Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most" of the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise but no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be in the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a "serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned, moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I saw Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only banned in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there since?) It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception -- claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive" or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered. Apparently
the RAHE moderator(s) are less intolerant than Dr. Mirabilis claims.

Btw, not all of my posts to RAHE are approved, either. You can bet
that when it appears I've stopped participating in a thread, it's because
I've reached the point where the mods disallowed or have asked me to rewrite a post
if I want to resubmit it. I usually find that's not worth the effort.


--
-S
"The most appealing intuitive argument for atheism is the mindblowing stupidity of religious
fundamentalists." -- Ginger Yellow

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most" of the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise but no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be in the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a "serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned, moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I saw Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only banned in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there since?) It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception -- claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive" or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered. Apparently
the RAHE moderator(s) are less intolerant than Dr. Mirabilis claims.

Btw, not all of my posts to RAHE are approved, either. You can bet
that when it appears I've stopped participating in a thread, it's because
I've reached the point where the mods disallowed or have asked me to rewrite a post
if I want to resubmit it. I usually find that's not worth the effort.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
Btw, not all of my posts to RAHE are approved, either. You can bet
that when it appears I've stopped participating in a thread, it's because
I've reached the point where the mods disallowed or have asked me to rewrite a post
if I want to resubmit it. I usually find that's not worth the effort.
Dear Fido
Just to remind you- there are other reasons for you to "stop
participation in a thread"
Like for instance this quote from my posting two days ago in the ":
Suggestion for Arny" thread .
"Sullivan is back again as a spokesman for "science" for the RAO
class..
I'll tell him how "science works"- anywhere, anytime. It is very
simple. It works by validating its hypothesis in successful
experiments . If the hypothesis is "There is no better way than ABX
to uncover subtle differences between audio components in their ability

to reproduce music " ( or however you want to phrase it- spare us the
nit-picking L.M.) then you perform experiments to show that. Usually
amongst the true experimental scientists you're supposed to have a
representative sample of various kinds of listeners, representative
musical samples, rigid statistical criteria and so on. But no matter. I

don't want to see you taking refuge in quibbles about wording . Your
definition, your statistics are fine.

For the nth time: quote any published experimental work anywhere
showing that your ABX incantation works
You know that we've been that route just a few days ago (see your
November 19th posting in the "How to become life and soul...") thread"

Still waiting. Nobody is censoring you here.Fido.
Ludovic Mirabel
I"ll stop calling you Fido when you stop calling me Dr. Mirabilis. For
the time being I'm competing with you for a golden palm in idiotic
name-calling.

--

In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most" of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a "serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned, moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive" or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure. I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Apparently
the RAHE moderator(s) are less intolerant than Dr. Mirabilis claims.

Btw, not all of my posts to RAHE are approved, either.

For the record, neither are all of mine.

You can bet
that when it appears I've stopped participating in a thread, it's because
I've reached the point where the mods disallowed or have asked me to rewrite
a post
if I want to resubmit it. I usually find that's not worth the effort.

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most" of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a "serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned, moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive" or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure. I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Apparently
the RAHE moderator(s) are less intolerant than Dr. Mirabilis claims.

Btw, not all of my posts to RAHE are approved, either.

For the record, neither are all of mine.

You can bet
that when it appears I've stopped participating in a thread, it's because
I've reached the point where the mods disallowed or have asked me to rewrite
a post
if I want to resubmit it. I usually find that's not worth the effort.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jenn says:
For the record, neither are all of mine.

In my case it was not one or two. It was nine submissions in a row.
Some of them were messages amended to comply with the reasons quoted
for a previous rejection- never because of profanity.

By the time I reached nine rejections I felt that Bates decided to
silence me and that RAHE was closed to me. I concluded that he was very
concerned about the sanctity of ABX. Sullivan unwittingly confirms
this:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
One gives thanks for the free society remembering all the little
censors cutting this or that in the two totalirian sysytems one lived
through- every true believer's nightmare.
Ludovic Mirabel

Sullivan unwittingly

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most" of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a "serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned, moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive" or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure. I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Do you have a perceptual tic that precludes you from cognitively
registering the word 'model'? *THAT* would be more interesting
than the suppositional horses you flog over on RAHE.


