is not a
really good indicator, but your inability to see the more
obvious subtlties of the situation point in that direction.

Arny,
I'm flattered that you copied my "so-and-so is a stupid person"
gambit,
but Paul is not the guy to do it to. Unlike you, me, or practically
anybody
else on r.a.o., Paul has never stooped to a low blow. He has been a
model
of cordiality. Except in very rare circumstances, it is impossible to
tell
very much about a person's native intelligence, and certainly not from
someone's attitudes. In David Halberstam's book, "The Best and the
Brightest", he chronicles how some of the most talented and brilliant
member
of this country's elite made the tragic mistake called Vietnam. The
correlation between "book intelligence" and common sense is not as
strong as
it should be.

By his own admission, Paul is not pointed toward hard science, but
he
may have sensibilities and abilities of an artistic, verbal, and
proportional nature of which you are unaware. Paradoxically, the music
we
listen to and care so much about is mostly composed by non scientists,
created by people who mostly don't care about our argument at all.

Your reply to Paul is a stark illustration of your antisocial
tendencies. While such a post might be excused in the context of the
gamesmanship that goes on with other players here, it will not be
understood
in terms of Paul's gentle challenge to you.

Note to Middius: Arny's post is unequivocal evidence of your thesis
that
he's nuts. While whether he's insane is up in the air, Arny has strong
antisocial tendencies. He doesn't play well with his friends. I
suggest
retaining Arny's reply for periodic FAQ posts.
__________________________________________________ _______________

I agree: there is something very odd about Arny's response to civility.
Recently I recognised his knowledge of electronics, gave him credit for
inventiveness and literacy, acknowledged the usefulness of his ABX
method in research and appealed to him for a civilised response to
civilised questioning of its applicability to the study of audio
component comparisons by listening panels. I omitted to add that when I
once asked for help in an electronics problem I got a courteous and
helpful answer from him.

Yes, Arny's boundaries are rigid. Within a limited realm of discourse, he
is
helpful and knowledgeable.

But don't dare to question his Empire building! In place of discussion
I got stream of abuse about my low intelligence level and my poor
immigrant's English; and zero response to the matter of fact questions.
It seems that he understands abuse and responds to it enthusiastically
on the same level but civilised argument is beyond his scope. Paul
Packer is only the latest in line trying to get to the man through the
paranoid carapace and getting all the eight tentacles out for an
answer.
Ludovic Mirabel

Ludovic, thanks for fleshing out the anti ABX position.

The anti-ABX position is in direct contradiction to reality.

Your collation of of
the evidence has been most useful, and presents an insuperable challenge
to
the ABXers.

No, it is a denial of reality.

An interesting conundrum is, why does ABX work so poorly?

A false statement, it works ecactly as intended.

I
think there is at least a masters thesis in the analysis.

Go ahead and write one and then get it critiqued by the real experts and
prepare for another ass whuppin'.

I really do think
that as flawed as the current execution may be, there is merit in the
concept. But it will require a better mind than Arny's to find the flaws.

It is not flawed in any way that you have described. It does what it is
supposed to exactly as it is supposed to do it, that is whay it is
recognized as a valid test protocol.
Mikey, it is terribly flawed. It may be salvageable, but Arny Krueger
bungled the engineering, and the experiment design. The only hifi companies
that use it are known for mass market sound equipment of dubioius quality.
We understand that you have impaired hearing, and impaired mental capacity.
You were a "special" child, and now you are a very "special" adult. Stick
with Fisher-Price.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...


It is not flawed in any way that you have described. It does what it is
supposed to exactly as it is supposed to do it, that is whay it is
recognized as a valid test protocol.

Mikey, it is terribly flawed. It may be salvageable, but Arny Krueger
bungled the engineering, and the experiment design. The only hifi
companies that use it are known for mass market sound equipment of
dubioius quality. We understand that you have impaired hearing, and
impaired mental capacity. You were a "special" child, and now you are a
very "special" adult. Stick with Fisher-Price.

Fisher-Price makes a mean toy wrecking ball!

Clyde Slick said:

You were a "special" child, and now you are a
very "special" adult. Stick with Fisher-Price.

Fisher-Price makes a mean toy wrecking ball!

Does RAO have an official aBxism Clown? If not, I nominate Mikey.

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...


Clyde Slick said:

You were a "special" child, and now you are a
very "special" adult. Stick with Fisher-Price.

Fisher-Price makes a mean toy wrecking ball!

Does RAO have an official aBxism Clown? If not, I nominate Mikey.

He is already official Village Idiot. Can we have ghost workers? Otherwise,
he is completely occupied.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...

Robert Morein wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"paul packer" wrote in message


[snip]
More arrogant twaddle from someone who apparently has highly
limited reading and thinking skills. I'm thinking Paul that
maybe you have an IQ in the 110-120 range? IQ is not a
really good indicator, but your inability to see the more
obvious subtlties of the situation point in that direction.

Arny,
I'm flattered that you copied my "so-and-so is a stupid person"
gambit,
but Paul is not the guy to do it to. Unlike you, me, or practically
anybody
else on r.a.o., Paul has never stooped to a low blow. He has been a
model
of cordiality. Except in very rare circumstances, it is impossible to
tell
very much about a person's native intelligence, and certainly not
from
someone's attitudes. In David Halberstam's book, "The Best and the
Brightest", he chronicles how some of the most talented and brilliant
member
of this country's elite made the tragic mistake called Vietnam. The
correlation between "book intelligence" and common sense is not as
strong as
it should be.