--
-S
"The most appealing intuitive argument for atheism is the mindblowing stupidity of religious
fundamentalists." -- Ginger Yellow

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most" of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a "serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned, moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive" or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure. I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Do you have a perceptual tic that precludes you from cognitively
registering the word 'model'? *THAT* would be more interesting
than the suppositional horses you flog over on RAHE.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan said to Jenn:
Do you have a perceptual tic that precludes you from cognitively
registering the word 'model'? *THAT* would be more interesting
than the suppositional horses you flog over on RAHE.

I'll take advantage offered by Sullivan's enigmatic
semantico/metaphysico/metaphorical imagery to straighten out my own
ambiguous wording. In my last message I said:

"One gives thanks for the free society remembering all the little
censors cutting this or that in the two totalitarian sysytems one lived

through- every true believer's nightmare"
..
Late night phrasing. What I meant was "Every true believer's daydream".
Of course.
Ludovic Mirabel

In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most"
of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise
but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my
remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be
in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a
"serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned,
moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened
to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I
saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only
banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there
since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its
terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro
audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good
and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been
validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive"
or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure. I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Do you have a perceptual tic that precludes you from cognitively
registering the word 'model'?

No. I simply don't know of any realities that I've invented.

*THAT* would be more interesting
than the suppositional horses you flog over on RAHE.

LOL Such as?

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of "most"
of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to advise
but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my
remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may be
in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a
"serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned,
moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be listened
to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure I
saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was only
banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there
since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its
terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a pro
audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty good
and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real". If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been
validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is "repetitive"
or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one- gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure. I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Do you have a perceptual tic that precludes you from cognitively
registering the word 'model'?

No. I simply don't know of any realities that I've invented.

But do you 'know of' the models of audio reality you've offered on RAHE? Because
if not, it would mean you aren't reading what you write there. Which would
explain a lot, actually.


*THAT* would be more interesting
than the suppositional horses you flog over on RAHE.

LOL Such as?

Oh dear...so, waht *do* you imagine you've been writing over there?
News reports?



--
-S
"The most appealing intuitive argument for atheism is the mindblowing stupidity of religious
fundamentalists." -- Ginger Yellow

In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just
for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup
for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of
"most"
of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to
advise
but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my
remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some
loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may
be
in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a
"serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned,
moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss
their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be
listened
to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure
I
saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was
only
banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there
since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio
perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its
terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a
pro
audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty
good
and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's
nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's
nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will
without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically
proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle
cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real".
If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been
validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is
"repetitive"
or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their
clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one-
gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have
offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure.
I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Do you have a perceptual tic that precludes you from cognitively
registering the word 'model'?

No. I simply don't know of any realities that I've invented.

But do you 'know of' the models of audio reality you've offered on RAHE?


All I "know" are my opinions on how equipment sounds to me, i.e. my
opinions, and I "know" the sound of live acoustic music because
listening to it is how I make my living, hence I'm highly practiced in
the details of the sound of actual instruments and actual acoustic
spaces. Is this what you mean by "audio realities"? If so, guilty as
charged, I guess.

Because
if not, it would mean you aren't reading what you write there. Which would
explain a lot, actually.

Yawn.



*THAT* would be more interesting
than the suppositional horses you flog over on RAHE.

LOL Such as?

Oh dear...so, waht *do* you imagine you've been writing over there?
News reports?

Pretty much, yes. I report my opinions on what I hear.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...


All I "know" are my opinions on how equipment sounds to me, i.e. my
opinions, and I "know" the sound of live acoustic music because
listening to it is how I make my living, hence I'm highly practiced in
the details of the sound of actual instruments and actual acoustic
spaces. Is this what you mean by "audio realities"? If so, guilty as
charged, I guess.

No, audio realities are ABX torture rituals, and ABX torture rituals alone.
Nothing else will do.

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Derrick Fawsitt wrote:
Can those apparently few people who use this Newsgroup just
for
matters
Audio advise me if there is a "more" appropriate newsgroup
for
dealing
with Audio queries ao running down the subject matter of
"most"
of
the
posts leads me to believe that this NG is for anything and
everything
except serious Audio buffs.
I do hope this post attracts those who are prepared to
advise
but
no
doubt some people will take offence at the tenure of my
remarks, I
assure you no offence is intended, I just want some
loudspeaker
advice
but feel from the subject matter of some of the posts I may
be
in
the
wrong place.
--
Derrick

By now it was demonstraded to you beyond any doubt what a
"serious
newsgroup" doea no look like.
Go to "www.Audio Asylum.com" The DBT discussion is banned,
moderator
rejects profanity, people argue about equipment and discuss
their
experience. You'll soon know who you feel deserves to be
listened
to.
Ludovic Mirabel


Audio Asylum is nothing if not aptly-named. And I'm pretty sure
I
saw
Sam
Tellig calling
someone *profane* names there recently. (DBT discussion was
only
banned
in
the cable section
last time I looked..has there been a forum-wide putsch there
since?)
It's
hardly the haven of
reason and civil discourse Derrick seems to seek.

If you want no-nonsense discussion of audio and audio
perception --
claims
of the 'I heard a
difference therefore it is real" type are actually against its
terms of
service, as are
flamewars and profanity -- try www.hydrogenaudio.org. For a
pro
audio
perspective , seek out
the www.prosoundweb forums or rec.audio.pro or rec.audio.tech.
www.audioholics.com also
has some very good articles on no-nonsense audio, and a pretty
good
and
lively forum. And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's
nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says:
.And of
course, there's rec.audio.high-end, every audiophool's
nightmare.

And naturally Sullivan's delight He can spout there at will
without
fear of contradiction. No need to take shelter in his dodge of
"killfiling" whenever the going gets too hot. The RAHE
engineer-moderator does his job for him. He hypocritically
proclaimed
ban on ABX debate. This allows RAHE to post all the subtle
cryptonyms
like: "Prove by a bias-free test that your impressions are real".
If
one says that the bias-free."test' (read ABX) has never been
validated
by experiment your retort is censored out because it is
"repetitive"
or
"uninteresting" or about ABX or what not. Sullivans and their
clones
reign supreme there. The gagged opposition left one by one-
gentle
Harry Lavo the last survivor.

There are others there who are simpatico :-)

Indeed...there always are.
These days there's almost always debate there about some *inventive*
model of audio reality that Jenn and other subjectivists have
offered.

Yep, that's me; always inventing some reality or another. Go figure.
I
just wish that I could remember inventing some reality; it sounds like
it could be interesting.

Do you have a perceptual tic that precludes you from cognitively
registering the word 'model'?

No. I simply don't know of any realities that I've invented.

But do you 'know of' the models of audio reality you've offered on RAHE?


All I "know" are my opinions on how equipment sounds to me, i.e. my
opinions, and I "know" the sound of live acoustic music because
listening to it is how I make my living, hence I'm highly practiced in
the details of the sound of actual instruments and actual acoustic
spaces. Is this what you mean by "audio realities"? If so, guilty as
charged, I guess.

Because
if not, it would mean you aren't reading what you write there. Which would
explain a lot, actually.

Yawn.



*THAT* would be more interesting
than the suppositional horses you flog over on RAHE.

LOL Such as?

Oh dear...so, waht *do* you imagine you've been writing over there?
News reports?

Pretty much, yes. I report my opinions on what I hear.
----------------------------------------------------------
Sullivan says: " Oh dear...so, waht *do* you imagine you've been
writing over there?
News reports?
Jenn answers:
Pretty much, yes. I report my opinions on what I hear.

How unscientific can you be? Don't you follow distilled wisdom and
"realities" dispensed daily on RAO and RAHE? Don't you know what
contribution "science" would make to your appreciation of audio and
your way of conducting? Shame on you.
Ludovic Mirabel