By his own admission, Paul is not pointed toward hard science,
but
he
may have sensibilities and abilities of an artistic, verbal, and
proportional nature of which you are unaware. Paradoxically, the
music
we
listen to and care so much about is mostly composed by non
scientists,
created by people who mostly don't care about our argument at all.

Your reply to Paul is a stark illustration of your antisocial
tendencies. While such a post might be excused in the context of the
gamesmanship that goes on with other players here, it will not be
understood
in terms of Paul's gentle challenge to you.

Note to Middius: Arny's post is unequivocal evidence of your thesis
that
he's nuts. While whether he's insane is up in the air, Arny has
strong
antisocial tendencies. He doesn't play well with his friends. I
suggest
retaining Arny's reply for periodic FAQ posts.
__________________________________________________ _______________

I agree: there is something very odd about Arny's response to civility.
Recently I recognised his knowledge of electronics, gave him credit for
inventiveness and literacy, acknowledged the usefulness of his ABX
method in research and appealed to him for a civilised response to
civilised questioning of its applicability to the study of audio
component comparisons by listening panels. I omitted to add that when I
once asked for help in an electronics problem I got a courteous and
helpful answer from him.

Yes, Arny's boundaries are rigid. Within a limited realm of discourse,
he is
helpful and knowledgeable.

But don't dare to question his Empire building! In place of discussion
I got stream of abuse about my low intelligence level and my poor
immigrant's English; and zero response to the matter of fact questions.
It seems that he understands abuse and responds to it enthusiastically
on the same level but civilised argument is beyond his scope. Paul
Packer is only the latest in line trying to get to the man through the
paranoid carapace and getting all the eight tentacles out for an
answer.
Ludovic Mirabel

Ludovic, thanks for fleshing out the anti ABX position.

The anti-ABX position is in direct contradiction to reality.

Your collation of of
the evidence has been most useful, and presents an insuperable challenge
to
the ABXers.

No, it is a denial of reality.

An interesting conundrum is, why does ABX work so poorly?

A false statement, it works ecactly as intended.

I
think there is at least a masters thesis in the analysis.

Go ahead and write one and then get it critiqued by the real experts and
prepare for another ass whuppin'.

I really do think
that as flawed as the current execution may be, there is merit in the
concept. But it will require a better mind than Arny's to find the
flaws.

It is not flawed in any way that you have described. It does what it is
supposed to exactly as it is supposed to do it, that is whay it is
recognized as a valid test protocol.


Mikey, it is terribly flawed. It may be salvageable, but Arny Krueger
bungled the engineering, and the experiment design. The only hifi
companies that use it are known for mass market sound equipment of
dubioius quality.

So Rel, AKG, Mark Levinson, Crown, and Lexicon are mass market products of
dubious quality?



We understand that you have impaired hearing, and impaired mental
capacity.

How big was that telescope?

You were a "special" child, and now you are a very "special" adult. Stick
with Fisher-Price.
Stick your own Fisher Price.

wrote in message
ink.net

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...


Mikey, it is terribly flawed. It may be salvageable, but
Arny Krueger bungled the engineering, and the experiment
design. The only hifi companies that use it are known
for mass market sound equipment of dubioius quality.

So Rel, AKG, Mark Levinson, Crown, and Lexicon are mass
market products of dubious quality?


Note that the "dubious quality" epithet comes from a guy who
was just bragging about buying Altec computer speakers. ;-)

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ink.net

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...


Mikey, it is terribly flawed. It may be salvageable, but
Arny Krueger bungled the engineering, and the experiment
design. The only hifi companies that use it are known
for mass market sound equipment of dubioius quality.

So Rel, AKG, Mark Levinson, Crown, and Lexicon are mass
market products of dubious quality?


Note that the "dubious quality" epithet comes from a guy who was just
bragging about buying Altec computer speakers. ;-)

Morein is not smart enough to notice his own hypocrisy.

The fact that he seldom answers a direct technical question is telling, just
as the fact that he seldom gets the ones he answers correct.

wrote in message
ink.net
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ink.net

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...


Mikey, it is terribly flawed. It may be salvageable,
but Arny Krueger bungled the engineering, and the
experiment design. The only hifi companies that use it
are known for mass market sound equipment of dubioius
quality.

So Rel, AKG, Mark Levinson, Crown, and Lexicon are mass
market products of dubious quality?


Note that the "dubious quality" epithet comes from a guy
who was just bragging about buying Altec computer
speakers. ;-)
Morein is not smart enough to notice his own hypocrisy.

The fact that he seldom answers a direct technical
question is telling, just as the fact that he seldom gets
the ones he answers correct.

You forgot the part where Morein surrounds his errors with
insults directed towards those who might try to straighten
him out.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ink.net
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ink.net

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...


Mikey, it is terribly flawed. It may be salvageable,
but Arny Krueger bungled the engineering, and the
experiment design. The only hifi companies that use it
are known for mass market sound equipment of dubioius
quality.

So Rel, AKG, Mark Levinson, Crown, and Lexicon are mass
market products of dubious quality?


Note that the "dubious quality" epithet comes from a guy
who was just bragging about buying Altec computer
speakers. ;-)
Morein is not smart enough to notice his own hypocrisy.

The fact that he seldom answers a direct technical
question is telling, just as the fact that he seldom gets
the ones he answers correct.

You forgot the part where Morein surrounds his errors with insults
directed towards those who might try to straighten him out.
I didn't forget, I just figured it was self evident. The only people
defending him are the people as screwed up and confused about audio as he
is.